Pseudo-Dionysius ''Divine Names, Mystical Theology'' (1920)

LIBRARY OF
WELLESLEY COLLEGE
PURCHASED FROM
Sv.'pet Fnnd
TRANSLATIONS OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE
General Editors: W. J. SPARROW-SIMPSON, D.D.,
W. K. LOWTHER CLARKE, B.D.
SERIES I
GREEK TEXTS
DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE

n^ iiwrti I
msr-m^m^Bm ttamam
TRSN5lAnO¥5 OF CHRT^TIM
LITERATURE ÊR[E5 . I
GREEK TEXT5
DIONYSIUS
THE AREOPAGITE
ON THE
DIVINE NAMES
AND THE
:1 MYSTICALTHEOLOGY
Bu C E ROLT.
SOCIETY FOR. PROMOTING

CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. London
kij The Macmilian Companu .lle\v\5rk
J 1920
Printed in Great Britain by
Richard Clay & Sons, Limited,
BRUNSWICK ST., STAMFORD ST., S.E. I.
AND BUNGAY, SUFFOLK.
BR
3/JS^/3
ino
PREFACE
The translations of which the present volume consists are
the work of a scholar who died
at the age of thirty-seven.
It has been felt that since the translator did not live to
write a preface his work should be introduced by a few
prefatory words. My excuse for accepting that office is
that I probably knew the lamented writer as well as any one
living. He
was deprived of both his parents while very
young, left almost friendless, and entrusted to my care from
the age of fourteen. He had already shown promise of
unusual ability. I sent him to King's College School, where
in the opinion of its distinguished Head, the Rev. Dr.
Bourne, he could have done anything if only he had been
given the health. At Oxford he was awarded the Liddon
Studentship.
Nothing can show more clearly what was thought of him
by competent judges in Oxford than the following letter
written by the Professor of Latin, A. C. Clark :
"
He was one of the best scholars who passed through
my hands at Queen's College, and I know no one who
made greater progress after coming into residence. In
those early days he had wonderful powers of work. I was
seldom so delighted as when he earned the great dis-
tinction of being 'mentioned' for the Hertford University
Scholarship in Latin. At the time everything seemed to
be within his grasp. But most unfortunately his health
failed shortly afterwards, and he was never able to do him-
self justice. Still, of recent years he wrote a remarkable
book, full of fine thought, brilliantly expressed, which was

much admired by good judges. I well remember, teo, his
Latin sermon preached at St. Mary's not long ago. ft was
vi PREFACE
delivered with feeling and fire, and seemed to me an admir-
able performance. I am sure that he would have
gained
distinction in the Church, if he had Hved.
"
He seemed to me a fme and noble character, free from
all mortal taint."
He was a singularly refined and religious character,

combining the acuteness of a philosophic mind with the
fervour of a mystic. He therefore possessed undoubted
qualifications for a study of Dionysius, with whose neo-
riatonic ideas and mystical tendencies he was in the
warmest sympathy.
The Introduction, containing a masterly exposition of
Dionysian principles, is entirely the translator's work, and,
within the limits which he set himself, may be called
complete. Rolt's fervid and enthusiastic disposition led him
to expound Dionysius with increasing admiration as his
studies continued. He laid his original introduction aside,
because to his maturer judgment it seemed insufficiently
appreciative.
In its final form the Introduction is beyond all question
a very able and remarkable piece of work. There are, how-
ever, several instances where the writer's enthusiasm and
personal opinions have led him to unguarded language,
or disabled him from realizing the dangers to which the
Areopagite's teaching tends. He does indeed distinctly
admit that Dionysius has his dangers, and says in one place
definitely that the study of him is for the few but the
:
bearing of the whole theory of the Supra-Personal Deity

on the Person of Christ and the Christian doctrine of the
Atonement requires to be more thoroughly defined than is
done in the exceedingly able pages of Rolt's Introduction.
It is not the business of an editor to express his own views,
but yet it seems only reasonable that he should call the
reader's attention to questionable expositions, or to dogmatic
statements which seem erroneous. In four or five places
the editor has ventured to do this with what efiect the
:
reader must decide. The Introduction of course appears

exactly as the Author left it. The few additional remarks
are bracketed as notes by themselves.
PREFACE vii
It is only right to add that the translator laboured under

certain disadvantages. The original text of Dionysius is
perplexing and confused, and no modern critical edition
has as yet been produced. Rolt was frequently in doubt
what the Author had really written.
But, beside the drawback incidental to any student of
Dionysius, there was the fact of the translator's solitary
position at Watermillock, a village rectory among the Lakes,
shut off from access to libraries, and from acquaintance
with former writers on his subject. This is a defect of
which the translator was well aware, and of which he patheti-
cally complained. Friends endeavoured to some extent to
supply him with the necessary books, but the lack of
reference to the literature of the subject will not escape the
reader of these pages. He was always an independent
thinker rather than a person of historical investigation.
Hence it is that one branch of his subject was almost
omitted namely, the influence of Dionysius on the history
;
of Christian thought. This aspect is far too important to

be left out. Indeed Dionysius cannot be critically valued
without it. An attempt therefore has been n'ade to supply
this omission in a separate Essay, in order to place the reader
in possession of the principal facts, both concerning the
Areopagite's disciples and critics.

W. J. S.-S.
CONTENTS
PACE
Preface V
By W. J. SPARROW-SiMrsoN, D.D.
Introduction —
i. the author
2. his leading ideas : the nature of the
godhead in itself. 4
3- ITS RELATION TO CREATION . 6
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL 20

4-
5- CONTEMPLATION .... 25
6. DIONYSIUS AND MODERN PHILOSOPHY 30
7- THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CONTEMPLATION 33
8. THE SCRIPTURAL BASIS OF DIONYSIUSS
9.
10.
DOCTRINES
conclusion
bibliography
......
...
40
44
.
47
The Divine Names . . . .

50
The Mystical Theology .... 191

THE influence OF DIONYSIUS IN RELIGIOUS
HISTORY (by W. J. SPARROW-SIMPSON, D.D.) 202
Index 221—223
Vlll
INTRODUCTION
I. — The Author and His Influence in the
Later Church
The writings here translated are among the extant
works of a theologian who professes to be St. Paul's
Athenian convert Dionysius, and points his claim
with a background of historical setting. But the
claim collapses beneath a considerable weight of
anachronisms, by far the chief of which is the later
neo-Platonism in almost every paragraph. In fact,
these writings appear to reflect, and even to quote,
the doctrines of the Pagan philosopher Proclus, who
began lecturing at Athens in A.D. 430. Moreover, it
is probable that the Hierotheus, who
figures so largely
in them, is the Syrian mystic Stephen bar Sudaili :
a later contemporary of the same thinker. The

Dionysian writings m.ay therefore be placed near
the very end of the fifth century.
The true name of their author is entirely unknown.
He was probably a monk, possibly a bishop, certainly
an ecclesiastic of some sort. His home is believed
to have been Syria, where speculative theology was
daring and untrammelled, and his works are the chief
among the very few surviving specimens of an im-
portant school. The pious fraud by which he fathered
them upon the Areopagite need not be branded with
the harsh name of " forgery," for such a practice was
I
2 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
in hisday permitted and even considered laudable.
Nor does it rob them of their value, any more than
certain parts of the prophecies ascribed to Isaiah are
worthless because they are by another hand. If the
Dionysian writings were historical documents the
matter would be otherwise, just as the Gospel Nar-
rative would lose nearly all its value if it" were a later
fabrication. But they arc not historical documents.
Their scope iswith the workings of man's mind and
iSpirit in a region that does not change, and their
findings are equally valid or invalid whatever be their
date. And yet even historically they have an interest
which docs not depend on their authorship. For, in
any case, they spring from a certain reputable school
within the Christian Church, and they were accepted
Iby the Church at large. And thus their bold path
'of contemplation and philosophy is at least permis-
sible to Christians. This path is not for all men, but
some are impelled to seek it; and if it is denied
them within the Christian pale, they will go and
look for it elscwherc. Nietzsche is but one of those
who have thus disastrously wandered afar in search
of that which is actually to be found within the fold.
Had he but studied the Dionysian writings he might
have remained a Christian. At the present time
these works have an added interest in the fact that,
since neo-Platonism has strong affinities with the
ancient of India, and may even owe
philosophies
something directly to that source through the sojourn
of Plotinus in the Punjab, such writings as these
may help the Church to meet with discriminating
sympathy certain Indian teachings which are now
becoming too familiar in the West to be altogether
ignored. The bearings of this matter on the mis-
sionary problem are obvious.
The first mention of "Dionysius" (to give him by
courtesy the name he takes upon himself) is in the
INFLUENCE ON LATER CHURCH 3
year 533, when, at a council held in Constantinople,!

Severus, Patriarch of Antioch, appealed to thesd
writings in support of Monophysite teaching. In
spite of this unpromising beginning they soon ac-
quired a great reputation; indeed, they presumably
possessed some authority already when this first
recorded appeal to them was made. They were
widely read in the Eastern Church, being elucidated
by the Commentary oC St. Maximus in the seventh
century and the Paraphrase of the learned Greek
scholar, Pachvmeres, in the thirteenth or fourteenth.
Through Erigena's Latin translation in the ninth
century they penetrated to the Western Church, and
were so eagerly welcomed in this country that (in
the words of the old chronicler), " The Mystical
Divinity ran across England like deer." They are
often quoted with reverence by St. Thomas Aquinas,
and were, indeed, the chief of the literary forces
moulding the mystical theology of Christendom.
Ruysbroeck slaked his thirst at their deep well, and
so they provided a far greater than their author with
stimulus and an articulate philosophy. Were this
their only service they would have the highest claims
on our gratitude.
But they have an intrinsic value of their own in
spite of their obvious defects. And if their influence
has too often led to certain spiritual excesses, yet
this influence would not have been felt at all had
they not met a deep spiritual want. It arose not
merely on account of their reputed authorship but
also because the hungering heart of man found here
some hidden manna. This manna, garnished though
it be in these writincfs with strange and often
all
untranslatable terms from, the Pagan Mysteries and
from later neo-Platonism, is yet in itself a plain and
nourishing spiritual meat. Let us now try to discover
its
quality from, the two treatises before us.
II. — His Leading Ideas: The Nature of the

Godhead in Itself
The basis of their teaching is the doctrine oi the
Super-Essential Godhead (vTieQovoiog OeaQxâ). We
I must, therefore, at the very outset fix the meaning
of this term. Now the word "Essence" or " Bein ct"
{ovoia) means almost invariably an individual exist
ence, more especially a person, since such is the
highest type that individual existence can in this
world assume. And, in fact, like the English word
"
Being," it may without qualification be used to
mean an angel. Since, then, the highest connotation
of the term "Essence" or "Being" is a person, it
" "
follows that Super-Essence" is intendecl Supra-
by
Personality." And hence the doctrine of the Super-
I Essential Godhead simply means that God is, in His
'ultimate Nature, Supra-Personal.
Now an individual person is one who distinguishes
himself from the rest of the world. I am a person
can say " I am I and I am not you."
because I :
Personality thus consists in the faculty of knowing

oneself to be one individual among others. And
thus, by its very nature. Personality is (on one side
of its being, at least) a finite thing. The very essence
of my personal state lies in the fact that I am not
the whole universe but a member thereof
God, on the other hand, is Supra-Personal because
He is infinite. He is not one Being among others,
but in His ultimate nature dwells on a plane where
there is nothing whatever beside Himself. The only
kind of consciousness we may attribute to Him is
/what can but be described as an Universal Con-
'
sciousness. He does not distinguish Himself from
us for were we caught up on to that level we should
;
be wholly transformed into Him. And yet we dis-

NATURE OF THE GODHEAD 5
tinguish between ourselves and Him because from

our lower plane of finite Being we look up and see
that ultimate level beyond us.
The Super-Essential Godhead is, in fact, precisely
that which modern philosophy describes as the Ab-
solute. Behind the diversities of this woHd there
must be an Ultimate Unity. And this Ultimate
Unity must contain in an undifferentiated condition
all the riches of consciousness, life, and existence
which are dispersed in broken fragments throughout
the world. Yet It is not a particular Consciousness
or a particular Existence. It is certainly not Uncon-
scious, Dead or, in the ordinary sense, non-Existent,

for all these terms imply something below instead of
above the states to which they are opposed.
Nevertheless It is not, in Its Ultimate Nature,
conscious (as we understand the term) for conscious-
ness implies a state in which the thinking Subject is
aware of himself and so becomes an Object of his
own perception. And this is impossible in the ulti-
mate Nature of the Undifferentiated Godhead where
there is no distinction between thinking Subject and'
Object of thought, simply because there is at that
level no distinction of any kind whatever. Similarly
the Godhead does not, in the ordinary sense, live (for
life is a process and hence implies distinctions) nor
does It even (in our sense) exist, for Existence is

contrasted with non-Existence and thus implies rela-
tionship and distinctions. Consciousness, Life, and
Existence, as we know them, are finite states, and
the Infinite Godhead is beyond them. cannot We
even, strictly speaking, attribute to It Unity, for
Unity is distinguished from Plurality. must We
instead describe It as a Super-Unity which is neither ^
One nor Many and yet contains in an undifferenti- '
ated state that Numerical Principle which we can

only grasp in its partial forms as Unity and Plurality.
III. — The Relation of the Godhead to

Creation
This principle of Plurality which is thus transceiid-
ently contained in Its Undifferentiated Nature com-
pels It to an eternal act of Creation. For all things
pre-exist in It fused and yet distinct, as (shall we say ?)
in a single sensation of hunger there are indivisiby
felt the several needs for the different elements of
food which are wanted respectively to nourish the
various kinds of bodily tissues, or as a single emotion
contains beforehand the different separate words
which issue forth to express it. Even so the Ulti-
mate Godhead, brimful with Its Super-Unity, must
overflow into multiplicity, must pass from Indifference
into Differentiation and must issue out of its Super-
Essential state to fashion a world of Being.
Now since the Godhead thus pours Itself out on
to the plane of Being (which plane itself" 'exists
through nothing but this outpouring), it follows that
the Godhead comes into relation with this plane :
or rather (inasmuch as the act is timeless) stands in

some relation to it. If the Godhead acts creatively,
then It is related to the world and sphere of creation :
eternally to the sphere of creation (which otherwise

could not exist), and thus potentially to the world
even before the world was made. Hence the God-
head, while in Its ultimate Nature It is beyond all
i differentiations and relationships, and dwells in a
region where there is nothing outside of Itself, yet
on another side of Its Nature (so to speak) touches
and embraces a region of differentiations and rela-
tionships, therefore Itself related to that region,
is
and so a sense belongs to it.

in Ultimately the
Godhead is undifferentiated and unrelated, but in Its
eternal created activity It is manifested under the
RELATION TO CREATION 7
I
form of Differentiation and Relationship. It belongs
concurrently to two worlds that of Ultimate Realit)
:
and that of Manifested Appearance. Hence, there-

fore, the possibility not only of Creation but als<5
Revelation {excpavoig). Just as the Godhead creates
all things by virtue of that Aspect of Its Nature
which is (as it were) turned towards them, so It is
revealed to us by virtue of the same Aspect turned
towards our minds which form part of the creation.
Hence all the Scriptural Names of God, and this
very Name "God" itself, though they apply to the
whole Nature of the Godhead and not merely to
some particular elemicnt or function thereof, yet
cannot express that Nature in Its Ultimate Super-
essence but only as manifested in Its relative activity.
Dionysius, in fact, definitely teaches that doctrine
which, when revived independently ofrecent yearsby
Dr. Bradley was regarded as a startling blasphemy :
that God is but an x^ppearance^ of the Absolute.

And this is, after all, merely a bold way of stating'
the orthodox truism that the Ultimate Godhead is
inconiprehensible a truism which Theology accepts
:
as an axiom and then is prone to ignore. The

various Names of God are thus mere inadequate
symbols of That Which transcends all thought and
existence. But they are undifferentiated titles because
they are symbols which seek (though unsuccessfully)
to express the undifferentiated Super-Essence. Though
the terms "God," "King," "Good," "Existent," etc.,
have all different connotations,
yet they all denote
the sam.e undifferentiated Deity. There are, however,
some Names which denote not the undifferentiated \
Godhead, but certain eternally differentiated Elements

in Its Manifestation. These are the Names of the
Three Persons in the Blessed Trinity. Whereas the
terms "God," "King," "Good," "Existent," etc.,
^
Appearance and Reality (2nd ed.), pp. 445 ff.
denote (though they cannot express it) the same
"
ReaHty the term " Father
: denotes som.ething
"
different from that of Son," and both of these
from that of " Holy Ghost." The whole Manifested
Godhead is ''God," "King," "Creator," "Saviour,"
"Lord," "Eternal," "Living," etc., but only One
Persona of the Godhead is Father, or Son, or Holy
Ghost. The undifferentiated titles differ from each
other merely through our feeble grasp of the Mani-
festation, and coalesce as our apprehension of it
grows ;
the differentiated titles [diaKeKQiueva or
diaxoL08Lg) represent actual distinctions in the eternal
Manifestation Itself. Thus the Absolute Godhead
isthe Super-Essence the eternally Manifested God-
;
head is the Trinity. As to the reasons of this

Dionysius deprecates all inquiry. He does not, for
instance, suggest that Relationship in this its simplest
form cannot but exist within that side of the God-
head which embraces and enters into this relative
world. Here, as elsewhere, his purpose in spite of
his philosophical language, is in the deepest sense
purely practical, and mere speculations are left on
one side. He accepts the Eternal Distinctions of the
Trinity because They have been revealed on the ;
other hand, he sees that they must belong to

the sphere of Manifestation or They could not be
revealed.
was said above that the Ultimate Godhead is
It
Supra-Personal, and that it is Supra-Personal be-

cause personality consists in the faculty of knowing
oneself to be one individual among others. xAre
the PersoncB of the Trinity then, personal, since They
are distinguished One from Another? No, They are
not personal, because, being the infinite Manifesta-
tion of the Godhead, They are Super-Essential, and
Dionysius describes Them by that title. And if it
be urged that in one place he joins the same title
to our Lord's individual Human Name and speaks

of " the Super-Essential Jesus," this is because the
Personality of our Lord (and our own personality
also through our union with Him) passes up into
a region transcending personality, and hence wdiile
the Humanity of Jesus is Personal His Godhead is
Supra-Personal. This is implied in a passage from
Hierotheus (quoted with approval by Dionysius him-
self)which teaches that the Deity of Jesus is of anl
universal character belonging through Him to all
redeemed mankind.
The teaching of Dionysius on the Trinity is, so
far as it
goes, substantially the same as that of St.
Augustine or St. Thomas Aquinas; only it is ex-
pressed in more exact, if at first sight somewhat
fantastic, terms. St. Augustine,^ for instance, teaches
that the inner Differentiations of the Trinity belong
[Augustine says indeed that the Father and the Son exist, non
^
seciindiim substantiani^ sed seainduvi relaiivum [De Trin. v. 6).

But Augustine's argument is, that while no attrilnite of God is acci-
dental, yet all attributes are not said with reference to His substance.
Certain attributes of God are neither accidental nor substantial, but
relative. This applies to Divine Fatherhood and Sonship. For the
Father is what He i-; in relation to the Son, and similarly the Son to
the Father. But these are relations of " Beings," and are relations
which are "eternal and unchangeable." Augustine does not affum a
supra-personal reality of God behind the Tiinity of manifestation. For
" But if the
Augustine the Father and the Son ai-e ultimate realities.
Father, in that He is called the Father, were so called in relation
to Himself, not to the Son ;
and the Son, in that He is called the
Son, were so called in relation to Himself, not to the Father; then
both the one would be called Father, and the other Son, according
to substance. But because the Father is not called the Faiher except
in that He has a Son, and the Son is not called Son except in that He
has a Father, these things are not said according to substance because
;
each of them is not so called in relation to Himself, but the terms are
used reciprocally and in relation each to the other nor yet according
;
to accident, because both the being called the Father, and the being
called the Son, is eternal and unchangeable to them. Wherefore,
although to be the Father and to be the Son is different, yet their
substance is not different ; because they are so ca'led, not according
to substance, but according to relation, which relation, however, is not
—
accident, because it is not changeable." Aug., De Trin. v. 6.
— Ed.]
B
solely to the realm of eternal Manifestation when he
sa}'s that They exist secuiidnin Relativuni and not
seaindinn Siibstantiani} Also he teaches the Supra-
Personality of the Trinity when he says that neither the
inidivided Trinity nor any of Its Three Persons is a
particular individuality ;"^ and St. Thomas teaches the
same thing when he says that the Human Soul of
Jesus does not comprehend or contain the Word
since the Human Soul is finite {i.e. a particular
ind ividuality) while the Word is Infinite.^
Thus while in the Undifferentiated Godhead the
"Persons" of the Trinity ultimately transcend Them-
selves and. point (as it were) to a region where They
are merged, yet in that side of Its Nature which
looks towards the universe They shine eternally forth
and are the effulgence of those "Supernal Rays"
through Which all light is given us, and whence all
energy streams into the act of creation. For by
Their interaction They circulate that Super-PIssencc
Which Each of Them perfectly possesses, and so
It passes forth from Them into a universe of Being.
Now the Godhead, while It is beyond all particular
Being, yet contains and is the ultimate Reality of
all particular Being; for Tt contains beforehand all
the particular creatures after a manner in which they
are ultimately identical with It, as seems to be im-
plied by the phrase that all things exist in It fused
and yet distinct. Thus although It is not a particular
, being, It in a transcendent manner contains and is
Again It is beyond all universal Being,
jParticularity.
(for universals are apprehended by the intellect,
^
De 7 rill. v. 6.
^
See De Trin. viii. 4. "Not this and that Good, but the very
"
Good . .Not a good Personality {animus) but good Goodness
. ;
and vii. 11, where he condemns those who s.ny the word persona is
employed "in the sense of a particular man such as Abraham, Isaac,
or Jacob, or anybody else who can be pointed out as being present."
^
Sm.'una, Pars III. Q. x. Art. i.
RELATION TO CREATION ii
whereas the Godhead is incomprehensible and there-

fore described as "formless."
is Nevertheless It con-
tains and is the Ultimate Reality of all universals,
for, even before the world was made, It eternally
embraced and embraces all things and all the uni-
versal laws of their existence. Thus after a tran-
scendent manner It contains and is Universality.
And hence in Its transcendent Nature Universality
and lârticularity are contained as one and the same
undifferentiated Fact.
But in this world of Being the particular and the
universal aspect of things must be mutually distin-
guished. Otherwise there could, on the one hand, be
no things, and on the other, no bond of unity between
them. Hence, w^hen the Super-Essence overflows in\
the act of creation, It runs, as it were, into the two \
main streams of Universal and Particular Being.
Neither of these two streams has any independent or
concrete existence. Taken separately, they are mere
potentialities: two separate aspects, as it v/ere, of the
creative impulse, implying an eternal possibility of
creation and an eternal tendency towards it, and yet
not jn themselves creative because not in themselves,
strictly speaking, existent. Nevertheless these two
streams differ each from each, and one of them has a
deo^ree of reality which does not belong to the other.
Mere universal Being, says Dionysius, does not
possess full or concrete existence at the same time,
;
since it is Bemo; or Existence, he does not call it

non-existent. Mere Particularity, on the other hand,
he practically identifies with Non-entity, for the
obvious reason that non-existence itself is a universal
category (as applying to all existent things), and,
therefore, cannot belong to th.at which has no
universal element at all. Thus the universal stream
is an abstract ideal and
possesses an abstract exist-
ence, the particular stream is an abortive impulse and
possesses no actual existence whatever. The one is

the formal law of the existence universe, the other its
rough material.
Thus these two emanating streams of potentiality
have, from before all time, eternally welled forth and
passed away, the universal into emptiness and the
particular into nothingness, or rather, through
nothingness back at once into the Super-Essence in
a ceaseless revolution which, until the appointed
moment arrives for Time and the temporal world to
begin, leaves no trace outside Its Super-Essential
Source and Dwelling and Goal. It is possible
(though one cannot say more), that Dionysius is
thinking especially of the difference between these
two streams when he describes the various motions of
the Godhead. The Particular stream of Emanation
may be in his mind when he speaks of the circular
movement, since the particular existences remain
within the Super-Essence, until the moment of their
temporal creation the Universal stream may be that
:
of which he is thinking when he speaks of the direct

and spiral movements, since both of these indicate
an advance and would therefore be appropriate to
express the out-raying tendency of that emanating
Influence which, even before the particular creatures
were made, had a kind of existence for thought as
the other stream had not.
This Universal stream consists of currents or
Emanations, Very Being, Very Life, etc. (avroelrai,
and of these currents some are more
avTot,cor}, k.t.I.),
universal than others Very Being is, obviously, the
;
most universal of all. And since the Super-Essence

transcends and so absorbs all Universality, it follows
that the more universal the Emanations are the
higher is their nature. This stream, in fact, runs, as
it were, in the channel which our thought naturally
traces ;
for thought cannot but seek for universals,
and the abstract and bloodless tendency of nnere

Philosophy comes from an undue exaltation of
thought over life. From this defect, however, Dio-
nysius is free.For, while he holds that the highest
Emanation is the most universal, he also holds (as
was seen) that the Emanations are in themselves the
mere background of existence and are not fully
existent. And he expressly says that while the
Emanations become more and more universal the
higher we ascend towards their Source, the creatures
become more and more individual and particular the
higher they rise in the scale. The reason is, of course,
that the Super-Essence transcends and absorbs all
Particularity as well as all Universality and hence ;
it is that
particular things become particularized by
partaking of It, just as universals become universalized
by a similar process. But of this more anon.
This Universal stream of Emanations thus eternally
possesses a kind of existence, but it is an empty
existence, like the emptiness of mere light if there
were no objects to fill it and be made visible. The
light in such a case would still be streaming forth
from the sun and could not do otherwise, and there-
fore it would not be an utter void but it would be
;
untenanted by any particular colour or shape.

Suppose, however, that the hght could be blotted out.
There would now remain the utter void of absolute
darkness. Such darkness cannot exist while the sun
IS shining in the cloudless heavens nevertheless the
;
very notion of light cannot but be contrasted in our

minds with that of darkness which is its absence and ;
so we conceive the light to be a positive thing which

fills the darkness even as water fills a void. When
the bowl is full of water, the void does not exist and ;
yet, since it would exist if the bowl could be wholly

emptied, we can regard this non-existent void as the
receptacle of the water.
Even so the Emanations of Very Being, etc., fill, as
it were, a void which does not and cannot exist, since
it is, and must be, saturated with them, and
yet it is,
by the very laws of our thinking, contrasted with
them and would, in a manner, exist if the Emana-
tions could cease to flow from the Super-Essence.
They, streaming eternally (as they must) from that
overflowing Source, permeate the whole boundless
region of the world that is to be a region be}ond
;
Time and Space. That region is thus their receptacle.

The receptacle, if emptied of them (though this is
impossible), wôuld contain nothing, and be nothing
whatsoever. Hence, it is called Not-Being, or the
Non-Existent (to fxi] ov).
So the two Streams flow timelessly without begin-
ning and without end, and cross, but do not mingle :
the Universal Stream perpetually advancing and the

Particular Stream circling round and slipping through
it, aswere, into the void of Nothingness (as a thing
it
by very nature invisible, would be in darkness

its
even while surrounded by the light) and so returning
into the Super-Essence without leaving a trace behind
it. This activity, though it must be expressed thus
in terms of Time, is really timeless and therefore
simultaneous. Eor the Streams are not something
other than the Super-Essence. They are simply
distant aspects of It. They are the Super-Essence in
Its creative activity. As the river flowing out of a
lake consists of the water which belongs to the lake,
or as the light and heat flowing from the sun are the
same light and heat that are in the sun, so the
emanating Streams are the same Power that exists
in the Super-Essence, though now acting (or striving
to act) at a distance. Or perhaps we may compare
the Super-Essence to a mountain of rich ore, the
inward depths of which are hidden beyond sight and
touch. The outer surface, however, is touched and
seen, and this corresponds to the Persons of the

Trinity ;
while the same mountain viewed at a
distance is the Stream of Universal Emanation
And though the view becomes dim.mer and dimmer
the farther awây you go, j-et it is ahvays the same
mountain itself that is being viewed. The Particular
Stream, on the other hand, is like the same mountain
when invisible at night, for the mountain still sends
forth its vibrations, but these are lost in the darkness.
Or we may compare the Super-Essence to a
magnet and the Persons of the Trinity to its tangible
surface, and the two emanating Streams to the positive
and negative magnetism which are simply the essence
of the magnet present (so to speak) at a distance.
Even so (but in a manner which is truer because
non-spatial) the Super-Essence is in the emanating
streams outside the Super-Essential plane and thus
interpenetrates regions which are remote from Itself.
It is both immanent in the world as its
Principle
of ]]ein2f and outside it as transcending: all catecrories
of Being. This contradiction is implied in the ver}^
"
word " Emanation (nooodog) which means an act by
which the Super-Essence goes forth from Itself.
And, in fact, Dionysius more than once definitely
says that the Super-Essence actually passes outside
of Itself even while It remains all the time wholly
within itself. This he expresses in one place by say-ij
ing that the act of Creation is an ecstasy of Divine!
LoYê. This thought is vital to his doctrine, and must?
be remembered whenever in the present attempt to
expound him, the Super-Essence is spoken of as
" "
outside the creatures. The Super-P2ssence is not,
strictly speaking, external to anything. But It is
'outside" the creatures because (as existing simul-
taneously on two planes) It is "outside" Itself. And^'
therefore, although the entire plane of creation is
interpenetrated by It, yet in Its ultimate Nature It is
i6 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
beyond that plane and so "outside" it. Finite

creatures tliough filled (according to their measure)
with Its Presence, yet must, in so far as they are
finite, look up to It as That which is Other than
Ithemselves. And, in this sense of being Other than
they are. It must be described as "outside" them,
even though (as their Principle of Being) It is within
'them.
Thus the two emanating streams, though they pass
outside of the Super-Essence, yet actually are the
Super-Essence Itself. And, in fact, the very term
Emanation {nQoodog) like the collateral term Differ-
entiation (didxQioig) may even be applied not only
to the two Streams but also to the Persons of the
Trinity ;
not only to the Magnets radiating Energy,
so to speak, but also to its actual Surface.
This matter needs a few words of explanation.
There is in the undifferentiated (vTTEQrjvcojiisvf])
Super-Essence a Differentiation between the Three
Divine " Persons," which Dionysius compares to the
distinction between different flames in the same
I indivisible brightness. And Each "Person" is an
IjEmanation because Each is a Principle of outgoing
^creative Energy. There is also a Differentiation
Detween the various qualities and forces of the crea-
tive Energy, rather as (if we may further work out
the simile of Dionysius) the light seen afar through
certain atmospheric conditions is differentiated into
various colours. And each quality or force is an
Emanation, for it is an outgoing current of creative
Energy. Or, by a slightly different use of language,
the entire creative process in which they flow forth
may be called not merely a collection of emanations
but simply " the Emanation." Thus an Emanation
may mean, (i) a Person of the Trinity (2) a current
;
of the Universal Stream (e.g., Very Being, or Very

Life, etc.); (3) a current of the Particular Stream (z.e.
a particular force) (4) the entire process whereby the

;
two Streams flow forth. This sounds confusing, but

the difficulty vanishes if we classify these various
meanings under two heads, viz. (i) an Emanating
:
l^'inciple {i.e. a "Person" of the Trinity), and (2) an

Emanating Act (whether regarded as a whole or in
detail). This classification covers all its uses.
These two heads, in fact, correspond exactly to the
"
two main uses of the word " Differentiation as
applying respectively to the Super-Essential sphere
and to the sphere of Being. And here Dionysius
certainly does cause needless difficulty by employing
"
the same word " Differentiation with these two dis-
tinct meanings in the same passage. The Persons of
the Trinity are differentiated, but the Energy stream-
ing from them is undifferentiated in the sense that it!
comes indivisibly from them all. In another sense, I
however, it is differentiated because it splits up into

separate currents and forces. Each of these currents
comes from the Undivided Trinity, and yet each
current is distinct from the others. Dionysius
expresses this truth by saying that the Godhead
enters Undividedly into Differentiation, or becomes
differentiated without loss of Undifference (fivcofievojQ
diaKQLverai).
Let us follow this creative process and see whither
it leads. The Super-Essence, as It transcends both
Non-Existence and Existence, also transcends both
Time and Eternity. But from afar It is seen or felt
as Existence and as Eternity. That is to say
Existence and Eternity are two emanating modes
or qualities of the Universal Stream. The Particular I
Stream, on the other hand, is Time-non-existent as I
yet and struggling to come to the birth but unable i
to do so until it gain permanence through min-

gling with Eternity. At a certain point, however
(preordained in the Super-Essence wherein Tunc
slumbered), the two streams not only cross but actually

mingle, and thus Time and the temporal world begin.
The Particular stream no longer sinks wholly through
the Universal, but is in part supported by it. Hence
the world of things arises like a substance hitherto
invisible but now becoming visible, and so, by this
change, springing out of darkness into light.
Now, when the Particular stream begins to mingle
with the Universal, it naturally mingles first with that
current of it which, being most universal, ranks the
highest and so is nearest the Source. It is only along
that current that it can advance to the others which
are further away. And that current is Being (avto-
sTvai). Thus the world-process begins (as Dionysius
iiad learnt from Genesis and from the teaching of
Plato) as the level of dead solid matter, to v/hich

"
he gives the name of " merely existent (ovoLOjdijg).
Thence, by participating more and more in the
Universal stream, it advances to the production of
plant and animal and man, being by the process
enriched with more and more qualities as Life
{avToCco?]), Wisdom (avrooo(pLa), and the other
currents of the Universal stream begin to permeate
it one by one.
Thus the separate indiviciuals, according to the
various laws (?.6yot) of their genera and species, are
created in this world of Time. And each thing,
while it exists in the world, has two sides to its exist-
ence one, outside its created being (according to the
:
sense of the word "outside" explained above), in the

Super-Essence wherein all things are One Thing (as
all points meet at infinity or as according to the neo-
Platonic simile used by Dionysius, the radii of a circle
meet at the centre), and the other within its own
created being on this lower plane where all things are
separate from each other (as all points in space are
separate or as the radii of the circle are separate
at the circumference). This paradox is of the very

utmost importance.
The kinds of existences being now created
vârious
in this world of time, we can regard them as ranged
in an ascendincf scale between Nothinq;ness and the
Super-Essence, each rank of being subsuming the
qualities of those that lie below it. Thus we get
the following system in ascending order Existence,
:
Life, Sensation, Reason, Spirit. And it is to this

scale that Dionysius alludes when he speaks of the
extremities and the intermediate parts of the creation,
meaning by the extremities the highest and the lowest
orders, and by the intermediate parts the remainder.
The diminution of Being which we find in glancing
down the ladder is, Dionysius tells us, no defect in
the ss'stem of creation. It is right that a stone should
be but a stone and a tree no more than a tree. Each
thing, being itself however lowly, is fulfilling the laws
of its kind which pre-exist (after a transcendent
manner) in the undifferentiated Super- Essence. If,
however, there is a diminution of Being where such
diminution has no place, then trouble begins to arise.
This is, in fact, the origin and nature of evil/ For as
we ascend the scale of Being, fresh laws at each stage
counteract the laws of the stage below, the law of life
by which the blood circulates and living things grow
upwards counteracting the mere law of inert gravita-
tion, and again, the laws of morality counteracting
the animal passions. And where this counter-action
fails, disaster follows. A hindered circulation means
ill-health, and a hindered self-control means sini
Whereas a stone is merely lifeless, a corpse is no|
only lifeless but dead ;
and whereas a brute i:
un-moral, a brutal man is wicked, or immoral. What'
in the one case is the absence from a thing of that
which has no proper place in it, is in the other case
the failure of the thing's proper virtues.
IV. — The Problem of Evil

At wearisome length Dionysius discusses the
problem of evil and shows that nothing is inherently
bad. For existence is in itself good (as coming
ultimately from the Super-Essence), and all things
are therefore good in so far as they exist. Since evil
is ultimately non-existent, a
totally evil thing would
be simply non-existent, and thus the evil in the
world, wherever it becomes complete, annihilates itself
and that wherein it lodges. VVe may illustrate this
thought by the nature of zero in mathematics, which
is
non-entity (since, added to numbers, it makes no
difference) and yet has an annihilating force (since it
reduces to zero all numbers that are multiplied by it).
Even so evil is nothing and yet manifests itself in the
annihilation of the things it qualifies. That which we
call evil in the world is merely a tendency of things
towards nothingness. Thus sickness is a tendency
towards death, and death is simply the cessation of
physical vitality. And sin is a tendency towards
spiritual death, which is the cessation of spiritual
vitality. But, since the ground of the soul is inde-
structible, a complete cessation of its being is
impossible ;
and hence even the devils are not
inherently bad. Were they such they would cease
ipso facto to exist.
Dionysius here touches incidentally on a mystical
doctrine which, as developed by later writers, after-
wards attained the greatest importance. This doctrine
of a timeless self is the postulate, perhaps, of all
Christian mysticism. The boldest expression of it is
to be found in Eckhart and his disciple Tauler, who
both say that even the lost souls in hell retain
unaltered the ultimate nobility of their being. And
lest this doctrine should be thought to trifle with
^rave matters, be it remembered that the sinfulness

and gravity of simply due to this indestructible
sin are
nobility of our being. Man cannot become non-moral,
and hence his capacity for wickedness. The soul is
potentially divine, and therefore may be actually
Satanic. The very devils in hell cannot destroy the
image of the Godhead within them, and it is this
image that sin defiles.
It follows from the ultimate non-entity of evil that,
in so far as it exists, it can
only do so through being
mingled with some element of good. To take an
by Dionysius himself, where there is
illustration given
disease there is vitality, for when life ceases the sick-
ness disappears in death. The ugliness of evil lies
precisely in the fact that it always, somehow or other,
consists in the corruption of something inherently
good.
It is, however, this ugliness of things that Dionysius |
fails to emphasize, and herein
the great weakness I
lies
of his teaching. Not only does he, with the misguided
zeal of an apologist, gloze
deliberately over certain
particular cruelties of the Creation and accept them
as finite forms of good, but also he tends to
explain
away the very nature of evil in itself. He tends to be
misled by his own true theories. For it is true that
evil is ultimately non-existent. St. Augustine taught
" "
this when he said Sin is nought
:
^
so did Julian ;
of Norwich, who " saw not sin^' because she believes

"
it hath no manner of substance nor any part of
being." The fault of Dionysius is the natural failure
'^
of liis mental type to grasp the mere facts of the

actual world as mere facts. He is so dazzled with
his vision of ultimate Reality that he does not feel
with any intensity the partial realities of this finite
universe. Hence, though his theory of evil is, in the
^
Com. on St. John i.
13. Cf. Cojif. vii. 18 ;
xii. 1 1.
2
Revelations of Divine Love, xxvii.
main, true, he does not quite grasp the true appUcation
of his theory to this world of actual facts.
For this world is by its very nature finite. And
hence, if the evil in it is (as Dionysius rightly says)
but partial, it must also be remembered (as he for a
moment forgets) that its very existence is but partial.
And, therefore, though evil is ultimately non-existent,
yet the bad qualities of things may, so far as this
present world is concerned, have as much reality, or
at least as much actuality, as their good qualities.
And when we say that evil is ultimately non-existent
!
we merely mean that evil oiigJit to have no actuality
here, not that it has none. Dionysius calls evil a
lapse and failure of the creature's proper virtues.
iBut a lapse or failure has in it something positive, as
he in the same breath both admits by using the word
and also tries to explain away. It is as positive as
the virtues from which it lapses. The absence of
light from the centre of a wooden block is nothing,
for the light has no proper place there, but the
absence of light from the air, where light should be,
is darkness and is a visible shadow. St. Augustine
has crystallized this truth in his famous epigram,
quoted above in part, which runs in full as follows :
"
Sin is naught, and men are naughtes when they
sin." The void left by the want of a good thing has
a content consisting in the want. Probably had
Dionysius seen m.ore of the world's misery and sin he
would have had a stronger sense of this fact. And
in that case he would have given more prominence
than he gives, in his extant writings at least, to the
Cross of Christ.
Two things should, however, be borne in mind.
In the first place he is writing for intellectual
Christians in whom he can take for granted both an
understanding of metaphysics and a horror of sin.
To such readers the non-existence of evil could not
have the same meaning as it would to the world

outside. For the same reason he (like other Christian
teachers after him) speaks of God's transcendent Non-
Existence without fearinc: lest his words should be
interpreted as atheism. In fact, to guard against
misinterpretation he utters the express warning that
mysteries can only be taught to the Initiated.^
In the second place throughout his whole treatment
of evil, he is no doubt writing with an eye on the
dualistic heresy of the Manichees, which was prevalent
in his day. Hence the occasional indiscretion of the
zeal with which he seeks to block every loop-hole
looking: towards dualism. The result is a one-sided
emphasis in his teaching rather than positive error.
H e rightly denies a dnn li'm nf ultiniritr rrnlitirr'^'-Tiirt
he tends to ignore, rather than to deny, the obvious
dualism of actual facts.
l)efore proceeding to the Method of Contemplation
which crowns and vitalizes the entire speculative
system of Dionysius, it will be well to bring together
in one paragraph the various meanings he gives to
Non-Existence.
(t) The Super-Essence transcends the distinction
" " "
betwêen the Aristotelian Matter and " Form but ;
in this world the two are distinct from each other.

And whereas, in this v/orld, Form without "Matter"
"
has an abstract existence for thought, "Matter with-
out Form has none. Thus mere "Matter" is
non-existent. And hence things both before their
creation and after their destruction are non-existent,
" "
for their latter" has then no
1^, form." (2) Similarly
Good without evil exists as the highest Manifestation
or
"
Form " of the Godhead, but evil without Good
is formless and therefore non-existent. (This does
"
not mean that " Matter or the world-stuff is evil, but
that neither it nor evil is anything at all.) And since
1
Div. Norn. i. 8, ad fin. ; My St. Theol. i. 2.
evil is ultimately altogether non-existent, all things
are non-existent in so far as they are evil. (3) Finally,
the Super-Essence is, in a transcendent manner, Non-
Existent as being beyond Existence. And hence the
paradox that the destructive force of evil and the
higher impulse towards the Godhead both have
the same negative principle of a discontent with the
existent world —
the dangerous, yet true, doctrine
(taught, among others, by St. Augustine and Dante -)
^
that evil is a mistaken quest for Good.

The principle of this classification is quite simple.
It lies in the fact that Bei?ig is the most universal of
the Emanations or Forms, and that all things there-
fore exist only in so far as they possess Form. Hence
the want of all " form " is non-entity and makes
things which are without any form to be non-existent ;
" "
that want of proper form which we call evil is a
tendency to non-entity and makes evil things to be
so far non-existent the want of complete substantial
;
"
or spiritual " form makes merely existent things {t. c.
" "
lifeless things) to be un-existent and the tran- ;
"
scendence of all " Form makes the Super-Essence to
be in a special sense " Non-Existent."
The theory of evil, as given above, is worked out in
a manner sufficiently startling.
Wenaturally divide existent things into good and
bad and do not think of non-existent things as being
things at all. Dionysius, with apparent pervêrsity,
says all things are good, and then proceeds to divide "
" " "
them into Non-Existent
Existent The
and !
reason is this All things have two sides to their

:
being the one in the Super-Essence and the other

:
in themselves. In the Super-Essence they are eter-

nally good, even before their creation. But in them-
sehês (i. e. in their created essence) they were wholly
non-existent before their temporal creation, and after
^
Conf. ii. 6, 12-14. Farad, v. 10-12.
CONTEMPLATION 25
it are partially non-existent in so far as they are

tainted with evil.
V. — Contemplation
So of a dual state belonging to all
far this doctrine
things an unprofitable speculation. We

may seem
now come to the point where its true value will be
seen. For it underlies a profound theory of Person- ;
ality and a rich method of Contemplation. This part i
of the subject is difficult, and will need close attention.

The process of Creation advances from the simple
to the complex as Life is added to mere Being, and
Consciousness to Life, and Rationality to Conscious-
ness. But from this point there begins a new phase
in the process. Man, having as it were floated into
the world down the Universal stream of Emanation,
now enters into his spirit, and so plunges beneath the
stream, and there below its surface finds an under-
current which begins to sweep him in a contrary
direction towards the Source. By the downward
movement his personality has been produced, by this
upward movement it will be transformed.
So man presses on towards God, and the method
of his journey is a concentration of all his spiritual
powers. By this method he gathers himself tog ether i
away fr oin Q ]ii-^vârrl ]-l-ii'ncTc; n|n thp rpntre_ôf his

i
being. And t hus ^""^ gradually Kor^m>^g unjfieH a nd

si '" 1-^1^
Anorplc; vvhngp (creation Dion\'suis
mplified, lil-'
"^s able to place at the very commencement of the
'
developing temporal order precisely because their
nature is of this utterly simple and concentrate^,
kind. And, because the process of advance is one
of spiritual rr.nnf>r»fâfi'on^ Qnrl mr>ypg ^^\^la,^fm*L^-t^nrn
from external things into the hid den depths of the
''ôul, LheiefOie rn an mUst cast away tPe. scpara te
forms of those-eTements which he thus draws from
'
the circumference into the centre of his personal
spirit. Having sucked the nourishment from the
various fruits growing severally in their different
proper zones by the margin of the stream up which
he presses, he assimilates those vitalizing elements
into his own tissues (finding each food suited in turn
to his advancing strength) and casts the rind away
as a thing no longer needed. And this rejection of
the husk in which the nourishing fruit had grown
is the process described by Dionysius as the Via
Negativa.
Let us consider this matter more in detail.
The first stage of Religion is anthropomorphic.
God is conceived of as a magnified Man with an out-
ward form. This notion contains some low degree of
truth, but it must be spiritualized. And^jn^ca sti-ng
away the mat eriali^tifl^jJ£tails of the conception we
begin to enter ona Via Negativa. All educated
Christians enter on this path, though very few are
given the task of pursuing it to the end. So first
the notion of an outward material form is cast away
and then \\\ej[\o, \\c>x\ of ânge. God is now repfa rded
^
^ ^ _and ^mm;^f^pri g.l Beings pos sessing all

U:>ip
qnaljtipc;
c^^
Pp^^nnnlffy anH^JMJTPrnpariftp^ of
^Sensation and Perception in an eternal and spiritual
manner. .This is a conception of God built up,
largely, by the Discursive Reason and appealing to
that side of our nature. But the Intuitive Reason
seeks to pierce beyond this shimmering cloud into
the hidden Light which shines through it. For the
mind demands an Absolute Unity beyond this variety
of Attributes. And such a Unity, being an axiom
or postulate, lies in a region behind the deductions
of the Discursive Reason. For all deduction depends
upon axioms, and axioms themselves cannot be
deduced.
Thus the human spirit has travelled far, but still
CONTEMPLATION 27
it is From the simple unity of its own

unsatisfied.
being gazes up at the Simple Unity of the Un-
it
created Light which still shines above it and beyond

it. The Light is One Thing and the human spirit
is another. All elements of difference in the human
spirit and in the Uncreated Light have disappeared,
but there still remains the primary distinction between
Contemplating Subject and
Contemplated Object.
The human and the Uncreated Light stand in
self
"
the mutual relationships of Me and " Thee."
"
That
which says "Me" is not the Being Which is addressed
as "Thee"; and the Being addressed as "Thee" is
not that which says "Me." The two stand over
against one another.
This relationship must now be transcended by a
process leading to ecstasy. The human spirit must
seek to go forth out of itself [i.e. out of its created
being) into the Uncreated Object of its contempla-
tion and so to be utterly merged. So it ceases to
desire even its own being in itself. Casting selfhood
away, strives to gain its true being and selfhood by
it
losing them in the Super-Essence. Laying its intel-

lectual activity to rest it obtains, by a higher spiritual
activity, a momentary glimpse into the depths of the
Super-Essence, and" perceives that There the distinc-
"
tion between "
Me and " Thee is not^'Ît sees into
the hidden recesses of an un plumbed Mystery in
which its own individual being and all things are
ultimately transcended, engulphed and transformed
into one indivisible Light. It stands just within
the borders of this Mystery and feels the process of
transformation already beginning within itself. And,
though the movements of the process are only just
commenced, yet it feels by a hidden instinct the ulti-
mate Goal whither they must lead. For, as Ruys-
"
broeck says : To such men it is revealed that they
are That which they contemplate."
This transcendent spiritual activity is called Un-
knowing, jPnr when wp l;nn\\iî thing- we ran tra ce
_Qut the lines of difi ereiic g^ which liLpaicilu Jf'Trom
other tlTtlTL^s, ur wtrte ETg^^*'^^^ rûR pp^t of it fram
All Kno^ in f;^r1- rnnî^f-Q in nr at
IrnnwjpHcrp^
"
st includes, the power of separat ing "-This from
ill llif^
l
'^rTpprrF.qqpnrp
the re arp nO lines
i^gij;Jl__j]'T7
" "
difference to trace, and there is no This or
" "
lat." Or rather, to putThis and
it
differently,
at," being now transcended, are simply one and
thel same thing. While the human spirit is yet im-
peiffect,
it looks up and sees the Super-Essence far
bevond it. At this stasre it still feels itself as *'this"
"
an perceives the Super-Essence as That." But
i still
en it begins to enter on the stage of spiritual

Rj^flection (to
use the techical term borrowed by
ionysius from the Mysteries) it penetrates the
Super-Essence and darkly perceives that There the
distinction ultimately vanishes. It sees a point where
" " " " "
this is transfigured into That," and That is
"
wholly this." And, indeed, already "That" begins
"
to pour Itself totally into "this
"
through the act
whereby
"
this has plunged itself into " That."
Thus the ultimate goal of the "ego" now seen afar
by Unknowing and attainable, perhaps, hereafter, is
to be merged. And yet it will never be lost. Even |
the last dizzy leap into Absorption will be performed
in a true sense by the soul itself and within the soul ^
itself. The statement of Dionysius that in the Super-
Essence all things are " fused and yet distinct," when
combined with the doctrine of human immortality,
means nothing else. For it means that the immortality
of the human soul is of an individual kind and so ;
the one sense, persists even while, in another

self, in
sense, it is merged. This is the most astounding
paradox of all And Dionysius states the apparent
!
contradiction without seeking to explain it simply

CONTEMPLATION '
29
because, here as elsewhere, he is not much concerned

with theory but is merely struggling to express in
words an overwhelming spiritual experience. The
explanation, however (if such it may be called) can
easily be deduced from his theory of existence and
of personality.
AH things have two sides to their existence one :
in the Super-Essence, the other in themselves. Thus

a human personality is (in William Law's words) an
"
outbirth" from the Godhead. And having at last
made its journey Home, it must still possess these
two sides to its existence. And hence, whereas on
the one side it is merged, on the other it is not. Its
very being consists of this almost incredible paradox.

And personality is a paradox because the whole
world is a paradox, and the whole world is fulfilled
in personality.
Forthis principle of a twofold existence underlies
all things, and is a reflection of the Super-Essential
Nature. As the Super-Essence has an eternal ten-

dency to pass out of Itself by emanation, so the
creatures have a tendency to pass out of themselves
by spiritual activity. As the Super-Essence creates
the world and our human souls by a species of Divine
"
ecstasy," so the human soul must return by an
answering "ecstasy" to the Super-Essence. On both
sides there is the same principle of Self-Transcend-
ence. The very nature of Reality is such that it must
have its being outside itself.
And this principle of self-transcendence or ecstasy
underlies not only the solitary quest of the individual
soul for God, but also the mutual relations of the
various individuals with each other. In all their
social activities of loving fellowship the creatures
seek and find themselves in one another and so j
outside of themselves. It is the very essence of '
Reality that it is not self-sufficing or self-contained, j

Not only do the creatures in which the Super-Essence
overflows possess, by an answering mystery, their
true being in the Super-Essence, but, as a result of
this, they possess their true being in each other; for
in the Super-Essence each has its place as an element
in One single and indivisible Reality. We have
here, in fact, the great antinomy of the One and the
Many, or the Universal and the Particulars, not solved
indeed, but pronounced to be insoluble and therefore
ultimate. It penetrates into a region beyond the in-
tellect, and that is why the intellect is finally baffled

by it.
The Dionysian theory

that one side of our being is
outside ourselves in the Super-Essence will be found
incidentally to reconcile Pragmatism and Idealism
together. For Dionysius teaches that on one side of
our being we actually develop in Time. And, if this
is so, we do as the Pragmatists assert literally inake
Reality. But the other side of our being is timeless
and eternally perfect outside ourselves. And if this
is so, then
Reality, as Idealists tell us, is something
utterly beyond all change. Perhaps this paradox is
intended in Wordsworth's noble line :
—
So build we up the being that we are.^
VI. — Dionysius and Modern Philosophy

Let us now consider the bearings of the Dionysian
theory on certain other currents of modern philosophy.
According to Dr. McTaggart each human soul
possesses, behind its temporal nature, a timeless self
and each one of these timeless selves is an eternal
^
Excursion, iv. about 70 Hnes from the end. With " the being that
we are," cf.
,
Prelude, xiv. 113-115 :—

" The
highest bb'ss
—
That flesh can know is theirs the consciousness
Of whom they are."
MODERN PHILOSOPHY 31
differentiation of the Absolute.^ these time- Now if

less selves are finite, then none embraces the whole
system. And, if that is so, in what does the Spiritual

Unity of the whole consist? If, on the other hand,
they are infinite, then each one must embrace the
whole System and, if so, how can they remain dis-
;
tinct Having
? the same context, they must coalesce
even as (according to Orthodox Theology) the " Per-
"
sons of the Trinity coalesce in the Unity behind
the plane of Manifestation.^ Dr. McTaggart's philo-
sophical scheme is noble, but it seems open to this
metaphysical attack, and psychologically it appears
to be defective as it leaves no room for worship,
which is a prime need of the human soul. The
Dionysian theory seems to meet the difficulty for ;
since our ultimate being is outside ourselves in the

Super-Essence, one side of our Being is supra-per-
sonal. Our finite selves are, on that side, merged
together in One Infinite "Self" (if It may be thus
inadequately described) and this Infinite Self (so to
;
call It) embraces, and is the Spiritual Unity of the

whole System. And this Infinite Self, seen from
afar, is and must be the Object of all worship until
at last worship shall be swallowed up in the com-
pleteness of Unknowing.
The paradox that our true existence is (in a sense)
outside ourselves is the paradox of all life. live We
by breath and food, and so our life is in these things
outside our individual bodies. Our life is in the air
and in our nourishment before we assimilate it as
our own. More astonishing still, Bergson has shown
that our perceptions are outside us in the things we
perceive.^ When I perceive an object a living cur-
rent passes from the object through my eyes by the
^
Studies in Hegelian Cosmology, especially in chaps, ii. and iii.
^
St. Thomas Aquinas, Stitiinia, Pars I.
Q. XL. Art, iii.
'^
Matiere et Menioire, chap, i.
afferent nerves to the brain, and thence by the efferent
nerves once more to the object from which it started,
causing a mere sensation in me (/. e. in my
body) but
causing me also by that sensation to have a per-
ception outside me {i.e. outside my body) in the
thing I look at. And all who gaze upon the same
object have their perceptions outside themselves in
that same object which yet is indivisibly one. Even
so are we to find at last that we all have our true
selfhoods in the One Super-Essence outside us, and
yet each shall all the time have a feeling in himself
of his own particular being without which the Super-
Essence could not be his.
The doctrine of Unknowing must not be con-
founded with Herbert Spencer's doctrine of the
Unknowable. The actual terms may be similar :
the meanings are at opposite poles. For Herbert

Spencer could conceive only of an intellectual ap-
prehension, which being gone, nothing remained :
Dionysius was familiar with a spiritual apprehen-

sion which soars beyond the intellect. Hence Her-
bert Spencer preaches ignorance concerning ultimate
things; Dionysius (like Bergson in modern times)
^
a transcendence of knowledge. The one means a

state below the understanding and the other a state
above it. The one teaches that Ultimate Reality is,
and must always be, beyond our reach the other ;
that the Ultimate Reality at last becomes so near

as utterly to sweep away (in a sense) the distinction
which separates us from It. That this is the mean-
ing of Unknowing is plain from the whole trend of
the Dionysian teaching, and is definitely stated, for
instance, in the passage about the statue or in others
which say that the Divine Darkness is dark through
excess of light. It is even possible that the word
Unknowing" was (with this positive meaning) a

*'
^
See Evolution Creatrice^ towards the end.
PSYCHOLOGY OF CONTEMPLATION 33
technical term of the Mysteries or of later Greek
Philosophy, and that this is the real explanation
and interpretation of the inscription on the Athenian
"
altar To the Unknown God." 1
:
VIL— The Psychology of Contemplation

Be this as it may, Dionysius is unquestionably
speaking of a psychological state to which he himself
has been occasionally led. It must, however, be
carefully distinguished from another psychological

state, apparently the same and yet really quite dif-
ferent, of which there is also evidence in other writers.
Amiel speaks of a mental condition in which the
self lies dormant, dissolved, as it were, and absorbed
into an undifferentiated state of being; and it is well
known that a man's individuality may become merged
in the impersonal existence of a crowd. The con-
trast between such a state and Unknowing consists
wholly in the difference of spiritual values and spiritual
intensity. Amiel felt the psychic experience men-
tioned above to be enervating. And the danger is
fairly obvious. For this psychic state comes not
through spiritual effort but through spiritual indo-
lence. And the repose of spiritual attainment must
be a strenuous repose.
The same psychic material may take either of two
opposite forms, for the highest experiences and the
lowest are both made of the same spiritual stuff
That is why great sinners make great saints and
why our Lord preferred disreputable people to the
respectable righteous. A
storm of passion may pro-
duce a Sonata of Beethoven or it may produce an
act of murder. All depends on the quality and
direction of the storm. So in the present instance.
There is a higher merging of the self and a lower
^
Acts xvii. 23. Cf. Norden's Agnosias Theos.
merging of it. The one

is above the level of per-
sonality, the other beneath it; the one is religious

the other hedonistic the one results from spiritual
;
concentration and the other from spiritual dissipation.

Apparently our souls are crystallizations, as it were,
out of an undifferentiated psychic ocean. So our
personalities are formed, which we must keep in-
violate. To melt back, though but for a time, into
that ocean would be to surrender our heritage and
to incur great loss. This is the objection to mere
psychic trances. But some have been called on to
advance by the intensification of their spiritual powers
until they have for a moment reached a very different
Ocean, which, with its fervent heat, has burst the
hard outer case of their finite selfhood, and so they
have been merged in that Vast Sea of Uncreated
Light which has brought them no loss but only
gain.
Just as in early days some had special gifts of
prophecy through the power of the Holy Ghost, but
some through the power of Satan, and the test lay
in the manifested results,^ so in the present instance.
We cannot doubt that the experience is true and
valid when we see its glory shining forth in the
humble Saints of God.
To illustrate this experience fully from the writings
of the Saints would need a volume to itself. Let us
take a very few examples from one or two writers of
unquestioned orthodoxy.
And first, for the theory of personality implied in
it we may turn to Pascal, whose teaching amounts
to very much the same thing as that of Dionysius.

"
Z^ ;;/^/," he says, ''est Jiaissable. En tin inot, le . . .
Moi a deux qiialites : il est ijijtiste en soi^ en ce qu'il se

fait centre du tont ; il est i7icoininode aux mitres, en
ce quit les vent asse^'vir : car cJiaque Moi est rennenii
^
I Cor. xii. 1-3 ;
i
John iv. 1-3.
et voudrait etrc le tyran de tons Ics autrcsy ^

Thus
a self-centred Moi, or Personality, is wrong inherently
and not only in its results. And it is inherently
wrong because a personality has no right to be the
centre of things. From this we may conclude
(i) that God, as being the rightful Centre of all
things, is not a Moi^ or Personality and (2) that the ;
transcendence of our Moi, or Personality, is our highest

duty. What, then, is the goal to which this tran-
scendence will lead us? Pascal has a clear-cut
answer " // liy a que I Eire universel qui soil tel.
:
\
• • •
Le Bien Universel est en nons^ est nous menies et nUst\*

pas nousy- This is exactly the Dionysian doctrint
>
Each must enter into himself and so must find Some^

thing that is his true Self and yet is not his particulai
self His true being is deep within his soul and yet\l
in Something Other than his individuality which is
within his soul and yet outside of him. may We

"
I entered into the
compare St. Augustine's words :
recesses of my being and saw above my

. . . . . .
i
mind an Unchanging Light. ^ Where, then, did I

Thee except in Thyself above myself?"*
'
find
Now for the actual experience of Unknowing and
of the Negative Path that leads to it. The finest
after
description of this, or at least of the aspiration
it, is to be found in the following passage from the
^
Confessions of St. Augustine :
"
Could one silence the clamorous appetites of the
silence his of the earth, the water,
body ; perceptions
and the air could he silence the sky, and could his
;
to think
very soul be silent unto itself and, by ceasing
of itself, transcend self-consciousness; could he
silence all dreams and all revelations which the mind
can image yea, could he entirely silence all^ lan-
guage and
;
all symbols and every transitory thing

—
^
1
vi. 20 lb. 26, xxiv. 39.
Pensees, (ed. Havet).
3 * ^
lb. x. 37. /b. ix. 25
Conf. vii. 16.
— inasmuch as these all say to the hearer We made '
—
:
not ourselves bul were made by the Eternal

'
if, after
such words, they were forthwith to hold their peace,

having drawn the mind's ear towards their Maker,
and He were now to speak alone, not through them
but by Himself, so that we might hear His word, not
through human language, nor through the voice of
an angel, nor through any utterance out of a cloud,
nor through any misleading appearance, but might
instead hear, without these things, the very Being
Himself, Whose presence in them we love might —
hear Him with our Spirit even as now we strain our
intellect and reach, with the swift movement of
thought, to an eternal Wisdom that remains un-
—
moved beyond all things if this movement were
continued, and all other visions (being utterly unequal
to the task) were to be done away, and this one vision
were to seize the beholder, and were to swallow him
up and plunge him in the abyss of its inward delights,
so that his life for ever should be like that fleeting
moment of consciousness for which we have been
yearning, would not such a condition as this be an
'Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord'?"
This passage describes the Via Ncgativa in terms
of aspiration drawn (we cannot doubt) from experi-
ence. The soul must cast all things away sense, :
perception, thought, and the very consciousness of

self; and yet the process and its final result are of
the most intense and positive kind. are reminded We
of Wôrdsworth's —
" ^
Thought was not ;
in enjoyment it
expired."
Perhaps more striking is the testimony of St

Thomas a Kempis, since, having no taste for specu-
lation, he is not likely to be misled by theories. In
ExcursioHy Book
*
I.
^
the Imitation of CJirist occurs the following passage :
''
When shall I at full gather myself in Thee, that for
Thy love I feel not myself, but Thee only, above all
feeling and all manner, in a manner not known to
"
all ?
Thus he speaks longingly of a state in which the
individual human spirit is altogether merged and has
no self-consciousness whatever, except the mere con-
sciousness of its merging. It is conscious of God
alone because, as an object of thought, it has gone
out of its particular being and is merged and lost in
Him. And the way in which St. Thomas describes
this state and speaks of it as not known to all
suggests that it was known to himself by personal
experience.
The clearest and profoundest analysis of the state,
based also on the most vivid personal experience of
it, is given by Ruysbroeck. The two following
passages are examples.
"
The spirit for ever continues to burn in itself, for
its love is eternal and it feels itself ever more and
;
more to be burnt up in love, for it is drawn and trans-

formed into the Unity of God, where the spirit burns
in love. If it observes itself, it finds a distinction and
an otherness between itself and God but where it is ;
burnt up it is undifferentiated and without distinction,

and therefore it feels nothing but unity for the flame ;
of the Love of God consumes and devours all that it

can enfold in its Self." "^
"
And, after this, there follows the third way of
feeling namely, that we feel ourselves to be one with
;
God for, through the transformation in God, we feel

;
ourselves to be swallowed up in the fathomless abyss

of our eternal blessedness, wherein we can nevermore
find any distinction between ourselves and God.
And this is our highest feeling, which we cannot
*
*
Book III., chap, xxiii, The Sparkling Stone, chap. iii.
experience in any other way than in the immersion in

love. And therefore, so soon as we are upHfted and
drawn into our highest feehng, all our powers stand
idle in an essential fruition; but our powers do not
pass away into nothingness, for then we should lose
our created being. And as long as we stand idle,
with an inclined spirit and with open eyes, but without
reflection, so long we can contemplate and have
fruition. But, at the very moment in which we seek
to prove and to comprehend what it is that we feel,
we fallback into reason, and there we find a dis-
tinction and an otherness between ourselves and God,
and find God outside ourselves in incomprehensi-
bility."!
Nothing could be more lucid. The moi is merged
in the Godhead and yet the ego still retains its in-
dividuality un-merged, and the existence of the
perfected spirit embraces these two opposite poles of
fusion and distinction.
The same doctrine is taught, though with less
masterly clearness, by St. Bernard in the De Diligcndo
Deo. There is, he says, a point of rapture where the
human spirit " forgets itself and passes wholly
. . .
into God." Such a process is " to lose yourself, as it

were, like one who has no existence, and to have no
self-consciousness whatever, and to be emptied of
"
yourself and almost annihilated." As a little drop
"
of water," he continues, blended with a large
quantity of wine, seems utterly to pass away from
itself and assumes the flavour and colour of wine, and
as iron when glowing with fire loses its original or
proper form and becomes just like the fire; and as
the air, drenched in the light of the sun, is so changed
into the same shining brightness that it seems to be
not so much the recipient of the brightness as the
actual brightness itself: so all human sensibility in
1
The Sparkling Stone, chap. x.
the saints must then, in some ineffable manner, melt

and pass out of itself, and be lent into the will of
God. . The substance (/.^. personality) will remain
. .
but in another form." ^

Of this transcendent experience St. Bernard bluntly \
"
says : To experience this state is to be deified," and
"Deification" is a technical term in the IVIystical
Theology of both the Eastern and the Western
Church. Though the word Oecooig was perhaps a
Mystery term, yet it occurs, for instance, in the
writings Macarius, and there is therefore
of St.
nothing strange or novel in the fact that Dionysius
uses it. But he carefully distinguishes between this
and cognate words and his fantastic and uncouth
;
diction (here as so
is often) due to a straining after
rigid accuracy. The Super-Essence he calls the
Originating Godhead, or rather, perhaps, the Origin
of Godhead (OeaQxio), just as he calls it also "the
"
Origin of Existence {ovoLaQxla). From this Origin
there issues eternally, in the Universal stream of
Emanation, that which he calls Deity or Very
Deity (0e6Tr]g or avToOsozrjg). This Deity, like
Being, Life, etc., is an effluence radiating from the
Super-Essential Godhead, and is a distant View of It
as the dim visibility of a landscape is the landscape
seen from afar, or as the effluent heat belongs to a
fire. Purified souls, being raised up to the heights of
contemplation, participate in this Effluence and so
are deified (OeovvTm) and become in a derivative
sense, divine (Oecodelg, Oeioi), or may even be called
Gods (Osol), just as by participating in the Effluence
or Emanation of Being all created things become in
a derivative sense existent (ovoiojSfj, ovxa). The
Super-Essential Godhead (Oeanîa) is beyond Deity"
as It is beyond Existence but the names " Deity ;
" "
{Oeoxrig) or Existent [cov) may be symbolically or
*
De Dil- Deo, chap. x.
inadequately applied to It, as a fire may be termed

"
warm " from its results though its actual tempera-
ture is of an intenser kind than this would
"
imply. And the name of Godhead," which belongs
to It more properly, is given It
(says Dionysius)
merely because it is the Source of our deification.
I
Thus instead of arguing from God's Divinity to man's
potential divinity, Dionysius argues from the acquisi-
tion of actual divinity by certain men to God's Supra-
Divinity. This is only another way of saying that
j
God but the highest Appearance or Manifestation
is
of the Absolute, x^nd this (as was seen above) is
only another way of stating the orthodox and obvious
doctrine that all our notions of Ultimate Reality are
inadequate.
VIII. — The Scriptural Basis of Dionysius's

Doctrines
the treatise " Concerning the Divine Names,"
In
Dionysius seeks to reconcile his daring conceptions
with Scripture. Nor can he be said to fail. His
\
argument, briefly, is that in Scripture we have a
4 Revealed Religion and that things which are Revealed
belong necessarily to the plane of Manifestation.
jThus Revealed Religion interprets to us in terms of
human thought things which, being Incomprehensible,
are ultimately This is merely what
beyond thought.
Augustine teaches when he says that the Pro-
^
St.
logue of St. John's Gospel reveals the mysteries of
^
Com. on St. John, Tr. I. i "For who can declare the Truth as
:
actually is? I venture to say, my brothers,

it
perhaps John himself
has not declared it as it actually is, but, even he, only according to his
powers. For he was a man sptaking about God— one inspired, indeed,
by God but still a man. Because he was inspired he has declared
—
something of the Truth had he not been inspired he could not have
—
declared anything of it but because he was a man (though an inspired
one) he has not declared the whole Truth, but only what was possible
for a man."
SCRIPTURAL BASIS 41
Eternity not as they actually are but as human

thought can grasp them.^ The neo-Platonism of
Dionysius does not invahclate Scripture any more
than that of Plotinus invaHdates the writings of Plato.
Dionysius merely says that there is an unplumbed^'.
Mystery behind the words of Scripture and stream-
'
ing through them, just as Plotinus and other neo- ;
Platonists hold that there is an unplumbed Mystery l
streaming through from behind Plato's categories of

thought. And if it be urged that at least our Lord's
teaching on the P'atherhood of God cannot be recon-
ciled with the doctrine of a Supra-Personal Godhead,
the answer is near at hand.^ For the Pagan Plotinus,
whose doctrine is similar to that of
Dionysius, gives
" "
this very name of Father to his Supra-Personal
—
Absolute or rather to that Aspect of It which comes
into touch with the human soul.^ Moreover in the
most rigidly orthodox Christian theology God the
^
[What Augustine says is that St. John, because he was only human,
has not declared the whole Truth concerning Deity. But this is very
different from saying that what St. John has declared does not
correspond with the eternal Reality. While Augustine holds that the
Johannine Revelation is not complete, he certainly held tliat it was
correct as far as it goes. Augustine had no conception of a Deity
whom the qualities of self-consciousness and personality did not
essentially represent. It is more than questionable whether Augustine
would have accepted the statement that the Prologue of St. John's
'^
Gospel does not record the mysteries of lilternity as they actually
are.''' Augustine had a profound belief that God as lie is in Himself
corresponds with God as He is revealed. Ed.] —
[The writer argues that Christ and Plotinus both employ the same
'^
expression, Father, to the Deity. But the use of the same expression
will not prove much unless it is employed in the same meaning. No
one can seriously contend that the Pagan Plotinus meant what Jesus
Christ meant of the Fatherhood of God. Surely it is unqueslionalile
that the Fatherhood of God meant for Jesus Christ what constituted
God's supreme reality. It was employed in a sense which is entirely
foreign to the metaphysical doctrine of a Supra-Personal Deity. The
Semitic conception of the Godhead was not that of a neo-Platnnist
metaphysician.
— Ed.]
^
e.g. Emu I. 6, 8 : "We have a country whence we came, an J we
have a Father there."
D
Father is not a Personality. St. xA.ugustine, for
" "
instance/ teaches that the Persons of the Trinity
are Elements whose true nature is unknown to us.'^
They correspond however, he says, to certain elements
in our individual personalities, and hence the human
^
[What Augustine says is that we do not speak of three essences and
three Gods, but of one essence and one God. then do we speakWhy
of three Persons and not of one Person ?
"
Why, therefore, do we not call these three together one Person,
or one Essence and one God we say three Persons, while we do not
;
say three Gods or three Essences unless it be because we wish some

;
one word to serve for that meaning whereby the Trinity is understood,
that we might not be altogether silent when asked, what three, while
we confessed that they are three?"
I.
Augustine's distinction is between the genus and the species.
Thus Abraham Isaac and Jacob are three specimens of one genus.
What he contends is that this is not the case in the Deity. 2. The
" there is
essence of the Deity is unfolded in these Three. And
" In no can any
nothing else of that Essence beside the Trinity." " way
other person whatever exist out of the same essence whereas in
mankind there can be more than three. 3. Moreover the three
specimens of the genus man, Abraham Isaac and Jacob, are more,
" But in God it is not
collectively, than any one of them by himself.
so ; for the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit together is not a
greater essence than the Father alone or the Son alone." What he
means is that the Trinity is not to be explained by spacial metaphors
{De Trin. vii. ii).
Augustine then is not teaching that the Persons of the Trinity are
Elements whose true nature is unknown to us. He certainly does
teach that Personality in the Godhead must exist otherwise than
what we find under human limitations. But Augustine's conception of
Deity is not the Supra- Personal Absolute. To him the Trinity was
not confined to the plane of Manifestation. We have only to remember
how he regards Sabellianism to prove this. Moreover, who can doubt
that Augustine's psychological conception of God as the Lover, the
Beloved and the Eove which in itself is personal, represented to his
mind the innermost reality and ultimate essence of the Deity? God is
not for Augustine a supra-personal something in which both unity and
trinity are transcended. The Trinity of Manifestation is for Augustine
that which corresponds with and is identical with the very essential
being of Deity. God is not merely Three as known to us but Three
as He is in Himself apart from all self-revelation. Ed.] —
2
De Trin. vii. ii : " ... do we speak of Three 'Persons'
Why
. . .
except because we need some one term to explain the meaning of
the word '
Trinity,' so as not to be entirely without an answer to the

'
question :
'
Three What ? when we confess God to be Three."
SCRIPTURAL BASIS 43
soul created (he tells us) not in the image of one

is
Person the Godhead but in the image of the whole

in
Trinity.^ Thus he by implication denies that God

the Father is, in the ordinary sense of the word, a
Personality. And the teaching of St. Thomas
Aquinas is very similar.^ It may, perhaps, even be
said that the germ of the most startling doctrines
which Dionysius expounds may be actually found in
Scripture. A
state, for instance, which is not know-
ledge and yet is not ignorance, is described by St.
"
Paul when he says that Christians know God or
^
rather are known of Him." This is the mental
attitude of Unknowing. For the mind is quiescent
and emptied of its own powers and so receives a
knowledge the scope and activity of which is outside
itself in God. And in speaking of an ecstatic experi-,
ence which he himself had once attained St. Paul
seems to suggest that he was, on that occasion, outside
of himself in such a ma'nner as hardly, in the ordinary
sense, to retain his own identity.'^ Moreover he
suggests that the redeemed and perfected creation is
at last to be actually merged in God (IVa ^ 6 0£og ra
ndvxa ev TidoLv^). And the doctrine of Deification is
certainl}', in the germ. Scriptural. For as Christ is
the Son of God so are we to be Sons of God,^ and
Christ is reported actually to have based His own
claims to Deity on the potential Divinity of the
human soul.' Moreover we are to reign with Him ^
and are, in a manner passing our present apprehen-

sion, to be made like when we seeHim as Him
He is.«
Now all the boldest statements of Dionysius about
1
De Trin. vii. 12. 2
Su7nvia, Pars I. Q. xi.v. Art. \ii.
'
Gal. iv. 9. ''2 Cor. xii. 2-5.
'•'
I Cor. XV. 28.
^
New Testament, /rt'.nv'w.
' ^
John X. 34-36. 2 Tnn. ii. 12;
Kev. i. 6; v. 10; xx.6.
^
I
Jolm iii. 2.
the ultimate glory for which the human soul is
destined are obviously true of Christ, and as applied
to Him, they would be a mere commentary on the
words " I and the Father are One." ^ Therefore if
Christ came to impart His Life to us so that the
^things which are His by Nature should be ours by-
Grace, it follows that the teaching of Dionysius is in
harmony with Scripture so long as it is made to rest
on the Person and Work of Christ. And, though
Dionysius does not emphasize the Cross as much as
could be wished, yet he certainly holds that Christ is
the Channel through which the power of attainment
is communicated to us. It must not be forgotten
that he waiting as a Christian to Christians, and so
is
assumes the Work of Christ as a revealed and
experienced Fact. And since he holds that every
individual person and thing has its pre-existent
limits ordained in the Super-Essence, therefore he
holds that the Human Soul of Christ has Its pre-
existent place there as the Head of the whole
creation. That is what he means by the phrase
"
Super-Essential Jesus," and that is what is taught
in the quotation from Hierotheus already alluded
to. No doubt the lost works of Dionysius dealt more
fully wnth this subject, as indeed he hints himself.
And through this scanty sense of the incredible
if,
evil which darkens and pollutes the world, he does

not in the present treatise lay much emphasis upon
the Saviour's Cross, yet he giv-es us definite teaching
on the kindred Mystery of the Incarnation.
IX. — Conclusion
A few words on this matter and the present sketch
is almost done. The Trinity (as was said) is Super-
^
John X. 30.
CONCLUSION 45
Essential or Supra-Personal. It is that Side of the

Godhead which is turned towards the plane of
" "
Creation. Each Person possesses the whole Super-
Essence and yet Each in a different manner. For
the Father originative and the other Two" Persons"
is
derivative. The
entire Super-Essence timelessly wells
up in the Father and so passes on (as it were), time-
less and entire, to the Son and Spirit. Thus the
'*
Second '* Person of the Trinity possesses eternally
" "
(like the other Two Persons in the Godhead)
nothing but this Formless Radiance. But when the
Second " Person " becomes Incarnate this Formless
and Simple Radiance focuses Itself (shall we say ?)
in the complex lens of a Human Individuality. Or
perhaps Christ's Humanity should rather be compared
to a prism which breaks that single white radiance
into the iridescent colours of manifold human virtues.
1 hence there streams forth a glory which seeks to
kindle in our hearts an answering fire whereby being
wholly consumed we may pass up out of our finite
being to find within the Super-Essence our pre-
determined Home.
Such is, in outline, the teaching of this difficult
writer who, though he tortured language to express
the truth which struggled within him for utterance,
yet has often been rashly condemned through being
misunderstood. The charge of Pantheism that has
been laid at his door is refuted by the very extrava-
gance of the terms in which he asserts the Transcend-"
ence of the Godhead. For the title " Super-Essence
itself implies a Mystery which is indeed the ultimate
Goal of the creatures but is not at present their actual
plane of being. It implies a Height which, though it
be their own, they yet can reach through nothing
else than acomplete self-renunciation. With greater
show of reason Dionysius has been accused of
hostility to civilization and external things. Yet here
!
46 DIONYSIUS jTHE AREOPAGITE
again unjustly. For, ifidji his solitary hermitage he

lived from the haunts of men, yet he wrote an
far
entire treatise on the institutional side of Religion ;
and he describes with impassioned enthusiasm the

visible beauties of Nature. And, in fact, in his
treatment of evil,he goes out of his way to assert
that the whole material world is good. Outwar.d
things are assumed as the starting-point from which
the human spirit must rise to another region of
experience. Dionysius does not mean that they are
all worthless ;
he simply means that they are not
ultimate. In the passage concerning the three move-
ments of the soul he implies that the human faculties
are valuable though they must finally be transcended.
" "
Even so Macarius tells us that Revelation is a
" "
mental state beyond Perception and beyond
^
''
Enlightened Vision." All our natural activities
must first silt together the particles which form the
block of marble before we can by the Via Negativa
carve the image out of it. And if this process of
block's original shape, yet it
rejection destroys the
needs the block to work upon, and it does not seek
to grind the whole material into powder. All life,
when rightly understood, is a kind of Via Negativa,
and we must struggle after certain things and then
deliberately cast them aside, as a musician
must first
master the laws of Counterpoint and then sometimes
of the Law is a
ignore them, or as the Religion
for the higher Religion of the Spirit.
preparation
Dionysius, nurtured in philosophy, passed beyond
as St. Paul, nurtured
Philosophy without obscurantism,
in the Law, passed beyond the Law without dis-
obedience. Finite things are good, for they point us
on to the Infinite but if we chain ourselves to them
;
M they will become a hindrance to our journey, when

''
they can no longer be

a guide. And Dionysius
1
Horn., vii. 5.
CONCLUSION 47
would have us not destroy them but merely break

our chains.
His doctrines are certainly dangerous. Perhaps
that is a mark of their truth. For the Ultimate
Truth of things is so self-contradictory that it is
bound to be full of peril to minds like ours which can
only apprehend one side of Reality at the time.
Therefore it is not perhaps to be altogether desired
that such doctrines should be very popular. They
can only be spiritually discerned, through the
intensest spiritual effort. Without this they will only
too readily lead to blasphemous arrogance and selfish
sloth. And yet the Via Negativa, for those who can
scale its dizzy ascent, is after all but a higher altitude
of that same royal road which, where it traverses
more populous regions, we all recognize as the one
true Pilgrim's Way. For it seeks to attain its goal
through self-renunciation. And where else are th^
true principles of such a process to be found if it be
not in the familiar virtues of Christian humility and
Christian love? '
X.— Bibliography
[The writings of the Areopagite consist of four im-
portant treatises De divinis Noviiiiibiis^ De niystica
:
Theologia, De Ccclesti Hierarchia^ De ecclesiatica Hicr-

arcliia ; some letters and a number of lost docu-
;
ments referred to in the treatises. Little has been

done as yet towards the provision of a critical text.
The Syriac, Armenian and Arabic versions have
not been investigated. Migne's text contains many
manifest errors it is a reprint of the Venice edition
;
of 1755-6.
The ideas of Dionysius's system are discussed In all
books on Mysticism, and a multitude of magazine
articles, mainly in German, deal with isolated points
48
DIONYSIUSJ
THk AREOPAGITE
in the actual treatises besi(|es the problem of author-
ship. The brief list given below will suffice for the
present purpose.
The Dionysian Documents have been critically in-
vestigated by Hipler, His work was followed by
J. Draseke in an Essay entitled " Dionysiaca," in the
Zeitsch'ift filr Wissenschaftliche TJieologie, 1887, pp.
300-333. Also by Nirschl. and by Styglmayr. in the
HistoriscJie JahrbucJi^ 1S95. Criticism on the author-
"
ship has been continued by Hugo Koch, Pseudo-
Dionysius Areopagita," in the ForscJmngen ziir
ChristlicJieii Litteratur-Jind DogniengescJiichtc, 1900.
Ed. by Ehrhard and Kirsch. Hugo Koch's work is
one of the best on the subject.
Colet, J. (Dean), Tzvo Treatises on The Hierarchies
of Dionysius^ with introduction and translation, by
J. H. Lupton (London, 1869).
Fowler, J., The Works of Dionysiiis, especially in
Reference to Cliristian Art (London, 1872). J.
Parker, English Translation (Oxford, 1897).
Sharpe, A. B., Mysticism : Its True Nature and
Valne (London, 1910). Contains a translation of
the Mystical Theology and of the letters to Caius
and Dorotheus.
Inge, W. R., Christian Mysticism (London, 1899),
pp. 104-122.
Jones, Rufus M., Studies in Mystical Religion
(London, 1909), Chap. IV.
Gardner, Edmund G., Dante and the Mystics
(London, 191 3), Chap. HI.
For the general influence of Dionysius reference

should be made to the following writers —
Bach, Josef, Die Dogmengescliichte des Mittelalters,
I Theil., 1874, pp. 6-15.
Baur, F. C, Die Christliche Lehre von der Dreiei-
BIBLIOGRAPHY 49
nigkeit unci MenscJiwerdung Gottes, 1842, Bd. II.,

207-251.
Dorner, Development of the; Doctrine of the Person
of Christ, English translation, Div. ii., Vol. I., pp.
i57ff.
Westcott, Essay on Dionysius the Areopagite in
Religious TJiougkt in the West, 1891, pp. 142-193.
Uebinger, J., Die Gotteslehre des Nikolaus Cusaiius,
1888.— Ed.]
THE DIVINE NAMES
This Treatise contains thirteen chapters. The following
is a brief summary of their contents.
Chapter I. Introductory. The Purpose of the Treatise.

Doctrine concerning (iod to be obtained from the
Scriptures. But all the Names there given Him cannot
represent Him who is Nameless. It is only Symbolical
Theology.
Chapter II. On the Divine Unity and Distinction.
Chapter III. On the Approach to the Divine.
Chapter IV. On Goodness as a Name of Deity, including
a discussion on the Nature of Evil.
Chapter V. On Deity as Being. The three degrees :
Existence, Life, Intelligence.
Chapter VI. On Deity as Life.

Chapter VII. Deity considered as Wisdom, Reason, Truth.
Chapter VIII. Deity considered as Power.
Chapter IX. Deity considered as Great and as Small.
Might be called, as Deity in relation to Space.
Chapter X. Deity as Omnipotent : the Ancient of Days.
God in relation to Time.
Chapter XL On God and Peace.
Chapter XII. On the Names Holy of holies. King of
kings, Lord of lords, God of gods.
Chapter XI 1 1. On the Divine Perfection and Unity.

50
THE DIVINE NAMES 51
CHAPTER I
Dionysius the Presbyter, to his fellow-Presbyter Timothy ^

What is the purpose of the discourse^ and what the
traditio7i concertiing the Divine Names.
I. Blessed Timothy, the Outlines of Divinity'^

Now,
being ended, I will
proceed, so far as in me lies, to an
Exposition of the Divine Names. And here also leF*
us set before our minds the scriptural rule that in
speaking about God v\ê should declare the Truth, not
with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demon-
stration of the power which the Spirit * stirred up in
the Sacred Writers, whereby, in a manner surpassing
speech and knowledge,'^ we embrace those truths
which, in like manner, surpass them, in that Union
which exceeds our faculty, and exercise of discursive,
and of intuitive reason.^ We must not then dare to
speak, or indeed to form any conception, of the
hidden super-essential ^ Godhead, except those things
that are revealed to us from the Holy Scriptures.''
^
The name of St. Paul's companion is intended to give colour to
ihc writer's pseudonym. See Introduction, p, I ; cf. iii. 2.
- ^
This work is lost. 2 Cor. ii. 4.
*
Tots acpdeyKTOts koI ayuwarois a^pQeyKTOis ical ayuuxTTws (rvpa'mdjXiOa.
See Intr. on " Unknowing," p. 32.
^
Kara tt]v KpelrTova rrjS KaO' T]fxas AoyiKqs Kal uoepas Svudfxcocs Kal
ii/€pyeias. D. frequently distinguishes between the discursive and the
inluiiive reason. Together they cover the whole of the intellect, cf.
Wordsworth, Prelude, xiv. 119, 120:
" Hence endless for the
occupation soul.
Whether
discursive or intuitive."
The former gives us deductions, the latter the axioms on which these
are based. See Intr., p. 26.
^
See Intr., p. 4.
'
D. is here contrasting tlie Affirmative Path of Knowing with the
Negative Path of Unknowing. The former has a value as leading up
to the latter but it is only safe so far as we keep within the bounds
;
of Scripture. Unscriptural conceptions of God are false Scriptural :
conceptions are true so far as they go but their literal meaning must
;
be transcended. See Intr., p. 41 f.

For a super-essential understanding of It is proper
to Unknowing, which Heth in the Super-Essence
Thereof surpassing Discourse, Intuition and Being ;
acknowledging which truth let us lift up our eyes

towards the steep height, so far as the effluent light
of the Divine Scriptures grants its aid, and, as we
strive to ascend unto those Supernal Rays, let us gird
ourselves for the task with holiness and the reverent
fear of God.'-* For, if we may safely trust the wise and
infallible Scriptures, Divine things are revealed unto
each created spirit in proportion to its powers, and
in this measure is perception granted through the
workings of the Divine goodness, the which in just

care for our preservation divinely tempereth unto
finite measure the infinitude of things which pass
man's understanding. For even as things which are
^
intellectually discerned cannot be comprehended or
perceived by means of those things which belong to
the senses, nor simple and imageless things by means
of t}^pes and images, nor the formless and intangible
essence of unembodied things by means of those
which have bodily form," by the same law of truth
the boundless^ Super-Essence surpasses Essences,
the Super-Intellectual Unity surpasses Intelligences,
^
;'. e. The Transcendent Truths which are beyond ordinary know-
ledge.
voTjTa. The word vovs —
Mind in the sense not merely of abstract
intellect but of the spiritual personality. Hence the word is often
used to =
an angel ; and votjtos is often used as =
spiritual, instead of
TTvevixariKSs,which D. does not employ. This use of vovs and its
derivatives is ultimately due to the influence of Aristotle. (Cf. the
use ot vovs in Plotinas. St. Thomas Aquinas regards intellectus
)
as = "personality." But here the reference is perhaps rather to the

province of abstract intellect.
^
Apparentlythis is the same thought repeated in three different
ways. The
formless essence (oôp(/)ia) of a thing is simple and image-
less — —
a Platonic idea perceived by the mind ; things which have
bodily form are, as it were, types and symbols perceived by the
senses.
•
Or "indeterminate."
THE DIVINE NAMES 53
the One which is beyond thought surpasses the

apprehension of thought, and the Good which is
beyond utterance surpasses the reach of words.^
Yea, it is an Unity which is the unifying Sourcd^t*
all unity and a Super-Essential Essence,^ a Mind
beyond the reach of mind

^
and a Word beyond
utterance, eluding Discourse, Intuition, Name, and
every kind of being. It is the Universal Cause of
existence while Itself existing not, for It is beyond
all Being and such that It alone could give, with
)
proper understanding thereof, a revelation of Itself.
2. Now concerning this hidden Super-Essential
Godhead we must not dare, as I have said, to speak,
or even to form any conception Thereof, except those
things which are divinely revealed to us from the
Holy Scriptures. For as It hath lovingly taught us
^
inthe Scriptures concerning Itself the understanding
and contemplation of Its actual nature is not acces-
sible to for such knowledge is super-

any being ;
essentially exalted above them all. And many of

the Sacred Writers thou wilt find who have declared
that It is not only invisible and incomprehensible,
but also unsearchable and past finding out, since
there is no trace of any that have penetrated the
hidden depths of Its infinitude."* Not that the Good
is wholly incommunicable to anything nay, rather, ;
while dwelling alone by Itself, and having there
(i) the material world

1
Thus the three grades are : ; (2) the spiritual
world of truths, personality, etc. ; (3) the Godhead which is, so to
speak, supra-spiritual.
2
i. e. A
Supra-Personal Personality. See Intr., p. 4 f.
Probably not "Irrational Mind" (as Dr.

3
vovs oLvo-qTos. Inge
translates it). Maxinius takes it passively, as translated above.
* Rom. xi. 33 i Cor. ii. ii ; Eph. S.
Ps. cxlv. 3 Matt. xi. 27
; ; ;
iii.
^
ouK oVTOs Tx^'ows ovSevhs rwv iirl ttji' Kpv(plau aifTrjs atrfipiav
COS
5ie\r}Kvd6Tcov. Two interpretations of this passage are possil)le (l) :
Those who have penetrated the hidden Depths cannot describe the
Vision (cf. Dante, Par. xxxiii, 55-66) ; (2) Nobody has ever penetrated
into the ultimate Depths of Deity.
firmly fixed Its super-essential Ray, It lovingly

reveals Itself by illuminations corresponding to each
separate creature's powers, and thus draws upwards
holy minds into such contemplation, participation
and resemblance ^ of Itself as they can attain —
even them that holily and duly strive thereafter
and do not seek with impotent presumption the
Mystery beyond that heavenly revelation which is so
granted as to fit their powers, nor yet through their
lower propensity slip down the steep descent,- but
with unwavering constancy press onwards toward the
ray that casts its light upon them and, through the
love responsive to these gracious illuminations, speed
their temperate and holy flight on the wings of a
godly reverence.
3. In obedience to these divine behests
which guide
all the holy dispositions
^
of the heavenly hosts, we
worship with reverent silence the unutterable Truths
and, with the unfathomable'* and holy veneration of our
mind, approach that Mystery of Godhead which ex-
ceeds all Mind and Being. And we press upwards to
those beams which in the Holy Scripture shine upon
us wherefrom we gain the light which leads us unto
;
1
Ocoipid, Koiuovia, o/xoiuxTts. These are three elements of one process.
Resemblance is the final goal, cf. I
John iii. 2. D. defines
Deification "a process whereby we are made like unto God
as
and are united unto Him {'^vwais) so far as these things
{acpo/j-oiwais)
maybe." {£cr/. Hier. I. 4. Migne, p. 376, A.)
^
Two kinds of danger: (i) spiritual presumption; (2) the tempta-
tions of our earthly nature. In dealing with the first D. warns us
against leaving the Affirmative Path until we are ready. The Negative
Path goes on where the Affamative Path stops. St. John of the Cross
and other spiritual writers insist that, though contemplation is a higher
acti\ ity than meditation through images, yet not all are called to it,
and that it is disastrous
prematurely to abandon meditation. S. John
of the Cross, in the Dark Night of the Soul, explains the signs which
will show when the time has come for the transition. Note the spiritual
snnity of D. His Unknowing is not a blank.
^
TO.S oKas . rS}V vTrepovpauicov raêcvu aylas SiaKOcrixrâcLS.
. .
^
A depth opens up in ihe heart of man corresponding to the depth
of the Godhead. Deep answers unto deep. Cf i Cor. ii. m, n.
THE DIVINE NAMES 55
the Divine praises,^ being supernaturally enlightened

by them and conformed unto that sacred hymnody,
even so as to behold the Divine enlightenments the
which through them are given in such wise as fits our
powers, and so as to praise the bounteous Origin of
all holy illumination in accordance with that Doctrine,
as concerning Itself, wherewith It hath instructed us
in the Holy Scriptures. Thus do we learn ^ that It is
the Cause and Origin and Being and Life of all crea-
tion.^ And It is unto them that fall away from It a
Voice that doth recall them and a Power by which
they rise and to them that have stumbled into a^
;
corruption of the Divine image within them, It is a

Power of Renewal and Reform and It is a sacred ;
Grounding to them that feel the shock of unholy

assault, and a Security to them that stand an upward :
Guidance to them that are being drawn unto It, and a

Principle of Illumination^ to them that are being
enlightened a Principle of Perfection to them that
:
are being perfected ^ a principle of Deity to them

;
that are being deified ^ and of Simplicity to them

;
that are being brought unto simplicity and of Unity

;
"^
^
vphs Tovs eeapx^KOvs vfivovs. Either (i) "leads us to declare the
Divine praises" or (2) "leads us to apprehend the Divine praises as
;
sung by angels," etc.

^
In the whole of this passage God is spoken of as at the same time
Efficient, Formal and Final Cause of the soul's activity. D. teaches
that God is present in all things, but not equally in all. Cf. Intr.,
p. 14.
3
Gen. i.
*
Three stages may be traced here corresponding to Purgation,
llluminaiion and Union. I have tried to indicate the transitions from
one stage t) the next by the punctuation.
^
Twv reXov/xeuuu reXerapxia. "Perfect" {t€A€ios) and the words
connected with it were technical terms in the Greek Mysteries. Possibly
there are traces of this technical use in St. Paul's Epistles {c^. I Cor.
ii. 6 ; Phil. iii. 15).
^
See Intr., p. 39.
Taif deovjuevcov Qcapxô-
'
The must turn away from the complex world of sense and
soul
—
have only one desire the desire for God. Thus it becomes concentrated
as it were, and so is in a simple and unified state. Cf. Malt. vi. 22.
See Intr., p. 25.
to them that
are being brought unto unity. Yea, in
a super-essential manner, above the category of
origin, It is the Origin of all origin, and the good and
bounteous Communication (so far as such may be ^) of
hidden mysteries and, in a word, It is the life of all
;
things that live and the Being of all that are, the
Origin and Cause of all life and being through Its
bounty which both brings them into existence and
maintains them.
4. These mysteries we learn from the Divine
Scriptures, and thou
wilt find that in well-nigh all the
utterances of the vSacred Writers the Divine Names
^
refer in aSymbolical Revelation to Its beneficent
Emanations.^ Wherefore, in almost all consideration
of Divine things we see the Supreme Godhead cele-
brated with holy praises as One and an Unity,
through the simplicity and unity of Its supernatural
indivisibility, from whence (as from an unifying
power) we attain to unity, and through the* supernal
conjunction of our diverse and separate qualities are
knit together each into a Godlike Oneness, and all
together into a mutual Godly union.^ And It is
called the Trinity because Its supernatural fecundity
is revealed in a Threefold
Personality,^ wherefrom
all Fatherhood in heaven and on earth exists and
draws Its name. And It is called the Universal
Cause ^ since all things came into being through Its
^
i. e. So far as we are capable of receiving this communication.
^
iK(paVT0piK'2s Kal V/J.Vr]TLKWS.
^
i. e. God's differentiated activities. Since the ultimate Godhead is
'ineffable, Scripture can only hint at Its Nature by speaking of Its
manifestations in the relative sphere. See Intr., p. 8.
*
God is ineffable and transcends unity, see Intr., p. 5. But, since
His presence in man produces an unity in each individual (and in
human society), Scripture calls Him "One."
^
The ineffable Godhead transcends our conception of the Trinity.
But we call Him a Trinity because we experience His trinal working —
as our ultimate Home, as an Individual Personality Who was once
Incarnate, and as a Power within our hearts. See Intr., p. 7.
^
God is not a First Cause, for a cause is one event in a temporal
THE DIVINE NAMES -7
bounty, whence all being springs and It is called ;
Wise and Fair because all things which keep their

own nature uncorrupted are full of all Divine
harmony and holy Beauty;^ and especially It is
called Benevolent'^ because, inone of Its Persons, It
verily and wholly shared in our human lot, calling
unto Itself and uplifting the low estate of man,
wherefrom, in an ineffable manner, the simple Being
of Jesus assumed a compound state,^ and the Eternal-
h.ath taken a temporal existence, and He who super-
naturally transcends all the order of all the natural

world was born in our Human Nature without any
change or confusion of His ultimate properties. And
in all the other Divine enlightenments which the
occult Tradition of our inspired teachers hath, by
mystic Interpretation, accordant with the Scriptures,
bestowed upon us, we also have been initiated appre- :
hending these things in the present life (according to

our powers), through the sacred veils of that loving
kindness which in the Scriptures and the Hierarchical
Traditions,* enwrappeth spiritual truths in terms
drawn from the world of sense, and super-essential
truths in terins drawn from Being, clothing with
shapes and forms things which are shapeless and
formless, and by a variety of separable symbols,
series, and God is beyond Time and beyond the whole creation. Vet
in so far as He
acts on the relative plane He may, by virtue of this
manifestation of Himself in the creation, be spoken of as a Cause.
^
J-ieauty is a sacrament and only truly itself when it points to some-
thing beyond itself. That is why "Art for Art's sake" degrades art.
Beauty reveals God, but God is more than Beauty. Hence Beauty has
its true being o//fsidc' itstU in Him. Cf. Intr., p. 31.
-
Love is the most perfect manifestation of God. Vet God is in a
sense beyond even love as we know it. For love, as we know it,
implies the distinction between "me" and "thee," and God is
ultimaiely beyond such distinction. See Tntr., p. 35.

^
airX'jvs ^l-qaovs ffuveTedri. Cf Myst. Theol. HI., "Super Essential
J?)
esus.
*
lepapX'""'''^ ""P'^Soo-fcoj', i.e. Ecclesin-ticnl Tradition.
E
58 DiONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
fashioning manifold attributes of the imageless and

supernatural Simplicity. \ But hereafter, when we are
corruptible and immortal and attain the blessed lot of
being like unto Christ, then (as the Scripture saith),
we shall be for ever with the Lord,^ fulfilled with His
visible Theophany in holy contemplations, the which
shall shine about us with radiant beams of glory
(even as once of old it shone around the Disciples at
the Divine Transfiguration) and so shall we, with our
;
mind made passionless and spiritual, participate in a

spiritual illumination from Him, and in an union
transcending our mental faculties, and there, amidst
the blinding blissful impulsions of His dazzling rays,
we shall, in a diviner manner than at present, be like
unto the heavenly Intelligences.^ For, as the in-
fallible Scripture saith, we shall be equal to the angels
and shall be the Sons of God, being Sons of the
Resurrection.^ Biit atpreseiit we employ (so far as
in us lies), appropriate symbols for things Divine ;
j'
and then from these we press on upwards according
to our powers to behold in simple unity the Truth per-
ceived by spiritual contemplations, and leaving behind
us all human notions of godlike things, we still the
activities of our minds, and reach (so far as this may
be) into the Super-Essential Ray,'^ wherein all kinds
of knowledge so have their pre-existent limits (in a
transcendently inexpressible manner), that we cannot
conceive nor utter It, nor in any wise contemplate
the same, seeing that It surpasseth all things, and
wholly exceeds our knowledge, and super-essentially
contains beforehand (all conjoined within Itself) the
bounds of all natural sciences and forces (while yet
1
I Thess. iv. i6.
-
eu deioTepa /j.iix7)(Tei ruv virepovpaviwv vowv — z. e, the angels.
^
Luke XX. 36.
*
Meditation leads on to Contemplation ; and the higher kind ol
Contemplation is
performed by the J7a Negativa.
THE DIVINE NAMES 59
Its force is not circumscribed by any), and so pos-

sesses, beyond the celestial Intelligences,^ Its firmly
fixed abode. For if all the branches of knowledge
belong to things that have being, and if their limits
have reference to the existing world, then that which
is
beyond all Being must also be transcendent above
all
knowledge."^
5. But if It is greater than all Reason and all
knowledge, and hath Its firm abode altogether be-
yond Mind and Being, and circumscribes, compacts,

embraces and anticipates all things^ while Itself is
altogether beyond the grasp of them all, and cannot
be reached by any perception, imagination, conjec-
ture, name, discourse, apprehension, or understanding,
how then is our Discourse concerning the Divine
Names to be accomplished, since we see that the
Super-Essential Godhead unutterable and name- is
less? Now, as we
setting forth our Out-
said when
lines of Divinity, the One, the Unknowable, the
Super-Essential, the Absolute Good (I mean the
Trinal Unity of Persons possessing the same Deity
and Goodness), 'tis impossible to describe or to con-
ceive in Its ultimate Nature nay, even the angelical ;
communions of the heavenly Powers Therewith which

we describe as either Impulsions or Derivations ^
from the Unknowable and blinding Goodness are
themselves beyond utterance and knowledge, and
belong to none but those angels who, in a manner
beyond angelic knowledge, have been counted worthy
^
i. e. The Angels. I have throughout translated virepovpavios
"celestial" instead of " super-celestial." the meaning is
' " celestial inPresumably
beyond the material sky," or a transcendent sense."
2
The whole of this passage shows that there is a positive element in
Unknowing.
^
"KOLVi-wv . . .
irpoXTjirTiKT]
— i.e. contains them eternally before their
creation.
"*
as e^Te iiriôXas etre irapaSoxas Xf'^ (ftdvai
—
i. e.
according as we
describe the act from above or below. God sends the impulse, the
ngels receive it.
6o DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
thereof. And
godlike Minds, angelically entering
^ ^
(according to their powers) unto such states of union

and being deified and united, through the ceasing of
their natural activities, unto the Light Which sur-
passeth Deity, can find no more fitting method to
celebrate its praises than to deny It every manner
of Attribute.^ For by a true and supernatural illu-
mination from their blessed union Therewith, they
learn that It is the Cause of all things and yet Itself
is
nothing, because It super-essentially transcends
them all. Thus, as for the Super-Essence of the
Supreme Godhead (if we would define the Tran-
scendence of its Transcendent Goodness*) it is not
lawful to any lover of that Truth which is above all
truth to celebrate It as Reason or Power or Mind or
Life or Being, but rather as most utterly surpassing
all condition, movement, life, imagination, conjecture,
name, discourse, thought, conception, being, rest,
dwelling, union,^ limit, infinity, everything that exists.
And yet since, as the Subsistence^ of goodness. It,
by the very fact of Its existence, is the Cause of all
things, in celebrating the bountiful Providence of the
I SupremeGodhead we must draw upon the whole
* creation.! For It is both the central Force of all
1
things, an^ also their final Purpose, and is Itself

before them all, and they all subsist in It and ;
^
01 OeoeiSch . . . foes — i. e. human minds.
2
"In a manner which imitates the angels."
a.yy€\oiJ.iiJ.r)Tws.
" Like
Cf. Wordsworth, Prelude, xiv. io8, I02 angels stopped upon :
the wing by sound of harmony from heaven's remotest spheres."

'
This shows that the Via Negativa is based on an experience and
not on a mere speculation.
*
Tt TToxe i(TTiv 7} tT/s virepayaOoTrjTOS virepvirapîs.
^ " Union " This word has more than one meaning in D.
(eVoxrts). ,
and hence occasional ambiguity. It may = (i) Unity {i. e. that which
makes an individual thing to be one thing) (2) Mental or Spiritual ;
intercourse ; (3) Physical intercourse ; (4) Sense perception. Here it
= either (i) or (2), probably (i).

^
ayaSSTrjTos uirapîs
— i. e. the ultimate Essence in which goodness
consists.
THE DIVINE NAMES 6i
through the fact of Its existence the world is brought \
into being and maintained and It is that which all

—
things desire those which have intuitive or discur-
;
sive Reason seeking It through knowledge, the next

rank of beings through perception, and the rest
through vital movement or the property of mere
existence belonging to their state.^ Conscious of
this, the Sacred Writers celebrate It by every Name J
-
^^
while yet they call It Nameless.2
6. For instance, they call It Nameless when they
say that the Supreme Godhead Itself, in one of the

mystical visions whereby It was symbolically mani-
fested, rebuked him who said
"
What is thy name ? " ^ :
and, as though bidding him not seek by any means

of any Name to acquire a knowledge of God, made
the answer: "Why askest thou thus after My Name
seeing it is secret?" Now is not the secret Name
^
precisely that which is above all names and nameless,
and is beyond every name that is named, not
fixed
only world but also in that which is to come ?
in this
On the other hand, they attribute many names to It
"
when, for instance, they speak of It as declaring I :
" "
am that I am," or I am the Life," or the Light,"
^ ^ "^
or " God," ^ or " the Truth," ^ and when the Inspired

Writers themselves celebrate the Universal Cause
with many titles drawn from the whole created
^ — — —
Man Animal Vegetable Inorganic Matter. For the thought
of this whole passage, cf. Shelley, Adovais : " That Light whose
smile kindles the universe." "The property of mere existence" =
cvcriwdri kuI e/crt/cV eTTiTTjSeioTTjra. ovaia =
an individual existence. Its
highest meaning is a "personality," its lowest a "thing." ovaiuiZi^s
refers generally to its lov\'est meaning and
"
possessing mere
=
existence," i.e. "belonging to the realm of inorganic matter." See
Intr., p. 4.
2
This shows that there is di
positive element in D.'s Via Negaiiva.
^
Judges xiii. 18.
* ^
I'hii. ii.
9 ;
Eph. i. 21. Ex. iii. 14.
® '
John xiv. 6. John viii. 12.
^ °
Gen. xxviii. 13. John xiv. 6.
^nlverse, such as
"
Good," and " Wise," ^
^
and "
Fair,"
^
as "Beloved," 4
as "God of Gods" and ''Lord of
Lords'"^ and of Holies," ^ as " Eternal," ^ as
"Holy
"Existent"^ and as "Creator of Ages," ^ as "Giver
of Life,"io as "Wisdom,"ii as " Mind,"i2 as " Word,"i3
as " Knower," ^"^ as "possessing beforehand all the
" ^^ " ^^
treasures of knowledge," ^^ as Power," as Ruler,"
" ^^ " " ^^
as King of kings," as Ancient of Days and ;
"
as Him that is the same and whose years shall
not fail," 2^ as " Salvation," ^^ as "Righteousness,"^'^ as
" " ""^^ "
Sanctification,"'^ as
Redemption, as Surpassing
all things in greatness,"
^"^
and yet as being in "the
Moreover, they say that He
^^
still small breeze."
dwells within our minds, and in our souls ^^ and
bodies,^^ and in heaven and in earth,-^ and that, while
remaining Himself, He is at one and the same time
within the world around it and above it (yea, above
the sky and above existence) and they call Him a ;
Sun,^^ a Star,^^ and a Fire,^^ and Water,^- a Wind or

Spirit,^^ a Dew,^^ a Cloud,^^ an Archetypal Stone,^^
and a Rock,^^ and All Creation,^^ Who yet (they
declare) is no created thing.
^ 7. Thus, then, the Universal and Transcendent
Cause must both be nameless and also possess the
names of all things in order that It may truly be
an universal Dominion, the Centre of creation on
which all things depend, as on their Cause and
1'
^
1
Matt. xix. 17.
2
Ps. xxvii. 4. Rom. xvi, 27.
^ ^ ^
Isa. V. I. Ps. cxxxvi. 2, 3. Isa. vi. 3.
^ ^
'
Deut. xxxiii. 27. Ex. iii. 14. Gen. i. 1-8.
^" ^^
Gen. i. 20 ; ii. 7 ; Job x. 12 John x. 10. Prov. viii.
;
12 1* Ps. xliv. 21. i^

I Cor. ii. 16. i=^'johni. i. c^l. ii. 3.
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Dan. vii.
Rev. xix. I. Rev. i. 5. Rev. xvii. 4. ,
-" 2^ 22 ^^
Ps. cii. 25. Ex. XV. 2. jgj._ xxiii. 6. i Cor. i.
30.
^^ -^ -^
Isa. xl. 15. I Kings xix. 12. John xiv. 17.
2' 2^ ^^
I Cor. vi. 19. Isa. Ixvi= I. Ps. Ixxxiv. ii.
^^ ^^ ^- Ps. Ixxxiv. 6.
Rev. xxii. 16. Deut. iv. 24.
^^ ^* ^^
John iv. 24 ; Acts ii. 2. Hosea xiv. 5. Ex. xiii. 21.
2^ 2^ ^^ Cor. xv. 28.
Ps. cxviii. 22. Ps. xxxi. 2, 3. i
\
THE DIVINE NAMES 63
Origin and Goal ;

and that, according to the Scrip-
tures, It may be all in all, and be truly called
may
the Creator of the world, originating and perfecting
and maintaining all things their Defence and Dwell-;
ing, and the Attractive Force that draws them and :
all this in one single, ceaseless, and transcendent act.^

For the Nameless Goodness is not only the cause
of cohesion or life or perfection in such wise as to
derive Its Name from this or that providential activity
alone nay, rather does It contain all things before-
;
hand within Itself, after a simple and uncircumscribed

m.anner through the perfect excellence of Its one and
all-creative Providence, and thus we draw from the
whole creation Its appropriate praises and Its Names.
8. Moreover, the sacred writers proclaim not only
such titles as these (titles drawn from universal ^ or

from particular ^ providences or providential activi-
ties ^), but sometimes they have gained their images
from certain heavenly visions ^ (which in the holy
precincts or elsewhere have illuminated the Initiates
or the Prophets), and, ascribing to the super-luminous
nameless Goodness titles drawn from all manner of
acts and functions, have clothed It in human (fiery
or amber) shapes ^ or forms, and have spoken of Its
Eyes,^ and Ears,^ and Hair,^ and Face,^^ and Hands,^^
and Wings,^^ and Feathers,^^ and Arms,^* and Back
^^
Parts,^^ and Feet and fashioned such mystical
;
^
God is above Time.
" "
2
e.g. I am that I am," Good," "Fair."
3 " " "
e.g. Sun,'^ Star," Rock," etc.
^
a-TT^ rwv .
trpovoiav rj irpouoovjj.evcov.
. . The first are the faculties
of aciing or being revealed in a certain way ; the second are the results
or manifestations of these faculties when in action.
5
Thus the complete classification is (i) Analogies drawn from the
:
material world, [a) universal, {b) particular ; (2) psychic visions.

' ®
6
Ezek. i. 26, 27. Ps. X. 5. James v. 4.
9
Dan. vii. 9.
^^ Ps. xxxiii.
17.
" Job x. 8.
12
Ps. xci. 4.
i=»
Ibid.
" Deut. xxxiii. 27.
15
Ex. xxxiii. 23. " Ex. xxiv. 10.
conceptions as Crown,^ and Throne," and Cup,^

its
and Mixing concerning which things we

Bowl,"^ etc.,
wîll attempt to speak when we treat of Symbolical
Divinity. At present, collecting from the Scriptures

what concerns the matter in hand, and employing as
our canon the rule we have described, and guiding
our search thereby, let us proceed to an exposition of
God's Intelligible^ Names; and as the Hierarchical
Law directs us in all study of Divinity, let us ap-
proach these godlike contemplations (for such indeed
they arc ^) with our hearts predisposed unto the vision
of God, and let us bring holy ears to the exposition
of God's holy Names, implanting holy Truths in holy
instruments according to the Divine command, and
withholding these things from the mockery and
laughter of the uninitiate, or, rather, seeking to re-
deem those wicked men (if any such there be) from
their enmity towards God. Thou, therefore, O good
Timothy, must guard these truths according to the
holy Ordinance, nor must thou utter or divulge the
jieavenly mysteries unto the uninitiate."^ And for
myself I pray God grant me worthily to declare the
beneficent and manifold Names of the Unutterable
and Nameless Godhead, and that He do not take
away the word of Truth out of my mouth.
1 2
Rev. xlv. 14. Ezek, i.
26, 27.
3 4
Ps. Ixxv. 8. Piov. ix. 5.
^
Twv uoriTwv Oewvvjxiwv — i. 6. the Names belonging to God when
revealed in the relative sphere ;
not those which belong to the uliimate
Godhead as such. In fact, the Godhead, as such, is Nameless, See
Intr. p. 7.
eiTTUf —
,
"
Kvpiws i. e. actually godlike because man is deified by them
'
See Afys/. 1 heol. I. 2 ; and cf. Matt. vii. 6.
THE DIVINE NAMES 65
CHAPTER II
Coticcrniyto the Undifferencincr and the Differentiation in

Divinity, and the Nature of Divine Uftijication and
Differetiiiatioft }
I. 'TiS the whole Being of the Supernal Godhead

(saith the Scripture) that the Absolute Goodness hath
defined and revealed.^ For in
what other sense may we
take the words of Holy Writ when it tells us how the
Godhead spake concerning Itself, and said: ''Why
asketh thou me concerning the good ? None is good
save one, that is, God." ^ Now this matter we have
discussed elsewhere, and have shown that all the
Names proper to God are always applied in Scripture!
not partially but to the whole, entire, full, complete
Godhead, and that they all refer indivisibly, absolutely,,
unreservedly, and wholly to all the wholeness of the
whole and entire Godhead. Indeed (as we made
mention in the Outlines of Divinity), if any one deny
that such utterance refers to the whole Godhead, he
blasphemeth and profanely dares to divide the Abso-
lute and Supreme Unity. We must, then, take them
as referring unto the entire Godhead. For not only
did the goodly Word Himself say: " I am Good," ^ but
^
irepl T/j/cDêvTjs KolX 5iaKeKpiiu4i'7]S deoAoyias nal t'is rj
deia eyccais kuI
-
Thepoint of this section is that God's Nature is not a sum total of
separate Attributes. Therefore when we say that the Scriptural titles
of God are only symbols and that the ultimate Godhead transcends
them, we do not mean that they express only a part of His Nature (for
His Nature has no parts), but that they dimly suggest His whole
Nature. Hence, too, we cannot say that some of God's titles belong
only to one separate Person of the Trinity and others only to the other
—
Persons severally e. g. The Trinity, and not the Father alone, is the
Creator of the world. "The one world was made by the Father,
through the Son, in the Holy Ghost" (St. Aug., Corn, on St. John,
Tr. XX. 9).
^
The title "Good" is applied to the whole Godhead. And if that
title, then others too. Cf. Matt. xix. 17.
•*
Tohn X. II
also one of the inspired prophets speaks of the Spirit
as Good.i So, too, of the words
"
I that I Am." - Am
If, instead of applying these to the whole Godhead,
they wrest them to include only one part Thereof,

"
how they explain such passages as
will Thus saith :
He that is and was and is to come, the Almighty," ^

or " Thou art the same," * or " The Spirit of Truth
:
that is, and that proceedeth from the Father"?^

And if they deny that the whole Godhead is Life,
how can that Sacred Word be true Which declared :
"
As the Father raiseth the dead and quickeneth
them, even so the Son quickeneth whom He will,"^
"
and also, the Spirit that quickeneth "? ^
It is And
as to the Dominion over the whole world belonging
to the whole Godhead, it is impossible, methinks, to
say (as far as concerns the Paternal and the Filial
Godhead) how often in the Scriptures the Name of
"
Lord " is repeated as belonging both to the Father
and to the Son moreover the Spirit, too, is Lord.^
:
And the Names " Fair " and " VVise " are given to
the whole Godhead and all the Names that belong
;
"
to the whole Godhead (e.g. " Deifying Virtue and
"
Cause ") Scripture introduces into all its praises of
the Supreme Godhead comprehensively, as when it
saith that "all things are from God," ^ and more in
"
detail, as when it saith that through Him are and to
Him are all things created," ^^ that "all things subsist
in Him," ^^ and that " Thou shalt send forth Thy
Spirit
and they shall be created."^^ And, to sum it all in brief,
^
Ps. cxliii. lo. This is a further argument arising out of what has
been said above. The point here is that we cannot Umit the title
"Good "to one Person of the Trinity, (The notion that the Father
is stern and the Son molhfies His sternness is false.) The rest of the
section takes other titles and shows how they are common to all Three
Persons of the Trinity.
2 3 4
Ex. iii. 14. ]^gy_ j_ ^_ pg (,jj 27.
^
John XV. 26. *^
John v. 21. "^

vi.
^
John 63.
2 Cor. iii. 17. 9 i"
i Chron. xxix. 14. Rom. xi. 36.
^1 12
Jbid. pg^ ^]^^ 20.
THE DIVINE NAMES 67
the Divine Word Himself declared "I and the Father

:
are one," ^ and " All things that the Father hath are
mine,"
^
and " All mine are thine, and thine are
mine."^ And again, all that belongeth to the Father/
and to Himself He also ascribes in the Common
Unity to the Divine Spirit, viz. the Divine operations,
the worship, the originating and inexhaustible crea-
tiveness and the ministration of the bountiful gifts.
And, methinks, that none of those nurtured in the
Divine Scriptures will, except through perversity, gain-
say it, that the Divine Attributes in their true and
Divine signification all belong to the entire Deity.
And, therefore, having here briefly and partially (and
more at large elsewhere) given from the Scriptures ,
the proof and definition of this matter, we intend that

whatever title of God's Entire Nature we endeavour •
to explain be understood as referring to the Godhead

in Its entirety.
2. And
if any one
say that we herein are intro-
ducing a confusion of all distinctions in the Deity,*
we for our part opine that such his argument is not
sufficient even to persuade himself. For if he is one
utterly at enmity with the Scriptures, he will also be
altogether far from our Philosophy and if he recks
;
not of the Holy Wisdom drawn from the Scriptures,

how can he reckon aught of that method by which
we would conduct him to an understanding of things
Divine ? But if he taketh Scriptural Truth as his
Standard, this is the very Rule and Light by which
we will (so far as in us lies) proceed straight to our
defence, and will declare that the Sacred Science
sometimes employs a method of Undifference and
sometimes one of Differentiation and that we must
;
neither disjoin those things which are Undifferenced

^ 2 ^
John X. 30. xvii. lo.
*
John xvi. 15. John
/• e. That we between the
are*Seeking to destroy the distinction
Persons of the Trinity.
nor confuse those which are Differentiated but follow- ;
ing the Sacred Science to the best of our powers,

we must lift up our eyes towards the Divine Rays ;
for, receiving thence the Divine Revelations as a

inoble Standard of Truth, we strive to preserve its
treasure in ourselves without addition, diminution,
or distortion, and in thus preserving the Scriptures,
we also are preserved, and are moreover enabled by
the same to the end that we may still preserve them
and be by thrm preserved.
3. Now Undifferenced Names belong to the entire
Godhead ^ (as we showed more fully from the Scrip-
tures in the Outlines of Divinity). To this class
" "
belong the following Super-Excellent,"
:
Super-
" " "
Divine," Super-Essential," Super-Vital," Supra-
Sapient," and thereto all those titles wherein the
negative expresses excess moreover, all those titles
;
which have a causal sense, such as " Good," " Fair,"

" " "
Existent," Lifegiving," Wise," and whatever titles
are ascribed to the Cause of all good things from
Its bountiful gifts."^ The differentiated Names, on
the other hand, are the Super-Essential names and
connotations of "Father," "Son," and "Spirit." In
these cases the titles cannot be interchanged, nor are
they held in common. Again, besides this, the perfect
and unchangeable subsistence of Jesus in our nature
is differentiated, and so are all the
mysteries of Love
and Being therein displayed.^
^
The method ot UndifTerence apphes to the tilfimate Godhead, that
of Differentiation to the emanating Godhead. The absokite and the
relative planes of Being both belong to God. On the absolute plane
all distinctions are transcended, and the Persons exist in a manner in
which They would appear to us to be merged, but on the relative
plane we see that They are eternally distinct. See Intr., p. 8.
-
Because we see things which are good, fair, existent, etc., we
apply to God, iheir ultimate Cause, the titles "Good," "Fair,"
"
Existent," etc. See p. 36, n. 6.
3
/. e.
Only the Second Person
"
was Incarnnte, was crucified, etc.
Mysteries of Love and Being — *iAav0pa'7rios ovaiwdr] ixvaT-qpia.
*
THE DIVINE NAMES 69
4. But needs must we, methinks, go deeper into the

matter and thoroughly explain the difference between
Undifference and Differentiation* as concerning God,
in order that our whole Discourse may be made clear,
and, being free from all doubtfulness and obscurity,
may (to the best of our powers) give a distinct, plain,
and orderly statement of the matter. For, as I said
elsewhere, the Initiates of our Divine Tradition
designate the Undifferenced Attributes of the Tran-
scendently Ineffable and Unknowable Permanencej,
as hidden, incommunicable Ultimates, but the
bene:*!'
ficent Differentiations of the Supreme Godhead,
they]
callEmanations^ and Manifestations and following ;
the Holy Scripture they declare that some Attributes

belong especially to Undifference, and some, on the,
other hand, to Differentiation.^ For instance, they
say concerning the Divine Unity, or Super-Essence,
that the undivided Trinity holds in a common Unity
without distinction Its Subsistence beyond Being, Its
Godhead beyond Deity, Its Goodness beyond Excel-
^
Trpo65ovs T€ Kol iK(pdvaeis,
— sc. the Persons of the Tiinity. See
Intr., p. 16.
^
The received text reads : âcri . . . koI ttjs elp7]fi^vr]s evuxrôos
Xhia KoL avdis rrjs Sm/cpifrews elvdi Tivas ISikos Koi evcocreis Ka\ SiaKpiaeis.
"
This, as stands, must be translated
it They say that certain quahties
:
belong to the said Undifference, and that to Differentiation, on the'

other hand, belong certain principles of Unity and principles of Differ-
entiation." This would mean that the Persons of the Trinity, though
distinct from Each Other, yet have a Common Unity, or else that Each
has a Unity of Its Own making It distinct from the Other Persons.
I have ventured, however, to emend the text by omitting the last six
words and making the sentence end at €lyai. I believe the last six
words have crept in from a marginal gloss or variant, which ran (I
imagine) as follows:
—dual tlvus IdiKas k.t.X. If the MS. belonged to
a family having seventeen or eighteen letters to a column the eluai after
Sm/cpiVecos would end a line, since there are 571 letters from the be-
ginning of the chapter to the end of that word. Hence it would easily
be confused with the elvai at the beginning of the gloss, which would
thus creep into the text. And, since the added words amount to
thirty-four letters, they would exactly till two lines, thus making
the
interpolation easier. For the meaning, see Intr., p. 6f.
lence ;
thesurpassing all things, of Its
Identity,
transcendently Individual Nature; Its Oneness above
Unity Its Namelessness and Multiplicity of Names
; ;
Its Unknowableness and perfect Intelligibility Its ;
universal Affirmation^ and universal Negation in a

state above all Affirmation and Negation,^ and that
It possesses the mutual Abiding and Indwelling (as
it were) of Its indivisibly supreme Persons in an
utterly Undiff'erentiated and Transcendent Unity,
and yet without any confusion ^ even as the lights
of lamps (to use visible and homely similes) being
in one house and wholly interpenetrating one another,
severally possess a clear and absolute distinction each

from each, and are by their distinctions united into
one, and in their unity are kept distinct. Even so
do we see, when there are many lamps in a house,
how that the lights of them all are unified into one
undifferentiated light, so that there shineth forth from
them one indivisible brightness; and no one, methinks,
could separate the light of one particular lamp from
the others, in isolation from the air which embraces
them all, nor could he see one light without another,
inasmuch as, without confusion, they yet are wholly
commin""led.
Yea, if any one takes out of the dwelling one of
the burning lamps, all its own particular light will
therewith depart from the place without either carry-
ing off in itself aught of the other lights or bequeath-
ing any of its own brightness to the rest. For, as
^
Cf. Myst. Theol. I. 2. This universal Affirmation is not pantheism
because evil, as such, is held to be non-existent. It is only all good-
ness that is affirmed of God, though He surpasses it. God is present
in all things, but not equally in all.
2 " Yes " " "
"No," and No the possibility
implies the possibility of
of Thus "Yes" and "No" belong to the relative world.
"Yes."
God's absolute existence is beyond such antithesis. See Intr., p. 4f
^
The Persons, though fused, are yet not confused because the
Godhead transcends unity. See Intr.., p. 5.
THE DIVINE NAMES 71
I said, the entire and complete union of the hghts
one with another brought no confusion or commixture

in any parts —
and that though the Hght is hterally
embodied in the air and streams from the material
substance of fire. The Super-Essential Unity of God,
however, exceedeth (so we declare) not only the
unions of material bodies, but even those of Souls
and of Intelligences, which these Godlike and celestial
Luminaries in perfect mutual interpenetration super-
naturally and without confusion possess, through
a participation corresponding to their individual
powers of participating in the All-Transcendent
Unity.i
5. There is, on the other hand,
a Differentiation
made in the Super-Essential Doctrine of God— not
merely such as have just mentioned (viz. that in
I
the very Unity, Each of the Divine Persons possesses

without confusion Its own distinct existence), but also
that the Attributes of the Super-Essential Divine
Generation are not interchangeable.^ The Father
alone is the Source of the Super-Essential Godhead, /
and the Father is not a Son, nor is the Son a Father ;
for the Divine Persons all preserve. Each without \
alloy. His own particular Attributes of praise. Such, J

then, are the instances of Undifference and of
Differentiation in the Ineffable Unity and Subsistence
"
of God. And if the term " Differentiation be also
applied to the bounteous act of Emanation whereby
the Divine Unity, brimming Itself with goodness in
the excess of Its Undifferenced Unity thus enters
1
Material things are merged by being united (<?.^. drops of water).
Souls or angels being united through love (whereby they participate in
God) are not merged but remain distinct even while being, as it were,
fused into a single spiritual unity more perfect than the fusion of water
with wine. The Persons of the Trinity are still more perfectly united
and at the same time still more utterly distinct.
2
Two kinds of Difterentiation (i) Distinctness of Existence,
:
(2) Difference of Functions.

into Multiplicity,^ yet an undifferenced unity worketh
even in those differentiated acts whereby, in ceaseless
communications, It bestows Being, Life, and Wisdom,
and those other gifts of the all-creative Goodness in
respect of which (as we behold the communications
and the participants thereof) we celebrate those
things wherein the creatures supernaturally partici-
pate. Yea, 'tis a common and undifferenced activity
of the whole Godhead that It is wholly and entirely
communicated unto each of them that share It and
unto none merely in part ^ even as the centre of a ;
circle is the radii which surround it in

shared by all
a ^circle ^ and as there are many impressions of a
;
seal all sharing in the seal which is their archetype

while yet this is entire, nor is it only a part thereof
that belongeth unto any of them. But the Incom-
municable All-creative Godhead transcends all such
symbols in that It isbeyond Apprehension nor hath

It any other mode of communion such as to join It
unto the participants."*
"
Perhaps, however, some one will say The seal is :
not entire and the same in all the printed copies."

I answer that this is not due to the seal itself (for it
gives itself wholly and identically to each), but the

difference of the substances which share it makes the
impressions of the one, entire, identical archetype to
be different. For instance, if they are soft, plastic,
and smooth, and have no print already, and are
neither hard and resistent, nor yet melting and
unstable, the imprint will be clear, plain, and per-
^
D. means that the Undifferentiated Godhead is actually present
in all these creative activities. It is multiplied (as it were) in Its
energies, and yet It remains indivisible. See Intr, , p. 17.

-
D. touches on the fundamental difference between spiritual
liere
and material things. Cf. Shelley: "True love has this different from
gold or clay that to divide is not to take away."
^
Plotinus uses the same illustration [Eiin. iv. i).
*
D. is always on his guard against Pantheism.
THE DIVINE NAMES 73
manent ;
but
if the aforesaid fitness should in auc^ht
be lacking, then the material will not take the
impression and reproduce it distinctly, and other such
results will follow as an unsuitable material must
bring about.
6. Again, it is by a Differentiated act of God's
benevolence that the Super-Essential Word should
wholly and completely take Human Substance of
human flesh and do and suffer all those things which,
in a special and particular manner, belong to the
action of His Divine Humanity. In these acts the
Father and the Spirit have no share, except of course
that they all share in the loving generosity of the
Divine counsels and in all that transcendent Divine
working of unutterable mysteries which were per-
formed in Human Nature by Him Who as God and
as the Word of God is Immutable.^ So do we strive
to differentiate the Divine Attributes, according as
these Attributes are Undifferenced or Differentiated.^
7. Now all the grounds of these Unifications, and
Differentiations in the Divine Nature which the
Scriptures have revealed to us, we have explained in
the Outlines of Divinity, to the best of our abilities,
treating separately of each. The latter class we have
philosophically unravelled and unfolded, and so have
sought to guide the holy and unspotted mind to con-
template the shining truths of Scripture, while the
former class we have endeavoured (in accordance
with Divine Tradition) to apprehend as Mysteries in
a manner beyond the activities of our minds.^ For
^
Redemption is a work performed l)y the whole Trinity through the
Second Person. (So, too, is Creation. Cf. p. 65, n. 2).
/. e. We strive
^
to distinguish the two planes of Being in God.
Cf. Athan. Creed: "Neither confounding the Persons," etc.
^
Undifference belongs to the ultimate (Jodhead, Differentiation to
the distinction between the Three Persons of the Trinity. The former
is the
sphere of ^^ystical Theology, the latter is that of Dogmatic
Theology. The former implies the P7a Negativa the latter the Via
Affiymativa.
allDivine things, even those that are revealed to us,
are only known by their Communications. Their
ultimate nature, which they possess in their own
original being, is beyond Mind and beyond all Being
and Knowledge.^ For instance, if we call the Super-
" "
Essential Mystery by the Name of God,'' or Life,"
" " "
or Being," or Light," or Word," we conceive of
nothing else than the powers that stream Therefrom
to us bestowing Godhead, Being, Life or Wisdom ^ ;
while that Mystery Itself we strive to apprehend by

casting aside all the activities of our mind, since
we behold no Deification,^ or Life, or Being, which
exactly resembles the altogether and utterly Tran-
scendent Cause of all things. Again, that the Father
is Originating Godhead while
Jesus and the Spirit
are (so to speak) Divine Off-shoots of the Paternal
Godhead, and, as it were. Blossoms and Super-Essential
Shinings Thereof we learn from Holy Scripture but ;
how these things are so we cannot say, nor yet

conceive.
8. Just so far can the
powers of our minds attain
as to see that all spiritual paternity and sonship is a
gift bestowed from the all-transcendent Archetypal
Fatherhood and Sonship both upon us and also upon
the celestial Powers whereby Godlike Minds receive-
:
^
Even the Differentiations finally lead us up into the Undifferenced
Godhead Where they transcend themselves. (Cf. p. 70, n. 3 and the
passage in ii. 4 about the torches.) Into that region we cannot track
them. But on the other side they flow out into creative activity, and
thus are, in some degree, revealed.
2
These terms may be thus classified :
—
Mature of Form under which Giver
Sphere of Activity.
'
(jift. IS manifested.
(i) Grace Godhead . "God"
(ii) Nature
(i) Material existence Being
. . . .
"Being"]
(2) Vegetable and animal existence . Life . "Life" |-"Word."
Human existence Wisdom " "
(3) . . . .
Light J
^
The doctrine of "Deification" is not a mere speculation. It
embodies an experienced fact. See Intr., p. 43.
THE DIVINE NAMES 75
the states and names of Gods, and Sons of Gods, and

Fathers of Gods, such paternity and sonship being
perfected in a spiritual manner (/. e. incorporeally,
immaterially, and invisibly) because the Divine Spirit
setteth above all invisible Immateriality and Deifica-
tion, and the Father and the Son, supernaturally
transcend all spiritual fatherhood and sonship.^ For
there is no exact similitude between the creatures \
and the Creative Originals for the creatures possess

;
'^
only such images of the Creative Originals as arc

possible to them, while the Originals Themselves
transcend and exceed the creatures by the very
nature of Their own Originalit}-. / To employ human
examples, we say that pleasant or painful conditions
produce in us feelings of pleasure or pain while yet
they possess not these feelings themselves and we ;
do not say that the fire which warms and burns is

itself burnt or warmed. Even so if any one says that
Very Life lives, or that Very Light is enlightened, he
willbe wrong (according to my view) unless, perchance,
he were to use these terms in a different sense from
the ordinary one to mean that the qualities of created
things pre-exist, after a superlative manner as touching
their true Being in the Creative Originals,^
9. Even the plainest article of Divinity, namely
the
j
^
The act spirit or soul imparts spiritual life to another
by which one
is a manifestation in time of a Mystery which is eternally perfect in the
Trinity, and would be impossible were it not ultimately rooted in that

Mystery. Just as all life draws its existence from the Divine i- 7//' r.r?-
vitality, so all spiritual paternity draws its existence from the
Divine
siipra-paternity.
-
TO airia /. —
e. The Persons of the Godhead.
,
^
So St. Augustine constantly teaches that God acts not in the
_^
manner which we call activity, but by causing the creatiire itself to

perform the action. Thus he explains (jod's rest on the Seventh Day
to mean not that God Himself rested but that the creation now rested
in Him. Aristotle and his disciple, St. Thomas, teach that God
moves all things simply through lieing desired by them. So God
causes action witliout Himself acting (somewhat as fire causes warmth
without feeling it). Cf. p. 87, n. i.
Incarnation and Birth of Jesus in Human Form,
cannot be expressed by any Language or known by
—
any Mind not even by the first of the most exalted
I
angels. That He took man's substance is a mysterious
truth, the which we have received but we know not ;
how from the Vîrgin's seed He was formed in another

manner than is natural, nor how His dry feet
supporting the solid weight of His material body He
walked upon the unstable substance of the water, nor
understand we any of the other things which belong
to the Supernatural Nature of Jesus. Of these things
I have
spoken enough elsewhere and our renowned ;
Teacher hath wonderfully declared, in his Elements -^
of Divinity^ what he hath either learnt directly from

the Sacred Writers, or else hath discovered from his
cunning research concerning Scriptural truths through
the much toil and labour which he bestowed thereon,
or else hath had revealed unto him by some diviner
inspiration wherein he received not only true spiritual
notions but also true spiritual motions} and by the
kinship of his mind with them (if I may so express
it) was perfected to attain without any other teacher
to a mystical communion with these verities and a
belief therein.^ And to put before them in briefest
compass the many blessed speculations of his
ingenious mind thus speaketh he concerning Jesus
in his compilation of the Elements of Divinity.
lo. From the ELEMENTS OF Divinity, by S.
Hicrotheus.
The Universal Cause which filleth all things is the
Deity of Jesus, whereof the parts are in such wise
tempered to the whole that It is neither whole nor
part, and yet is at the same time whole and also part,
vTrep(pvu>s. The proper meaning of virepcpvi'is in the Dionysian
writings appears to be "supernatural."
"
01) iîovov i-LaSwv aWa koI iradcou to 0e7a.
'
irphs TTjj' aSiSaKThy avToov Koi /xvaTiiajp airoreAeadels evwaiv Kal
IVKTril'.
THE DIVINE NAMES 77
containing in Its all-embracing unity both part and

whole, and being transcendent and antecedent to
both.^ This Deity is perfect in those Beings that
are imperfect as a Fount of Perfection ^ It is Perfec- ;
tionless ^ in those that are perfect as transcending |
and anticipating their Perfection It is the Form ;
producing Form in the formless, as a Fount of every

form and it is Formless in the Forms, as being
;
beyond all form It is the Being that pervades all

;
beings at once though not affected by them ; and It

*
is Super-Essential, as transcending every being It ;
sets all bounds of Authority and Order, and yet It

has Its seal beyond all Authority and Order.^ It is
the Measure of the Universe ^ and it is Eternity, ;
and above Eternity and before Eternity.'^ It is an
^
beyond Unity the Godhead is, of course, beyond the
Being
categories of whole and part. The Godhead is not a Whole because
It is indivisible, nor a Part because there is nothing, on the ultimate
plane, outside It. Yet It is a Whole because It includes the true

existence of all things, and is Partitive because It contains the prin-
ciple of separate Individuality whereby Christ possesses a Human Soul
distinct from all other human souls, and whereby, too, we possess
distinct and separate souls.
-
God is in us even before we are in Him. Cf. Luke xvii. 21.
Cf. St. Aug., "Thou wast within I was without." Also cf. c. i. 3
;
c. iii. i :
" P'or the Trinity," etc. See Intr. p. 6 on the use of the word
;
"outside."
^
Perfection implies an object or purpose achieved. Hence it implies
a distinction between self and not self. The Godhead is beyond such
a distinction. Compared with imperfection, It is perfect ; compared
with perfection, It is perfectionless (dreAi^s), or, rather, beyond
Perfection (vTrepreAi^s) and before it {irporeXcios), just as compared
with impersonal things It is personal, and compared with personality
It is non-personal, or, rather,
supra-personal,
^
Cf. p. 75, n. 3.
^
Cf. St. Paul on the Law and the Spirit. The Law is
deposited,
as it and yet the Law cramps the Spirit, and the
were, by the Spirit :
Spirit must break loose from this bondage.

^
L e. It gives the universe its bounds and distinctions.
' " "
Eternity, in the sense of Very Eternity (ouToaicor), is an Emana-
tion of the Godhead —
a distinct view of Its transcendent state (cf. Intr.,
p. 17). It is the Divine Rest taken in the abstract, as Very Life is
Abundance in those Beings that lack, and a Super-
Abundance in those that abound unutterable,
;
ineffable ; beyond Mind, beyond Life, beyond Being ;
It supernaturally possesses the supernatural and

super-essentially possesses the super-essential.^ And
since that Supra-Divine Being hath in loving kindness
come down from thence unto the Natural Estate, and
verily took substance and assumed the name of Man
(we must speak with reverence of those things which
we utter beyond human thought and language), even
in this act He possesses His Supernatural and Super-
Essential Existence —
not only in that He hath
without change or confusion of Attributes shared
in our human lot while remaining unaffected by that
unutterable Self-Emptying as regards the fullness of
His Godhead, but also because (most wonderful of all
wonders !) He passed in His Supernatural and Super-
Essential state through conditions of Nature and
Being, and receiving from us all things that are ours,
exalted them far above us.^
II. So much for these matters. Now let us
proceed to the object of our discussion and endeavour
to explain the Common and Undifferenced Names
belonging to God's Differentiated Being.^ And, that
the subject of our investigation may be clearly de-
fined beforehand, we give the name of Divine Differen-
perhaps the Divine Motion taken in the abstract. The Godhead in-
cludes both Rest and Motion by transcending them.
1
Behind Nature are certain higher supernaiural possibilities (which
are manifested, e.g., in the Miracles of Christ and His Disciples), and
beyond our personalities there is a mystery which is greater than our
finite selves, and yet, in a sense, is our true selves. The Godhead
possesses in Itself the supernatural possibilities of Nature and the
supra-personal possibilities of our personalities.
i, e. Christ did not merely
keep His Godhead parallel, as it were,
'^
with His Manhood, but brought It into His Manhood and so exalted
the Manhood.
^
/. e. Let us explain what are the Names which belong indivisibly to
all Three Persons of the Trinity.
THE DIVINE NAMES 79
was said) to the beneficent Emanations of

tiation (as
the Supreme Godhead.^ For bestowing upon all
things and supernally infusing Its Communications
unto the goodly Universe, It becomes differentiated
without loss of Undifference ^ and multiplied with-
;
out loss of Unity from Its Oneness it becomes

;
manifold while yet remaining within Itself. For

example, since God is super-essentially Existent and
bestows existence upon all things that are, and brings
the world into being, that single Existence of His is
said to become manifold through bringing forth the
many existences from Itself, while_ yet He remains
One in the act of Self-Multiplication Undifferenced ;
throughout the process of Emanation, and Full in the

emptying process of Differentiation Super-Essen- ;
tially transcending the Being of all things, and

guiding the whole world onwards by an indivisible
act, and pouring forth without diminution His in-
defectible bounties. Yea, being One and communi-
cating of His Unity both unto every part of the
world and also unto the whole, both unto that which
is one and unto that which is
many. He is One in
an unchangeable and super-essential manner, being
neither an unit in the multiplicity of things nor yet
the sum total of such units. Indeed, He is not an
unity in this sense, and doth not participate in unity
nor possess it ^ but He is an Unity in a manner far
;
^ "
The word Emanation" is here used in its very widest sense as
including (i) the Persons of the Trinity, (2) Their creative activity as
manifested in the Universal and the Particular stream of energy. See
Intr., p. 17. The Differentiated Being of the Trinity underlies all the
Differentiations of the creative process. The Trinity is differentiated
on the plane of Eternity ; then It emanates or energizes on the temporal
plane, and thus It is manifested in all the differentiations of the universe,
(especially in deified souls).
-
God is indi visibly present in each separate deified soul (see supra,
p. 71), the sentence beginning : "And
if the term 'Differentiation be
'
also applied to the bounteous act," etc.

^
These two phrases well ejcpress the meaning of the title "Beyond
8o DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
different from this, above all unity which is in the
world ; yea, He is an Indivisible Plurality, insatiable
yet brim-full, producing, perfecting, and maintaining
all unity and plurality. Moreover, since many,
through Deification from Him, are made Gods (so
^
far as the Godlike capacity of each allows), there thus

^
appears to be what is called a Differentiation and a
Reduplication of the One God, yet none the less He
is the primal God, the Supra-Divine and Super-
Essentially One God, who dwells Indivisibly within
the separate and individual things, being an Un-
differenced Unity in Himself and without any com-
mixture or multiplication through His contact with
the Many.^ And supernaturally perceiving this, thus
speaketh (by inspiration, in his holy writings) that
Guide unto Divine illumination by whom both we
and our teacher are led, that mighty man in things
Divine, that Luminary of the world. For though
(saith he) there be that are called gods, whether in
heaven or in earth (as there be gods many and lords
many). But to us there is but one God, the Father,
of whom are all things, and we in Him, and one Lord
Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him.
For in divine things the undifferenced Unities are of
more might than the Differentiations * and hold the
foremost place and retain their state of Undifference
even after the One has, without departing from Its
oneness, entered into Differentiation. These Differ-
entiations or beneficent Emanations of the whole
"
Unity {vTT^p-qvoojxfvri), which I have generally translated, like TjvwfievT],
as
" Undifferenced."
^
Trj e| avTov 6ew(Tei . . . decoy iroWuiv yiyuofxfuocy. See Intr., p. 43.
2
C'f. p. 71, n. I.
^
The fullness of God's Unity
manifested, (i) in all the multiplicity
is
of the material world, (2) after a higher manner in the deified souls of
men and in angels.
*
Each deified soul is a differentiation of God (cf. p. 71, n. i); yet
the Unity of God transcends them all, even after Go^ has thus poured
Himself into them.
THE DIVINE NAMES 8i
Godhead — whereby Its Undififerenced Nature is

shared in common ^ — we shall (so far as in us
lies)
endeavour to describe from the Divine Names which
reveal them in the Scriptures, having now made this
clear beforehand (as hath been said) that every Name :
of the Divine beneficent Activity unto whichever of

the Divine Persons it is applied, must be taken as
belonging, without distinction, to the whole entirety
of the Godhead."'^
CHAPTER III
IV/uit is ihc powef ÎJPraycr? Also coiicernini^ iJie Blessed

Hierotheus mid concerning Reverence and the Wj-itiiig of
Divinity.
I. And first of all, if it like thee, let us consider the

*'
highest Name, even Goodness," by which all the
Emanations of God are conjointly revealed.^ And
let us begin with an invocation of the Trinity, the
Which, as It surpasseth Goodness, and is the Source
of all goodness, cloth reveal all conjoined together Its
own good providences.* For we must first lift up our
minds in prayer unto the Primal Goodness, and by
drawing nearer Thereunto, we must thus be initiated
into the mystery of those good gifts which are rooted
in Its being. For the Trinity is nigh unto all things,
and yet not all things are nigh unto It.^ And when
we call upon It with holy prayers and unspotted
^
/. e. These active Manifestations
whereby God enters into each part
of the universe, yet without loss of Unity.
-
See the beginning of this chapter.
^
All God's activities are good.
*
The particular activities of God exist as one Act in Ilim, cf. ji. 79,
n. 2. So St. Thomas (following Aristotle) calls Mim Actus Purus.
^
Cf. p. 77, n, I.
^2 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
mind and with our souls prepared for union with
God, then are we also nigh Thereto for It is not in ;
space, so as to be absent from any spot, or to move

from one position to another.^ Nay, to speak of It
as omnipresent doth not express Its all-transcendent
all-embracing Infinitude.^ Let us then press on in
prayer, looking upwards to the Divine benignant
Rays, even as if a resplendent cord were hanging
from the height of heaven unto this world below, and
we, by seizing it with alternate hands in one advance,
appeared to pull it down but in very truth;
instead of drawing down the rope (the same being

already nigh us above and below), we were ourselves
being drawn upwards to the higher Refulgence of the
resplendent Rays. Or even as, having embarked on
a ship and clinging to the cables, the which being
stretched out from some rock unto us, presented
themselves (as it were) for us to lay hold upon them,
we should not be drawing the rock towards ourselves,
but should, in very truth, be drawing ourselves and
the vessel towards the rock as also, conversely, if
;
any one standing upon the vessel pushes away the

rock that is on the shore, he will not affect the rock
(which stands immovable) but will separate himself
therefrom, and the more he pushes it so much the
more will he be staving himself away. Hence, before
every endeavour, more especially if the subject be
Divinity, must we begin with prayer not as though :
we would pull down to ourselves that Power which is

^
This is profouiid Spatial metaphors are always dangerous, though
.
unavoidable, in Theology. In space if is A

touching B then B must be
touching A. In the spiritual world this is not so. God is near me (or
rather in me), and yet I may be far from God because I may be far from
my 0W71 true sef. I must seek my true self where it is, in God. It is
the paradox of Personality that my true self is outside my self and I can
only gain it by casting aside this counterfeit "self." Cf. p. 77, n. i,
and Inir., p. 15.
^
Even tlie word "omnipresent" suggests that God is in space,
whereas really His existence is non-spatial.
THE DIVINE NAMES Ss
both everywhere and nowhere, but that, by these

nig"h
remembrances and invocations of God, we may
commend and unite ourselves Thereunto.
2. Now perhaps there is need of an explanation
why, when our renowned teacher Hierotheus hath

^
compiled his wonderful Elements of Divinity, we
have composed other Tractates of Divinity, and now
are writing this present as if his work were not
sufficient. Now if he had professed to deal in an
ordered system with all questions of Divinity, and had
gone through the whole sum of Divinity with an
exposition of every branch, we should not have gone
so far in madness or folly as to suppose that we
could touch these problems with a diviner insight
than he, nor would we have cared to waste our time
in a vain repetition of those same truths more
;
especially since it would be an injury to a teacher

whom we love were we thus to claim for ourselves
the famous speculations and expositions of a man
who, next to Paul the Divine, hath been our chief
"
preceptor. But since, in his lofty Instructions on
Divinity," he gave us comprehensive and pregnant
definitions fitted to our understanding, and to that o{
such amongst us as were teachers of the newly
initiated souls, and bade us unravel and explain with
whatever powers of reason we possessed, the compre-
hensive and compact skeins of thought spun by his
mighty intellect and since thou hast thyself often-
;
times urged us so to do, and hast remitted his

treatise to us as too sublime for comprehension,
therefore we, while setting him apart (as a teacher of
advanced and perfect spirits) for those above the
commonalty, and as a kind of second Scriptures
worthy to follow the Inspired Writings, will yet
teach Divine Truths, according to our capacity, unto
those who are our peers. For if solid food is suited
only to the perfect, what degree of perfection would

itneed to give this food to others ? Wherefore we
are rightsaying that the direct study of the
in
Scriptures and the comprehensive teaching
^
spiritual
of them need advanced capacities, while the under-
standing and the learning of the matter which
contribute thereto is suited to the inferior Initiators
and Initiates.^ We
have, however, carefully observed
.
the principle Whatsoever things our Divine Pre-

:
ceptor has throughly dealt with and made clearly

manifest we have never in any wise ventured thereon,
for fear of repetition, nor given the same explanation
of the passage whereof he treated. For^ even among
our inspired Hierarchs (when, as thou knowest, we
with him and many of our holy brethren met together
to behold that mortal body. Source of Life, which
received the Incarnate God,'* and James, the brother
of God, was there, and Peter, the chief and highest
of the Sacred Writers, and then, having beheld it, all
the Hierarchs there present celebrated, according to
the power of each, the omnipotent goodness of the
Divine weakness) on that occasion, I say, he sur-
:
passed all the Initiates next to the Divine Writers,

*
Or "intelligible" {votjtuv). Cf. p. 52, n. i. The Scriptures are
expressed in symbolic terms which our minds can grasp. Hierotheus
was inspired to penetrate to the ultimate truth enshrined in these
symlôls. Thus he was able not only to assimilate this solid food himself
but also to give it to others. Apparently Hiei'otheus passed through
certain extraordinary psychic experiences, which are described in his
writings. These particular experiences D. has not himself passed
through. But he believes that his own teaching may clear the ground,
and so be a preliminary to such flights. He is chiefly explaining
principles, but these principles may lead the way to a true experience.
St. Paul and other Scriptural writers experienced such extraordinary
psychic states, though they do not speak of them in the extravagant
terms apparently used by Hierotheus. Cf. 2 Cor. xii. 2-4.
2
Toy vcpeifxeuois KaBiepoDTals Kal Upu^fxevois.
sc. It would be an impiety to do so, for he is almost equal to the
^
Sciiptural Writers, as he showed when he met with them to view the

body of the B. V. M.
*
Cf. p T, n I.
THE DIVINE NAMES 85
yea, he was wholly transported, was wholly outside of

himself, and was so moved by a communion with
those Mysteries he was celebrating, that all who
heard him and saw him and knew him (or rather
knew him not) deemed him to be rapt of God and
endued with utterance Divine. But why should I
tell thee of the divine things that were uttered in that
place ? For, unless I have forgotten who I am, I

know that I have often heard from thee certain
fragments of those enraptured praises ;
so earnest
hast thou been with all thy soul to follow heavenly
things.
3. But, tosay nothing of those mystical ex-
periences (since they cannot be told unto the world,
and since thou knowest them well), when it behoved
us to communicate these things unto the world and
to bring all whom we might unto that holy knowledge
we possessed, how he surpassed nearly all the holy
teachers in the time he devoted to the task, in pure-
ness of mind, in exactness of exposition, and in all
other holy qualities, to such a degree that we could
not attempt to gaze upon such spiritual radiance.
For we are conscious in ourselves and well aware
that we cannot sufficiently perceive those Divine
I'ruths which are granted to man's perception, nor
can we declare and utter those elements of Divine
Knowledge which are given unto man to speak. We
fall very short of that understanding which the
Divine men possessed concerning heavenly truths,
and verily, from excess of reverence, we should not
have ventured to listen, or give utterance to any
truths of Divine philosophy, were it not that we are
convinced in our mind that such knowledge of Divine
Truth as is possible must not be disregarded. This
conviction was wrought within us, not only by the
natural impulse of our minds, which yearn and strive
for such vision of supernatural things as may be
attained, but also by the holy ordinance of Divine
Law itself,which, while it bids us not to busy ourselves
in things beyond us because such things are both
beyond our merits and also unattainable,^ yet

earnestly exhorts us to learn all things within our
reach, which are granted and allowed us, and also
generously to impart these treasures unto others.'^
In obedience to these behests we, ceasing not through
weariness or want of courage in such search for
Divine Truth as is possible, yea, and not daring to
leave without assistance those who possess not a
greater power of contemplation than ourselves, have
set ourselves to the task of composition, in no vain
attempt to introduce fresh teaching, but only seeking
by more minute and detailed investigations to make
more clear and plain that which the true Hierotheus
hath said in brief.
CHAPTER IV
"
Conccniino; "Good,'' U<^ht:' "Beautiful:' "Desire:;'
"
Ecstasy:' "Jealousy." Also that Evil is neither existent
nor sprung from a?tytki?tg existent nor inherent in existent
tilings.
"
I. Now "
US consider the name of Good which
let
the Sacred Writers apply to the Supra-Divine God-
head in a transcendent manner, calling the Supreme
Divine Existence Itself "Goodness" (as it seems to
me) in a sense that separates It from the whoje
creation, and meaning, by this term, to indicate that
the Good, under the form of Good-Being,^. extends
Its goodness by the very fact of Its existence unto all
*
Ecclus. iii. 21 ;
P<. cxxxi. i. "2 Tim. ii. 2.
^
cos ouiTiwSes a'y.xfljf.
THE DIVINE NAMES 8^
things.^ F or as our sun, through no choice or deH-

beration, \5ut by the very fact of its existence, gives
Hght to all those things which have any inherent
power of sharing its illumination, even so the Goodl
(which is above the sun, as the transcendent
archetype
by the very mode of its existence is above its faded
image) sends forth upon all things according to theirW
receptive powers, the rays of Its undivided Goodness. I
^
Through these all Spiritual Beings and faculties and I
activities (whether perceived or percipient^) began I ;
through these they exist and possess a life incapable

of failure or diminution, and are untainted by any
corruption or death or materiality or birth, being
separate above all instability and flux and restless-
ness of change. And whereas they are bodiless and
immaterial they are perceived by our minds, and
whereas they are minds themselves, they possess a
supernatural perception and receive an illumination
(after their own manner) concerning the hidden
nature of things,-^ from whence they pass on their
own knowledge to other kindred spirits. Their rest
is in the Divine Goodness, wherein
they are grounded,
and This Goodness maintains them and protects
them and feasts them with Its good things. Through
desiring this they possess their being and their
blessedness, and, being conformed thereto (according
^
God's activity cannot be distinguished from Himself. Cf. p. 8i,
n. 4. —
God acts simply by being what He is by being Good. This
fits in with the doctrine that He creates the world as being the Object
of its
"
desire. He attracts it into existence.
j
^ al VQ-r\ToX Kai
pofpal irciaai Kal ohaiai Koi Svudueis Kal evepyeiai.
Angels and men are percipient Essences; their powers when quiescent
or dormant on the one hand and active on the other are respectively
percipient faculties and activities. But angels and men with their
faculties and activities can also be perceived. Cf. next sentence.
^
This doctrine may be based on some psychic experience enjoyed by
D. or recounted to him. George Fox received an experience of this
kind in which he had an intuitive knowledge concerning the hidden
properties of plants. See his Diary near the beginning.
SS DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
to their powers), they are goodly, and, as the Divine
Law commands, pass on to those that are below
them, of the gifts which have come unto them from
the Good.
2. Hence have they their celestial orders, their
self-unities, mutual indwellings, their distinct
their
Differences, the faculties which raise the lower unto
the higher ranks, the providences of the higher for
those beneath them their preservation of the pro-
;
perties belonging to each faculty, their unchanging

introversions,^ their constancy and elevation in their
search for the Good, and all the other qualities which
we have described in our book concerning the Pro-
perties and Orders of the Angels.- Moreover all
things appertaining to the Celestial Hierarchy, the
angelic Purifications, the Illuminations and the at-
tainments which perfect them in all angelic perfection
and come from the all-creative and originating Good-
ness, from whence it was given to them to possess
their created goodness, and to manifest the Secret
Goodness in themselves, and so to be (as it were)
the angelic Evangelists of the Divine Silence and
to stand forth as shining lights revealing Him that
;|is
within the shrine. And next those sacred and
holy Minds, men's souls and all the excellences that
''
belong to souls derive their being from the Super-

i
Excellent Goodness. So do they possess intelli-
^
gence so ;
do
preserve their living being
they
immortal ; they exist at all, and can, by
so is it
straining towards the living angelic powers, through

^
Lit. "Revolutions." {al irepl eavTus ajj-erd-rrTUTOi cvueXlêis.)
. . .
In Dante s Pa radiso the souls of the Redeemed all move with a circular
motion. This symbolizes an activity of spiritual concentration. Cf.
iv. S, 9.
^
The Celestial Hierarchy is among D.'s extant works. It is
referred to by Dante and was the chief source of mediaeval angelology.
^
tV ovcthoSt] (cDiiu
—
i.e. life as such, mere life, the life which they
share with animals and plants.
THE DIVINE NAMES 89
their good guidance mount towards the Bounteous

Origin of all things so can they (according to their
;
measure) participate in the illuminations which

stream from above and share the bounteous gift
(as far as their power extends) and attain all the
other privileges which we have recounted in our book,
Concerrrhig the Soul. Yea, and the same is true,
if it must needs be said,
concerning even the irrational
souls, or living creatures, which cleave the air, or
tread the earth, or crawl upon the ground, and those
which live among the waters or possess an amphibi-
ous life, and all that live buried and covered in the
earth —
in a word all that possess a sensitive soul
or life. All these are endowed with soul and life
because the Good exists. And all plants derive
from the Good that life which crfves them nourish-
ment and motion, and even whatsoever has no life
or soul exists through the Good, and thus came into *]
the estate of being. ^

3. Now if the Good is above all things (as indeed
It Formless Nature produces all-form
is) Its and ;
in It Not-Bein^ is an excess of Beinc^,^ and

alone
Lifelcssness an excess of Life and Its Mindless state
is an excess of Wisdom,'^ and all the Attributes of
^ —
The existence of the whole creation angels, men, animals, and
vegetables, dead matter
—
is in the Good. It has not, in the ordinary
sense, made them, but they are grounded in It and draw their existence
from it and would not exist but for it. They exist not through any
particuUr activity It exerts but solely because It Is.
^ "
Being" implies finite relations; for one thing must be dist'n-
guished from another. If a thing is itself, it is not something else ;
this thing is not that. The Good is beyond this distinction, for nothing
(on the ultimate plane) is outside It. See Intr., p. 5.
'
This apparently profitless speculation really suggests profound
spiritual mysteries. Love is the one rtality and love is self-realization
through self-sacrifice. We must lose our We must,
life to find it.
through the excess of spiritual within us, seek to be (as it were)

life
lifeless, so that this excess of life may still lie ours. And such was the
Incarnate Life of Christ and such is the Life of God in eternity. So
too the wisdom of Chiist is, from a worldly point of view, foolishness. ,
G
eio DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
the Good we express in a transcendent manner by
negative images.^ And is reverent
if it so to say,
even that which not desires the all-transcendent
is
Good and struggles itself, by its denial of all things,
to find its rest in the Good which verily transcends
all being.
4. Nay, even the foundation and the bound-
aries of the heavens (as we forgot to say while
For worldly wisdom = self-seeking, but the Wisdom of Christ = self-

abandonment. In fact Heavenly Wisdom = Love. Cf. i Cor. i. 25 ;
iii. 18, 19.

^
That which Is Not = Evil {vide infra in this chapter). Cf. Inlr. ,
p. 20. Tiie Good is Non-Existent as being beyond existence evil is ;
non-existent as being contrary to it. Thus evil is by its very nature

trying as it were to be Good.
Tnis also looks like a barren paradox and yet it may contain a spiritual
truth. Evil is, in the words of Goethe, "the spirit that denies": It
is destructive, e.g. injustice, cruelty, immorality, etc., undermine or
overwhelm civilization and so destroy it. But the Good supersedes
civihzation and so in a sense destroys it. Cf. the eschatological teach-
ing of Christ. Civilization, art, morality, etc., are good so iar as they
go, but imperfect. Being halfway, as it were, between Good and
evil, and being of necessity neither wholly the one nor wholly the
other, they must disappear wherever the one or the other completely
triumphs. Christ's teaching on Marriage illustrates this. Marriage
is sacred, and divorce is wrong, because it seeks to abolish Marriage.
And yet Marriage finally abolished in heaven. St. Paul's antithesis
is
of Law and Spirit is another example. The Law is good and yet is
not the Good. Sin is contrary to the Law, but the Spirit is contrary
to the Law in another sense and so supersedes it. So too with art. A
modern vandal is beauty because he is below it, a
indifferent to
Mediaeval Saint became sometimes indifferent to beauty by rising to a
super-sensuous plane above it. Greek idolatry is a higher thing than
Calvinism, but the Christianity of the New Testament is a higher
thing than Greek idolatry. The Saints sometimes employ negatives
in one sense and those who are not saints employ the same negatives
in another whence disaster.
; Much of Nietzsche's language [e. g.
the phrase "Beyond Good and Evil") might have been used by a
Medieval Christian Mystic; but Nietzsche did not generally mean
what the Christian Mystic would have meant by it. Soijk too with
pain. All pain is in itself bad, being a negation of our personality.
And yet a self-abnegation springing from Love which bravely bears
" The devil
pain is the highest kind of Good. put it into the heart
. . .
of Judas to betray" Christ, and yet the Passion was in accordance with
" the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God."
THE DIVINE NAMES 91
thinking other matters) owe their origin to

of
the Good, Such is this universe, which lessens not
nor grows, and such the noiseless movements (if
noiseless they be)^ of the vast heavenly revolution,
and such the starry orders whose light is fixed as
an ornament of heaven, and such the various wander-
ings of certain stars
—
especially the repeated and
returning orbits of those two luminaries to which
the Scripture giveth the name of " Great," ^ whereby
we reckon our days and nights and months and
years which define the round of time and temporal
;
events and give them measurement, sequence, and ^
cohesion. And what shall I say concerning the j
sun's rays considered in themselves? From the/

Good comes the light which is an image of Good-
ness wherefore the Good is described by the name
;
of '* Light," being the archetype thereof which is

revealed in that image. For as the Goodness of the
\
all-transcendent Godhead reaches from the highest
and most perfect forms of being unto the lowest, 1
and still
beyond them all, remaining superior to
is
'
those above and retaining those below in its embrace,

>
and so gives light to all things that can receive It,
and creates and vitalizes and maintains and perfects
them, and is the Measure of the Universe and its
^
Eternity,* its Numerical Principle,^ its Order, its

^
ei ovTcc xph (payaL. D. is alluding to the ancient belief in the
Music of the Spheres.
^
Gen. i. 16.
^
lj.4rpov. All things have their pre-existent limits in the Super-
Essence.
*
alwv —
i.e. The Permanent
Principle underlying its temporal process.
This and the next phrase explain what is meant by the words "the
Measure of the universe." The Good sets bounds to the world
(i) temporally, because Eternity is the Fount of Time, (2) spatially,
because Transcendent Unity is the Fount of Number. All temporal
things are permanent in God and all diversities are one in Him.
;
^
All number has its roots in the Good. Elsewhere D. says that
the Good being beyond Unity, is a Multiplicity as well as an Unity.
Cf. Intr., p. 5.
Embracing Power, its Cause and its End :

^
even so
this great, all-bright and ever-shining sun, which is
the visible image of the Divine Goodness, faintly re-
echoing' the activity of the Good, illumines all things
that can receive its light while retaining the utter
simplicity of light, and expands above and below
throughout the visible world the beams of its
"own radiance. And if there is aught that does not
share them, this is not due to any weakness or
deficiency in its distribution of the light, but is due
to the unreceptiveness of those creatures which do
not attain sufficient singleness to participate therein.
For verily the light passeth over many such sub-
stances and enlightens those which are beyond them,
and there is no visible thing unto which the light
reacheth not in the exceeding greatness of its proper
radiance.- Yea, and it contributes to the birth of
material bodies and brings them unto life, and
nourishes them that they may grow, and perfects
and purifies and renews them. And the light is the
measure and the numerical principle of seasons and
of days and of all our earthly Time for 'tis the ;
selfsame light (though then without a form) which,

Moses the Divine declares, marked even that first
period of three days which was at the beginning of
time. And Goodness draweth all things to
like as
Itself, the great Attractive Power which unites
and is
^
things that are sundered (being as It is the God- :
head and the Supreme Fount and Producer of Unity) ;
^
Here we get once more the Aristotelian classification of causes.
The Good is :
—
Formal Cause immanent in the world (Order — Ta|ts)
(i)
(2) containing the world (Embracing

(i)
Power — ;
Efficient Cause (Cause — TrepioxTj).

(ii)
fiii) Final Cause

alria).
(End —reAos).
^
The permeates water but it does not permeate a stone.
light It
passes over the stone and permeates the water beyond it.
^
apxifTuvdycoyos eari tuv €(fK€5acr/j.euccv.
THE DIVINE NAMES 93
and like as all things desire It as their beginning,

their cohesive power and end and like as 'tis the
;
Good (as saith the Scripture) from which all things

were made and are (having been brought into exist-
ence thence as from a Perfect Cause) and like as in ;
the Good all things subsist, being kept and controlled

^
in an almighty Receptacle and like as unto the
;
Good all things are turned (as unto the proper End
of each) and like as after the Good all things do
— ;
yearn those that have mind and reason seeking It

|
by knowledge, those that have perception seeking.

It by perception, those that have no perception seek-
ing by the natural movement of their vital instinct,

It
and those that are without life and have mere
existence seeking It by their aptitude for that bare
participation whence this mere existence is theirs
^ —
even so doth the light (being as it were Its visible
image) draw together all things and attract them

unto Itself: those that can see, those that have
motion, those that receive Its light and warmth,
those that are merely held in being by Its rays ^ ;
whence the sun is so called because it summeth^ all

things and uniteth the scattered elements of the world.
All material things desire the sun, for they desire
either to see or to move and to receive light and
warmth and to be maintained in existence by the
light. I say not (as was feigned by the ancient
myth) that the sun is the God and Creator of this

Universe, and therefore takes the visible world
under his special care but I say that the "invisible
;
things of God from the creation of the world

are clearly seen, being understood by the things
^
ws iu TTaVTOKparopiKCf irvO/jLeui.
-
(i)Man, (2) Animal, (3) Vegetable, (4) Matter.
^
This seems to imply that matter itself could not exist without the
influence of the light. Perhaps this belief rests on Gen. i. I, 2.
*
7j\io5 oTi iravra aoWrj iroiu. With the ;zai/ etymology of. iv .5.
that are made, even His eternal power and God-
1
head."
But these things are dealt with in the" Symbolic
5.
Divinity." Here I desire to declare what is the
" "
spiritual meaning of the name Light as belonging
to the Good.^ The Good God
is called Spiritual Light
because He
every heavenly mind with spiritual
tills
light, and drives all ignorance

and error from all
souls where they have gained a lodgment,, and giveth
them all a share of holy light and purges their
spiritual eyes from the mist
of ignorance that sur-
rounds them, and stirs and opens the eyes which
are fast shut and weighed down with darkness, and
gives them first a moderate illumination, then (when
they taste the Light and desireIt more) He giveth
Himself in greater measure and shineth in more
abundance on them " because they have loved much,"
yand ever He constraineth them according
to their
powers of looking upwards.
6. And so that Good which is above all light is
called a Spiritual Light because It is an Originating
Beam and an Overflowing Radiance, illuminating
with its fullness every Mind above the world, around
it, or it,^ and renewing all their spiritual
within
powers, embracing them all by Its transcendent com-
pass and exceeding them all by Its transcendent
elevation. And It contains within Itself, in a simple
^
form, the entire ultimate principle of light and is ;
^
Rom. i. 20. The sun is not personal or supra- personal. But its
impersonal activity is an emblem, as it were, of God's supra- personal
activity.
2
Two
worlds: (i) Nature, (2) Grace. God is revealed in both;
the former was apparently the subject o[ the Sy/udo/ic Divinity; the
latter is that of the present treatise,
^
i.e. Men
and different orders of angels.
Material light is diffused in space and
•*
hence is divisible. The _
Spiritual Light is being totally present to each illuminated

indivisible,
mind. Hence the Spiritual Light is simple in a way that the material
light is not.
THE DIVINE NAMES 95
the Transcendent Archetype of Light and, while ;
bearing the Hght in its womb, It exceeds it in quaUty

and precedes it in time and so conjoineth together
;
all spiritual and rational beings, uniting them in one.^

For as ignorance leadeth wanderers astray from one
another, so doth the presence of Spiritual Light join
and unite together those that are being illuminated,
and perfects them and converts them toward that
—
which truly Is yea, converts them from their mani-
fgld false opinions and unites their different percep-
tions, or rather fancies, into one true, pure and coherent
knowledge, and filleth them with one unifying light.
7. This Good is described by the Sacred Writers
as Beautiful and as Beauty, as Love or Beloved, and
by all other Divine titles which befit Its beautifying
and gracious fairness. Now there is a distinction
"
between the titles " Beautiful and " Beauty " applied
to the all-embracing Cause. For we universally dis-
tinguish these two titles as meaning respectively the
qualities shared and the objects which share therein.
We give the name of " Beautiful " to that which
shares in the quality of beauty, and we give the
name of "Beauty" to that common quality by which
all beautiful things are beautiful. But the Super-
"
Essential Beautiful is called " Beauty because of that
quality which It imparts to all things severally ac-
cording to their nature,^ and because It is the Cause"
of the harmony and splendour in all things, flashing
forth upon them all, like light, the beautifying com-
munications of Its originating ray and because It ;
summons all things to fare unto Itself (from whence

It hath the name of "Fairness"^), and because It
^
All our spiritual and mental powers are due to the same Spiritual
Light working in each one of us. Cf. Wordsworth: "Those mys-
teries of Being which have made and shall continue evermore to make
of the whole human race one brotherhood."
2
Cf. ii. S.
^
ws TvavTa TTphs eouTo Ka\ovv {odfu Kot KaWos Aeyerai). Cf. iv. 4.
draws all things together in a state of mutual inter-
penetration. And it is called " Beautiful " because

\l It is All-Beautiful and more than Beautiful, and is
B
eternally, unvaryingly, unchangeably Beautiful in- ;
capable of birth or death or growth or decay and ;
not beautiful in one part and foul in another nor yet ;
at one time and not at another nor yet beautiful in

;
relation to one thing but not to another nor yet ;
beautiful in one place and not in another (as if It

were beautiful for some but were not beautiful for
others); nay, on the contrary. It is, in Itself and by
Itself, uniquely and eternally beautiful, and from
beforehand It contains in a transcendent manner the
originating beauty of everything that is beautiful.
For in the simple and supernatural nature belonging
to the world of beautiful things,^ all beauty an<d all
that is beautiful hath its unique and pre-existent
Cause. From this Beautiful all things possess their
existence, each kind being beautiful in its own manner,
and the Beautiful causes the harmonies and sympa-
thies and communities of all things. And by the
Beautiful all things are united together and the Beau-
tiful is the beginning of all things, as being the
Creative Cause which moves the world and holds all
things in existence by their yearning for their own
Beauty. And It is the Goal of all things, and their
Beloved, as being their Final Cause (for 'tis the desire
of the Beautiful that brings them all into existence),
and It is their Exemplar- from which they derive
their definite limits; and hence the Beautiful is the
^
The ultimate nature of all beautiful things is a simple and super-
natural Element common to them all and manifested in them all. The
law of life is that it has its true and ultimate being outside it. The
true beauty of all beautiful things is outside them in God. Hence all
great art (even when not directly religious) tends towards the Super-
natural or has a kind of supernatural atmosphere.
2 —
irapaây/j.aTiKov t'.e. the ultimate Law of their being, the Jciea
or Type.
THE DIVINE NAMES 97
as the Good, inasmuch as all things, in all

causation, desire the Beautiful and Good nor is there ;
fsame
anything in the world but hath a share in the Beau-
tiful and Good. Moreover our Discourse will dare
^
to aver that even the Non-Existent shares in the
^
Beautiful and Good, for Non-Existence is itself
beautiful and good when, by the Negation of all, .
Attributes, it is ascribed Super-Essentially to God.

This One Good and Beautiful is in Its oneness the
Cause of all the many beautiful and good things.
Hence comes the bare existence of all things, and
hence their unions,^ their differentiations, their identi-
ties, their differences,* their similarities, their dissimi-
larities, their communions of opposite things,^ the
unconfused distinctions of their interpenetrating
elements ^ the providences of the Superiors,' the
;
interdependence of the Co-ordinates, the responses .
of the Inferiors,^ the states of permanence wherein

all keep their own identity. And hence again the
intercommunion of all things according to the power
of each their harmonies and sympathies (which do
;
not merge them) and the co-ordinations of the whole

^ —
rh UT] tv i.e. that mere nothingness which is manifested either
as (i) formless "matter" or (2) evil. See Intr., p. 20.
-
Evil is non-existent in one sense. The Good is Non-Existent in
another. Cf. p. 90, n. i.
^
ravTorriTes, erepoTTjres.
€Vci>aeLS, SiaKpiaeis,
*
parts are united into wholes and wholes articulated
Hence into
parts, and hence each thing is identical with iiself and distinct from
ever>'thing else.
^
e.g. Moisture interpenetrates the solid earth,
"
e.g. In a piece of wet ground the water u water and the earth is
earth,
^
al irpovoiai rccv vireprepccu. Lit, "the providences," etc., ^..C-
the influence of the light without which, D. holds, the material world
could not exist. Or this and the following may refer to different ranks
of angels, or to angels and men.
^
al iina-Tpocpairwu KaraScecTTep-xu. Lit. "the conversions," etc.
e.g. jNIatter ^âccording to his theory) responds

to the influence of the
light. And men are influenced by angels, and the lower angels by the
higher.
^
universe the mixture of elements therein and the
;
indestructible ligaments of things the ceaseless suc- ;
cession of the recreative process in Minds and Souls

and in Bodies for all have rest and movement in
;
That Which, above all rest and all movement, grounds

each one in its own natural laws and moves each one
to its own proper movement.^
8. And the Heavenly Minds are spoken of as
moving (i) in a circular manner, when they are
united to the beginningless and endless illuminations
of the Beautiful and Good ^ (2) straight forward, ;
when they advance to the providential guidance of

those beneath them, and unerringly accomplish their
designs ;^ and (3) with spiral motion, because, even
while providentially guiding their inferiors, they
remain immutably in their self-identity,^ turning un-
ceasingly around the Beautiful and Good whence all
identity is sprung.
9. And
the soul hath (i) a circular movement —
viz. an introversion ^ fronx things without and the
unified concentration ^ of its spiritual powers which —
gives it a kind of fixed devolution, and, turning it
from the multiplicity without, draws it together first
into itself,^ and then (after it has reached this unified
condition) unites it to those powers which are a
^
The point of this section is that besides the particular and partial
harmonies already mentioned, there is a universal harmony uniting the
whole world in one system.
^
In the two following sections the difference between angelic and
human activity is that the
angels confer spiritual enlightenment and
men receive it. Angels are in a state of attainment and men are
passing through a process of attainment.
^
Vide supra on Introversion (p. 88, n. i).
They are united to God in the centre of their being, by ceaselessly
*
entering into themselves. They help us by going forth, as it were,

from themselves.
^
Their true self-identity is rooted in God. See Intr. pp. 31 f. ,
*
7; eis kavrriv elcroôs.
'
In souls being unified and simplified. See Intr., p. 25.
^
Cf. St.
" ascendat
Aug. per se supra se."
THE DIVINE NAMES 99
perfect Unit^^ând thus leads it on unto the Beautiful \

and Good Which is beyond all things, and is One j
and is the Same, without beginning or end. (2) And

the soul moves with a spiral motion whensoever
(according to its capacity) it is enlightened with
truths of Divine Knowledge, not in the special unity'
of its being- but by the process of its discursive
j
reason and by mingled and alternative activities.^!

(3) And it moves straight forward when it does not I
enter into itself to feel the stirrings of its spiritual
j
unity (for this, as I said, is the circular motion), I
but goes forth unto the things around it and feels

|
an influence coming even from the outward world,

as from a rich abundance of cunnin<7 tokens,
drawing it unto the simple unity of contemplative
acts.^
10. These three
motions, and also the similar
motions we perceive in this material world and (far
anterior to these) the individual permanence, rest and
z. e. To the Angels and the

^
perfected Saints. There is a somewhat
similar thought in Wordsworth's Prelude : "To
hold fit converse with
the spiritual world / and with the generations of mankind / spread over
time past, present, and to come / age after age till time shall be no more."
This thought in Wordsworth and in D. is an experience and not a
speculation.
^
This spiritual unity was by later Mystical writers called the apex of
the soul, or the ground, or the spark. Another name is syiUei-esis
or syuderesis.
^
There is an element of intuition in all discursive reasoning because
allargument is based on certain axioms which are beyond proof {e.g.
the law of universal causation). In fact tlie validity of our laws of
thought is an axiom and therefore perceived by intuition. In the
present passage D. means something deeper. He means that formal
Dogmatic Theology advances round a central core of spiritual experi-
ence by which it must constantly be verified, Pectus facit theolpgitm.
Whenever theology even attempts to be purely deductive it goes wrong
{e.g. Calvinism). If it is not rooted in intuition it will be rooted in
fancies,
*
In D,'s classification Introversion and Sensation are both unmixed
movements, for each leads to a kind of perception. Discursive reason-
ing is a mixed movement because it does not lead to a direct perception
and yet it must contain an element of perception.
loo DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
grounding of each Kind^ have their Efficient, Formal,

and Final Cause in the Beautiful and Good Which ;
is above all rest and motion

through Which all rest
;
and motion come and from Which, and in Which,

;
and unto Which, and for the sake of Which thev are.
For from It and through It are all Being and life of
spirit and of soul and hence in the realm of nature
;
magnitudes both small, co-equal and great hence all ;
the measured order and the proportions of things,

which, by their different harmonies, commingle into
wholes made up of co-existent parts hence this ;
universe, wîich is both One and Many; the conjunc-

tions of parts together the unities underlying all
;
multiplicity, and the perfections of the individual

wholes hence Quality, Quantity, Magnitude and
;
Infinitude; hence fusions^ and differentiations, hence

all infinity and all limitation all boundaries, ranks, ;
transcendences,^ elements and forms, hence all Being,

all Power, all Activity, all Condition,^ all
Perception,
all Reason, all Intuition, all Apprehension, all Under-
jstanding, All Communion^
—
in a word, all that is
•'comes from the Beautiful and Good, hath its very
existence in the Beautiful and Good, and turns to-
,
wards the Beautiful and Good. Yea, all that exists
and that comes into being, exists and comes into
being because of the Beautiful and Good and unto ;
this Object all things gaze and by It are moved and

are conserved, and for the sake of It, because of It
and in It, existeth every originating Principle be —
i. e. The
^
types of things existent in the permanent spiritual world
before the things were created in this transitory material world; the
Platonic Ideas. There was also a Jewish belief in such a pre-existence
of things. Cf. Rev. iv. 1 1 (R. V.).
"
(TvyKpicTeis.
"*
virepoxai. eîs.
^
'iycocns. The word is here used in the most comprehensive manner
to include physical communion, sense-perception, and spiritual com-
munion of souls with one another and with God.
THE DIVINE NAMES loi
this Exemplar,^ or be it Final or Efficient or Formal

or Material Cause —
in a word, all Beginning, all Con-
servation, and all Ending, or (to sum it up) all things
that have being are derived from the Beautiful and i
Good. Yea, and all things that have no substantial 1
being^ super-essentially exist in the Beautiful and

Good this is the transcendent Beginning and the
:
transcendent Goal of the univêrse. For, as Holy

"
Scripture saith Of Him, and through Him, and to
:
Him, are all things to whom be glory for ever.

:
Amen."^ And hence all things must desire and yearn

for and must love the Beautiful and the Good. Yea, _
and because of It and for Its sake the inferior thingfs

yearn for the superior under the mode of attraction,
and those of the same rank have a yearning towards
their peers under the mode of mutual communion ;
and the superior have a yearning towards their in-

feriors under the mode of providential kindness and ;
each hath a yearning towards itself under the mode

of cohesion,* and all things are moved by a longing
for the Beautiful and Good, to accomplish every'
outward work and form every act of will. And
true reasoning will also dare to affirm that even the
Creator of all things Himself yearneth after all
things, createth all things, perfecteth all things, con-
serveth all things, attracteth all things, through
^
The exemplar is the formal cause before this is actualized in the
object embodying it. The principle in an oak tree constituting it an
oak is the formal cause. But before there were any oak trees this
principle existed as an exemplar. The final cause is the beneficent
purpose the oak tree serves. In the Aristotelian classification exemplar
and final cause would be classed together as final cause.
^
This means either (i) that actually non-existent things {e.g. the
flowers of next year which have not yet appeared, or those of Inst year,
which are now dead) have an eternal place in God ; or else (2) that evil
things have their true being, under a different form, in Him.
^
Rom. xt. 36.
*
In the whole of this passage D. is thinking primarily of Angels and
men, or at least of sentient creatures. But he would see analogies
of such activity in the inanimate material world.
\ \
nothing but excess of Goodness. Yea, and the
Divine Yearning is naught else than a Good Yearn-
ing towards the Good for the mere sake of the Good.
For the Yearning which createth all the goodness of
the world, being pre-existent abundantly in the Good
Creator, allowed Him not to remain unfruitful in
Himself, but moved Him to exert the abundance of
His powers in the production of the universe.^
II. And let no man think we are contradicting the
Scripture when we solemnly proclaim the title of

"Yearning." For 'tis, methinks, unreasonable and
foolish to consider the phrases rather than the mean-
ing ;
and such isof them that wish for
not the way
insight into things Divine, but rather of them that
receive the empty sounds without letting them pass
beyond their ears, and shut them out, not wishing to
know what such and such a phrase intends, nor how
they ought to explain it in other terms expressing
the same sense more clearly. Such men are under
the dominion of senseless elements and lines, and of
uncomprehended syllables and phrases which pene-
trate not into the perception of their souls, but make
a dumb noise outside about their lips and hearing :
^
elsTO irpaKTiKeveaOai Kara, rrjv airdvrwv yevvr]TiKT]y vfrepPoKt'jP.
Desire =
want. =
And want in us imperfection ; but in God it that =
excess of perfection, whereby God is
" Perfectionless." Thus the words
"super-excellence," "super-unity," etc., are not meaningless super-
latives. They imply an impulse towards motion within the Divine
Stillness, a Thirst in the Divine Fullness. Cf. Julian of Norwich :
Revelations, ch. xxxi. "... There is a property in God of thirst and

longing." The categories of Greek Philosophy are static. The super-
latives of D. imply something dynamic, though the static element
remains. In much modern philosophy (the Pragmatists and also
Jiergson) dynamic conceptions are prominent but the tendency here is
;
for the static to disappear instead of being subsumed as it is in D. The

result, or the cause, is that Grace is lost sight of and only Nature
is perceived. Really Absolutism and Pragmatism are not mutually
exclusive for Rest and Motion co-exist as transcended elements in
;
(iod. This is the paradox of perfect Love which is both at rest and in
Cf. Julian of Norwich
" I had
motion, both satisfied and unsatisfied. :
Him and I wanted Him" {Revelations^ ch. x.).

THE DIVINE NAMES 103
it unlawful to explain the number "four" by

holding
calling it "twice two," or a straight" line by calling it
" "
a " direct line or the Motherland by calling it the
"
Fatherland," or so to interchange any other of those
terms which under varieties of language possess all
the same signification. Need is there to understand _
that in proper truth wjeô but use the elements and
syllables and phrases and written terms and words as
an aid to our senses; inasmuch as when our soul is
moved by spiritual energies unto spiritual things, our
senses, together with the thing which they perceive,
are all superfluous even as the spiritual faculties ar^
;
also such when

the soul, becoming Godlike,^ meets ii
the blind embraces of an incomprehensible union the
Rays of the unapproachable Light.
^
Now when
the mind, through the things of sense, feels an eager
stirring to mount towards spiritual contemplations,^
it values most of all those aids from its perceptions
which have the plainest form, the clearest words, the
things most distinctly seen, because, when the objects
of sense are in confusion, then the senses themselves
cannot present their message truly to the mind. But
that we may not seem, in saying this, to be setting
aside Holy Scripture, let those who blame the title
"
of " Yearning hear what the Scripture saith :
"
Yearn for her and she shall keep thee exalt her and ;
she shall promote thee she shall bring thee to honour

;
when thou dost embrace her." And there are many

'^
2
This clause can only have been written by one for whom Unknow-
ing was a personal experience. The previous clause shows how there
is a negative element even in the Method of Affirmation. Sense-per-
ception must first give way to spiritual intuition, just as this must finally
give way to Unknowing. (Cf. St. John of the Cross's
Dar/; Nigh/, on
three kinds of night.) All progress is a transcendence and so, in a
sense, a Via Negativa. Cf. St. Aug., Transcendc mundum ei sape
animum, transcende animuni ei sape Deum.
^
This shows that the Via Negativa starts from something positive.
*
It is a transcendence, not a mere negati(in. Prov. iv. 6, J>i
other such Scriptural passages which speak of this
yearning.
12. Nay, some of our writers about lioly things
have thought the title of " Yearning
"
diviner than
" "
that of Love." Ignatius the Divine writes He :
whom I
yearn for is crucified." ^
Intro-And in the
'*
'
ductions of Scripture^ thou wilt find some one

"
sa)'ing concerning the Divine Wisdom I
yearned :
for her beauty." Let us not, therefore, shrink from this

title of "Yearning," nor be perturbed and affrighted
by aught that any man may say about it. For"

methinks the Sacred Writers regard the titles " Love
"
and " Yearning as of one meaning but preferred, ;
when speaking of Yearning in a heavenly sense, to

" " ^
qualify it with the world real because of the incon-
venient pre-notion of such men. For whereas the
"
title of Real Yearning" is employed not merely by
ourselves but even by the Scriptures, mankind (not
grasping the unity intended when \' earning is ascribed
to God) fell by their own propensity into the notion
^
6 i/j.hs ''Epctis iaravpciDTai. Ignatius Ep. ad Rom. § 6. But possibly
"
St.Ignatius means :
My earthly affections are crucified," St. Ignatius
wrote just before being martyred, at the beginning of the second century.
This reference would alone be sufficient to make the authenticity of the
Dionysian writings improbable.
[It is perhaps impossible to determine whether Ignatius meant by the
words " "
my Love is crucified to refer to Jesus or to him'self. The latter
is
supported by Zahn and by Lightfoot, the former by Origen,
" Nee
Prologue to Commentary on Canticles. puto quod culpari possit,
si
quis Deum, sicut Joannis, charitatur, ita ipse amorem nominit.
Denejire memini, aliquem sanctorum dixisse Ignatium nomine de
Christo : Mens autem amor crucifixus est nee reprehendi eum per hoc
:
dignum judico." Much further evidence is given in Jacobson's

Apostolic Fathers (p. 2>ll)^ Jacobson himself supports it, observing
that the Greek commemoration of Ignatius takes the words in this
sense. Whether Dionysius followed Origen or not, his exposition is
very interesting and is quite pos-ibly the true. See also the translator's
note on tpcos. Ed.]
"
^v Tcus Trpo€i(ray(i}ya7s tS>v Xoyiwv. Apparently this was a title
of the books ascribed to Solomon. The present reference is Wisdom
viii. 2.
^
Tots Oeiois fjLaWov avaOelpai rhu tvrws tpuna.
of a partial, physical and divided quality, which is

not true Yearning but a vain image of Real Yearning,
or rather a lapse therefrom.^ For mankind at large
cannot grasp the simplicity of the one Divine Yearning,
and hence, because of the offence it gives to most
men, it is used concerning the Divine Wisdom to
lead and raise them up to the knowledge of the Real
Yearning until they are set free from all offence
thereat and often on the other hand when it was
;
possible that base minds should suppose that which

is not convenient, the word that is held in greater
reverence is used concerning ourselves.^ " Thy love,"
"
says some one, came upon me like as the love of
women. "^ To those who listen aright to Holy Scrip-
ture, the word
"
Love " is used by the Sacred Writers
in Divine Revelation with the same meaning as the
word " Yearning." It means a faculty of unifying
and conjoining and of producing a special commingling
together in the Beautiful and Good a faculty which
"*
:
pre-exists for the sake of the Beautiful and Good, and

is diffused from this
Origin and to this End, and holds
together things of the same order by a mutual con-
nection, and moves the highest to take thought for
those below and fixes the inferior in a state which
seeks the higher.
13. And the Divine Yearning brings ecstasy, not
allowing them that are touched thereby to belong
unto themselves but only to the objects of their
affection. This principle is shown by superior things
^
Earthly desire is below static conditions, the Divine Desire is above
them.
i. e. The word cpws is sometimes used
concerning God to stimulate
-
our minds by its unexpectedness and so to make us penetrate beyond

the word to the mystery hinted at by it. On the other hand ayaTTTj or
sometimes used concerning human relationships
aydTrrjcris is to prevent
any degrading associations from entering in.
^
2 Sam. i. 26.
*
Kai iffTL TovTo dwdixcws ivoTToiou ical (TuvSeTiicTis ua'. Stcifj e^SvTwi
cruyKpaTiKris.
H
io6 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
through their providential care for their inferiors, and

by those which are co-ordinate through the mutual
bond uniting them, and by the inferior through their
diviner tendency towards the highest. And hence
the great Paul, constrained by the Divine Yearning,
and having received a share in its ecstatic power,
"
says, with inspired utterance, I live, and
yet not I but
Christ liveth in me": true Sweetheart that he was
and (as he says himself) being beside himself unto
God, and not possessing his own life but possessing
and loving the life of Him for Whom he yearned.
And we must dare to affirm (for 'tis the truth) that
|the Creator of the Universe Himself, in His Beautiful
and Good Yearning towards the Universe, is through
the excessive yearning of His Goodness, transported
outside of Himself in His providential activities
towards all things that have being, and is touched
by the sweet spell of Goodness, Love and Yearning,
and so is drawn from His transcendent throne above
Ifi all things, to dwell within the heart of all things,
jj through a super-essential and ecstatic power whereby
He yet stays within Himself.^ Hence Doctors call
Him " jealous," because He is vehement in His Good
Yearning towards the world, and because He stirs men
up to a zealous search of yearning desire for Him, and
thus shows Himself zealous inasmuch as zeal is always
felt concerning things which are desired, and inasmuch
as He hath a zeal concerning the creatures for which
He careth. In short, both the Yearning and its Object
belong to the Beautiful and the Good, and have
therein their pre-existent roots and because of it
existand come into being.
But why speak the Sacred Writers of God
14.
sometimes as Yearning and Love, sometimes as the
^
This finely suggests that the " Selfhood" of God is selfless. Vide
Intr., p. 9. Note also the combination of rest and motion alluded
to here.
Object of these emotions ? In the one case He is the

Cause and Producer and Begetter of the thing signified,
in the other He is the Thing signified Itself. Now the
reason why He is Himself on the one hand moved by
the quality signified, and on the other causes motion
by it,^ is that He moves and leads onward Himself
unto Himself.- Therefore on the one hand they call
Him the Object of Love and Yearning as being
Beautiful and Good, and on the other they call Him
Yearning and Love as being a Motive-Power leading-
all things to Himself, Who is the only ultimate Beauti-
ful and Good —
yea, as being His own Self-Revelation
and the Bounteous Emanation of His own Tran-
scendent Unity, a Motion of Yearning simple, self-
moved, self-acting, pre-existent in the Good, and
overflowing from the Good into creation, and once
again returning to the Good. And herein the
Divine Yearning showeth especially its beginningless
and endless nature, revolving in a perpetual circle for
the Good, from the Good, in the Good, and to the Good,
with unerring revolution, never varying its centre or
direction, perpetually advancing and remaining and
returning to Itself. This by Divine inspiration our
renowned Initiator hath declared in his Hymns of
Yearfiing, which it will not be amiss to quote and thus
to bring unto a holy consummation our Discourse
concerning^ this matter.
15. Words of the most holy Hierotheus from the
"
Hymns of Yearnmg. Yearning (be it in God or
Angel, or Spirit, or Animal Life, or Nature) must be
^
Yearning is a moven^.ent in the soul ; the Object of Yearning causes
such movement in the souh
^
Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas Detis j/iovet sicitt desideratum a Se Ipso.
:
Cf. Spenser: "He loved Himself because Himself was fair." Cf.
Plato's Doctrine of epojs. This Yearning is eternally fulfilled in the
Trinity. Cf. Dante: "O
somma luce che sola in Te sidi / sola T'
intendi e da Te intelletta / cd intcndente 'I'e ami ed arridi." It is
struggling towards actualization in this world.

io8 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
conceived of as an uniting and commingling power
which moveth the higher things to a care for those
below them, moveth co-equals to a mutual communion,
and finally moveth the inferiors to turn towards their
superiors in virtue and position."
1 6. Words of the same, from the same Hymns of
"
Yeajviing. Forasmuch as we have set down in
order the manifold yearnings springing from the One,
and have duly explained what are the powers of
knowledge and of action belonging to the yearnings
springing from the One, and have duly explained
what are the powers of knowledge and of action
proper to the Yearnings within
^
the world and
^
above it (wherein, as hath been already explained,
the higher place belongeth unto those ranks and
orders of Yearning which are spiritually felt and
perceived, and highest amongst these are the Divine
Yearnings in the very core of the Spirit towards those
Beauties which have their veritable Being Yonder),^
let us now yet further resume and compact them all
together into the one and concentrated Yearning

which is the Father of them all, and let us collect
together into two kinds their general desiderative
^
/. e. The social instinct in men and animals, and the impulse of
mutual attraction in the inanimate world.
^
The manifold yearnings of the spirit for Truth, Beauty, Spiritual
Love, etc.
^
i.e. Of the two classes just alluded to the second is the higher ;
and of those yearnings which belong to this class the most transcendent
are the highest. Religion is higher than secular life, and the highest
element
in Religion is other-worldly.
Thereceived text reads —
"The Divine Yearnings in the very core," etc., ol avrouor^roL koI
6€7oi Twv ovTcos e/celKaKws epuTcou. I have ventured to amend epwrccv
to epcDTGs. If the MS from which the received text is derived belonged
to a family having seventeen or eighteen letters to a line then this
word would probably come the end of a line (since there are
at
260 letters to the end of it, from the beginning of the section), and
would have the 6v- of uvtws just above it and the -ou- of avrovSriToi just
above that, and ipwrwu at the end of the line next but one above that.
This would make the corruption of epwres into 4pwTwv very natural.
powers, over which the entire mastery and primacy

is in that
Incomprehensible Causation of all yearning
which Cometh from Beyond them all, and whereunto
the universal yearning of all creatures presseth
upwards according to the nature of each."
17. Words of the same, from the same Hymns of
"
Yearning. Let us once more collect these powers
into one and declare that^there is but One Simple
Power Which of Itself moveth all things to be
mingled in an unity, starting from the Good and
going unto the lowest of the creatures and thence
again returning through all stages in due order unto
the Good, and thus revolving from Itself, and through
Itself and upon Itself^ and towards Itself, in an
unceasing orbit."
18. Now some
y will "If the
one, perhaps, say:
^
"That which is not "= formless matter. Plotinus (^;/«. i. 8. 3)
defines the Non-Existent as the world of sense- perception. It is, as it
were, the stuff of which all things perceived by the senses are made.
This stuff cannot exist without some kind of " form," and therefore, if
"
entirely bereft of all form," would simply disappear into nothingness.
Thus, apart from that element of "form" which it derives from the
Good, it is sheer Non-Entity.
Each individual thing consists of "matter" and "form" i.e. of —
this indeterminate "stuff" and of the
particular qualities belonging to
that thing. Remove those qualities and the thing is destroyed e.g. :
remove the colours, shape, etc., of a tree, and the tree becomes non-
existent. It crumbles into dust, and thus the "stuff" takes on a new
form. If, as M. I.e Bon maintains, material particles sometimes lose
their material qualities and are changed into energy, in such a case the
"stuff" lakes on yet another kind of form. The individual thing, in
"
every case, becomes non-existent when it loses its form," or the sum
total of its individual qualities, but the "stuff" persists because it at
once assumes another "form."
Hence this "stuff,"being non-existent /^r se, draws its existence
from the Good Which is the Source of all "form." And thus the
existence of this non-existent stuff is ultimately contained in the Good.
D. tries to prove that evil is non-existent by showing that there
is
nothing that can have produced it. Good cannot have produced it
because a thing cannot produce its own opposite ; evil cannot have
produced itself because evil is always destructive and never productive.
All things that exist are produced by the Good or the desire for the
—
Good which comes to the same thing.
no DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
Beautiful and Good is an Object of Yearning and
desire and love to all (for even that which is not longs-
for It, as was said,^ and strives to find its rest therein,
and thus It creates a form even in formless thincjs and
thus said super-essentially to contain^ and does so
is
contain, the non-existent)

- —
if this is so, how is it that
the company of the devils desires not the Beautiful
and Good, but, being inclined towards matter and
fallen far from the fixed angelic state of desire for the
Good, becomes a cause of all evils to itself and to all
other beings which we describe as becoming evil ?
How is it that the devils, having been produced
wholly out of the Good, are not good in disposition ?
Or how is it that, if produced good from out of the
Good, they became changed ?
^
What made them
^
The "matter" or stufi of which the universe is made, exists
ultimately in the Good, but evil does not. All force exists ultimately
in the Good, but the warping of it, or the lawlessness of it (which is
the evil of it), does not exist in the Good. Pôrce, or energy, as such is
a relative embodiment of the Absolute evil as such is a conlradiction
:
of the Absolute.
^
/. e. There is an element of good in evil things enabling them to
"
cohere and so to exist. In this passage *' Non- Existent is used in
three senses: (i) "Matter," or force, cannot exist without some form
(which is its complement) and therefore is technically called non-
existent. (2) Evil cannot exist at all on the ultimate plane of Being,
nor in this world without an admixture of good (which is its contrary)
and therefore is in an absolute sense non-existent. (3) The Good is
beyond all existence and therefore is by transcendence Non-Existent.
^
The Good is beyond this world and beyond the stuff, or force, of
which this world, ismade.
Evil, on the other hand, is world and the stuff composing
below this
it. Get world [sc. the difference between
rid of the limitations in this
one quality and another) and you have an energy or force possessing
all the particular qualities of things fused in one. Get rid of the
limitations inherent in this (/. e. intensify it to infinity) and you have
the Goofl. On the other hand, destroy some particular object {e.^. a
tree), and that object, being now actually non-existent, has still a
potential existence in the world-stuff. Destroy that potential existence
and you have absolute non-existence, which is Evil.
Thus the three grades may be tabulated as follows :
(i) Transcendent Non-Existence (= the Good).

(ii) Actual Non-Existence ( = the woild stuff, force or energy, of
THE DIVINE NAMES in
evil, and indeed what is the nature of evil ? FroiTi"

what origin did it arise and in what thing doth it lie
ij
Why did He that is Good will to produce it? Anc

how, having so willed, was He able so to do?^ Anc
if evil comes from some other cause, what other cause
can anything have excepting the Good ? How, i
there is a Providence, doth evil exist, or arise at all, o
escape destruction ? And why doth "
anything in th(
world desire it instead of Good ?
19. Thus perhaps will such bewildered discourse
speak. Now we will bid the questioner look towards)
the truth of things, and in the first place we willi
venture thus to answer: "Evil cometh not of the||
Good ;
and if it comelh therefrom it is not evil. For i
even as cannot cool us, so Good cannot produce-

fire
the things which are not good. And if all things that
have being come from the Good (for it is natural to
the Good to produce and preserve the creatures, and
natural to evil to corrupt and to destroy them) then
nothing in the world cometh of evil. Then evil can-
whicli material particles are a form. Modern science teaches that

atoms have no actual existence. Thus the atomic theory has worked
round to something very much like D.'s theory of the non-existent
world stuff).
(iii) Absolute Non-Existence (= Evil).
The three grades might be expressed by a numerical symbol as
follows : If finite numbers represent the various lorms of existence, the
finite numbers) = the Good:
Infinity (which contradicts the laws of
from multi-
Unity (which is a mere abstraction and cannot exist apart
into parts) = the world stuff:
plicity since every finite unit is divisible
Zero (which annihilates all finite numbers that are multiplied by it) =^
Evil.
1
The argument in the rest of the section is as follows :
Evil exists, for there is a radical difference between virtue and vice,
l-.vil is, in fact, not merely negative, but positive not merely :
destructive, but also productive. And hence it is necessary to the

perfection of the world. To which D. replies in tlie next section
that evil does not exist evil, nor is it positive or productive c/ua
giia
evil. It exists and is and productive solely through an
positive
admixture of the Good. (We might illustrate by the
this fact that
Zero, multiplied by Infinity, produces finite number.)

not even in any wise exist, if it act as evil upon itself.
And unless it do so act, evil is not wholly evil, but
hath some portion of the Good whereby it can exist at
all. And if the things that have being desire the
Beautiful and Good and accomplish all their acts for
the sake of that which seemeth good, and if all that
they intend hath the Good as its Motive and its Aim
(for nothing looks unto the nature of evil to guide it
what place is left for evil among things
in its actions),
that have being, or how can it have any being at all
bereft of such good purpose ? And if all things that
have being come of the Good and the Good is Beyond
things that have being, then, whereas that which
exists not yet hath being in the Good evil con- ;
trariwise hath none (otherwise it were not wholly evil

or Non-E7is ; for that which is wholly Non-Ens can
be but naught except this be spoken Super-Essentially
of the Good). So the Good must have Its seat far
above and before that which hath mere being and
that which hath not but evil hath no place either
;
amongst things that have being or things that have

not, yea it is farther removed than the Non-Existent
from the Good and hath less being than it. Then ' '
'
(saith one perchance) '

whence cometh evil ? For if
evil is not, virtue and vice must needs be

'
(saith he)
the same both in their whole entirety and in their
corresponding particulars,'
— /. e. even that which
fighteth against virtue cannot be evil. And yet
temperance is the opposite of debauchery, and right-
eousness of wickedness. And I mean not only the

righteous and the unrighteous man, or the temperate
and intemperate man I mean that, even before the
;
external distinction appeared between the virtuous

man and his opposite, the ultimate distinction between
the virtues and the vices hath existed long beforehand
in the soul itself, and the passions war against the
reason, and hence we must assumQ something evil
which is contrary to goodness. For goodness is not

contrary to itself, but, being come from One Beginning
and being the offspring of One Cause, it rejoices in
fellowship, unity, and concord. Even the lesser Good
is not contrary to the greater, for that which is less
hot or cold is not contrary to that which is more so.

Wherefore evil lieth in the things that have being and
possesseth being and is opposed and contrary to good-
ness. And if evil is the destruction of things which
have being, that depriveth it not of its own being. It
itself still hath being and giveth being to its offspring.
Yea, is not the destruction of one thing often the

birth of another ? And thus it will be found that evil
maketh contribution unto the fullness of the world,
and through its presence, saveth the universe from
imperfection."
20. The true answer whereunto will be that evil
(qna evil) causes no existence or birth, but only

debases and corrupts, so far as its power extends, the
substance of things that have being. And if any one
says that it is productive, and that by the destruction
of one thing it giveth birth to somewhat else, the true
answer is that it doth not so (/tea destructive. Qua
destructive and evil it only destroys and debases but;
it taketh upon it the form of birth and essence through
the action of the Good. Thus evil will be found to

be a destructive force in itself, but a productive force
through the action of the Good. Qua evil it neither
hath being nor confers it through the action of the
;
Good, it hath being (yea, a good being) and confers

being on good things. Or rather (since we cannot
call the same thing both good and bad in the same
relations, nor are the destruction and birth of the
same thing the same function or faculty, whether pro-
ductive or destructive, working in the same relations).
Evil in itself hath neither being, goodness, productive-
ness, nor power of creating things which have being
and goodness the Good, on the other hand, wherever
;
It becomes perfectly present, creates perfect, universal

and untainted manifestations of goodness while the ;
things which have a lesser share therein are imperfect

manifestations of goodness and mixed with other
elements through lack of the Good. In fine, evil is
not in any wise good, nor the maker of good but ;
every thing must be good only in proportion as it

approacheth more or less unto the Good, since the
perfect Goodness penetrating all things reacheth not
only to the wholly good beings around It, but
extendeth even unto the lowest things, being entirely
present unto some, and in a lower measure to others,
and unto others in lowest measure, according as
each one is capable of participating therein.^ Some
creatures participate wholly in the Good, others are
lacking in It less or more, and others possess a still
fainter participation therein, while to others the Good
is
present as but the faintest echo. For if the Good
were not present only in a manner proportioned unto
each, then the divinest and most honourable things
would be no higher than the lowest And how, pray, !
could all things have a uniform share in the Good,

since not all are equally fit to share entirely therein ?
But in truth the exceeding greatness of the power of
the Good is shown by this —
that It giveth power even
to the things which lack It, yea even unto that very
lack itself, inasmuch as even here is to be found some
kind of participation in It.^ And, if we must needs
^
D. is no pantheist. According to Pantheism God is equally
present in all
things. Thus Pantheism is a debased form uf the
Immanence doctrine, as Calvinism is a debased form of the Tran-
scendence doctrine. In the one case we get Immanence without
1
Transcendence in the other Transcendence without Immanence. D.
:
I
holds a Transcendent Immanence (cf. Bradley, Appearance and Reality,
rebutting cliarge of Pantheism).
2
e.
g. The cruelty of Nature seems to show Intelligence ;
and
Intelligence per se is a good thing,
boldly speak the truth, even the things that fight

against It possess through Its power their being and
their capability to fight. Or rather, to speak shortly,
all creatures in so far as they have being are good and
come from the Good, and in so far as they are deprived
of the Good, neither are good nor have they bcing.^
For in the case of other qualities, such as heat or cold,
the things v/hich have been warmed have their being
even w^hen they lose their warmth, and many of the
creatures there are w^hich have no life or mind; and
in like manner God transcendeth all being and so is
-
Super-Essential and generally, in all other cases,
;
though the quality be gone or hath never been

present, the creatures yet have being and can subsist ;
but that which is utterly bereft of the Good never had,'

nor hath, nor ever shall have, no nor can have any sort
of being whatever. For instance, the depraved sinner,
though bereft of the Good by his brutish desire, is in
this respect unreal and desires unrealities but still he
;
hath a share in the Good in so far as there is in him a

distorted reflection of true Love and Communion.^
And anger hath a share in the Good, in so far as it is
a movement which seeks to remedy apparent evils,
converting them to that which appears to be fair.
And even he that desires the basest life, yet in so far
as he feels desire at all and feels desire for life, and
intends what he thinks the best kind of life, so far
participates in the Good. And if you wholly destroy
the Good, there v/ill be neither being, life, desire, nor
motion, or any other thing. Hence the birth of fresh
^
All evil things contain the seed of their own decay, and so tend to
non-existence. The arrogance and cruelty of the Germans has been
their weakness, as discipline and self-sacrifice has been their strength.
^
God exists without Essence, as an object can exist without this
particular quality or that.
^
D. is thinking especially of carnal sin. Such sin is a depraved
form of that which, in its true purity, is a mystery, symbolizing the
Unitive Life.
ii6 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
life out of destruction is not the function of evil but is
the presence of Good in a lesser form, even as disease
is a disorder, yet not the destruction of all order, for if
this happen the disease itself will not exist.^ But the
disease remains and exists. Its essence is order
reduced to a Diininiu^n ; and in this it consists. For
that which is utterly without the Good hath neither
being nor place amongst the things that are in being ;
but that which is of mixed nature owes to the Good

its place things in being, and hath this place
among
amongst them and hath being just so far as it partici-
pates in the Good. Or rather all things in being will
; have their being more or less in proportion as they
ji participate in the Good. For so far as mpre Being is
concerned, that which hath not being in any respect
will not exist at all that which hath being in one
;
respect but not in another doth not exist in so far as

it hath fallen away from the
everlasting Being while ;
in so far as it hath a share of being, to that extent it

exists ;
and thus both an element of existence and an
element of non-existence in it are kept and preserved.
So too with evil. That which is utterly fallen from
Good can have no place either in the things which are
more good or in the things which are less so. That
which is good in one respect but not in another is at
war with some particular good but not with the whole
of the Good. It also is preserved by the admixture
of the Good, and thus the Good giveth existence to
the lack of Itself through some element of Itself being
present there. For if the Good be entirely removed,
|
there will not remain aught at all, either good or

mixed or absolutely bad. For if evil is imperfect
Goodness, the perfect absence of the Good will
remove both the perfect and the imperfect Good, and
evil will only exist and appear because, while it is evil
in relation to one kind of good (being the^contrary
^
A diseased body siill lives. Death ends the disease.
thereof), yetit depends for its existence on another
kind of good and, to that extent, is good itself. For

^
things of the same kind cannot be wholly contra-
dictory to one another in the same respects.^ Hence
evil is Non-Existent.J^
^
21. Neither inhereth evil in existent creatures.^
For if all creatures are from the Good, and the Good
is in them all and embraces them all, either evil can
have no place amongst the creatures, or else it must
have a place in the Good.^ Now it cannot inhere in
the Good, any more than cold can inhere in fire just ;
so the quality of becoming evil cannot inhere in that

which turns even evil into good. And if evil doth
inhere in the Good, what will the mode of its inher-
ence be? If you say: It cometh of the Good, I
answer That is absurd and impossible. For (as
:
the infallible Scriptures say), a good tree cannot bring

forth evil fruit, nor yet is the converse possible. But
if it cometh not of the Good, it is plainly from another
origin and cause. Either evil must come from the

Good, or the Good from evil, or else (if this is
impossible) both the Good and evil must be from
another origin or cause. For no duality can be an
origin : some unity must be the origin of all duality.!
And yet it is absurd to suppose that two entirely
^
Exuberant vitality is per se a good thing and the more exuberant
the better, though, like all good things, it is dangerous, and unless
properly directed is disastrous.
2
If good and evil are both existent, they are, to that extent, both of
the same kind which is impossible.
;
^
So far D. has been showing that evil is not an itUimate principle,
being neither (i) identical with the Good, nor (2)self-subsistent. Now
he argues that it is not a necessary element in any created thing :
neither in their existence as such, nor in any particular kind of
creature.
*
D. rambles characteristically, but the general argument is plain.
All existence is from the Good. Hence, if evil is inherent in the
nature of existence, evil is from the Good. Thus D. meets ngain and
])roceeds to lay the ghost of a theory which he has already elaborately
slain in the previous section.
ii8 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
opposite things can owe their birth and their being

to the same thing. This would make the origin itself
not a simple unity but divided, double, self-contra-
dictory and discordant. Nor again is it possible that
the world should have two contradictory origins,
existing in each other and in the whole and mutually
For,^ were this assumed, God
^
at strife. cannot be
freefrom pain, nor without a feeling of ill, since there
would be something causing Him trouble, yea, all
things must in that case be in a state of disorder and
perpetual strife whereas the Good imparts a principle
;
of harmony to all things and is called by the Sacred

Writers Peace and the Bestower of Peace. And hence
it is that all good things
display a mutual attraction
and harmony, and are the offspring of one Life and
are disposed in fellowship towards one Good, and are
kindly, of like nature, and benignant to one another.
And so evil is not in God,^ and is not divine. Nor
jcometh it of God. For either He is not good, or else~
He worketh goodness and bringeth good things unto
^
Having just given a metapliysical argument for the non-existence
of evil, D. now gives an argument drawn from the actual nature of the
universe and of God's creative activity.
Tliis argument is not so satisfactory as the metaphysical one, for,
under all the harmony of the world, there is perpetual strife, and the
Cross of Christ reveals God as suffering pain. " Christ is in an
agony
and will be till the end of the world " {Pascal).
The metaphysical argument is sound because metaphysics deal with
ultimate ideals, and evil is ultimately or ideally non-existent. The
argument from actual facts is unsound because evil is actually existent.
Much wrong thinking on the subject of evil is due to a confusion of
ideal with actual non-existence. D. here seems to fall into this
mistake.
2
D. here uses the name " "
God because he is thinking of the
Absolute or the Good, not in Its ultimate Nature, but in Its emanating
or creative activity, in which the Personal Differentiations of the
Trinity appear. See II. 7.
^
i. e. Evil does not arise through the passage of the Good from
Super-Essence into Essence. It is not in the Good through the Good
submitting to the conditions of existence (D. has already shown that

evil has no place in the ultimate Super-Essential Nature of the Good).
existence. Nor acts He thus only at some times and

not at others, or only in the case of some thincfs but
not of all. For were He to act thus, He must suffer
a change and alteration, and that in respect of the
divinest quality of all causality.
—
And if the Good
is in God as His substance, God must, in chang-
very
ing from the Good, sometimes exist and sometimes
not exist. if you feign that He hath the
Doubtless
Good by mere participation therein, and derives It
from another, in that case He will, forsooth, sometimes
possess It and sometimes not possess It.^ Evil, there-
fore, doth not come from God, nor is it in God either
absolutely or temporally.^
22. Neither inhereth evil in the angels.^ For if the
good angel declares the Divine Goodness, he is in [
a secondary manner and by participation that which

the Subject of his message is in a primary and causal
manner.'* And thus the angel is an image of God,
a manifestation of the invisible light, a burnished
mirror, bright, untarnished, without spot or blemish,
receiving (if it is reverent to say so) all the beauty
of the Absolute Divine Goodness, and (so far as may
be) kindling in itself, with unallowed radiance, the
Goodness of the Secret Silence. Hence evil inhereth
not in the angels they are evil only in so far as they
;
must punish sinners. But in this respect even those

who chastise wrong-doers are evil, and so are the
priests who exclude the profane man from the Divine
^
This is a feduciio ad absurdum. D. considers it obvious that God
possesses the Good as His Substance and not by participation. The
Persons of the Trinity are not products of the Absolute but Emanations
or Differentiations of It.
^
The argument is as follows No evil is from God. All existence
:
is from God. Therefore no existence is evil.

^
Having shown that existence as such is not inherently evil, D. now
takes various forms of existence and shows that none of them is, as
such, inherently evil.
*
Old Testament " Sons of
Cf.
"
title, God," and D. on Deification.
Cf. also I have said, Ye are Gods."
Mysteries. 'tis not the suffering of the
But, indeed,
punishment that but the being worthy thereof;
is evil
nor yet is a just exclusion from the sacrifices ev-il,
but to be guilty and unholy and unfit for those pure
mysteries is evil.
23. Nor For, were

are the devils naturally evil.
they such, they would not have sprung from the
Good, nor have a place amongst existent creatures,
nor have fallen from Goodness (being by their very
nature always evil). Moreover, are they evil with
respect to themselves or to others.? If the former ^
they must also be self-destructive if the latter, how
;
do they destroy, and what do they destroy ? ^

Do
they destroy Essence, or Faculty, or Activity?^ If
Essence, then, first, they cannot destroy it contrary
to its own nature for they cannot destroy things
;
which by their nature are indestructible, but only

the things which are capable of destruction. And,
secondly, destruction itself is not evil in every case
and under all circumstances. Nor can any existent
thing be destroyed so far as its being and nature act ;
for its destruction is due to a failure of its natural

order, whereby the principle of harmony and symmetry
grows weak and so cannot remain unchanged.* But
^
/. e. If totally and essentially by very nature evil with respect to
themselves. In so far as they continue to exist they are good with
respect to themselves.
2
Evil is the contrary of the Good. Hence since the Good is by Its
very nature productive, evil must be destructive. Hence the devils, if
essentially evil, must be essentially destructive. Now they are not
essentially self-destructive, for, were they such, they could not exist,
j
Therefore, if essentially evil, they must under all circumstances be
destructive of other things.
'
The essence o^ {e. g.) an apple-tree is self-identity its faculty is its
;
latent power of producing leaves, apples, etc. ;

its activity is the actual
production of the leaves, apples, etc.

^
(
I
)
The devils do not destroy all things {e. g. they do not annihilate
the human soul). Therefore they are not essentially evil. Evil passions
are good things misdirected. (2) Often the destruction of a thing is
beneficial [e.g. the falling of the faded leaf). In fact, nothing could be
THE DIVINE NAMES iî
the weakness is not complete for, were it complete,

;
it would have annihilated both the process of destruc-

tion and the object which suffers it and such a
:
destruction as this must be self-destructive. Hence

such a quality is not._eyil but imperfect good for ;
that which is wholly destitute of the Good can have

no place among things that have being.^ And the
same is true of destruction when it works upon a
faculty or activity. Moreover, how can the devils be
evil since they are sprung from God ? For the Good
produceth and createth good things. But it may be
said that they are called evil not in so far as they

exist (for they are from the Good and had a good
existence given them), but in so far as they do not
exist, having been unable (as the Scripture saith) to
keep their original state. For in what, pra}% do we
consider the wickedness of the devils to consist except
their ceasing from the quality and activity of divine
virtues? Otherwise, if the devils are naturally evil,
they must be always evil. But_evil is unstable.^
Hence if they are always in the same condition, they
are not evil for to remain always the same is a
;
property of the Good. But if they are not always

evil, then they are not evil by their natural constitu-
tion, but only through a lack of angelic virtues.^
Hence they are not utterly without the Good, seeing
that they exist and live and form intuitions and have
dcstro)ed if it had not grown feeble and so become worliiy to be

destroyed. (D. here, in his zeal to explain evil away, countenances the
base doctrine that might is light. What is wrong with the whole
system of the universe is that its underlying law is the survival of the
fittest. The enlightened conscience of liumanity rebels against this
law.)
1
The weakness is an imperfect good, and therefore the process of
destruction which co-operates with the weakness is an impcricct grod.
-
The Good is permanent. Hence its ct-ntrary muse be unstable.
^ Its
Evil is essentially a negative and self-contradictory thing.
very permanence would be opposed to its own nature and would
be due
to an element of the Good within it.
1^2 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
within them any movement of desire at all but they ;
are called evil because they fail in the exercise o_f

their natural activity. The evil in them is therefore
a warping, a declension from their right condition a ;
failure, an imperfection, an impotence, and a weakness,

loss and lapse of that power which would preserve
their perfection in them. Moreover what is the evil
in the devils ? Brutish wrath, blind desire, headstrong
fancy. But these qualities, even though they exist
in the devils, are not wholly, invariably, and essentially
evil. For in other living creatures, not the possession
of these qualities but their loss is destructive of the
creature and hence is evil while their possession
;
preserves the creature and enables the creature pos-

jsessing them to exist. Hence the devils are not evil
in so far as they fulfil their nature, but in so far as
'jthey do not. Nor hath the Good bestowed complete

upon them been changed rather have they fallen
;
from the completeness of that gift. i\nd we maintain

that the angelic gifts bestowed upon them have never
themselves suffered change, but are unblemished in
their perfect brightness, even if the devils themselves
do not perceive it through blinding their faculties of
spiritual perception.^ Thus, so far as their existence
is concerned, they possess it from the Good, and are
naturally good, and desire the Beautiful and Good

in desiring existence, life, and intuition, which are
existent things. And they are called evil through
the deprivation and the loss whereby they have
lapsed from their proper virtues. And hence they
\are evil in so far as they do not exist and in desiring
;
desire that which is non-existent.

iêvil they
24. But perhaps some one will say that human
^
^
There is a timeless ground in all personalities, and this ground is
good. Eckhart and Tauler say that even the souls in hell possess
eternally the divine root of their true being. Ruysbroeck says, this
divine root does not of itself make us blessed, but merely makes us
exist.
souls are the seat of evil. Now if the reason alleged

is that they have contact with evil temptations when
they take forethought to preserve themselves there-
from, this is not evil but good and cometh from the
Good that turns even evil into good. But if we mean
the depravation which souls undergo, in what do they
undergo depravation except in the deficiency of good
qualities and activities and in the failure and fall
therefrom due to their own weakness ? Even so we
say that the air is darkened around us by a deficiency
and absence of the light while yet the light itself is
;
always light and illuminates the darkness. Hence'

the evil inhereth not in the devils or in us, as evil,
but only as a deficiency and lack of the perfection of
our proper virtues.
25. Neither inhereth evil in the brute beasts. For
if you take
away the passions of anger, desire, etc.
(which are not in their essential nature evil, although
alleged to be so), the lion, having lost its savage
wildness, will be a lion no longer and the dog, if it ;
become gentle to all, will cease to be a dog, since

the virtue of a dog is to watch and to allow its own
masters to approach while driving strangers away.
Wherefore 'tis not evil for a creature so to act as
preserveth its nature undestroyed evil is the de- ;
struction of its nature, the weakness and deficiency

of its natural qualities, activities, and powers. And
if all things which the
process of generation produces
have their goal of perfection in time, then even that
which seemeth to be their imperfection is not wholly
and entirely contrary to nature.^
Neither inhereth evil in nature as a whole. For
26.
natural laws together come from the universal
if all
system of Nature, there is nothing contrary to Nature.^

^
i. e. That which is imperfect in them is capable of being made
perfect.
'
The sum total of natural laws comes from the ultimate unity of
'Tis but when we consider the nature of particular
things, that we find one part of Nature to be natural
and another part to be unnatural. For one thing
may be unnatural in one case, and another thing in
another case and that which is natural in one is
;
unnatural in another.^ Now the evil taint of a natural

force is something unnatural. It is a lack of the
thing's natural virtues. Hence, no natural force is

evil the evil of nature lies in a thing's inability to
:
fulfil its natural functions. ^

27. Neither inhereth evil in our bodies. For ugli-
less and disease are a deficiency in form and a want
f'of order. But this is not wholly evil, being rather
a lesser good. For were there a complete destruc-
tion of beauty, form, and order, the very body must
disappear. And that the body is not the cause of
evil in the soul is plain in that evil can be nigh at
hand even without a body, as it is in the devils.
Evil in spirits' souls and bodies is a weakness and
lapse in the condition of their natural virtues.
"
28. Nor is the familiar notion true that Evil
inheres in matter qua matter." For matter, too,
hath a share in order, beauty, and form. And if
matter is without these things, and in itself hath no
quality or form, how can it produce anything, since
in that case it hath not of itself even the power of
suffering any affection? Nay, how can matter be
Nature, which comes from the Good. Thus the sum total of natural
laws is not, as such, opposed to the ultimate unity of Nature, and
therefore is not as such opposed to the Good. It is not essentially
evil.
^
Cf. Section 30.
-
The argument of the whole passage is that evil is not inherent in
the essential nature of things as a whole or of any particular thing. It
arises in particular things (accidentally, as it were) through their failure
to fulfil their true nature. But what of this accident ? Is it inherent ?
Perhaps we might answer, "Not inherent because capable of being
eliminated."
evil ? hath no being- whatever, it is neither

For if it
good nor evil but if it hath a kind of being, tlien

;
(since all things that have being come from the

Good) matter must come from the Good. And
thus either the Good produces evil (/. e. evil, since it
comes from the Good, is good), or else the Good
Itself is produced by the Good, as coming evil [i.e.
thus from evil, is we are driven back
evil). Or else
again to two principles. But if so, these must be
derived from some further single source beyond them.
And if they say that matter is necessary for the
whole world to fulfil its development, how can that
be evil which depends for its existence upon the
Good ? For evil abhors the very nature of the Good.
And how can matter, if it is evil, produce and nourish
Nature? For evil, ^//<^ evil, cannot produce or nourish
anything, nor create or preserve it at all. And if
they reply that matter causes not the evil in our
souls, but that it yet draws them down towards evil,
can that be true For many of them have their
.'*
gaze turned towards the Good. And how can that

Be, if matter doth nothing except drag them down
towards evil } Hence evil in our souls is not derived
from matter but from a disordered and discordant
motion. And if they say that this motion is always
the consequence of matter and if the unstable ;
medium of matter is necessary for things that are

incapable of firm self-subsistence, then why is it that
evil isthus necessary or that this necessary thing is
1
evil ?
Nor is the common saying true that Deprivation

29.
or Lack fights by its natural power against the Good.
For a complete lack is utterly impotent and that ;
^
Matter, it is argued, is evil because the discordant motion of the
soul springs from matter. But, replies D., matter is necessary for
certain kinds of existence. Hence it follows that evil is necessary. But
this is impossible.
which is
partial hath its power, not in so far as it
isa lack, but in so far as it is not a perfect lack.
For when the lack of the Good is partial, evil is not
as yet and when it becomes perfect, evil itself
;
utterly
vanishes.
30. In fine, Good cometh from the One universal
Cause ;
and evil from many partial deficiencies. God
knows evil under the form of good, and with Him
the causes of evil things are faculties productive of
good. And if evil is eternal, creative, and powerful,
and if it hath being and activity, v/hence hath it
these attributes ? Come they from the Good ? Or
from the evil by the action of the Good ? Or from
some other cause by the action of them both? All
natural results arise from a definite cause; and if
evil hath no cause or definite
being, it is unnatural.
For that which is contrary to Nature hath no place
in Nature, even as unskilfulness hath no
place in
skilfulness. Is the soul, then, the cause of evils, even
as fire is the cause of warmth? And doth the soul,
then, fill with evil whatsoever things are near it? Or
is the nature of the soul in itself
good, while yet in
its activities the soul is sometimes in one
state, and
sometimes in another ?i Now, if the very existence
of the soul is naturally evil, whence is that existence
derived ? From the Good Creative Cause of the
whole world? If from this Origin, how can it be,
in essential nature, evil?
its For all things sprung
from out this Origin are good. But if it is evil merely
in its activities, even so this condition is not fixed.
Otherwise {i.e. if it doth not itself also assume a
good quality) what is the origin of the virtues ?2

^
D.
here alluding to the mystical doctrine of the timeless self—
is
the ultimate root of goodness in each individual which remains
unchanged by the failures and sins of the temporal self.
-
D. is arguing with those who hold that evil is in some sense
necessary to the existence of the world, and therefore has a permanent
place in it. Sin is, they hold, a necessary self-realization of human
There remains but one alternative Evil is a weak- :
ness and deficiency of Good,

31. Good things have all one cause. If evil is
opposed to the Good, then hath evil many causes.
The efficient causes of evil results, however, are not
any laws and faculties, but an impotence and weak-
ness and an inharmonious mingling of discordant
elements. Evil things are not immutable and un-
changing but indeterminate and indefinite the sport :
of alien influences which have no definite aim. The

Good must be the beginning and the end even of all
evil things. For the Good is the final Purpose of all)
things, good and bad alike. For even when we act ;
amiss we do so from a longing for the Good for no| ;
one makes evil his definite object when performing

any action. Hence evil hath no substantial being,l
but only a shadow thereof; since the Good, and not
itself, is the ultimate object for which it comes into,
existence.
I
32. Unto evil we can attribute but an accidental
kind of existence. It exists for the sake of some-
j'
thing else, and is not self-originating. And hence

our action appears to be right (for it hath Good as
its object) while yet it is not
really right (because
we mistake for good that which is not good). 'Tis
proven, then, that our purpose is different from our
action. Thus evil is contrary to progress, purpose,
nature, cause, principle, end, law, will, and being.
Evil is, then, a lack, a deficiency, a weakness, a dis-
proportion, an error, purposeless, unlovely, lifeless,
unwise, unreasonable, imperfect, unreal, causeless,
indeterminate, sterile, inert, powerless, disordered,
incongruous, indefinite, dark, unsubstantial, and never
in itself possessed of any existence whatever. How,
souls which are in their ultimate essence sinless. D. replies that, if
this is so, we cannot explain how goodness can ever be (as it is) a form
of sel(-iealization for human souls.
then, is it that an admixture of the Good bestows any

power upon evil ? For that which is altogether desti-
tute of Good is nothing and hath no power. And
if the Good is Existent and is the Source of will,
power, and action, how can Its opposite (being des-

titute of existence, will, power, and activity), have any
power against It? Only because evil things are not
all entirely the same in all cases and in all relations.^
'^
In the case of a devil evil lieth in the being contrary
to spiritual goodness in the soul it lieth in the being
;
contrary to reason in the body it lieth in the being

;
contrary to nature.
33. How can evil things have any existence at all
if there is a Providence? Only because evil (as such)
hath no being, neither inhereth it in things that have
being. And naught that hath being is independent
of Providence for evil hath no being at all, except
;
when mingled with the Good. And if no thing in

the world is without a share in the Good, and evil is
the deficiency of Good and no thing in the world is
utterly destitute of Good, then the Divine Providence
is in all things, and nothing that exists can be with-
out It. Yea, even the evil effects that arise are turned
by Providence to a kindly purpose, for the succour
of themselves or others (either individually or in
common), and thus it is that Providence cares indi-
vidually for each particular thing in all the world.
Therefore we shall pay no heed to the fond argument
"
so often heard that Providence shall lead us unto
virtue even against our will." 'Tis not worthy of
Providence to violate nature. Wherefore Its Provi-
dential character is shown herein that It preserves :
the nature of each individual, and, in making pro-

vision for the free and independent, it hath respect
unto their state, providing, both in general and in
•
'^
i. e. Evil things are not ejitirely bad, but are bad only in some
partial aspect.
particular, according as the nature of those It cares

for can receive Its providential benefactions, which
are bestowed suitably on each by Its multiform and
universal activity.
34. Thus evil hath no beings, nor any inherence in
things that have being. nowhere qua evil
Evil is ;
and it arises not through any power but through

weakness. Even the devils derive their existence
from the Good, and their mere existence is good.
Their evil is the result of a fall from their proper
virtues, and is a change with regard to their indi-
vidual state, a weakness of their true angelical
perfections. And they desire the Good in so far
as they desire existence, life, and understanding; and
in so far as they do not desire the Good, they desire
that which hath no beins;-. And this is not desire,
but an error of real desire.
35. By "men who sin knowingly" Scripture means
them that are weak in the exercised knowledge^ and
performance of Good; and by "them that know the
Divine Will and do it not," ^ it means them that have
heard the truth and yet are weak in faith to trust the
Good or in action to fulfil it.^ And some desire not
to have understanding in order that they may do
good, so great is the warping or the weakness
of their will. And, in a word, evil (as we have
often said) is weakness, impotence, and deficiency of \
^
Tz^pi Tr]v akrjcTTov tou ayaOov yvwatv.
^
Luke xii. 47.
^
In the previous section D. has maintained that all people ultimately
desire the Good. Hence it follows that all sin is due to ignorance for ;
could we all recognize that which we desire we would follow it. Ti)is
raises the question What, then, does Scripture mean \>y speaking of
:
men who sin knowingly? To this D. replies that wilful sin is wilful
ignorance. the failure to exercise the knowledge we possess as
It is :
when we know a fact which yet is not actually present to our minds.
We know (having been taught it) the desirableness of the Good, but
we can shut this desirableness out from our minds and refuse to dwell
upon it. In such a case we refuse to ex rcise our knowledge.
I30 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
knowledge (or, at least, of exercised knowledge), or

of faith, desire, or activity as touching the Good.
Now, it may be urged that weakness should not be
punished, but on the contrary should be pardoned.
This would be just were the power not within man's
grasp but if the power is offered by the Good that
;
giveth without stint (as saith the Scripture) that

which is needful to each, we must not condone the
wandering or defection, desertion, and fall from the
proper virtues offered by the Good. But hereon let
that suffice which we have already spoken (to the
best of our abilities) in the treatise Concerning Justice
and Divine fiidgnietit :^ a sacred exercise wherein
the Truth of Scripture disallowed as lunatic babbling
such nice arguments as despitefully and slanderously
blaspheme God. Jn this present treatise we have, to
the best of our abilities, celebrated the Good as truly
Admirable, as the Beginning and the End of all
things, as the Power that embraces them, as That
Which gives form to non-existent things, as That
which causes all good things and yet causes no evil
things, as perfect Providence and Goodness surpass-
all that are not, and
ing all things that are and
turning base things and the lack of Itself unto good,
as That Which all must desire, yearn for, and love ;
and as possessed of many other qualities jthe which

a true argument hath, methinks, in this chapter
expounded. , W v
^
This treatise IS lost.
'' ''' ^
r ^
CHAPTER V
Exemplars P
''''
Concerning ''Existence'^ ajid also concernhig

"
I. must we proceed to the Name of " Being;
Now
which is truly applied by the Divine Science to Him
that truly Is. But this much we must say, that it is
not the purpose of our discourse to reveal the Super-
Essential Being in its Super-Essential Nature ^ (for
this is unutterable, nor can we know It, or in anywise
express It, and It is beyond even the Unity 2), but
only to celebrate the Emanation of the Absolute
Divine Essence into the universe of things. For the
Name of " Good " revealing all the emanations of the
universal Cause, extends both to the things which
1
The ultimate Godhead is reached only by the Negative Path, and
known only by Unknowing. The Affirmative Path of philosophical
knowledge leads only to the differentiated manifestations of the God-
head e.g. the Trinity, in Its creative and redemptive activities, is
:
known by the Affirmative Method, but behind these activities and the
faculty for them lies an ultimate Mystery where the Persons transcend
Themselves and are fused (though not confused).
2
In spiritual Communion, the mind, -being joined with God, dis-
Him as Self from Not-Self, Subject from Object.
tinguishes itself from
And law was fulfilled even in the Human Soul of Christ, Who
this
distinguished Himself from His Father. The Persons of the Trinity,
though they lie deeper than this temporal world (being, in Their
eternal emanative Desire, the Ground of its existence), were manifested
through the Incarnation. Hence the distinction of Father, Son, and
Spirit, revealed in the Human Soul of Christ, exists eternally in the
Trinity. And those who reach the Unitive State, since they reach it
only through the Spirit of Christ and are one spirit with Him, must
in
a lesser degree reveal the Personal Differentiations of the Trinity in
their lives. But because the eternal Differentiations of the Trinity
transcend Themselves in. the Super-Essence, therefore Their manifesta-
tions in the Unitive State lead finally to a point beyond Union where.^
all distinctions are transcended. At that point the distinction between
Self and Not-Self, Subject and Object, vanishes in the unknowable
Mystery of the Divine Darkness. The Self has disappeared and been,
in a sense, merged. But in another sense the Self remains. This is
the paradox of Personality — that it seeks (and attains) annihilation in
the Supra-personal plane, and yet on the relative plane retains its own
particular being. This is the paradox of Love. See Intr., p. 28 f., and p. 8.
are,and to the things which are not, and is beyond
"
both categories.^ And the title of " Existent ex-
tends to all existent things and is beyond them.
And the title " Life " extends to all living things
"
and is beyond them. And the title of Wisdom '*
extends to the whole realm of Intuition, Reason, and

is beyond them all.^
Sense-Perception, and
These Names which reveal the Providence of
2.
God our Discourse would now consider. For we
make no promise to express the Absolute Super-
Essential Goodness and Being and Life and Wisdom
of the Absolute Super-Essential Godhead which (as
saith the hath Its foundation in a
Scripture)
^
secret place beyond Goodness, Godhead, Being,
all
Wisdom, and Life but we are considering the be-

;
nignant Providence which is revealed to us and are

Transcendent Goodness and Cause
celebratinof It as
of good things, and as Existent as Life and as
all
Wisdom, and as productive Cause of Existence and

of Life and the Giver of Wisdom, in those creatures
which partake of Existence, Life, Intelligence, and
1
i.e. Extends both to good things and to bad things and is beyond
the opposition between good and bad. The Good extends to bad
things l)ecause evil is a mere distortion of good, and no evil thing could
exist but for an element of good holding it together : its existence, qua
existence, is good. See ch. iv.

The Good is beyond the opposition between good and evil because
on the ultimate plane nothing exists outside It. It is beyond relation-
ships. Hence also beyond Existence, Life, and Wisdom, since these
(as we know them) imply relationships.
Sense-perception is a direct apprehension of that which we
2
actually touch, see, hear, taste, or smell ;

Reason or Inference is an
indirect apprehension of that which we do not actually touch, see, etc.
Intuition is a direct apprehension of that which (by its very nature) we
do not touch, see, etc. Sense perception, Reason, and Intuition are
refractions from the perfect Light of Divine Wisdom but the Divine
;
Wisdom is beyond them because God apprehends all things, not as

existent outside Mimself, but as existent in Himself, under the form of
a single Unify which is identical with His own Being.
The Godhead is a Single Desire wherein all the souls eternally exist
^
as fused and inseparable elements. See Ps. xvii. 12.
Perception. We
do not regard the Good as one
thing, the Existent as another, and Life or Wisdom
as another nor do we hold that there are many
;
causes and different Godheads producing different

effects and subordinate one to another
but we hold ;
that one God

the universal Source of the emana-
is
tions,^ and the Possessor of all the Divine Names we

declare and that the first Name expresses the per-
;
fect Providence of the one God, and the other names
express certain more general or more particular

nipdes of His Providence.^
"
3. Now, some one may say How is it, since :
Existence transcends Life, and Life transcends

Wisdom, that living things are higher than things
which merely exist, and sentient things than
those which merely live, and reasoning things than
those which merely feel, and intelligences than those
which have only reason ? ^ do the creatures
Why
rise in this order to the Presence of God and to a
closer relationship with Him ? You would have
expected those which participate in God's greater
gifts to be the higher, and to surpass the rest."
Now if intelligent beings were defined as having no
^
i. e. Is the Source of Goodness, existence, li.'e, wisdom, etc.
^
The title "Good" applies to all God's providential activity, for
everything that He makes is got. d. And even evil is good depraved and ;
exists as good in the Good

(see p. 132, n. i). Or, rather, evil possesses
not an existence but 3.fio7i-extste>ice in the Good. It is (according to D.) a
kind of non-existent good. Hence the title "Existent" is not quite
so general as the litle " Good."
"
Living" is a less" general title still
(since a stone, for instance, has no life), and "Wise is yet less general
(since a plant is not wise). Thus we get the following table of

emanating activity :
(i) Good (including and transcending existent and non-cxistcnt

things, viz. "good," and "evil").
(2) Existent {existent things, viz. good).
(3) Life (plants, animals, men, angels).
(4) Wisdom (men and angels).
^
Intuition is the faculty of the Intelligences or Angels, by which are
meant, of course, angels and spiritual men ; Discursive Reason is that
of natural men.
Existence or Life, the argument would be sound ;
but since the divine Intelligences do exist in a manner

surpassing other existences, and live in a manner sur-
passing other living things, and understand and
know a manner beyond perception and reason,
in
and a manner beyond all existent things partici-
in
pate in the Beautiful and Good, they have a nearer

place to the Good in that they especially participate
therein, and have from It received both more and
greater gifts, even as creatures possessed of Reason
are exalted, by the superiority of Reason, above those
which have but Perception, and these are exalted
through having Perception and others through having
Life. And the truth, I think, is that the more any-
thing participates in the One infinitely-bountiful God
the more is it brought near to Him and made diviner
than the rest.^
^
The more universal a Title is, the more truly it is applicable to
God (see end of Section 2). Thus Existence is more applicable than
Life, and Life than Wisdom, as involving in each case less that needs to
be discarded. Thus Wisdom implies both a time-process and also a
certain finite mode
of consciousness, neither of which belong to the
eternal and God
infinite Life implies a time-process though not a
:
finite consciousness Existence implies neither time-process nor finite

:
consciousness. Thus we reach the highest conception of God by a

process of abstraction in which we cast aside all particular elements (cf.
St. Augustine on the Bonum bomim).
This is the philosophical basis of the Via Negativa. But this
abstraction is not mere abstraction nor this negation mere negation.
Existence in God subsumes and so includes all that is real in Life and ;
Life in Him subsumes all that is real in Wisdom. Hence the creatures,
as they advance in the scale of creation, draw from Him more and
more particular qualities and progress by becoming more concrete and
individual instead of more abstract. All the rich variety of creation
exists as a simple Unity in God, and the higher a creature stands in
the scale, the more does it draw fresh forces from this simple Unity and
convert them into its own multiplicity. D. would have understood
Evolution very well. This passage exactly fits in with D's. psychological
doctrine of the Via Negativa. That which is reached by the spiritual
act of Contemplation explains the principles underlying the whole
creative process, the growing diversity of the world-process and of human
life. In God there is a rich Unity, and we must leave all diversity
behind to reach It. Thus we shall have richness without diversity.
4. Having now dealt with this matter, let us con-

sider the Good as that which really Is and gives
their being to all things that exist. The Existent
God by the nature of His power, super-essentially
is,
above all existence He is the substantial Cause and
;
Creator of Being, Existence, Substance and Nature,

the Beginning and the Measuring Principle of ages ;
the Reality underlying time and the Eternity under-

lying existences the time in which created things
;
pass,^ the Existence of those that have any kind of

existence, the Life-Process of those which in any
way pass through that process. From Him that Is
come Eternity, Essence, Being, Time, Life-Process,
and that which passes through such Process, the
^
things which inhere in existent things and those
which under any power whatever possess an inde-
pendent subsistence. For God is not Existent in
any ordinary sense, but in a simple and undefinable
manner embracing and anticipating all existence in
Himself. Hence He is called " King of the Ages,"
because in Him and around Him
Being is and
all
subsists, and He neither was, nornor hath

will be,
entered the life-process, nor is doing so, nor ever will,
or rather He doth not even exist, but is the Essence
of existence in things that exist and not only the
;
things that exist but also their very existence comes

from Him that Is before the ages. For He Himself is
the Eternity of the ages and subsists before the ages.
^
Eternity is a totum simiil. It may thus be symbolized by a point
revolving round a centre at infinite speed. Time would be symbolized

by a point revolving round a centre at a finite speed. Thus eternity is
time made perfect. Time is thus subsumed in eternity as the incomplete
in the complete. Hence time, like existence, life, etc., exists in Cjod
as transcended. Hence the temporal-process is a manifestation of Him.
This might lead to Pantheism, but 1). is saved from such a result by
his hold on the complementary truth of Transcendence. All the
that thing 3ls an element in
properties, etc., of each thing exist outside
the Transcendent Being of God.
2
/. e. The qualities of things.
5. Let us, then, repeat that all things and all ages
derive their existence from the Pre-Existent. All
Eternity and Time are from Him, and He who is
Pre-Existent is the Beginning and the Cause of all
Eternity and Time and of anything that hath any
kind of being. All things participate in Him, nor
doth He depart from anything that exists He is ;
before all things, and all things have their main-

tenance in Him and, in short, if anything exists
;
*
under any form whatever, 'tis in the Pre-Existent

that it exists and is perceived and preserves its being.
Antecedent^ to all Its other participated gifts is that
of Being. Very Being is above Very Life, Very Wis-
dom, Very Divine Similarity and all the other universal
Qualities, wherein all creatures that participate must
participate first of all in Being Itself; or rather, all
those mere Universals wherein the creatures parti-
cipate do themselves participate in very Being Itself.
And there is no existent thing whose essence and
eternal nature is not very Being.^ Hence God receives
His Name from the most primary of His gifts when,
as is meet, He is called in a special manner above all
"
things, He which Is." For, possessing in a trans-
cendent manner Pre-Existence and Pre-Eminence,
He caused beforehand all Existence (I mean Very
Being) and in that Very Being caused the par- all
ticular modes
of existence. Pôr all the principles
of existent things derive from their participation in
Being the fact that they are existent and that they
are principles and that the former quality precedes
the latter. And if it like thee to say that Very Life
is the Universal
Principle of living things as such,
and Very Similarity of similar things as such, and
Very Unity of unified things as such, and Very
^
Logically not temporally.
sc.
-
Cf. St. Augustine,
" Homini bono tolie et Dev.m
"
homineni,
invenis. Cf. Section 8.
Order of orderly things as such, and if it Hke thee

to give the name
of Universals to the Principles of
all other things which (by participating in this quality
or in that or in both or in many) are this, that, both
or many thou wilt find that the first Quality in which
they participate is Existence, and that their existence
is the basis, (i) of their permanence, and (2) of their \
being the principles of this or that and also that only

;
through their participation in Existence do they exist

and enable things to participate in them. And if
these Universals exist by participating in Existence,
far more is this true of the things which participate
in them.
6. T hus the
firs t gift which the—Absolute ,and j
Transcendent Goodness bestows is that of mere

'
Existence, and so It derives its first title from the

chiefest of the participations in Its Being. From It
and in It are very Being and the Principles of the
world, and the world which springs from them and
all things that in any way continue in existence.
This attribute belongs to It in an incomprehensible
and concentrated oneness. For all number pre-
exists indivisiblv in the number One, and this number
contains all things in itself under the form of unity.
All number exists as unity in number One, and only ,
,
when it goes forth from this number is it differenced

and multiplied.^' All the radii of a circle are con-
centrated into a single unity in the centre, and this
point contains all the straight lines brought together
within itself and unified to one another, and to the
one starting-point from which they began. Even so
are they a perfect unity in the centre itself, and,
departing a little therefrom they are differenced a
little, and departing further are differenced further,
and, in fact, the nearer they are to the centre, so

^
The number One, beintj infinitely divisible, contains the potenti-
ality of all numbers.
K
much the more are they united to it and to one
another, and the more they are separated from it the
more they are separated from one another.^ I
7. Moreover, in the Universal Nature of the world
all the individual Laws of Nature are united in one
Unity without confusion and in the soul the

;
individual faculties which govern different parts of

the body are united in one. And hence it is not
strange that, w^hen we mount from obscure images to
the Universal Cause, we should with supernatural
i
eyes behold all things (even those things which are
mutually contrary) existing as a single Unity in the
Universal Cause. For It is the beginning of all
things, whence are derived Very Being, and all things
that have any being, all Beginning and End, all Life,
Immortality, Wisdom, Order, Harmony, Power,
Preservation, Grounding, Distribution, Intelligence,
Reason, Perception, Quality, Rest, Motion, Unity,
Fusion, Attraction, Cohesion, Differentiation, Defini-
tion, and all other Attributes which, by their mere
existence, qualify all existent things.
8. And from the same Universal Cause come those
godlike and angelical Beings, which possess Intelli-
gence and are apprehended by Intelligence and ;
from It come our souls and the natural laws of the

whole universe, and all the qualities which we speak
of as existing in other objects or as existing merely
in our thoughts. Yea, from It come the all-holy and
most reverent Powers, which possess a real existence ^
and are grounded, as it were, in the fore-court of the
Super-Essential Trinity, possessing from It and in It
their existence and the godlike nature thereof; and,
after them, those which are inferior to them, possessing
their inferior existence from the same Source and ;
1
Cf. Plotinus.
^
sc. In contradistinction to the Godhead, which (being beyond
essence) does not literally exist.
the lowest, possessing from It their lowest existence

(/. e. lowest compared with the other angels, though
compared with us it is above our world). And human

souls and all other creatures possess by the same
tenure their existence, and their blessedness, and exist
and are blessed only because they possess their
existence and their blessedness from the Pre-existent,
and exist and are blessed in Him, and begin from
Him and are maintained in Him and attain in Him
their Final Goal. And the highest measure of
existence He bestows upon the more exalted Beings,
which the Scripture calls eternal ^ but also the mere
;
existence of the world as a whole is perpetual and ;
its very existence comes from the Pre-existent. He

is not an Attribute of
Being, but Being is an Attribute
of Him ;
He is not contained in Being, but Being is
contained in Him He doth not possess Being, but
;
Being possesses Him He is the Eternity, the Begin-

;
ning, and the Measure of Existence, being anterior to

Essence and essential Existence and Eternity, because
He is the Creative Beginning, Middle, and End of all
things. And hence the truly Pre-existent receives
from the Holy Scripture manifold attributions drawn
from every kind of existence and states of being;
and processes (whether past, present, or future) are

properly attributed to Him ;
for all these attributions,
if their divine meaning be perceived, signify that He
hath a Super-Essential Existence fulfilling all our
categories, and is the Cause producing every mode of
existence. For He is not This without being That ;
nor doth He possess this mode of being without

that. On the contrary He is all things as being the
Cause of them all, and as holding together and
anticipating in Himself all the beginnings and all the
fulfilments of all things and He is above them all
;
in tliat He, anterior to their existence,

super-essentially
^
2 Cor. iv. 18,
transcends them all. Hence all attributes may be
jl
affirmed at once of Him, and yet He is No Thing.^
He possesses all shape and form, and yet is formless
and shapeless, containing beforehand incompre-
hensibly and transcendently the beginning, middle,
and end of all things, and shedding upon them a
pure radiance of that one and undifferenced causality
whence all their fairness comes. ^
For if our sun,
while remaining one luminary and shedding one
still
unbroken light, acts on the essences and qualities of
the things which we perceive, many and various
though they be, renewing, nourishing, guarding, and
perfectingthem differencing them, unifying them,
;
warming them and making them fruitful, causing

them to grow, to change, to take root and to burst
forth quickening them and giving them life, so that
;
each one possesses in its own way a share in the

—
same single sun if the single sun contains beforehand
in itself under the form of an unity the causes of all
the things that participate in it much more doth ;
this truth hold good with the Cause which produced

the sun and all things and all the Exemplars ^ of
;
existent things must pre-exist in It under the form of

one Super-Essential Unity."^ For It produces Essences
only by an outgoing from Essence. And we give
"
^''
the name of " Exemplars to those laws which, pre-
existent in God ^ as an Unity, produce the essences
of things laws which are called in Divine Science
:
^
Cf. Theol. Gertn. passim. Hence the soul possessing God is in a
state of "having nothing and yet possessing all things." Cf. Dante,
cio c he per I' universa si squaderna, etc.
^
Cf. Section 5.
3
i. e. The Platonic ideas of things — their ,
ultimate essences. Bat

see below.
*
Cf. Blake. "Jerusalem," ^^//w.
*
i. e. produces the essences of" things, It must first contain
If It
Essence. D. here uses the term " God because he is thinking of the
Absolute in Its emanating activity (wherein the Differentiations of
the Trinity appear).
" "
Preordinations or Divine and beneficent Volitions,
laws which ordain things and create them, laws
whereby the Super-Essential preordained and brought
into being the whole universe.
9. And whereas the philosopher Clement^ maintains
" "
that the title Exemplar may, in a sense, be applied
to the more important types in the visible world, he
employs not the terms of his discourse in their proper,
perfect and simple meaning.^ But even if we grant
1
This is apparently the Bishop of Rome {c. A, D. 95), writer of the
well-known Epistle to the Corinthians, which is the earliest Christian
writing outside the New Testament, and is published in Lightfoot's
Apostolic Fathers. But no such passage as D. alludes to occurs in the
Epistle, which is his one extant writing.
^
Cf. St. Augustine, Co;>imeniary on St. John, Tr. XXL, § 2 :
" Ubi
demonstrat Filio Pater quod facit nisi in ipso Filio per quem facit?
.... Si quid facit Pater per Filium facit ; si per sapientiam suam et
virtutem suam facit non extra illi ostendit quod videat ... in ipso illi
;
ostendit quod facit. ... (3) Quid videt Pater, vol potius quid videt
Filius in Patre . . et ipse."
.
(The Son beholds all things in Plimself,
and is Himself in the Father.)
All things ultimately and timelessly exist in the Absolute. It is
their Essence (or Super-Essence). Their creation from the Absolute
into actual existence is performed by the Differentiated Persons of the
Trinity : the Father working by the Spirit through the Son. Thus
the Differentiated Persons (to which together is given the Name of
God) being the 77ianifested Absolute, contain eternally those fused yet
distinct essences of things which exist in the Absolute as a single yet
manifold Essence. This Essence they, by their mutual operation, pour
forth, so that while ultimately contained in (or, rather identified with)
the Absolute, it is in this world of relationships distinct and separate
from the Differentiated Persons Which together are God, being in
fact, a created manifestation of the Absolute, as God is an Uncreated
Manifestation Thereof.
This created Essence of the world itself becomes differentiated into
the separate creatures (water, earth, plants, animals, etc.), having this
tendency because it contains within itself their separate generic forms
which seek expression in the various particular things. Wherever we
can trace a law or purpose it is due to the presence of a generic form.
Thus vapour condenses into water in obedience to the generic form of
water, and an oak-tree grows to its full stature in obedience to the
generic form of the oak. So too with works of art. A cathedral is
built in accordance with a plan or purpose, and this plan is the pre-
existent generic form of the building ; whereas a fortuitous heap of
stones does not (as such) manifest any plan, and therefore has no
generic form.
the truth of his contention, we must remember the
"
Scripture which saith I did not show these
:
things
unto thee that thou mightest follow after them," but
that through such knowledge of these as is suited to
our faculties we may be led up (so far as is possible)
to the Universal Cause. We
must then attribute unto
It all things in one All-Transcendent
Unity, inasmuch
as, starting from Being, and setting in motion the
creative Emanation and Goodness, and penetrating
all things, and filling all things with Being from Itself,
and rejoicing in all things, It anticipates all things
in Itself, in one exceeding simplicity rejecting all
reduplication and It embraces all things alike in

;
the Transcendent Unity of Its infinitude, and is

indivisibly shared by all (even as a sound, while
remaining one and the same, is shared as one by
several pairs of ears).
r lo. Thus the Pre-existent is the Beginning and
the End of all things the Beginning as their Cause,
:
the End as their Final Purpose. He bounds all

things and yet is their boundless Infinitude, in a
manner that transcends all the opposition between
the Finite and the Infinite.^ For, as hath been often
D. attributing to Clement (perhaps fictitiously) the view that generic

—
forms can in themselves i. e. in their created essence be properly —
called Exemplars, maintains that this is not strictly accurate. Properly
speaking, he says, they are Exemplars only as existent in God, and not
as projected out from Him. If, by a licence, we call them Exemplars,
yet we must not let our minds rest in them, but must pass on at once
God.
to find their true being in
This apparent hair-splitting is really of the utmost practical impor-
tance. D. is attacking the irreligious attitude in science, philosophy,
and life. We must seek for all things (including our own personalities)
not in themselves but in God. The great defect of Natural Science
in the nineteenth century was its failure to do this. It was, perhaps,
the defect of Gnosticism in earlier days, and is the pitfall of Occultism
to-day.
^
i. e. He gives each thing its distinctness while yet containing
infinite possibilities of development for it.
said, He contains beforehand and did

^
create all
things in One Act, being present unto all and every-
where, both in the particular individual and in the
Universal Whole, and going out unto all things while»
yet remaining in Himself. He is both at rest and in
motion,^ and yet is in neither state, nor hath He
beginning, middle, or end He neither inheres in any
;
individual thing, nor is He any individual thing. ^ We

cannot apply to Him any attribute of eternal things
nor of temporal things. He transcends both Time ^
and Eternity, and all things that are in either of

them inasmuch as Very Eternity ^ and the world
;
with its standard of measurement and the things

which are measured by those standards have their
being through Him and from Him. But concerning
these matters let that suffice which hath been spoken
more properly elsewhere.
^
He is always yearning yet always satisfied. Cf. St. Augustine,
Confessions, ad in. A
reproduction of this state has been experienced
by some of the Saints. Cf. Julian of Norwicli : "I had Him and I
wanted Him."
"
He is the ultimate Reality of all beings, and is not one Being
among others.
^
Very Eternity perhaps corresponds to the aeternitas of St. Thomas
and Eternity to his aevujfi (with which cf. Bergson's durê). Eternity
is a totum simul without beginning or end, aevmn is a toUcm sijnul
with beginning but no end. It is eternity reached through Time, or
Time accelerated to the stillness of infinite motion and so chan>;ed
into Eternity, as in human souls when finally clothed with perfected
immortality.
The Absolute, or Godhead, is beyond Very Eternity, because this
latter is a medium of differentiated existence (for the differentiated
Persons of the Trinity exist in it), whereas the Godhead is undifferenti-
ated and beyond relationships. This world of Time springs out of
Very Eternity and is rooted therein, being made by the differentiated
Persons.
CHAPTER VI
"
Concerning Zz/i?."
1. Now must we celebrate Eternal Life as that

whence cometh very Life and all life,^ which also
endues every kind of living creature with its appropriate
meed of Life. Now the Life of the immortal Angels
and their immortality, and the very indestructibility of
their perpetual motion, exists and is derived from It and
for Its sake. Hence they are called Ever-living and
Immortal, and yet again are denied to be immortal,
because they are not the source of their own immor-
tality and eternal life, but derive it from the creative
Cause which produces and maintains all life. And,
as, in thinking of the title "Existent," we said that It
is an Eternity of very Being, so do we now say that
the Supra-Vital or Divine Life is the Vitalizer and

Creator of Life. And all life and vital movement
comes from the Life which is beyond all Life and
beyond every Principle of all Life. Thence have souls
their indestructible quality, and all animals and plants
possess their life as a far-off reflection of that Life.
When this is taken away, as saith the Scripture, all
^
life fades ;
and those which have faded, through
being unable to participate therein, when they turn to
It again revive once more.
2. In the first place It gives to Very Life its vital
quality, and to all life and every form thereof

gives It
the Existence appropriate to each. To the celestial
forms of life it gives their immaterial, godlike, and
^
The Godhead, though called Eternal Life, is really supra-vital,
because implies differentiations, and the Godhead as such is un-
life
differentiated. This Supra- Vitality passes out through the Differenti-
ated Persons of the Trinity into Very Life, whence life is derived to all
the creatures.
*
Ps. cir. 29, 30.
unchangeable immortality and their unswerving- and

unerring perpetuity of motion and, in the abundance
;
of Its bounty, It overflows even into the life of the

devils, for not even diabolic life derives its existence
from any other source, but derives from This both its
vital nature and its permanence. And, bestowing
upon men such angelic life as their composite nature
can receive, in an overflowing wealth of love It turns
and calls us from our errors to Itself, and (still
Diviner act) It hath promised to change our whole
being (I mean our souls and the bodies linked
therewith) to perfect Life and Immortality, which
seemed to the ancients unnatural, but seems to me and
thee and to the Truth a Divine and Supernatural
thing Supernatural, I say, as being above the visible
:
;
order of nature around us, not as being above the
j
Nature of Divine Life. For unto this Life (since it is
the Nature of all forms of life,ând especially of those
which are more Divine) no form of life is unnatural
or supernatural. And therefore fond Simon's cap-
tious arguments^ on this subject must find no entry
into the company of God's servants or into thy
blessed soul. For, in spite of his reputed wisdom, he
forgot that no one of sound mind should set the
superficial order of sense-perception against the In-
visible Cause of all things.^ We
must tell him that
" "
if there is aught against Nature 'tis his language.
For naught can be contrary to the Ultimate Cause.

3. From this Source all animals and plants receive
their life and warmth. And wherever (under the
form of intelligence, reason, sensation, nutrition,
growth, or any mode whatsoever) you find life or the
^
The ultimate Principle.
i. e.
~
Simon denied the Resurrection of the Body. Vide Irenceus,
Origen, Hippolytus, Epiphanius.
3
Physical life has behind it Eternal Life, by which it is in the true
sense natural for it to be renewed and transformed.
Principle of life or the Essence of life, there you find
that which lives and imparts life from the Life tran-
scending all life, and indivisibly^ pre-exists therein as
in its Cause. For the Supra-Vital and Primal Life is
the Cause of all Life, and produces and fulfils it and
individualizes it. And we must draw from all life the
attributes we apply to It when we consider how It
teems with all living things, and how under manifold
forms It is beheld and praised in all Life and lacketh
not Life or rather abounds therein, and indeed hath
Very Life, and how It produces life in a Supra-Vital
manner and is above all life ^ and therefore is
described by whatsoever human terms may express
that Life which is ineffable.
CHAPTER VII
" " " " "
Concerjiing Wisdom^' Mi7id^' Reaso?!," Truth,'' Faith:'
Now,
I, thee, let iis consider the Good and
if it like
Eternal Life as Wise and as Very Wisdom, or rather
as the Fount of all wisdom and as Transcending all
wisdom and understanding. Not only is God so over-
flowing with wisdom that there is no limit to His
understanding, but He even transcends all Reason,
Intelligence, and Wisdom.^ And this is
supernatur-
ally perceived by the truly divine man (who hath
^
Since Eternal Life is undifferentiated, all
things have in It a
common or identical life, as all plants and animals have a common life
in the air they breathe.
^
See p. 144, n. I.
^
All wisdom or knowledge implies the distinction between thinker
and object of thought. The undifferentiated Godhead is beyond this
distinction but (in a sense) it exists in the Persons of the Trinity and
;
between them and the world, and hence from Them comes Absolute
Wisdom, though the Godhead transcends it.
been as a luminary both to us and to our teacher)

when he says " The fooHshness of God is wiser than
:
men." ^ And these words are true not only because

all human thought is a kind of error when compared
with immovable permanence of the perfect
the
thoughts which belong to God, but also because it is
customary for writers on Divinity to apply negative
terms to God in a sense contrary to the usual one.
For instance, the Scripture calls the Light that shines
on all things "Terrible,"and Him that hath many Titles
and many Names "Ineffable" and "Nameless," and
Him that is present to all things and to be discovered
from them all "Incomprehensible" and "Unsearch-
able." In the same manner, it is thought, the divine
Apostle, on the present occasion, when he speaks
of
"
God's foolishness," is using in a higher sense the ap-
parent strangeness and absurdity implied in the word,
so as to hint at the ineffable Truth which is before all
Reason. But, as I have said elsewhere, we misinter- ;
pret things above us by our own conceits and cling

to
the familiar notions of our senses, and, measuring
Divine things by our human standards, we are led
astray by the superficial meaning of the Divine and
Ineffable Truth. Rather should we then consider
that while the human Intellect hath a faculty of
Intelligence, whereby it perceives intellectual truths,
yet the act whereby the Intellect communes with the
things that are be}'ond it transcends its intellectual
nature. 2 This transcendent sense, therefore, must be
given to our language about God, and not our human
sense. We must be transported wholly out of our-
selves and given unto God. For 'tis better to belong ,
unto God and not unto ourselves, since thus will the 1
1
I Cor. i. 25.
2
This is the Doctrine of Unknowing.
Cf. "Through love, through hope, and faith's transcendent dower,
We feel that we are mightier than we know."
Divine Bounties be bestowed, if we are united to
God.i Speaking, then, in a transcendent manner of
"
this Foolish Wisdom," - which hath neither Reason
nor Intelligence, let us say that It is the Cause of all
Intelligence and Reason, and of all Wisdom and
Understanding, and that all counsel belongs unto It,
and from It comes all Knowledge and Understanding,
and in It ''are hid all the treasures of wisdom and
knowledge."^ For it naturally follows from what
hath already been said that the All-wise (and more
than Wise) Cause is the Fount of Very Wisdom and
of created wisdom both as a whole and in each
individual instance.*
2. From It the intelligible and intelligent powers of
the Angelic Minds derive their blessed simple percep-
tions, not collecting their knowledge of God in partial
fragments or from partial activities of Sensation or of
discursive Reason, nor yet being circumscribed by
aught that is akin to these,^ but rather, being free
from all taint of matter and multiplicity, they perceive
the spiritual truths of Divine things in a single
immaterial and spiritual intuition. And their intui-
tive faculty and
activity shines in its unalloyed and
undefiled purity and possesses its Divine intuitions all
together in an indivisible and immaterial manner, being
by that Godlike unification made similar (as far as
may be) to the Supra-Sapient Mind and Reason of
1
The term "Go'l'" is rightly used here because the manifesled
Absolute is meant.
" 2
I Cor. i.
25. Col. ii.
3.
•*
(i) Very Wisdom = Wisdom in the abstract.
(2) Wisdom as a whole = Wisdom embodied in the universe as a
whole.
(3) Wisdom in each individual instance =
Wisdom as shown in
the structure of some particular plant or animal, or part of
a plant or animal.
(i) Is an Emanation (2) and (3) are created.
;
^
/. e.
They are not limited by the material world, which, with its
laws, is known through sensation an4 discursive reason.
God through the working of the Divine Wisdom.^

And human souls possess Reason, whereby they turn
with a discursive motion round about the Truth of
things, and, through the partial and manifold activities
of their complex nature, are inferior to the Unified
Intelligences: yet they too, through the concentration
of their many faculties, are vouchsafed (so far as their
nature allows) intuitions like unto those of the
Angels. Nay, even our sense-perceptions themselves
may be rightly described as an echo of that Wisdom ;
even diabolic intelligence, qua intelligence, belongs

thereto, though in so far as it is a distraught intelli-
gence, not knowing how to obtain its true desire, nor
wishing to obtain it, we must call it rather a declen-
sion from Wisdom. Nov/ we have already said that
the Divine Wisdom is the Beginning, the Cause, the
Fount, the Perfecting Power, the Protector and the
Goal of Very Wisdom and all created Wisdom, and of
all Mind, Reason, and Sense-Perception. We must
now ask in what sense God,^ W'ho is Supra-Sapient,
can be spoken of as Wisdom, Mind, Reason, and
Knowledge? How can He have an intellectual intui-
tion of intelligible things when He possesses no
intellectual activities? Or how can He know the
things perceived by sense when His existence tran-
scends all sense-perception ? And yet the Scripture
says that He knoweth all things and that nothing
escapes the Divine Knowledge. But, as I have often
said, we must interpret Divine Things in a manner
^
This speculation is, no doubt, based on experience. A concentra-
tion of the spiritual faculties in the act of contemplation produces that
unity of the soul of which all mystics often speak. The angels are
conceived of as being always in such a state of contemplation.
^
God is the Manifested Absolute. Plence qua Absolute He is
supra-sapient, qtia Manifested He is wise (cf, ch. i, § i). The Persons
of the Trinity possess one common Godhead (=the Absolute) which
is supra-sapient, and in that Godhead. They arc One. Yet they are
known by us only in their differentiation wherein Supra-Sapience is
revealed as Wisdom.
suitable to their nature. For the lack of Mind and
^- Sensation must be predicated of God by excess and
not by defect.^ And in the same way we attribute
lack of Reason to Him that is above Reason, and
Imperfectibility to Him that is above and before Per-
fection ;
and Intangible and Invisible Darkness we
attribute to that Light which is Unapproachable
because so far exceeds the visible light.
It And thus
the Mind of God embraces all things in an utterly
transcendent knowledge and, in Its causal relation to
all things, anticipates within Itself the
knowledge of
—
them all knowing and creating angels before the
angels were, and knowing all other things inwardly
and (if I may so put it) from the very beginning, and
thus bringing them into existence. And methinks
this is taught by the Scripture when it saith " Who
knoweth all things before their birth." ^ For the Mind
of God gains not Its knowledge of things from those
things; but of Itself and in Itself It possesses, and
hath conceived beforehand in a causal manner, the
cognizance and the knowledge and the being of them
all. And It doth not perceive each class specifically,^
but in one embracing casuality It knows and main-
tains all things —
even as Light possesses beforehand^
in itself a causal knowledge of the darkness, not know-"
ing the darkness in any other way than from the

Light.* Thus the Divine Wisdom in knowing Itself
\
^^ Via Negativa. It is not mere negation.

^
Susannah 42.
'
"According to its idea," "according to the law of its species."
We perceive that this is a rose and that is a horse because we have
—
two separate notions in our minds one the notion of a rose and the
other that of a horse. But in the Divine Knowledge there is only
one Notion wherein such specific notions are elements, as the activities
of several nerves -are elements in one indivisible sensation of taste, or
touch, or smell.
*
i. (f.
Suppose the light were conscious, and knew its own nature, it
would know that if it withheld its brightness there would be darkness
(for the very nature of light is that it dispels, or at least prevents,
willknow all things will in that very Oneness know

:
and produce material things immaterially, divisible

things indivisibly, manifold things under the form of
Unity. For if God, in the act of causation, imparts
Existence to all things, in the same single act of caus-
ation He will support all these His creatures the
which are derived from Him and have in Him their
forebeing, and He will not gain His knowledge of
things from the things themselves, but He will bestow
upon each kind the knowledge of itself and the know-
ledge of the others. i\nd hence God doth not possess
a private knowledge of Himself and as distinct there-
from a knowledge embracing all the creatures in
common for the Universal Cause, in knowing Itself,
;
can scarcely help knowing the things that proceed

from it and whereof It is the Cause. With this know-
ledge, then, God knoweth all things, not through a
mere understanding of the things but through an
understanding of Himself. For the angels, too, are
said by the Scripture to know the things upon earth
not through a sense-perception of them (though they
are such as may be perceived this way), but through
a faculty and nature inherent in a Godlike Intelligence.
it is that we know
3. Furthermore, we must ask how
God when He cannot be perceived by the mind or
the senses and is not a particular Being. Perhaps
'tis true to say that we know not God by His Nature
(for this is unknowable and beyond the reach

of all
Reason and Intuition), yet by means of that ordering
of all things which (being as it were projected out of
darkness). On the other hand, the light could not directly know the
darkness, because darkness cannot exist where there is light. The
simile is capable of being applied to illustrate God's knowledge of the
world, because the world is imperfect. It applies more fundamentally
to God's knowledge of evil, and is so employed by St. Thomas Aquinas,
who quotes this passage and says {Summa, xiv. lo) that, since evil is
the lack of good, God knows evil things in the act by which He knows
good things, as we know darkness through knowing light.
-^t
:52 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
Him) possesses certain images and semblances of His

Divine Exemplars, wc mount upwards (so far as our
feet can tread that ordered path), advancing through
the Negation and Transcendence of all things and
through a conception of an Universal Cause, towards
That Which is beyond all things.^ Hence God is
known in all things and apart from all things and ;
God is known through Knowledge and through Un-

j knowing, and on the one hand He is reached by
Intuition, Reason, Understanding, Apprehension,
Perception, Conjecture, Appearance, Name, etc.; and
yet, on the other hand, He cannot be grasped by
I
Intuition, Language, or Name, and He is not anything
in the world nor is He known in anything. He is All
in all things and Nothing in any,^ and is
^Things
nown from all things unto all men, and is not known
"rqm any unto any man. 'Tis meet that we employ
uch terms concerning God, and we get from all
jhings (in proportion to their quality) notions of Him
'ho is their Creator. And
yet on the other hand,
e DivinestKnowledge of God, the which is received'
rough Unknowing, is obtained in that communion
hich transcends the mind, when the mind, turning

way from all things and then leaving even itself
behind, is united to the Dazzling Rays, being from
them and in them, illumined by the unsearchable
depth of Wisdom.^ Nevertheless, as I said, we must
God, being the Manifested Absolute, exists on two planes at once

^
:
that of Undifferentiation and that of Differentiation. On this second

plane He moves out into creative activity. And thus He is both
knowable and unknowable knowable in so far as He passes outwards
:
into such activity, unknowable in that His Being passes inwards into
Undifferentiation. Thus He is known in His acts but not in His
ultimate Nature.
^
He is the Super-Essence of all things, wherein all things possess
their true being outside of themselves [as our perceptions are outside
of ourselves in the things we perceive. (
Vide Bergson, A/aiiere et
Mhnoire. )].
This experience and not mere theor)\
'^
is
THE DIVINE NAMES 15;^
draw this knowledge of Wisdom from all things for ;
wisdom it is (as saith the Scripture) ^ that hath made

all things and ever ordereth them all, and is the
Cause of the indissoluble harmony and order of all
things, perpetually fitting the end of one part unto
the beginning of the second, and thus producing the
one fair agreement and concord of the whole.
4. And God is called
"
Word " or " Reason " 2 by the
Holy Scriptures, not only because He is the Bestower
of Reason and Mind and Wisdom, but also because
He contains beforehand in His own Unity the causes
of all things, and because He penetrates all things,
" " "
reaching (as the Scripture saith) unto the end of
^
all things," and more especially because the Divine
Reason is more simple than all simplicity, and, in the
transcendence of Its Super-Essential Being, is inde-
pendent of all things.^ This Reason is the simple
and verily existent Truth that pure and infallible
:
Omniscience round which divinely inspired Faith

revolves. It is the permanent Ground of the faith-
ful, w^hich builds them in the Truth and builds the

Truth in them by an unwavering firmness, through
which they possess a simple knowledge of the Truth
of those things which they believe.^ For if Know-
ledge unites the know'er and the objects of knowledge,
^
Piov, viii.
'^
The reference
is, of course, to the opening verses of St. John's
Gospel. The passage shows that by the term "God" D.
present
means not one Differentiation of the Godhead singly (/. e. not God
the Father), but all Three Differentiations together ; the undivided
(though differentiated) Trinity.
^
Wisdom viii. i.
*
God is called Reason: (i) because lie is the Giver of reason ;
(2) because reason causes unity {e.g. it unifies our thoughts, making
them coherent), and God in His creative activity causes unity and in
His ultimate Godhead is Unity.
^
The Divine Omniscience is: (i) the Object of our faith because
we trust in it (2) the Ground of our faith because the development
;
of our faith comes from it. Faith is a faint image of Divine Know-
ledge, and is
gradually perfected by being changed into knowledge. /
^
L
and if ignorance is always a cause of change and of
self-discrepancy in the ignorant, naught (as saith
Holy Scripture) shall separate him that believeth in
the Truth from the Foundation of true faith on which
he shall possess the permanence of immovable and
unchanging firmness. For surely knoweth he who
is united to the Truth that it is well with him, even
though the multitude reprove him as one out of his

mind. Naturally they perceive not that he is but
come out of an erring mind unto the Truth through
right faith. But he verily knows that instead of
being, as they say, distraught, he hath been relieved
from the unstable ever-changing movements which
tossed him hither and thither in the mazes of error,
and hath been set at liberty through the simple
immutable and unchanging Truth. Thus is it that
the Teachers from whom we have learnt our know-
ledge of Divine Wisdom die daily for the Truth,
bearing their natural witness in every word and deed
to the single Knowledge of the Truth which Chris-
tians possess yea, showing that It is more simple
:
and divine than all other kinds of knowledge, or

rather that it is the only true, one, simple Knowledge
of God.
CHAPTER VHI
CoJice7-ning ''Power" "Righteousness/^ ^'-
Salvation'^
" and also concer7iing "Inequality."
Rede?nptiofi" J
I. Now since the Sacred Writers speak of the

Divine Truthfulness and Supra-Sapient Wisdom
as Power, and as Righteousnes, and call It Salvation
and Redemption, let us endeavour to unravel these
Divine Names also. Now I do not think that any
one nurtured in Holy Scripture can fail to know
that the Godhead transcends and exceeds every mode

of Power however conceived. For often Scripture
attributes the Dominion to the Godhead and thus
distinguishes It even from the Celestial Powers.^ In
what sense, then, do the Sacred Writers speak ^f It
also as Power when It transcends all Power? Or in
what sense can we take the title Power when applied
to the Godhead ?
2. We answer thus: God

Power because in
is
His_g\yjri--Self He power beforehand and

contains all
exceeds it, and because He is the Cause of all power
and produces all things by a power which may not be
thwarted nor circumscribed, and because He is the
Cause wherefrom Power exists whether in the whole
system of the world or in any particular part.^ Yea,
He is Infinitely Powerful not only in that all Power
comes from Him, but also because He is above all
power and is Very Power, and possesses that excess
of Power which produces in infinite ways an infinite
number of other existent powers; and because the
infinitude of powers which is continually being multi-
plied to infinity can never blunt that transcendently
infinite^ activity of His Power whence all power
comes and because of the unutterable, unknowable,
;
inconceivable greatness of His all-transcendent Power

which, through its excess of potency, gives strength
to that which is weak and maintains and governs
the lowest of its created copies, even as, in those
things whose power strikes our senses, very brilliant
^
Thehighest power our minds can conceive is that of the angels.
But Godhas the dominion over them, and hence His power is of a yet
higher kind such as we cannot conceive.
^
Since the ultimate Godhead is undifferentiated God's power is
conceived of as an undifferentiated or /f /<?;///«/ energy.
^
The inexhaustible multiplication of things in this world, though it
should go on for ever, is a series made up of separate units. God's
inexhaustible energy is beyond this series because it is one indivisible
act. The Undifferentiated transcends infinite divisibility. Cf. IX. 2.
156 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPx\GITE
illuminations can reach to eyes that are dim and as
loud sounds can enter ears dull of hearing. (Of
course that which is utterly incapable of hearing is
not an ear, and that which cannot see at all is not
an eye.^)
3. Thus this distribution of God's Infinite Power
j| permeates all
things, and there
nothing the is in
world utterly bereft of all power. Some power it must
have, be it in the form of Intuition, Reason, Percep-
tion, Life, or Being. And indeed, if one may so
^
express it, the very fact that power exists is derived
from the Super-Essential Power.

4. From this Source come the Godlike Powers of
the Angelic Orders from this Source they immutably
;
possess their being and all the ceaseless and immortal

motions of their spiritual life and their very stability
;
and unfailing desire for the Good they have received

from that infinitely good Power which Itself infuses
into them this power and this existence, and makes
them ceaselessly to desire existence, and gives them
the very power to desire that ceaseless power which
they possess.
5. The effects of this Inexhaustible Power enter
(into men and animals and plants and the entire
\ Nature of the Universe, and fill all the unified
,
organizations with a force attractins: them to mutual
!
harmony and concord, and drawing separate in-
dividuals into being, according to the natural laws
and qualities of each, without confusion or merging
of their properties. And the laws by which this
Universe is ordered It preserves to fulfil their proper
functions, and keeps the immortal lives of the in-
dividual angels inviolate and the luminous stars of
;
^
This is meant to meet the objection that if God's power is infinite
tliereshould be no decay or death. Thinc^s, says D., are sometimes
incapable of responding, as a blind eye cannot respond to the light.
^
i. e Power in the abstract.
heaven It keeps in all their ranks unchanged, and gives

unto Eternity the power to be; and the temporal
orbits It differentiates when they begin their circuits
and brings together again when they return once
more and It makes the power of fire unquenchable,
;
and the liquid nature of water It makes perpetual ;
and gives the atmosphere its fluidity, and founds the

earth upon the Void and keeps its pregnant travail
without ceasing. And It preserves the mutual
harmony of the interpenetrating elements distinct
and yet inseparable, and knits together the bond
uniting soul and body, and stirs the powers by which
the plants have nourishment and growth, and governs
the faculties whereby each kind of creature maintains
its being and makes firm the indissoluble
permanence
of the world, and bestows Deification ^ itself by giving
a faculty for it unto those that are deified. And, in
short, there is nothing in the world which is without
the Almighty Power of God to support and to sur-
round it. For that which hath no power at all hath
no existence, no individuality, and no place whatever .
in the world. \
^
6. But Elymas
the sorcerer raises this objection :
"If God is Omnipotent" (quoth he) "what meaneth

your Sacred Writer by saying that there are some
"
things He cannot do } And so he blames Paul the
Divine for saying that God cannot deny Himself.^
Now, having stated his objection, I greatly fear that
I shall be laughed at for my folly, in going about to
pull down tottering houses built upon the sand by
idle children, and in striving to aim arrow at an my
inaccessible target when I endeavour to deal with this
^
See Intr., p. 43.
^
The name
is introduced to
support the fiction of authorship, and
an objection, current no doubt in the writer's day (as in every age), is
put into the mouth of one who belonged to the same time as St. Paul's
Athenian convert.
2
2 Tim. ii. i^.
question of Divinity.
^
But thus I answer him The .:
denial of the true Self is a declension from Truth. And

Truth hath Being and therefore a declension from
;
the Truth is a declension from Being. Now whereas

Truth hath lêing and denial of Truth is a declension
from Being, God cannot fall from Being. We
might say
that He not lacking in Being, that He cannot lack
is
Power, that He knozvs not how to lack Knowledge.

The wise Elymas, forsooth, did not perceive this and ;
so is like an unskilled athlete, who (as often happens),

thinking his adversary to be weak, through judging
by his own estimation, misses him each time and
manfully strikes at his shadow, and bravely beating
the air with vain blows, fancies he hath gotten him a
victory and boasts of his prowess through ignorance
of the other's power.- But we striving to shoot our
guard home to our teacher's mark celebrate the
Supra-Potent God as Omnipotent, as Blessed and the
only Potentate, as ruling by His might over Eternity,
as indwelling every part of the universe, or rather
as transcending and anticipating all things in His
Super-Essential Power, as the One Who hath bestowed
upon all things their capacity to exist, and their exist-
ence through the rich outpouring of His transcendent
and abundant Power.
7. ^g^Jn^J^pd.is, called_"Jîghteousness'' because
He gives to things what is right, definIn~g~Pro^
all
pôrtion, Beauty, Order, Arrangement, and

all
E)is-_
positions of Place and Rank for each, in accord an ce
with that place which is most truly right and ;
because He causeth each to possess its independent

activity. For the Divine Righteousness ordains all
things, and sets their bounds and keeps all things
^
He seems to mean two disiinct things: (i) The objection is
childish and needs no answering (2) The whole question is beyond
;
the reach of our understanding.

2
This unskilled athlete is not very convincing. Presumably D.
could not box !
unconfused and distinct from one another, and gives \
to all things that which is suited to each according to

the worth which each possesses.^ And if this is true,
then all those who blame the Divine Righteousness
stand (unwittingly) self-condemned of flagrant un-
righteousness for they say that immortality should
;
belong to mortal things and perfection to the im-

perfect, and necessary or mechanical
motion to those
which possess free spiritual motion, and immutability
to those which change, and the power of accomplish-
ment to the weak, and that temporal things should be
eternal, and that things which naturally move should be
unchangeable, and that pleasures which are but for a
season should last for ever and, in short, they would
;
interchange the properties of all things. But they

should know that the Divine Righteousness is found
in this to be true Righteousness, that it gives to all
the qualities which befit them, according to the worth
of each, and that it preserves the nature of each in its
proper order and power.^ ''
I 8. But some one may say It is not right to :
leave holy men unaided to be oppressed by the

wicked." We must reply, that if those whom you
call holy love the earthly things which are the objects
ôf material ambition, they have utterly fallen from
the Desire for God. And I know not how they can
be called holy where they do this wrong to the things
which are truly Lovely and Divine, wickedly rejecting
them for things unworthy of their ambition and their
love. But if they long for the things that are real,
then they who desire aught should rejoice when the
^
Fide sup fa on Exemplars.
-
is least satisfactory when he becomes an apologist,
D. and when
— (like other apologists) he tries to explain away the obvious fact of evil
and imperfection. Within certain limits what he says will hold. A
rose fulfils its true function a rose, and not by trying to be
by being
\ an elephant. But to hold that whatever is, is best, is quietism. The
variety of the world is good, but not its imperfections.
i6o DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
object of their desire is obtained. Now are they not

nearer to the angelic virtues when they strive, in their
desire for Divine Things, to abandon their affection
towards material things, and manfully to train them-
selves unto this object in their struggles for the
Beautiful ? Thus, 'tis true to say that it is more in
accordance with Divine Righteousness not to lull into
its destruction the manliness of the noblest characters
through bestowing material goods upon them, nor to

leave them without the aid of Divine corrections if
any one attempt so to corrupt them. It is true Justice
to strengthen them in their noble and loyal stability,
and to bestow on them the things which befit their
high condition.!
9. This Divine Righteousness is also called the
Salvation or Preservation of the world, because It
preserves and keeps the particular being and place of
each thing inviolate from the rest, and is the inviolate
Cause of all the particular activity in the world. And
pif any one speaks of Salvation as the saving Power
v/hich plucks the world out of the influence of evil,
we will also certainly accept this account of Salvation
since Salvation hath so many forms. We
shall only
ask him to add, that the primary Salvation of the
world is that which preserves all things in their
proper places without change, conflict, or deteriora-
tion, and keeps them all severally without strife or
struggle obeying their proper laws, and banishes all
inequality and interference from the world, and
establishes the due capacities of each so that they
fall not into their opposites nor suffer any trans-
ferences.^ Indeed, it would be quite in keeping with
^
True again within certain limits. The Saints are made perfect
through suffering. But what of the innocent child victims of war
atrocities ?
^
Salvation is that which, when persons or things are in a right state,
keeps them therein when they are in a wrong state, transfers them
;
thence. The first meaning is positive and essential, the second negative
THE DIVINE NAMES i6i
the teaching of the Divine Science to say that this

Salvation, working in that beneficence which pre-
serves the world, redeems all things (according as
each can receive this saving power) so that they fall
not from their natural virtues. Hence the Sacred
Writers call It Redemption, both because It allows
"
not the things which truly exist ^ to fall away into
-
nothingness," and also because, should ahything
stumble into error or disorder and suffer a diminu-
^n of the perfection of its proper virtues, It redeems
even this thinq; from the weakness and the loss it
suffers filling up that which it lacks and supporting
:
its feebleness with Fatherly Love raising it from its

;
evil state, or rather setting firmly in its right state

it ;
completing once more the virtue it had lost, and

ordering and arraying its disorder and disarray ;
making it perfect and releasing it from all its defects.

So much for this matter and for the Righteousness
whereby the equality or proportion of all things is
measured and given its bounds, and all inequality or
disproportion (which arises from the loss of proportion
in the individual things) is kept far away. For if one
considers the inequality shown in the mutual differ-
ences of all things ifi the world, this also is preserved
by Righteousness which will not permit a complete
mutual confusion and disturbance of all things, but
keeps all things within the several forms naturally
belonging to each.^
and incidental. The Scriptural view includes both sides, with the
emphasis on the first. Protestantism (being in this as in other matters
of a negative tendency) ignores the positive side to the great detriment
^
of Religion. i. e. All
good things.
2
Nothingness includes (i) mere non-entity ; (2) evil. (Perhaps
both meanings are intended.) Salvation maintains all good things
both in their being and in their excellence. If they fell away towards
nothingness the result is first corrui)tion and then destruction.
^
The wordtVoTTjs implies that a thing is identical in size, etc. (i) with
other things (2) with its own true nature.
;
It thus = (
i
)
"
equality
"
;
(2) "rightness." D. maintains that all things possess tlie latter

though not the former.
CHAPTER IX
" "
Concernins^ ''Great,'' ''Small:' Sained' Differejit:' "Like,''
"
"Vnlikc," Standi7ig:' "Motion," "Equality:"
1. Now, since Greatness and Smallness are

ascribed to the Universal Cause, and Sameness and
Difference, and Similarity and Dissimilarity, and
Rest and Motion, let us also consider these Titles of
the Divine Glory so far as our minds can grasp them.
Now Greatness is attributed in the Scriptures unto
God, both in the great firmament and also in the thin
air whose subtlety reveals the Divine Smallness.^
And Sameness is ascribed to Him when the Scripture
saith,
**
Thou art the same," and Difference when He
is depicted by the same
Scriptures as having many
forms and qualities. And He is spoken of as Similar
to the creatures, in so far as He is the Creator of
things similar to Himself and of their similarity and ;
as Dissimilar from them in so far as there is not His

like. And He is spoken of as Standing and Immov-
able and as Seated for ever, and yet as Moving and
going forth into all things.- These and many similar
Titles are given by the Scriptures unto God.
2. Now God is called Great in His peculiar Great-
ness which giveth of Itself to all things that are great

and is poured upon all Magnitude from outside and
stretches far beyond it embracing all Space, exceed-
;
ing all Number, penetrating beyond all Infinity^ both

Boundless space cannot contain God, yet He is wholly contained
^
in a single point of that apparent nothingness which we call air. Cf.

Section 3.
^
Cf. St. Augustine, Confessions, i, Section r.
The great paradox is that God combines perfect Rest and perfect
Motion. Idealism has seized the first aspect, Pragmatism and Vitalism
the second. A
sense of both is present in the highest Mystical expe-
rience and in the restful activity or strenuous repose of Love.
3
Cf. 155, n. 3.
in Its exceeding fullness and creativê magnificence,

and also in the bounties that weW forth from It, inas-
much as these, being shared by all in that lavish
outpouring, yet are totally undiminished and possess
the same exceeding Fullness, nor are they lessened
through their distribution, but rather overflow the
more. This Greatness is Infinite, without Quantity
and without Number.^ And the excess of Greatness
reaches to this pitch through the Absolute Transcen-
dent outpouring of the Incomprehensible Grandeur.
3. And Smallness, or Rarit}^ is ascribed to God's
Nature because He is outside all solidity and distance
and penetrates all things without let or hindrance.
Indeed, Smallness is the elementary Cause of all
things for you will never find any part of the world
;
but participates in that quality of Smallness. This,

then, is the sense in which we must apply this quality
to God. It is that which penetrates unhindered unto
all things and through all things, energizing in them
and reaching to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of
joints and marrow and being a Discerner of the
;
desires and the thoughts of the heart, or rather of all

^
things, for there is no creature hid before God. This
Smallness is without Quantity or Quality;^ It is
Irrepressible, Infinite, Unlimited, and, while com-
prehending all things, is Itself Incomprehensible.
^
It is a Quality, not a quantity.
Vulgarity consists in mistaking
quantity for quality. This has been the mistake of the modern world.
^
Heb. iv. 12. We
can conceive of the mind's search for God in
two ways as a journey, (i) outwards, to seek Him beyond the sky, (2)
:
inwards, to seek Him in the heart. Fsalm xix. combines both ways.
So does \he /â7'ad/so. Dante passes outwards through the concentric
spheres of space to the Empyrean which is beyond space and encloses
it. There he sees the Empyrean as a point and his whole journey from
sphere to sphere as a journey inwards instead of outwards. (Canto
xxviii. 16.) The Mystics often speak of " seeing God in a Point."
God is in all things as the source of their existence and natural life ;
and in us as the Source of our existence and spiritual life.

^
The Potentiality of all quality is without /d-r/Zc/z/ar quality. Cf
p. 155, n. 2.
^
4. And Sameness is attributed to God as a super-
essentially Eternal and
Unchangeable Quality,
resting in Itself, always existing in the same condition,
present to all things alike, firmly and inviolably fixed
on Its own basis in the fair limits of the Super-
Essential Sameness not subject to change, declension,
;
deterioration or variation, but remaining Unalloyed,

Immaterial, utterly Simple, Self-Sufficing, Incapable
of growth or diminition, and without Birth, not in
the sense of being as yet unborn or imperfect, nor
in the sense of not having received birth from this
source or that, nor yet in the sense of utter non-
existence but in the sense of being wholly or utterly
;
Birthless and Eternal and Perfect in Itself and always

the Same, being self-defined in Its Singleness and
Sameness, and causing a similar quality of Identity
to shine forth from Itself upon all things that are
capable of participating therein and yoking different
^
things in harmony together. For It is the boundless
Richness and Cause of Identity, and contains before-
hand in Itself all opposites under the form of Identity
in that one unique Causation which transcends all
identity."
5. And Difference is ascribed to God because He
is, in His
providence, present to all things and
becomes all things in all for the preservation of them
all,^ while yet remaining in Himself nor ever going
forth from His own proper Identity in that one
ceaseless act wherein His life consists and thus with ;
undeviating power He gives Himself for the Deifica-

^
It causes eacli thing (i) to be a thing, (2) to co-exist harmoniously
with other things.
-
It contains the potential existence of all things, however different
from each other, as the air contains the potential life of all the various
plants and animals.
''
Since He is the Super-Essence of all things, their life is 2iltii)iately
—
His Life i. e. He is, in every case, the underlying Reality of their
individual existence.
tlon of those that turn to Him.^ And the difference

of God's various appearances from each other in the
manifold visions of Him must be held to si^nifv
something" other than that which was outwardly-
shown. For just as, supposing we were in thought
to represent the soul itself in bodily shape, and
represent this indivisible substance as surrounded by
bodily parts, we should, in such a case, give the
surrounding parts a different meaning suited to the
indivisible nature of the soul, and should interpret
the head to mean the Intellect, the neck Opinion (as
being betwixt reason and irrationality), the breast to
mean Passion, the belly Animal Desire, and the legs
and feet to mean the Vital Nature thus using the :
names of bodily parts as symbols of immaterial

faculties even so (and with much greater reason)
;
must wc, when speaking of Him that is beyond all

things, purge from false elements by sacred heavenly
and mystical explanations the Difference of the
Forms and Shapes ascribed to God. And, if thou
wilt attribute unto the intangible and unimaged God,
the imagery of our threefold bodily dimensions, the
Divine Breadth is God's exceeding wide Emanation
over all things. His Length is His Power exceeding
the Universe, His Depth the Unknown Mystery
which no creature can comprehend. Only we must
have a care lest, in expounding these different forms
and figures we unwittingly confound the incorporeal
meaning of the Divine Names with the terms of the
sensible symbols. ^ This matter 1 have dealt with in
my Syuibolical Divinity: the point I now wish to
^
Because He is the underlying Reality of our separate personalities,
which have their true being outside themselves in Him, therefore in
finding our true selves we find and possess His Being. Cf. St. Bernard :
Ubi se mihi dedit me mihi reddidit.

-
i. e.We must not take metaphorical titles literally (much bad philo-
sophy and much sentimentality and also brutality in Religion has come
from taking anthropomorphic titles of God literally).
make clear is this : we must not suppose that
Difference in God means any variation of His utterly
unchanging Sameness. It means, instead, a multi-
plicity of acts wherein His unity is undisturbed, and

His all-creative fertility while passing into Emanations
retains its uniformity in them.
6. And if God be called Similar (even as He is
Same," to signify that He

"
called is wholly and
altogether like unto Himself in an indivisible Per-
"
manence) Similar" we must not
this appellation of
repudiate. But the Sacred Writers tell us that the
All-Transcendent God is in Himself unlike any
being, but that He nevertheless bestows a Divine
Similitude upon those that turn to Him and strive to
imitate those qualities which are beyond all definition
and understanding. And 'tis the power of the Divine
Similitude that turneth all created things towards
their Cause. These things, then, must be considered
similar to God by virtue of the Divine Image and
Process of Similitude working in them and yet we ;
must not say that God resembles them any more

than we should say a man resembles his own portrait.
For things which are co-ordinate may resemble one
" "
another, and the term similarity may be applied
indifferently to either member of the pair they can ;
both be similar to one another through a superior

principle of Similarity which is common to them both.
But in the case of the Cause and Its effects we cannot
admit For It doth not bestow the
this interchange.
on these objects and on those
state of similarity only ;
but God is the Cause of this condition unto all that

have the quality of Similarity,^ and is the Fount of
Very Similarity
-
and all the Similarity in the world
;
anything derived this quality from some other source than God,
^
If
that thing, instead of standing towards God in the relation of effect to
Cause, would be co-ordinate with Him. But as it is, a// things stand
towards God in the relation of effect to Cause.
2
Vide supa on Very Existence, Very Life, Very Wisdom, etc.
possesses Its quality through having a trace of the

Divine Similarity and thus accomphshes the Unifi-
cation of the creatures.
7. But what need is there to labour this point ?
Scripture itself declares

^
that God is Dissimilar to
the world, and not to be compared therewith. It
says that He is different from all things, and (what is

yet more strange) that there is nothing even similar
to Him. And yet such language contradicts not the
Similitude of things to Him. For the same things
are both like unto God and unlike Him like Him in :
so far as they can imitate Him that is beyond

imitation, unlike Him in so far as the effects fall short
of the Cause and are infinitely and incomparably
inferior.
8. Now what
say" we concerning'' the Divine attri-
butes of " Standing and " Sitting } Merely this
—
that God remains What He is in Himself and is
firmly fixed in an immovable Sameness wherein His
transcendent Being is fast rooted, and that He acts
under the same modes and around the same Centre
without changing and that He is wholly Self-Sub-
;
sistent in His possessing Very Immutability

Stabilit}',
and an entire Immobility, and that He is all this in
a Super-Essential manner.^ For He is the Cause of
the stability and rest of all things He who is beyond :
all Rest and Standing. And in Him all things have

their consistency and are preserved, so as not to be
shaken from the stability of their proper virtues.
9. And what is meant, on the other hand, when
the Sacred Writers say that the Immovable God
moves and goes forth unto all things Must we not .''
understand this also in a manner befitting God ?

Reverence bids us regard His motion to imply no
change of place, variation, alteration, turning or
^
Cf. e.
g. Ps. Ixxxvi. 8.
^
i. e. This stability is due to Undififerentiation.
locomotion, whether straightforward, circular, or com-
pounded of both or whether belonging to mind, soul,
;
or natural powers but to mean that God brings all

;
things into being and sustains them,^ and exerts all

manner of Providence over them, and is present to
them all, holding them in His incomprehensible
embrace, and exercising over them all His provi-
dential Emanations and Activities. Nevertheless our
reason must agree to attribute movements to the
I mi mutable God in such a sense as befits Him.
Straightness we must understand to mean Directness
of aim and the unswerving Emanation of His
energies, and the outbirth of all things from Him.
,',
His Spiral Movement must be taken to mean the
ycombination of a persistent
Emanation and a pro-
ductive Stillness. And His Circular Movement must
be taken to mean His Sameness, wherein He holds
toijcther the intermediate orders and those at either
extremity, so as to embrace each other, and the act
whereby the things that have gone forth from Him
return to Him again.
lo. And if any one
takes the Scriptural Title of
" "
Same," or that ofRighteousness," as implying
"
Equality, we must call God Equal," not only because
^^He is without parts and doth not swerve from His
purpose, but also because He penetrates equally to
i
all things and through all, and is the Fount of Very
Equality, whereby He worketh equally the uniform

interpenetration of all things and the participation
thereof possessed by things which (each according to
its capacity) have an equal share therein, and the
-
equal power bestowed upon all according to their
worth and because all Equality (perceived or exer-
;
cised by the intellect, or possessed in the sphere of

^
St. Augustine frequently explains God's activity to consist in His
causing His creatures to act, while Himself resting.

2 "
i. e. "Due," right," cf. p. i6i, n. 3.
THE DIVINE NAMES i6q
reason, sensation, essence, nature, or will) is trans-

cendently contained beforehand as an Unity in Him
through that Power, exceeding all things, which
brings all Equality into existence.
C:hapter X
Concerjiing
'''
Omnipote7it^''
'''
A?icie?it of Days''; and also
concerning
'"''
Eternity''' and'''' Time."
1. Now 'tis time that our Discourse should

"
celebrate God (Whose Names are many) as Omni-
" "
potent and Ancient of Days." The former title is
given Him because He is that All-Powerful Founda-
tion of all things which maintains and embraces the
Universe, founding and establishing and compacting
it knitting the whole together in Himself without a
;
rift, producing the Universe out of Himself as out of

an all-powerful Root, and attracting all things back
into Himself as unto an all-powerful Receptacle,
holding them all together as their Omnipotent
Foundation, and securing them all in this condition
with an all-transcendent bond suffering them not to .O
fall away from Himself, nor (by being removed from
out of that perfect Resting Place) to come utterly to
destruction. Moreover, the Supreme Godhead is
i
called "Omnipotent" because It is potent over all
things, and rules with unalloyed sovran ty over the
world It governs and because It is the Object of
;
desire and yearning for all, and casts on all Its

voluntary yoke and sweet travail of Divine all-
powerful and indestructible Desire
"
for Its Goodness.
"
2. And Ancient of Days is a title given to God
because He is the Eternity^ of all things and their
1
In the Super-Essence each thing has its ultimate and timeless
being. "
-
M .
^
Time,^ and is anterior to Days and anterior to
Eternity and Time. And the titles " Time," " Day,"
"
Season," and Eternity must be applied to Him in
" "
a Divine sense, to mean One Who is utterly in-

capable of all change and movement and, in His
eternal motion, remains at rest ^ and Who is the
;
Cause whence Eternity, Time, and Days are derived.

Wherefore in the Sacred Theophanies revealed in
mystic Visions He is described as Ancient and yet
as Young the former title signifying that He is the
:
Primal Being, existent from the beginning, and the

latter that He grows not old. Or both titles
together teach that He goes forth from the Beginning
through the entire process of the world unto the
End. Or, as the Divine Initiator^ tells us, either
term implies the Primal Being of God the term :
"Ancient" signifying that He is First in point of

Time, and the term Young" that He possesses the
''
Primacy in point of Number, since Unity and the

properties of Unity have a primacy over the more
advanced numbers.^
3. Need is there, methinks,
that we understand the
sense in which Scripture speaketh of Time and
lUernity. For where Scripture speaks of things as
" "
eternal doth not always mean things that are
it
absolutely Uncreated or verily Everlasting, Incor-
^
In the Super-Essence each thing has the limit?; of its duiati >n
the move-
predetermined. Or else D. means that in the Super-Essence
ment of Time has the impulse which generates it.
Temporal precedence is metaphorically used to express meta-
2
physical precedence. God cannot in the literal sense of the words,

tempo) ally precede time.
3
He transcends both Rest and Motion.
*
Presumably Hierotheus.
^
He is the Source of all extension both in Time and in Space,
Unitv underlies all counting (for 2, 3, 4, etc. =twice I, three limes I,
four times i, etc.). Hence it is the Origin, as it were, of all number.
And, being at the beginning of the arithmetical series (as youth is at the
beginning of life) it is symbolized (according to D.) by youthfulness.
ruptible, Immortal,
Invariable, and Immutable
" ^
{e.g. Be ye up, ye eternal doors,"
lift and such-
" "
like passages). Often it gives the name of Eternal
to anything very ancient and sometimes, again, it
;
" "
applies the term Eternity to the whole course
of earthly Time, inasmuch as it is the property
of Eternity to be ancient and invariable and to
"
measure the whole of Being. The name " Time it
gives to that changing process which is shown in
birth, death, and variation. And hence we who are
here circumscribed by Time are, saith the Scripture,
destined to share in Eternity when we reach that
incorruptible Eternity which changes not. And
sometimes the Scripture declares the glories of a
Temporal Eternity and an Eternal Time, although
we understand that in stricter exactness it describes
and reveals Eternity as the home of things that are
in Being, and Time as the homiC of things that are in
Birth.^ We must not, therefore, think of the things
which are called Eternal as being simply co-ordinate
with the Everlasting God Who exists before Eternity ;^
^
Ps. xxiv, 7.
^
We cannot help thinking of Eternity as an Endless Time, as we
think of infinite number as an endless numerical process. But this is
wrong. Eternity is timeless as infinite number is superior to all
numerical process. According to Plato, Time is "incomplete life"
"
and is
Eternity complete life." Thus Eternity fulfils Time and yet
contradicts it, as infinite number fulfils and contradicts the properties of
finite numbers. If Time be thought of as an infinite series of finite
numbers Eternity is the sum of that series and not its process. But the
name may be applied loosely to Lhe process, though this is generally to
be avoided. According to St. Thomas, Eternity measures Rest, and
Time measures Motion;: Eternity is a tohim siimil and Time is siicces-
sivttin. The difference between them is not, he says, that Time has a
beginning and an end whereas Eternity has neither, though he admits
that each of the particular objects existing in Time began and will end.
{Sinnma, Pars I. Q. x. Art. iv.) But this is, he says, not essential to
the nature of time : it is
o\\\y pei' accidens {ibid. Art. v.). Cf. Aristotle's
distinction between " unlimited Time" and limited Time.
^
He alludes to Angels and the perfected souls of men and to their
celestial abode.
but, strictly following the venerable Scriptures, we
had better interpret the words " Eternal " and
" "
Temporal in their proper senses, and regard those
things wîich to some extent participate in Eternity
and to some extent in Time as standing midway
between things in Being and things in Birth. ^ And
God we must celebrate as both Eternity and Time,-
as the Cause of all Time and Eternity and as the
Ancient of Days as before Time and above Time
;
and producing all the variety of times and seasons ;
and again, as existing before Eternal Ages, in that
St. Thomas speaks of aevwn as standing between Eternity and

'^
Time and participating in both. Time, he says, consists in succession,

Aevtini does not but is c.ipable of it, Eternity does not and is incapable
of it [Sit;n/?ia, Pars I. Q. X. Art. v.). Thus the heavenly bodies, he says,
are changeless in essence, but capable of motion from place to place ;
and the angels are changeless in nature, but capable of choice anil so
of spiritual movement. Maximus's note on the present passage explains
this to be D.'s meaning.
There is in each one of us a timeless self. It is spoken of by all the
Christian Mystics as the root of our being, or as the spark, or the
Synteresis, etc. Our perfection consists in this ultimate reality,
which is each man's self, shining through his whole being and
transforming it. Hence man is at last lifted on to the eternal plane
from that of time. The movements of his spirit will then be so
intense that they will attain a toiimi sitnttl. We
get a foretaste of
this when, in the experience of deep spiritual joy, the successive parts
of Time so coalesce (as it were) that an hour seems like a moment.
Eternity is Rest and Time is Motion. Accelerate the motion in the
individual soul, through the intensification of that soul's bliss to infinity.
There is now in the soul an infinite motion. But Infiniie Motion is
above succession, and therefore is itself a form of repose. Thus
Motion has been changed into Rest, Time into Eternity. Mechanical
Time, or dead Time (of which Aristotle speaks as mere movement or
succession) is the Time measured by the clock developing or living
;
Time (which is "incomplete life") is real Time, and this is

Plato's
Aei'iim, which partakes both of mechanical Time and of Eternity.
The best treatment of the subject is probably to be found in Bergson's
theory of ditree. (Cf. Von Hiigel's Eternal Life. )
The words "eternal," "everlasting," etc., being loosely employed,

may refer to three different things (i) endless mechanical Time, i. c.
:
mere endless succession (2) Aeviun^ or developing and finally per-

;
fected lining Time (3) True Timeless Eternity.

;
-
Vide pp. 169 n. i, 170 n. i.
THE DIVINE NAMES I73
He Eternity and above Eternity and His

^
is before
Kingdom is the Kingdom of all the Eternal Ages.
Amen.
CHAPTER XI
"
CoJiccrning'''' Peace'''' and zv hat is meant by Very Being^' Itself,
"
Very Lije^^' ^^Very Foiuer,'^ a7td similar plu-ascs.
I. Now let us praise with reverent hymns of peace

the Divine Peace which is the Source of all mutual
attraction. For this Quality it is that unites all
things together and begets and produces the har-
monies and agreements of all things. And hence it
is that all things long for It, and that It draws their
manifold separate parts into the unity of the whole

and unites the battling elements of the world into
concordant fellowship. So it is that, through partici-
pation in the Divine Peace, the higher of the mutually
Attractive Powers ^ are united in themselves and to
each other and to the one Supreme Peace of the
whole world and so the ranks beneath them are by
;
them united both in themselves and to one another

and unto that one perfect Principle and Cause of
Universal Peace,^ which broods in undivided Unity
upon the world, and (as it were with bolts which
fasten the sundered parts together) giveth to all
things their laws, their limits, and their cohesion nor ;
^
Vide p. 170, n. 2.
^
/. e. The Seraphim,
^
The Divine Energy and Light streams through the medium of the
higher orders to the lower. This is worked out in the Celestial
Hierarchy of the same writer. We
get the same thought in Dante's
Paradiso, where the Primiwi A/obile, deriving its motion from an
immediate contact with the Empyrean, passes them on to the next
sphere and so to all the rest in turn, the movement being received
and conveyed by the succeeding angelic orders presiding severally, in
descending scale of dignity, over the concentric spheres. Sec Convito,—
II. 6.
suffers them to be torn apart and
dispersed into the
boundless chaos without order or foundation, so as to
lose God's Presence and depart from their own
unity,
and to in a universal confusion.
mingle together
Now as quality of the Divine Peace and
to that
Silence, to which the holy Justus gives the name
^
of "Dumbness" and "Immobility" (sc. so far as

concerns all emanation which our
knowledge can
grasp),ând as to the manner in which It is still and
silent and keeps in Itself and within Itself and is
wholly and entirely one transcendent Unity in Itself,
and while entering into Itself and multiplying Itself,^
doth not leave Its own Unity, but, even in the act of
going forth to all things, remains entirely within
Itself through the excess of that all-transcendent
Unity concerning these things 'tis neither right nor
:
possible for any creature to frame any language or

conception. Let us, then, describe that Peace (inas-
much as It transcends all things) as " Unutterable,"
yea and
"
Unknowable " and, so far as 'tis possible
;
for men and for ourselves who are inferior to many

^
Fide Acts i. 23 ;
or Col, iv. 11.
xviii. 7
;
^
Victorinus calls God
the Father Cessatio, Silentium, or Qtiies, and
also Motiis, as distinguished from Motio (the name he gives God the
Son), the former kind of movement being the quiescent generator of
the latter, since Victorinus was an older contemporary of St. Augustine
(see Conf. viii.2-5) his speculations may have been known to D.
The peace of Godattracts by its mysterious influence. This influence
is, in a sense, an emanation
or outgoing activity (or it could not affect
us), but it is a thing felt and not understood.
2
It multiplies Itself by entering into the creatures and seeking to be
reproduced in each of them. This whole passage throws light on the

problem of Personality. If our personalities are ultimately contained
in the Absolute, the Absolute is not a Person but a Society of Persons.
I), would reply that the Absolute is Supra-Personal, and that in
It our personalities have their ultimate existence, outside of them-
selves, as an undifferentiated Unity, though that ultimate plane needs
also and implies the existence of the relative plane on which our
personalities exist as differentiated individuals. The Holy Spirit enters
into the various individuals, but still possesses One Supra-Personal
Godhead. Plotinus says the Godhead is indivisibly divided.
good men, let us examine those cases where It is

amenable to our intuitions and language through
being manifested in created things.
Now, the first thing to say is this that God is
2. :
the Fount of Very Peace and of all Peace, both in

general and in particular, and that He joins all things
together in an unity without confusion whereby they,
are inseparably united without any interval between
them, and at the same time stand unmixed each in
its own form, not losing their purity through being
mingled with their opposites nor in any way blunting (

the edge of their clear and distinct individuality. Let
us, then, consider that one and simple nature of the
Peaceful Unity which unites all things to Itself to
themselves and to each other, and preserves all things,
distinct and yet interpenetrating in an universal
cohesion without confusion. Thus it is that the
Divine Intelligences derive that Unity whereby they
are united to the activities and the objects of their
intuition ^ and rise up still further to a contact,
;
beyond knowledge, with truths which transcend the

mind. Thus it is that souls, unifying their manifold
reasoning powers and concentrating them in one pure
spiritual act, advance by their own ordered path
through an immaterial and indivisible act of spiritual
intuition. Thus
it is that the one and indissoluble
connection of things exists by reason of its Divine

all
harmony, and is fitted together with perfect concord,

agreement and congruity, being drawn into one with-
out confusion and inseparably held together. For
the entirety of that perfect Peace penetrates to all
things through the simple, unalloyed presence of Its
unifying power, uniting all things and binding the
extremities together through the intermediate parts,
^
Contemplation, Act of Contemplation, and Object Contemplated
are allunited together, and so imply a fundamental Unity which exists
ulthnately in God.
all things being thus conjoined by one homogenous
attraction. And It bestows even upon the utmost
limits of the universe the enjoyment of Its Presence,
and makes all
things akin to one another by the
unities, the identities, the communions and the mutual
attractions which It gives them for the Divine ;
Peace remains indivisible and shows forth all Its

\
power in a single act, and permeates the whole world
without departing from Its own -Identity. For It
goes forth to all things and gives to all things of Itself
(according to their kinds), and overflows with the
abundance of Its peaceful fecundity, and yet through
the transcendence of Its unification It remains wholly
and entirely in a state of Absolute Self-Unity.^
"
3. But," some one perchance will say, "in wdiat
sense do all things desire peace ? Many things rejoice
in opposition and difference and distinction, and
would never choose willingly to be at rest." Now if
the opposition and difference here intended is the
individuality of each thing, and the fact that naught
(while it remains itself) wishes to lose this quality,
then neither can we deny this statement but, how- ;
ever, we shall show that this itself is due to a desire

for Peace. For all things love to have peace and
unity in themselves and to remain without moving or
falling from their own existence or properties. And
the perfect Peace guards each several individuality
unalloyed by Its providential gift of peace, keeping
all things without internal or mutual discord or
confusion, and establishing all things, in the power of
unswerving stability, so as to possess their own peace
and rest.^
Cf. p. 174, n. 3.
J
"
D.'s paradox is the paradox of sanity. We
must hold at the
same time two apparent contradictions. On one side all things are,
in a sense, merged, in the other side they are not. Their Super-
Essence is identical and is one and the same Super-Essence for all. Yet
4. And if all things which move be found desiring

not to be at rest but always to perform their proper
movements, this also is a desire for that Divine Peace
of the Universe which keeps all things in their proper
places so that they fall not, and preserves the indi-
vidual and the motive life of all moving^ thincrs from
removal or declension. And this it doth by reason
that the things which move perform their proper
functions throu2;h bein^^ in a constant state of inward
^
peace.
5. But if, in affirming that Peace is not desired by
all, the objector is thinking of the opposition caused
by a falling away from Peace, in the first place there
is nothing in the world which hath
utterly fallen away
from all Unity for that which is utterly unstable,
;
boundless, baseless, and indefinite hath neither Being

nor any inherence in the things that have Being.
And if he says that hatred, to vvârds Peace and the
blessings of Peace is shown by them that rejoice in
strife and anger and in conditions of variations and
instability, I answer that these also are governed by

dim shadows of the desire for Peace for, being ;
oppressed by the various movements of their passions,

they desire (without understanding) to set these at
rest, and suppose that the surfeit of fleeting pleasures
will give them Peace because they feel themselves
each one severally and iiidividnally possesses It. The paradox is due
to the fact that the question is one of ultimate
Reality.
All life and individuality start in the individual's opposition to the
rest of the world, for by distinguishin;j^ myself from the world I, in a
sense, oppose myself to it. This is the basis of selfishness and so of
moral evil.But being transmuted by Love, it becomes the basis of all
harmony and moral good, and so leads to Peace. And the same prin-
ciples of opposition and harmony are at work in the whole creation,
animate and inanimate alike. (Cf. Dante, Paradise, I. 103 to end.)
^
Vide supra [Movet Deus sicut Desideratum] True peace is restful
:
energy, both elements of which are incomplete in the jjresent world

but complete in the Godhead.
disturbed by the cravings which have
unsatisfied
mastered them.^ no need to tell how the
There is
loving-kindness of Christ cometh bathed in Peace,

wherefrom we must learn to cease from strife, whether
against ourselves or against one another, or against
the angels, and instead to labour together even with
the angels for the accomplishment of God's Will, in
accordance with the Providential Purpose of Jesus
Who worketh all things in all and maketh Peace,
unutterable and foreordained from Eternity, and
reconcileth us to Himself, and, in Himself, to tlie
Father. Concerning these supernatural gifts enougli
hath been said in the Outlines of Divinity with
confirmation drawn from the holy testimony of the
Scriptures.
6. Now, since thou hast, on a previous occasion,
sent me an epistle asking what I mean by Very Being
Itself, Very Life Itself, Very Wisdom Itself: and since
thou saidst thou couldst not understand why some-
times I call God "Life" and sometimes the "Fount
of Life": I have thought it necessary, holy man of
God, to solve for thee this question also which hath
arisen between us. In the first place, to repeat again
what hath often been said before, there is no contra-
diction between calling God "Life" or "Power" and
"Fount of Life, Peace, or Power." ^ The former
titles are derived from forms of existence, and
especially from the primary forms,^ and are applied
to Him because all existences come forth from Him ;
the latter titles are given Him becaus.e in a super-

essential manner He transcends all things, even the
1 " E se altra cosa vostra amor seduce Non

Dante, Paradiso.
Cf.
e se nondi quella alcun vestigio," etc.
2
Absolute Existence or Life, etc., is in God super-essentially, and
timelessly emanates from Him. It is in Him as a Super-Essence and
projected from Him as an Essence.

^
i. e. The angels, who, being the highest creatures, possess Exist-
ence, Life, Peace, Power, etc., in the grea,test degree.
primary "But," thou wilt say, "what

existences.^
mean we at all by Very Being and Very Life and
those things to which we ascribe an Ultimate
"
Existence derived primarily from God ? We reply
"
as follows This matter is not crooked, but straight-
:
forward, and the explanation thereof is easy. The

Very Existence underlying the existence of all things
is not some Divine or Angelic Being (for only That
Which is Super-Essential can be the Principle, the

Being and the Cause of all Existences and of Very
Existence Itself)^ nor is It any life-producing Deity
other than the Supra-Divine Life which is the Cause
of all living things and of Very Life,^ nor, in short, is
It identical with any such originative and creative
Essences and Substances of things as men in their
rash folly call "gods" and "creators" of the world,
though neither had these men themselves any true
and proper knowledge of such beings nor had their
fathers. In fact, such beings did not exist.'* Our
" "
meaning is different
"
Very Being," :
Very Life,"
"
Very Godhead are titles which in an Originating
Divine and Causal sense we apply to the One
Transcendent Origin and Cause of all things, but we
also apply the terms in a derivative sense to the
Providential Manifestations of Power derived from
the Un participated God, i. e. to the Infusion of Very
Being, Very Life, and Very Godhead, which so trans-
mutes the creatures where each, according to its
nature, participates therein, that these obtain the
^
The titles "Absolute Life," etc., correspond to the Via Affirnia-
and the " Cause of Absolute
tiva, titles Life," etc. ,^to the Via Negativa.
The Godhead causes (i) the particular existent thing, (2) the
-
:
ultimate fact of Existence, i. e. Absolute Existence. The Exemplars

are in the Godhead and not in the emanating Absolute Existence.
^
See last note.
*
Perhaps under the pretence of attacking Paganism D. is really
aiming his shafts against JNIanicheism or some Gnostic heresy current
in his day.
i8o DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
" *' "
qualities and names :
Existent," Living," Divinely
Possessed," etc.^ Hence the Good God is called the
Fount, first, of the Very Primaries then, of those :
creatures which share completely therein then, of ;
those which share partially therein.^ But it needs

not to say more concerning this matter, since some of
our Divine Teachers have already treated thereof.
"
They give the title Fount of Very Goodness and
Deity" to Him that exceeds both Goodness and
Deity; and" they give the name of "Very Goodness
and Deity to the Gift which, coming forth from
God, bestows both Goodness and Deity upon the"
creatures and they give the name of *' Very Beauty
;
to the outpouring of Very Beauty and in the same ;
manner they speak of "complete Beauty" and

"
partial Beauty," and of things completely beautiful
and things beautiful in part.^ And they deal in the
same way with all other qualities which are, or can be,
similarly employed to signify Providential Manifesta-
tions and Virtues derived from the Transcendent
God through that abundant outpouring, where such
qualities proceed and overflow from Him. So is
the Creator of all things literally beyond them all,
and His Super-Essential and Supernatural Being
altogether transcends the creatures, whatever their
essence and nature.
1
(i) Godpossesses and ts Absolute Beiny, Absolute Life, etc.
(2) Hepours forth Absolute Being that the creatures may share it
and so exist and be ennobled.
Migne's text here is corrupt, I have emended it.
-
(i) The First Things

=
Absolute Existence, etc.
(2) Those that share completely therein
=
the angels and perfected
human souls.
(3) Those that share partially therein

= the lower orders of creation
which possess ( xistence without or life without con-
life,
sciousness, or consciousness without spirituality (stones,

plants, animals).
I
^
The beauty of a human being is more complete than that of a
horse, and spiritual beauty is more complete
than mere physical
beauty.
THE DIVINE NAMES i8i
CHAPTER XII
''
Concer7U72g ''Holy of holies;^ Ki7i'^ of kiiigs^^^ ''Lord of
"
lords r God ofgodsJ'
1. Forasmuch as the things which needed to be
said concerning this matter have been brought, I
think, to a proper ending, we must praise God
(whose Names are infinite) as "Holy of holies" and
"
King of kings," reigning through Eternity "and unto
the end of Eternity and beyond it, and as Lord of
"
lords and ' God of gods." And we must begin
"
by saying what we understand by Very Holiness,"
what by " Royalty," "Dominion," and "Deity," and
what the Scripture means by the reduplication of the
titles.
2. Now Holiness is that which
as a we conceive
freedom from all a complete and
defilement and
Vutterly untainted purity. And Royalty is the power
to assign all limit, order, law, and rank. And
Dominion is not only the superiority to inferiors, but
isalso the entirely complete and universal possession

of fair and good things and is a true and steadfast
firmness wherefore the name is derived from a word
;
meaning "validity" and words meaning severally

"that which possesseth validity" and "which cxer-
ciseth" it.^ And Deity is the Providence which con- |
templates all things and which, in perfect Goodness,

^
D, holds that God's dominion is an absolute quality in Himself
apart from all reierence to the creation. The Greek word, as he truly
says, supports his view.
The Latin Doviinus, on the other hand, implies the notion of
governing-, and so has a necessary reference to the creation. Hence
St. Augustine says that God could not actually be spoken of as
"Lord" before the world or the angels were made. Eckhart says
ihat before the creation God was not God,
" Er war was Er war."
D. holds that the title "God" is relative to us. Ikit then he holds —
and here explains — that the roots of this relationship exist timelcssly in
the undifferentiated Godhead.
goes round about all things and holds them to-

gether and fills them with Itself and transcends all
things that enjoy the blessings of Its providential

care.
3. These titles, then, must be given in an absolute
sense to the All-Transcendent Cause, and we must
/
add that It is a Transcendent Holiness and Dominion,
that It is a Supreme Royalty and an altogether
^
Simple Deity. For out of It there hath, in one
single act, come forth collectively and been distributed
throughout the world Perfection of
all the unmixed
I
all untainted Purity all Law and Order of the
;
that
world, which expels all disharmony, inequality and
disproportion, and breaks forth into a smiling aspect
of ordered Consistency ^ and Rightness, bringing into
their proper place all things which are held worthy
to participate in It all the perfect Possession of all
;
fair qualities and all that good Providence which

;
contemplates and maintains in being the objects of

Its own activity, bounteously bestowing Itself for the
Deification of those creatures which are converted
unto It.
4. And since the Creator of all things is brim-full

with them all in one transcendent excess thereof He
"
is called of Holies," etc., by virtue of Tlis
Holy
overflowing Causality and excess of Transcendence.^
Which meaneth that just as things that have no
substantial Being- are transcended by things that
have such Being, together with Sanctity, Divinity,
Dominion, or Royalty and just as the things that ;
^
the same
fact —"Transcendent," "Supreme,"
being Super-Essential,
that,
"Simple,"'
it is
all express
above the multiplicity of the
creatures.
-
Cf. Shelley, Adonais: "That Light whose smile kindles the
universe."
^ " Holiness "
especially contains the notion of Transcendence.
*
i. The
material things (cf. Myst. Theol. I.).
e. This is the ordinary
meaning of the phrase in D.
participate in these Qualities are transcended by the

Very Qualities themsehês even so all things that
—
have Being are surpassed by Him that is beyond
them all, and all the Participants and all the Very
^
Qualities are surpassed by the Unparticipated
Creator. And Holy Ones and Kings and Lords and
Gods, the language of Scripture, are the higher
in
Ranks in each Kind ^ through which the secondary
Ranks receiving of their gifts from God, show forth
the abundance of that Unity thus distributed among
them in their own manifold qualities which various —
qualities the First Ranks in their providential, godlike
activity draw together into the Unity of their own
being.^
^
Material thini^s are surpassed by angels and perfected human souls,
and these by the Divine Grace which they all share and this, together ;
with the whole creation on which it is bestowed, is surpassed by God

from Whom it emanates. For while this emanation can be commu-
nicated the Godhead cannot. (Cf. Via Negativa. See esp. Mvst.
Theol. I.).
^
?'. e. The higher ranks whether among angels or among human
souls. (Cf."I have said, Ye are gods,' " "hath made us kings and
'
priests," etc. )
^
The highest ranks {i. e. the Seraphim and the Contemplative Saints)
have a direct version of God, Whomthey behold by an act of complete
contemplation.
s]iiritual
Others, learning from them, behold God truly but less directly by —
knowing rather than by Unknowing, by discursive Meditation rather
—
than by intuitive Contemplation or are called to serve Him chiefly in
practical works. Contemplation is a complete activity of the concen-
trated spirit, unifying it within itself and uniting it to all kindred spirits
(for true Mysticism is the same in every age and place). Meditation
and practical works are partial activities which imply a succession of
different images in the same mind and a shifting variety of different
mental types and interests in the same Community.
CHAPTER XIII
"
Co7tcer7ii7ig ^'•Perfect-'' and 0?ie.^^
I. So much for these titles. Now let us, if thou art

willing, proceed to the most important Title of all.
For the Divine Science attributes all qualities to the

Creator of all things and attributes them all together,
and speaks of Him as One.^ Now such a Being is
Perfect not only in the sense that It is Absolute
:
Perfection and possesseth in Itself and from Itself

distinctive Uniformity of Its existence,^ and that It
is wholly perfect in Its whole Essence, but also in
the sense that, in Its transcendence It is beyond

Perfection and that, while giving definite form or
;
limit to all that is indefinite. It is yet in Its simple

Unity raised above all limitation, and is not contained
or comprehended by anything, but penetrates to all
things at once and beyond them in Its unfailing
bounties and never-ending activities.^ Moreover, the
Religion, in its highest forms, and Philosophy and Natural Science

^
postulate and seek some Unity behind the world. Hence Unity is
regarded as the tdthnate attribute. Thus Plotinus calls the Absolute
" The One." God
possesses all Attributes not separately but indivisibly,
as pure light contains all colours.
Though the Godhead is the Super-Essence of the creatures, yet on
2
the other hand It is distinct from them because It transcends them.

(See next note, ) This aspect of distinctness is manifested in the fact that
the Emanation of Absolute Life, etc., is distinct from the Persons of
the Trinity, the aspect of identity is manifested in the fact tliat They
possess Absolute Life antecedently to the act of Emanation.
^
The Godhead is Perfect (i) absolutely, and not by participation in
:
some other essence (2) tj-anscendently, and not in such a manner as to

;
be differentiated from other essences (for on the super-essential plane of

the Undifferentiated Godhead there is no other essence than It), The
Emanation of Abs )!ufe Life, etc., is perfect absolutely, because, being a
direct overflow from the Godhead, it does not participate in any other
Essence but not transcendently, because it is differentiated from the
;
particular things which share it. That is why it does not contain
Exemplars. The creatures possess their true and undifferentiated being
not in the Emanation but in the ultimate Godhead. The Emanation
"
Title *'
Perfect means that It cannot be increased
(being always Perfect) and cannot be diminished, and
that It contains all thino-s beforehand in Itself
and overflows in one ceaseless, identical/ abundant
and inexhaustible suppl)% whereby It perfects all
perfect things and fills them with Its own Perfection.
^
"
2. And the title "One implies that It is all things
under the form of Unity through the Transcendence
of Its single Oneness,^ and is the Cause of all things
without departing from that Unity. For there is
nothing in the world without a share in the One ;
and, just as all number participates in unity (and we

speak of one couple, 07ie dozen, one half, one third, or
one tenth) even so everything and each part of every-
thing participates in the One, and on the existence of
the One all other existences are based, and the One
Cause of all things is not one of the many things in
the world,'* but is before all Unity and Multiplicity
and gives to all Unity and Multiplicity their definite
bounds.^ For no multiplicity can exist except by
is, we may say, tra}iscendental, or timeless, but not traiiscoidciU^ or

undifferentiated. D., by saying that "in Its transcendence ... It
penetrates to all things at once and beyond them,'' teaches incidentally
that the Godhead's Transcendence and Immanence are ultimately the
same fact. They are two ways of looking at the one truth of Its
Undiffcrenliation. Since It is undifferentiated the Godhead is beyond
our individual being but since It is undifferentiated It is not ultimately
;
other than ourselves. It is beyond our essence and is our Super-Essence.

The theory of mere Transcendence is Deism, that of mere Immanence
isPantheism. True religion demands both in one fact and as one fact.
So God is both near and far (see the VAhle fassim). He is far because
He is nearer to ns than our oivn souls are. " Thou wast within, I was
outside" (St. Augustine). Hence true Introversion is an act of self-
transcendence. We must lose ourselves to find ourselves.
^
Identical because timeless.
2
"Perfect," a teim taken from the Mysteries expressing the final
state of the initiated.
3 *
Seep. 184, n. 3. Cf. X., 2.
°
The Godhead is not one individual, or essence, among otheis, but is
the Super-Essence of them all. The numbers i, 2, 3, 4, etc.

= X i i,
form "
"
I X 2, I X 3, I X 4, etc. Thus in the i X i the first figure
N
^
some participation in the One : that which is many
in its parts is one in its entirety that which is ; many
in its accidental quahties is one in its substance ;2
that which is in number or faculties is one in
many
^
species ;
that which
is many in its emanating activities
is one in its originating essence.^ There is naught in

the world without some participation in the One, the
Which in Its all-embracing Unity contains beforehand
all things, and all things conjointly, combining even
opposites under the form of oneness. And without

the One there can be no Multiplicity yet contrari- ;
wise the One can exist without the Multiplicity just

as the Unit exists before all multiplied Number.^
And if all things be conceived as being ultimately
unified with each other, then all things taken as a
whole are One.^
3. Moreover, we must bear this in mind : that when
we attribute a common unity to things we do so in
represents the unity underlying all numbers, the second figure represents
unity as a particular number among other numbers. The first figure
may thus be taken as a symbol of the Godhead, the second figure as a
8} mbol of all created unity.
Though created unity differs (see last note) from Uncreated Unity,
1
of
yet it is, so to speak, a reflection thereof, as essence is a reflection
Super-Essence. So each number, because based on an underlying
Unity, is itself a unit, and the underlying Unity of the Godhead shines
through the world in all the harmonies and systems of things.
2
A tree is one tree though (i) made up of root, trunk, branches,
leaves, etc., (2) green in the leaves and brown in the trunk, etc.
^
There are many oaks with different capacities of growth and pro-
ductiveness, yet all belong to the same "oak species'' ; and there are
many species or kinds of trees (oaks, chestnuts, firs, etc.) yet all belong
to the genus "tree."
*
A man's thoughts, desires and acts of will all spring from his one
jiersonality.
^
Just as in the series 1x2, 1X3, 1X4, etc., if you destroy the
2, 3, 4, etc., the I remains, so the universe disappeared the Godhead
if
would still remain. (Cf. Emily Bronte "Every existence would exist
:
in Thee.")
^
All things possess the same Super-Essence, and that is
why they are
connected together in this world.
accordance with the preconceived law of their kind

belonging to each one, and that the One is thus the
elementary basis of all things.^ And if you take
away the One there will remain neither whole nor
part nor anything else in the world for all things ;
are contained beforehand and embraced by the One

as an Unity in Itself. Thus Scripture speaks of the-*\,
whole Supreme Godhead as the Cause of all things \
"
by employing the title of One" and there is One ;
God VVho is the Father and One Lord Jesus Christ ,
and One unchanging Spirit, through the transcendent

indivisibility of the entire Divine Unity, wherein all
things are knit together in one and possess a supernal •
Unity and super-essentially pre-exist. Hence all

things are rightly referred and attributed unto It,
since by It and in It and unto It all things possess
their existence, co-ordination, permanence, cohesion,,
fulfilment, and innate tendency. And you will not
find anything in the world but derives from the One
(which, in a super-essential sense, is the name of the
whole Godhead) both its individual existence and the
process that perfects and preserves it.^ And we also
must, in the power of the Divine Unity, turn from
the Many to the One and declare the Unity of the
whole single Godhead, which is the One Cause of all
things before all distinctions of One and Many,
;
Part and Whole, Definiteness and Indefiniteness,^

1
Cf. p. 186, n. 3.
^
i. e. Both its unity in space and
unity in time.
its
^
A when we can " This is not
thing is definite say of it :
that,"
indefinite when it is doubtful w^hether this is, or is not, that. The God-
head not being a particular thing, belongs to a region where tliere is no
"this" or "that." So wê cannot say, on that ultimate plane either:
"This is not that," or, " It is doubtful whether t?as is that." Hence
the mystical act of Unknowing. Knowdedge distinguishes things, Un-
knowing passes beyond this act yet without confusion. In Unknowing
the distinction between Thinker and Object of Thought is (from one
point of view) gone and yet the psychical state is a luminously
;
clear one. Our personalities in their Super-Essence are merged yet

uncon fused.
1 88 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
Finitude and Infinitude;^ giving definite shape to all
things that have Being, and to Being itself; the
Cause of everything and of all together a Cause —
both co-existent and pre-existent and transcendent,
and all these things at once yea, beyond existent
;
Unity itself, and giving definite shape to existent

Unity itself. For Unity, as found in the creatures,
is numerical and number participates in Essence
;
:
but the Super-Essential Unity gives definite shape to

existent unity and to ever)^ number, and is Itself the
Beginning, the Cause, the Numerical Principle and
the Law of Unity, number and every creature. y\nd
hence, when we speak of the All-Transcendent God-
head as an Unity and a Trinity, It is not an Unity
or a Trinity such as can be known by us or any
other creature, though to express the truth of Its
utter Self-Union and Its Divine Fecundity we apply
" " "
Unity to That Which
*'
the titles of Trinity and
is beyond titles, expressing under the form of
all
Iêing That Which is beyond Being.^ IBut no Unity

)r
Trinity or Number or Oneness or Fecundity or
iny other thing that either is a creature or can be
1 tiown to any creature, is able to utter the mystery,
beyond all mind and reason, of that Transcendent
Godhead which super-essentially surpasses all things.
It hath no name, nor can It be grasped by the
reason ;
It dwells in a region be)ônd us, where our
feet cannot tread. Even the title of " Goodness " \^q
do not ascribe to It because we think such a name
suitable but desiring to frame some conception and
;
language about this Its ineffable Nature, we consecrate

as primarily belonging to It the Name we most
revere. And in this too we shall be in agreement
with the Sacred Writers ;
nevertheless the actual
See p. 162 on "Greatness" and " Smallness."

^
^
Numerical unity is a number among other numbers and so implies
differentiation. The Godhead is undifferentiated.
truth must still be far beyond us. Hence we have

given our preference to the Negative method, because
this Ufts the soul above all things cognate with its
finite nature, and, guiding it onward through all the
conceptions of God's Being which are transcended by

that Being exceeding all Name, Reason, and Know-
ledge, reaches beyond the farthest limits of the world
and there joins us unto God Himself, in so far as the
power of union with Him is possessed even by
us men.
4. These Intelligible Names we have collected and
endeavoured to expound, though falUng short not
only of the actual meaning thereof (for such a failure
even angels would be forced to confess), nor yet
merely of such utterance as angels would have given
concerning them (for the greatest of those among us
who touch these themes are far inferior to the lowest
of the angels) nor yet do we merely fall behind the
;
teaching of the Sacred Writers thereon or of the

Ascetics, their fellow-labourers, but we fall utterly
and miserably behind our own compeers. And hence
if our words are true and we have really, so far as in
us hes, attained some
intellectual grasp of the right
way to explain the Names of God, the thanks are
due to Him Who is the Creator of all things granting ;
first the faculty of speech and then the power to use

it well. And if any Synonym hath been passed over
we must supply and interpret that also by the same
methods. And if this treatment is wrong or imperfect,
and we have erred from the Truth either wholly or
in part, I beg thy loving-kindness to correct my
unwilling ignorance, to satisfy with argument my
desire for knowledge, to help my
insufficient strength
and heal my involuntary feebleness and that,
;
obtaining thy stores partly from thyself and partly

from others and wholly from the Good, thou wilt also
pass them on to us. And I pray thee be not weary
I90 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
in this kindness to a friend, for thou seest that we
have not kept to ourselves any of the Hierarchic
Utterances which have been handed down to us, but
have imparted them without adulteration both to
yourselves and to other holy men, and will continue
so to do as long as we have the power to speak and
you to hear. So will we do' no despite unto the
tradition, unless strengthfail us for the perception
or the utterance of these Truths. But be these
matters as God wills ^ that we should do or speak.
And be this now the end of our treatise concerning
the Intelligible Names of God. Now will I proceed,
God helping me, to the Symbolical Divinity.
^
This anthropomorphic phrase is not inconsistent with the concep-
tions D. has been expounding because he regards the limits of indi-
;
vidual human cnpacities, etc., as timelessly existent in the Super-Essence.

Ey a natural, though inadequate, metaphor, the limits of the resulting
activities are spoken of as due to God's Will.
THE MYSTICAL THEOLOGY
^
CHAPTER I
What is the Divine Gloojn.
Trinity, which exceedeth all Being, Deity, and

Goodness ^ Thou that instructeth Christians in Thy
!
heavenly wisdom Guide us to that topmost height

!
of mystic lore ^ which exceedeth light and more than

exceedeth knowledge, where the simple, absolute, and
unchangeable mysteries of heavenly Truth lie hidden
in the dazzling obscurity of the secret Silence, out-
shining all brilliance with the intensity of their dark-
ness, and surcharging our blinded intellects with the

utterly impalpable and invisible fairness of glories
which exceed all beauty Such be my prayer and
!
;
thee, dear Timothy, I counsel that, in the earnest

exercise of mystic contemplation, thou leave the senses
and the activities of the intellect and all things that
the senses or the intellect can perceive, and all things
in this world of nothingness, or world of being,
in that
and that, thine understanding being laid to rest,^ thou
strain (so far as thou mayest) towards an union with
Him whom neither being nor understanding can con-
tain. For, by the unceasing and absolute renunciation
^
Lit.
"
Super- Essential, Supra-Divine, Super-Excellent."
^
Lit. "Oracles" ; /. e. to the most exalted and
mystical teaching of
Holy Scripture.
^
Gk. ayvw(TTws here refers to a transcendent or spiritual Unknowing
(as inguished from mere ignorance).
(lis
191
of thyself and all things, thou shalt in pureness cast
all things aside, and be released from all, and so shalt
be led upwards to the Ray of that divine Darkness
which exceedeth all existence.^
These things thou must not disclose to any of the
uninitiated, by whom I mean those who cling to the
objects of human thought, and imagine there is no
super-essential reality beyond, and fancy that they
know by human understanding Him that has made
Darkness His secret place.^ And, if the Divine
Initiation is beyond such men as these, what can be
said of others yet more incapable thereof, who describe
the Transcendent Cause of all things by qualities
drawn from the lowest order of being, while they deny
that it is in any way superior to the various ungodly
delusions which they fondly invent in ignorance of
this truth ? ^ That while it possesses all the positive
attributes of the universe (being the universal Cause),
yet in a stricter sense It does not possess them, since
1
"The
Super-Essential Ray of Divine Darkness."
2
Philosophers and unmystical theologians.
/. e.
i.e. Those who accept "popular theology."

'^
The first stage of
theistic Religion is anthropomorphic, and God is thought of (like
Jehovah) as a magnified man of changing moods. Popular religion
seldom rises above this level, and even gifted theologians often sink
to it. But it is, D. tells us, the lowest stage. Then comes a meta-
physical stage. God is now thought of as a timeless Being and therefore
changeless, but the conception of a magnified man has been refined
rather than abolished. The ultimate truth about God and our relation
to Him is held to be that He is a "Person" and that He has "made"
the world. (This attitude is seen at its worst in Unitarian theology,
Bradley's criticisms on Lotze show how this fails on the intellectual
side. The Doctrine of the Trinity, by insisting on an unsolved Mystery
in God, prevents Orthodox theology from resting permanently in this
morass, though it often has one foot there.) And non-Christian
thinkers, in opposition to this conception, regard the ultimate Reality
as impersonal, which is a worse error still. Wemust get beyond our
partial conceptions of "personality," "impersonality," etc. They are
useful and necessary up to a point, but the Tiuth lies beyond them and
is to be apprehended in a supernatural manner by what later wriiers
call "infused" contemplation. The sum of the whole matter is that
God is incomprehensible.
THE MYSTICAL THEOLOGY 193
It transcends them all, wherefore there is no con-

tradiction between affirming and denying that It has
them inasmuch as It precedes and surpasses all
deprivation, being beyond all positive and negative
^-
distinctions ?
Such at least is the teachinsr
o of the blessed Bartho-
lomew.^ For he says that the subject-matter of the
Divine Science is vast and yet minute, and that the
Gospel combines in itself both width and straitness.
Methinks he has shown by these his words how
marvellously he has understood that the Good Cause
o[ all things is eloquent yet speaks few words, or rather
none possessing neither speech nor understanding
;
because it exceedeth all things in a super-essential

manner, and is revealed in Its naked truth to those
alone who pass right through the opposition of fair
and foul,^ and pass beyond the topmost altitudes of
the holy ascent and leave behind them all divine
enlightenment and voices and heavenly utterances and
plunge into the Darkness where truly dwells, as saith
the Scripture, that One Which
beymrd all things. is
For not without reason* Moses bidden

is the blessed
first to undergo purification himself and then to
separate himself from those who have not undergone
it ;
and after all purification hears the many-voiced
trumpets and sees many lights fâsh forth with pure
and diverse-streaming rays, and then stands separate
from the multitudes and with the chosen priests
presses forward to the topmost pinnacle of the Divine
Ascent. Nevertheless he meets not with God Himself, /
^
On Via AffirDiativa and Via Negativa, vide Inti-. , p. 26 f.
2
No
writings of St. Bartholomew are extant. Possibly D. s
inventing, though not necessarily.

^
Vide Intr., p. 21. "Beyond Good and Evil" (though not in
Nietzsche's sense). When evil disappears Good ceases to be an
opposition to it, and so Good attains a new condiiion.
*
In the following passage we get the three stages tabulated by later V
Mystical Theology: (i) Purgation, (2) Illumination, (3) Union. |
yet he beholds
— not Him indeed He is invisible)
— but the place wherein He dwells.
(for
And this I take
to signify that the divinest and the highest of the
things perceived by the eyes of the body or the mind
are but the symbolic language of things subordinate
to Him who Himself transcendeth them all. Through
these things His incomprehensible presence is shown
walking upon those heights of His holy places w4iich
are perceived by the mind and then It breaks forth,
;
even from the things that are beheld and from those
that behold them, and plunges the true initiate unto
the J-)arkness_ of Unknowing wherein he renounces
all the apprehensions of his understanding and is
enwrapped in that which is wholly intangible and in-

visible, belonging wholly to Him that is beyond all
things and to none else (whether himself or another),
and being through the passive stillness of all his
reasoning powers united by his highest faculty to Him
that is wholly Unknowable, of whom thus by a rejec-
tion of all knowledge he possesses a knowledge that
exceeds his understanding.
CHAPTER n
How it is 7iece5sary to be united with and render praise to Hi))i
WJio is the cause of all and above all.
Unto this Darkness which is beyond Light we pray

that we may come, and may attain unto vision
through the loss of sight and knowledge, and that in
ceasing thus to see or to know we may learn to know

that which is beyond all perception and understanding
(for this emptying of our faculties is true sight and
knowledge),^ and that we may offer Him that tran-
^
See Intr.
p. 27, on the D.'s teiminology is always exact
,
— ecstasy.
though exuberant or rather exuberant because exact. And, since if
the mind, in thinking of any particular thing, gives itself to that thing
scencis allthingsthe praisesof atranscendent hymnody,

which ;ve shall do by denying or removing all things^
that n e —
like as men who, carving a statue out of
marble, remove all the impediments that hinder the
image and by this mere
cleai perceptive of the latent
remn-al display the hidden statue itself in its hidden [^
beaity.^ Now we must wholly distinguish this '
negative method from that of positive statements.

For when we were making positive statements ^ we
begnn with the most universal statements, and then
tbrou2|-li intermediate terms we came at last to
particular titles,^ but now ascending upwards from
and so belongs to it, in utterly ceasing to belong to itself it ceases

to have any self-consciousness and possesses a God-consciousness
instead. This would be a mere merging of the personality, but that
the Godhead, according to D. is of such a paradoxical nature as to
,
contain all the creatures fused and yet distinct (Intr p. 28) so the self
,
is merged on one side of its being and distinct on the oiher. If I lose
myself in God, still it will always be "I" that shall lose myself There.
^
This simile shows that the Via Negativa is, in the truest sense,
positive. Our "matter-moulded forms" of thought are the really
negative things. (Cf. Bergson.) A sculptor would not accept a block
of ice in place of a block of marble (for ice wil| not carve into a statue) ;
and yet the block of marble is not, as such, a statue. So, too, the
Christian will not acceptan impersonal God instead of a personal God
"
(for an impersonal Being cannot be loved), and yet a personal" God
is not, as such, the
Object of the Mystical quest. The conception of
Personality enshrines, but is not, the UUimate Reality. If D. were
open to the charge of pure negativity so often brought against him, he
would have wanted to destroy his block of marble instead of carving it.
^
Namely, in the Divine Names and in the Outlines ; see Chap. III.
^
In theDivine Natnes D. begins with the notion of Goodness
(which he holds to be possessed by all things) and proceeds thence to
Existence (which is not possessed by things that are either destroyed or
yet unmade), and thence to Wisdom (which is not possessed either by
unconscious or irrational forms of Life), and thence to qualities (such as
Righteousness, Salvation, Omnipotence) or combinations of opposite
qualities (such as Greatness and Smallness) which are not, in the full
sense, applicable to any creature as such. Thus by adding quality
to quality (" Existence" to "Goodness," "Life" to "Existence,"
"Wisdom" to "Life," "Salvation," etc., to "Wisdom") he reaches
the conception of God. But he constantly reminds us in the Divine
Names that these qualities apply adequately only to the manifested
Godhead which, in Its ultimate Nature, transcends them.
particular to universal conceptions we strip

off all
qualities
^
in order that we may attain a, naked
knowledge of that Unknowing which in all existent
things is enwrapped by all objects of knowledge/^ and

that we may begin to see that super-essential Darkness
which is hidden by all the light that is in ex''stent
things.
CHAPTER III
What are the affirmative expressions respecting Godj and w/i it
are the negative.
Now I have in my Outlines of Divinity set forth
those conceptions which are most proper to the

affirmative method, and have shown in what sense
God's holy nature is called single and in what sense
trinal, what is the nature of the Fatherhood and
Sonship which we attribute unta Jt what is meant ;
by the articles of faith concerning the Spirit; how

from the immaterial and indivisible Good the interior
rays of Its goodness have their being and remain
immovably in that state of rest which both within
their Ori2:in and within themselves is co-eternal with
the act by which they spring from It
^
in what manner;
^
The of
process from the universal to the particular is the process
actual development (existence before life, and life before rationality,
etc.); the converse is the natural process of thought, which seeks
to
refer things to their universal laws of species, etc. {Divine Names,
V. 3). But this latter process is not in itself the Via Negativa, but
of a
only the ground plan of it, differing from it as a ground i:)lan
mountain path differs from a journey up the actual path itself.^ The
the world that
process of developing life complicates, but enriches, ;
of thought simplifies, but eviscerates it. Contemplation, being an act

of the human spirit, is a process of developing life, and yet follows the
direction of thought. Hence it enriches and simplifies at the same
time.
2
Cf. p. 194, n. I.
3
The Good=(i) the Undifferentiated Godhead, and hence, in
Manifesiion, (2) God the Father as the Fount of Godhead to the other
Jesus being above all essence^ has stooped to an

essential state in which the truths of human nature
all
meet and all the
;
other revelations of Scripture
whereof my Outlines of Divinity treat. And in the
book of the Divine Names I have considered the
meaning as concerning God of the titles Good,
Existent, Life, Wisdom, Power and of the other titles
which the understanding frames, and in my Symbolic
Divinity I have considered what are the metaphorical
titles drawn from the world of sense and applied to
the nature of God what are the mental or material
;
images we form of God or the functions and instru-

ments of activity we attribute to Him; what are the
places where tie dwells and the robes He is adorned
with ;
what is meant by God's anger, grief, and
indignation, or the divine inebriation and wrath ;
what is meant by God's oath and His malediction, by

His slumber and awaking, and all the other inspired
imagery of allegoric symbolism. And I doubt not
that you have also observed how far more copious
are the last terms than the first for the doctrines of
God's Nature and the exposition of His Names could
not but be briefer than the Symbolic Divinity.^ For
Persons. The Rays =

God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, Who,
as manifested Differentiations, eternally proceed from the Father.
The separate being of the Three Persons exists on the plane of
Manifestation (of. St. Augustine, who says: "They exist seaindutii
relalivHvi and not secundu/n essentia/n"). [Augustine says i2on
scciiuduin siihstantiain. The translator quotes it correctly in his intro-
duction, p. 10.
— Ed.] But this plane isThey wholly inter-
eternal.
])enetrate, and the state of with the Act of Their
rest is co-eternal
Procession, because They possess eternal repose and eternal motion.
" Mother
'•
This is a case of comimuticatio idiotiiatiun (cf. the title
of God" applied to the Blessed Virgin Mary). The Godhead of our
Lord is Super-E.^sential, not Plis Manhood.
2 "
T\\e Sy)nboIical Divinity wzs an attempt lo spiritualize "popular
,'heology, the Divine Names sought to spiritualize philosophical theo-
logy, the present treatise is a direct essay in Spiritual Theology.
198 DIOXYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
themore that we soar upwards the more our language
becomes restricted to the compass of purely intel-
lectual conceptions, even as in the present instance
plunging into the Darkness which is above the
intellect we shall find ourselves reduced not merely
to brevity of speech but even to absolute dumbness
both of speech and thought. Now in the former
treatises the course of the argument, as it came down
from the highest to the lowest categories, embraced
an ever-widening number of conceptions which in-
creased at each stage of the descent, but in the
treatise it mounts upwards from below towards
present
the category of transcendence, and in proportion to ^
its ascent it contracts its terminology, and when the
whole ascent is passed it will be totally dumb, being
at last wholly united with Him Whom words cannot
describe.^ But why is it, you will ask, that after
beginning from the highest category when one method
was affirmative we begin from the lowest category
where it is negative?^ Because, when affirming the
existence of that which transcends all affirmation,
we were obliged to start from that which is most
akin to It, and then to make the affirmation on which
the rest depended but when pursuing the negative
;
method, to reach that which is be}'ond all negation,

we must start b}' appl}'ing our negations to those
qualities which differ most from the ultimate goal.
Surely it is truer to affirm that God is life and good-
ness than that He is air or stone, and truer to deny
that drunkenness or fury can be attributed to Him
^
At the last stage but one the mind beholds an Object to Which all
terms of thought are inadequate. Then, at the last stage, even the
distinction between Subject and Object disappears, and the mind itself
is That Which it contemplates. Thought itself is transcended, and
the whole Object-realm vanishes. One Subject now knows itself as
the part and knows itself as the Whole.
2
In the Divine Names the order of procedure was: Goodness,
Existence, Life, etc. Now it passes from sense-perception to thought.
than to deny that we may apply to Him the categories

of human thought.^
CHAPTER IV
That He Who is the Pre-emi7ient Cause of e7'erythi?ig se?isibly
perceived is JtotHimself any one of the things sensibly
perceived.
We therefore maintain ^
that the universal Cause
transcending all things is neither impersonal nor
lifeless, nor irrational nor without understanding: in
short, that Itîs not a materjal body, and therefore
does not possess outward shape or intelligible form,
or quality, or quantity, or solid weight jior has It ;
any local existence which can be perceived by sight

or touch nor has It the power of perceiving or
;
being perceived nor does It suffer any vexation

;
or disorder through the disturbance of earthly

passions, or any feebleness through the t}Tanny of
material chances, or any want of light nor any ;
change, or decay, or division, or deprivation, or ebb

and flow, or anything else which the senses can
perceive. None of these things can be either
identified w^th it or attributed unto It.
^
This shows that the Via Negativa is not purely negative.
Being about to explain, in these two last chapters, that no mateiial
^
or menial qualities are present in the Godhead, D. safeguards the

position against pure negativity by explaining that ihey are not absent
either. The rest of this chapter deals with the qualities (i) of inanimate
matter (2) of material life.
;
CHAPTER V
That He IVJio is the Pre-ej)iiiiejit Cause of everythmg intelli-
gibly perceived is not Himself any one of the tilings
i?itelligibly perceived.
Once
more, ascending yet higher we maintain
^
that It not soul, or mind, or endowed with the

is
faculty of imagination, conjecture, reason, or under-

standing nor is It any act of reason or under-
;
standing nor can It be described by the reason

;
or perceived by the understanding, since It is not

number, or order, or greatness, or littleness, or
equality, or inequality, and since It is not immovable
nor in motion, or at rest, and has no power, and is not
power or light, and does not live, and is not life nor ;
is It personal essence, or eternity, or time nor can ;
It be grasped by the understanding, since It is not
knowledge or truth ; kingship or wisdom

nor is It ;
nor is It one, nor is nor is It Godhead^ or

It unity,
Goodness nor is It a Spirit, as we understand the
;
term, since It is not Sonship or Fatherhood nor ;
is It any other thing such as we or any other being

can have knowledge of; nor does It belong to the
category of non-existence or to that of existence ;
nor do existent beings know It as it actually is, nor

does It know them as they actually are ^ nor can ;
the reason attain to It to name It or to know It ;
nor is it darkness, nor is It light, or error, or truth ;*
It is not (i) a Thinking Subject nor (2) an Act or Faculty of

;
Thought nor (3) an Object of Thought.

;
-
Divine Names, II. 7. Godhead is regarded as the property of
Deified men, and so belongs to relativity.
It knows only Itself, and there knows all things in their Super-
'^
—
Essence sub spt'cie aeiirniiatis.
*
Truth is an Object of Thought. Therefore, being beyond ob-
jectivity, the ultimate Reality is not Truth. But still less is It Error.
nor can any affirmation or negation ^ apply to it ;
for while applying affirmations or negations to those

orders of being that come next to It, we apply not
unto It either affirmation or negation, inasmuch as
It transcends all affirmation by being the perfect
and unique Cause of all things, and transcends all
negation by the pre-eminence of Its simple and
absolute nature free from — every limitation and
beyond them ali.^
^
Cf. p. 199, n. 2.
^
It is (i) richer than all concrete forms of positive existence;
(2) more simple than the barest abstraction. (Cf. p. 196, n. i.)
O
THE INFLUENCE OF DIONYSIUS
IN RELIGIOUS HISTORY
By W. J. Sparrow-Simpson
The significance of the teaching of Dionysius

cannot be appreciated aright without tracing to
some extent his influence on subsequent rehgious
thought.
Four works of the Areopa2;ite survive. They
are: Concerning the Heavenly tlierarchy Concern- ;
ing the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy Concerning

;
the
Divine Names ; and, Concerning Mystical Theology.
Commentaries upon thetn began to be written at
an early date. The first great propagator of Dio-
nysian theories was the very able monk and confessor
Maximus. Maximus, who died in the year 662,
wrote notes on all four treatises. These still survive,
and may be found in the collected edition of the
works of the Areopagite. Maximus is remarkably
clear and acute, and contributed not a little to extend
his Master's reputation. He was gifted with a sim-
plicity of style which the Areopagite by no means
shared, and expounded with great clearness the
difficultpassages of Dionysius. And certainly the
reader will not deny that those passages are by no
means few.
Already, before Maximus's labours, the teaching of
the Areopagite was known in the West, and was
appealed to by Pope Martin the First in the Lateran
202
INFLUENCE IN RELIGIOUS HISTORY 203
o
Council of 649. Martin complained that the doc-

trine of the Areopagite was being misrepresented.
Dionysius was being credited with ascribing to Christ
one divino-human activity {iina operatio deivirilis)^
whereas what Dion}'sius had Avritten was a new
divino-human activity {>iaivr\ deavdQLKi) evsoysia, nova
operatio dcivijilis)?- Apart from the theological
controversy implied in the respective phrases, it is
remarkable to find what authority is already ascribed
to its teacliing.
Butit is really quite impossible to appreciate the
historic place of Dionysius without a study of John

Scotus Erigena. It was Erigena who in reality
popularized Dionysius for Latin Christendom. The
Greek writings of the Areopagite had been sent
to the Gallican Church by Pope Paul in 757, and
remained for nearly a century unread in the Abbey
of St. Denis. Then Erigena, at the request of Charles
the Bald, undertook to translate them into Latin.
This he accomplished for all the four principal
works.
But Erigena did vastly more than merely act as
translator. He incorporated the principles of the
Areopagite in his celebrated treatise De Divisioiie
NaturcB, in which his own spe:ulative system is con-
tained, and which may be said to be as representative
of his mind as the De Principiis is for Origen or the
Suninia for St. Thomas.
Erigena bases his whole conception of Deity on
the teaching of Dionysius. The treatise is thrown
into the form of a discussion between the Master and
a Disciple. It is an attempt to reconcile Theology
with Philosophy After the Master has insisted on
the ineffable and incomprehensible nature of the
Divine essence, the Disciple inquires how this propo-
sition is to be reconciled with the teachinc:' of the
^
See Hefele, Concilic?igeschichte, Bd. III. 196.
Theologians on the Unity and Trinity of God. The

incomprehensibility of the First Cause appears self-
evident. And if Deity is incomprehensible, definition
is impossible. For that which cannot be understood
certainly cannot be defined. We can only say that
God is ; but ivhat He is we are unable to affirm.
But if this is so, why have the Theologians ventured
to predicate Unity and Trinity as characteristics of
the ultimate reality?
To the Disciple's criticism the Master replies by
appealing to the teaching of the Areopagite. Did
not the Areopagite affirm that no words, no names,
no expression whatever, can express the supreme and
causal essence of all things.^ That authority is quoted
as decisive.
Neither the Unity nor the Trinity in God is such
that the clearest human intellect is able to conceive
it. Why, then, have the Theologians taught these
doctrines ?
Erigena's answer is In order to provide religious
:
people with some definite object for contemplation

and instruction.
[
For this purpose the faithful are bidden to believe
in their heart and confess with their lips that God is
good, and that He exists in one Divine essence and

three persons.
And this teaching of the Theologians is, in the
Master's opinion, not without philosophical justifi-
cation.
For contemplating the ineffable cause of all things,
the Theologians speak of the Unity.
Then again, contemplating this Divine Unity as
extended into multiplicity, they affirm the Trinity.
And the Trinity is the unbegotten, the begotten, and
the proceeding.
The Master goes on to explain the distinction be-
tween affirmative and negative theology. Negative
theology denies that certain things can be predicated

of Deity. Affirmative theology asserts propositions
which can be predicated. This again is altogether
based on the teaching of Dionysius.
Here the Disciple desires to be informed why it
is that the Areopagite considers such predicates as
goodness, truth, justice, wisdom, which appear to be

not only Divine but the divinest of attributes, as
merely figuratively transferred from man to Deity.
The Master replies that no characteristics appli-
cable to the finite and limited can be strictly applicable
to the infinite and eternal.
Thus, according to Erigena, following closely on
the principles of the Areopagite, although goodness
is
predicated of Deity, yet strictly speaking He is
not goodness, but plus quani bonitas or super bonus.
Similarly, Deity is not Truth, hut plus quavi Veritas^
and super eternitas, and plus quain Sapiens.
Hence affirmation and negation arc alike permis-
sible in reference to Deity.
If you affirm that Deity is super-essential, what is
it
precisely that is meant by the use of "super"?
You do not in reality affirm what God is, but simply
that Heis more than those things which exist. But
where the difference consists you do not define.
But the reason why Erigena asserts the strict in-
applicability of the term essential to Deity is, that
he interprets the term in a way which involves spacial
relations. Essence in all things that exist is local
and temporal. But Deity is neither.
Deity as Erigena contemplates it is simply the
Infinite and the Absolute and of that, nothing what-
;
ever can be strictly predicated beyond the fact that

it is. The Cause of all things can only be known to
exist, but by no inference from the creature can we
understand what it is.
Since, then, Erigena has postulated the philosophic
2o6 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
Absolute, the immutable, impassible First Cause, as
the Deity, he is compelled to go on to den)^ that
Deity can be subject to affection or capable of
love.
This conclusion the Disciple confesses to be pro-
foundly startling. It appears to contradict the whole
authority both of the Scriptures and of the Fathers.
At the same time it is all logical enough, granting
the First Cause to be incapable of action or passion,
which seems to involve the Immutable in change a :
contradiction of the very idea of Deity. It is all
logical enough. But what about the Scriptures,

which teach the contrary ? And what of the simple
believers, who will be horrified if they hear such
?
propositions
The Master assures the Disciple that there is no
need to be alarmed. For he is now employingthe
method of speculative reason, not the method of
authority. He agrees with Dionysius, for Dionysius
j
had said as much, that the authority of the Scripture
! is in all things to be submitted to. But Scripture
ciocs not give us terms adequate to the representation
i of Deity. It furnishes us with certain s}^mbols and
,
signs, by condescension to our infirmities. Dionysius

is again appealed to in confirmation of this.
It is curious to notice how, while professedly en-
gaged in the method of speculative inquiry, Erigena

Hills back on the authority of Dionysius a very
:
significant proof of the value wluch he ascribed to

the Areopagite.
So, then, at last the conclusion is reached that,
strictly speaking, nothing whatever can be predicated
concerning Deity, seeing that He surpasses all under-
standing, and is more truly known by our nescience,
ignorance concerning Him being the truest wisdom,
and our negations more correct than our affirmations.
For whatever you deny concerning Him you deny
correctly, whereas the same cannot be said of what

you may affirm.
Nevertheless, subject to this premise of acknow-
ledged inadequacy, qualities may be rightly ascribed
to Deity by way of symbolical representation.
Hence, it is correct to maintain that true authority
does not contradict right reason, nor right reason
true authority. Both spring from one source, and
that one source is Divine.
Thus by a metaphor God may be described as
Love, although, as a matter of fact, He transcends it.
It has been a matter of frequent dispute whether
the system of Erigena is fundamentally Christian or
Pantheistic. In the careful study of Erigena by
Theodor Christlieb it is maintained that, while sen-
tences may be quoted on either side, and the author
vacillates, now towards Theism, now in a Pantheistic
direction, his attempted reconciliation of Theology
with Philosophy ends in the supremacy of the latter,
and in the abolition of the essential characteristics of
the Christian Re\'elation.
That the Deity cannot be comprehended by human
intelligence is a commonplace of all the great early
theologians of the Church. It can be richly illus-
trated from the theological orations of St. Gregory
Nazianzen, or the writings of St. Augustine and St.
Hilary upon the Holy Trinity. But then these
theologians also maintained with equal conviction
that God could be apprehended by man. For this
balancing consideration Erigena finds no place. God
is for Erigena that of which no distinctive quality can
be predicated. God is in effect the Absolute.

But then what becomes of God's self-conscious-
ness? In Christlieb's opinion Erigena's conception of
the Deity precludes any firm hold on the Divine self-
consciousness. wSelf-consciousness involves a whole
content of ideas, a world of thought, which contradicts
2o8 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
the absolute self-identity ascribed by Erigena to the
Deity.
In his anxiety to explain the transcendent excel-
lence of Deity, the superlative exaltation above the
contingent and the mutable, Erigena seems in the
opinion of his critics to have over-reached the truth
and reduced the Deity to an abstraction in which
perfection and nothingness are identified.
Erigena's conclusion raises in reality the all im-
portant problem so constantly debated in modern
thought, whether the Absolute is the proper concep-
tion of Deity, and whether the God of religion and of
fact is not rather spirit, self-consciousness, and perfect
personality. The teaching of Dionysius in the ex-

position of Erigena became scarcely distinguishable
from Pantheism.
Christlieb finds a similar unsatisfactoriness in
Erigena's theory of the Trinity.

It will be remembered that, after maintaining as
his fundamental position that Deity cannot be defined
because it cannot be comprehended, and that nothing
whatever can be affirmed concerning it beyond the
fact of its being, Erigena went on to justify the theo-
logians of the Church in affirming the Unity and
the Trinity. But the grounds on which Erigena
justified the authorities of the Church are significant.
He did not justify the doctrine on the ground that
it was a truth revealed, or because it was an inference
demanded of the fact and claim of Christ. It is

remarkable how obscure a place Christ occupies in
Erigena's conception of Deity. The ground on which
Erigena would justify the doctrine is that Unity and
Multiplicity may fairly be ascribed to the First Cause
of all things, because Deity can be regarded in its
simplicity as one and then regarded as extended
into multiplicity.
But it is impossible to avoid the criticism that this
is not
ascription of Unity and Multiplicity to Deity
the same thing as the doctrine of the Trinity. Nor
is it obvious why Trinity should be substituted for
Multiplicity. Moreover, this Multiplicity exists sub-

jectively in the human mind rather than in the being
of Deity since it is expressly forbidden by the
:
author's fundamental principle to say anything what-

ever concerning Deity beyond the fact that it exists.
And further still, on the author's principles neither
Unity nor Multiplicity can be strictly ascribed to
Deity. Both must be merged in something else
which is neither the one nor yet the other, and which
escapes possible definition.
all
It is scarcely wonderful, therefore, that Christlieb
should conclude that on Erigena's principles the
doctrine of the Trinity is not really tenable. Erigena
certainly endeavours to approximate to the Church's
Tradition, and to give it an intellectual justification.
But in spite of these endeavours he is unable to
maintain any real distinctions in his Trinity. They
have no actual substantial existence whatever. They
are mere names and not realities. There may be
appearances. But in its essential being, according jto
Erigena, Deity is neither unity nor trinity, but an
incomprehensible somewhat which transcends them
both. For Erigena both the Unitarian and the
Trinitarian representations of God are alike products
of subjective human reflection. They are neither of
them objected realities. If you rest on either of them
you are according, to Erigena, mistaken. For God is
more than Unit}' and more than Trinity.
Looking back on the whole course of Erigena's
exposition of Dionysian principles, we see that the
Areopagite had identified God with the Absolute.
Dean Inge says that " Dionysius the Areopagite
describes God the Father as superessential indeter-
'
'
mination/ the unity which unifies every unity,' the

'
absolute no-thing which is above all reality.'
'
No
moral or trial,' he exclaims in a queer ebullition of
jargon, 'can express the all-transcending hidclenness
of the all-transcending superessentially superexisting
" ^
super-Deity.' And Erigena did not hesitate to
deny Being to Deity. Being, in his opinion, is a
defect. The things that are not, are far better than
the things that are. God, therefore, in virtue of His
excellence, is not undeservedly described as Nihil —
.nothingness.
f
Two conceptions of Deity emerge in this exposition.
One is, that the Deity is identical with the Absolute.
It is beyond personality, beyond goodness, beyond

consciousness, beyond existence itself Nothing what-
i ever can be predicated concerning it. Being is
identical with nothingness. It is above the category
i of relation. This is the philosophic conception.
The other conception is that Deity possesses the
attributes of self-conscious personality. This is the
religious conception.
In the exposition of Erigena the philosophic
conception affirmed to be the true, while the religious
is
conception is regarded as the creation of the theo-
logians for the purpose of explanation and of faith.

I From this distinction certain things seem clear. It
I
seems clear that the philosophic conception of Deity
'
as identical with the Absolute, cannot satisfy the

requirements of religion, and that Deity cannot become
an obiect of adoration unless it is invested with the
attributes of personality. That of which nothing
can be predicated crinnot become the object of our
worship.
But at the same time if the religious conception of
Deity as self-conscious and personal is offered to our
contemplation with the express proviso that it does
not represent what God really is, the proviso paralyses
1
Cf. Inge, The Philosophy of Plot inns, II. 112.
the wings of our aspiration and renders Deity im-

possible as an object of prayer.^
Erigena was by no means d^ persona grata to the
Church of his age. He was a metaphysician, without
the mystical tendencies of Dionysius, and while he
expounded the Areopagite's ideas roused suspicion
and resentment by the boldness of his conclusions.
At the same time his translations of Dionysius made
the Greek Master's principles familiar to the Latin
wôrld.
In the Eastern Church the Areopagite's influence
isclearly present in the great Greek Theologian, St.
John of Damascus, When speaking of the inadequacy
of human expressions to represent the reality of God
John Damascene appeals to Dionysius.^ And the
whole of his teaching on the Divine incomprehensi-
bility is clearly due to the influence of the Areopagite.
When we read that an inferior nature cannot com-
prehend its superior, or when we find the distinction
drawn between negative theology and affirmative,
between that which declares what God is not and
that which declares what He is and that the former
;
]:>rcsentsthe Divine superiority to all created things ;
when further still v/e read of the super-essential

essence, and the super-divine Deity we see in a :
moment the influerxe of Dionysian conceptions.

Nevertheless St. John Damascene is anything rather
than a blind adherent of Areopagite teaching. On
the contrary it is profoundly, true as Vacherot^ has
said, that he follows Dionysius with discrimination :
or rather, perhaps, that he supplements the Doctrine

of the Divine incomprehensibility by very definite
teaching on the reality of the distinctions within the
1
Cf. Inge, The Philosophy of Plotinus, II. 115.
'^
De Fide Ofihodoxa. Bk. I. ch. xii.
^
Vacherot's Histoire Critique de F Ecole d'Ale:candrie, III. 40,
1851.
Deity and on the reality of the personal Incarnation

of the eternal Son of God in Mary's Son. That is to
say, that while the Philosopher appears in the Areo-
pagite to eclipse the Theologian, the Theologian in
St. John Damascene controls the Philosopher. The
careful, discriminate use of Dionysius by the great
Greek Schoolman is most remarkable. He assimilated
the true elements while rejecting the questionable or
exaggerated.
Returning once more to the Church of the West,
the influence of Dionysius is seen extending, through
Erigena's translations, into the Monastic studies.
The theologian Hugh, of the Abbey of St. Victor at
Paris, wrote in ten books a Commentary on the
Heavenly Hierarchy of the Areopagite, full of enthu-
siastic appreciation of the great mystic's teaching.
Far more important than this is the influence
exerted by Dionysius over the mind of St. Thomas.
It is not only that St. Thomas wrote a Covnnentary
on the Divine Navies,^ but in the works of Aquinas his
ideas are constantly reappearing. He is one of St.
Thomas's favourite authorities. As one becomes in-
creasingly more familiar with the greatest of all the
scholastic theologians this ascendancy of the Greek
mystic becomes more and more impressive. But it
is almost needless to say that Aquinas treats the
Areopagite critically. St. Thomas is profoundly
averse from everything which resembles a Pantheistic
tendency. His teaching alike on the Trinity and on
the Incarnation belongs to another realm of thought
from that of the neo-Platonist.
At a later period misgivings arose in the Church
whether the theology of the Areopagite was, in fact,
altogether above suspicion. So long as his traditional
identification with the disciple of St. Paul was main-
Thomas, Tom. XV.

^
See Parma edition of St. Opusculum vii.
pp. 259-405.
o
taincd, and he was credited with being, by apostoHc

appointment, first Bishop of Athens, these dis-
tinctions made suspicion of his orthodoxy seem
irreverent and incredible. But when the identifi-
cation was questioned by the historical critics of the
seventeenth century, and the tradition completely
dispelled, then the term Pseudo-Dionysius began to
be heard and to prevail, and criticism upon its
orthodoxy arose in the learned schools in France.
Le Ouien, in a dissertation prefixed to the works
of St. John Damascene, propounds the formidable
inquiry Num Pseudo-Dionysius haereticus fuerit.^
:
Le Ouien is convinced that Dionysius employs

language which confuses the Divine and the Human
in our Lord fails to distinguish accurately between
;
person and nature and betrays unquestionable

;
monophysite tendencies.
On the Bernard de Rubeis, in his
other hand,
Dissertatio7il^ says that Le Ouien
fails to do justice to
the author's meaning and that Aquinas understood
;
the author better, and thought him orthodox.

The University of Paris defended the Areopagite.
The University of Louvain agreed. The Jesuits
eagerly advocated his orthodoxy. Lessius, the cele-
brated author of the Treatise on the Divine Perfections,
corresponding with another Jesuit, Father Lanssel,
declared that he had read the Areopagite frequently,
and had carefully studied all his writings. For thirty-
six years Dionysius had been his chosen patron,
always remembered by him in the Sacrifice of the
Mass, with a prayer to be permitted to share the
Arcopagite's wisdom and spirit.^ What disturbed
Lessius was that the Areopagite had not been better
1
Migne, Patrol. Grccc, Tom. XCIV. i. 281.
2
See also the Parma edition oi St. Thomas, Tom. XV. 430 ff. ,
wlitre
this Dissertation is printed.
Migne, Patrol. Gncc, Tom. IV, 1002.
•^
translated. Inadequate terms had been put in the
Latin rendering which might easily lead the reader
into error. For many instances of this might be
produced. Father Lanssel, however, is compelled to
admit quite frankly that the Areopagite's writings
contain difficulties which cannot be laid to the charge
of his translators. St. Thomas himself had said as
much.
That Master of the Schoolmen, that thcologicB
apex, who solvedthe hardest problems in theology
more easily than Alexander cut the Gordian knot,
did not hesitate to say that Dionysius habitually
suffered from obscurity of style. This obscurity was
not due to lack of skill, but to the deliberate design
of concealing truth from the ridicule of the profane.
It was also due to his use of platonic expressions
which are unfamiHar to the modern mind. Some-
times the Areopagite is, in the opinion of St. Thomas,
too concise, wrapping too much meaning into a
solitary word. Sometimes, again, he errs the opposite
way, by the over-profuseness of his utterances.
Nevertheless, this profuseness is not really super-
fluous, for those who completely scrutinize it become
aware of its solidity and its depth. The fact is, adds
Father Lanssel, as Isaac Casaubon asserted, the Aero-
pagite invents new words, and unusual unheard-of
and startling expressions. The Confessor Maximus
admitted that his Master obscures the meaning of the
superabundance of his phraseology.
When we come to the nineteenth century we find
the Treatises of the Areopagite criticized, not only, or
chiefly, for their form and style, but also for their
fundamental principles.
The System of the Areopagite was subjected to a
very searching by Ferdinand Christian
critical analysis
Baur. {Christiiche Lehre von der Dreieinigkcit unci
Menschwerdnng Gottes, 1842; Bd. II. 207-251.)
According to Dionysius, as understood by Baur,

God isthe absolute Unity which stands contrasted
with the Many. The Many denotes the world of
concrete reah'ty. Doubtless there is a process from
Unity to Multiplicity, affirmation and negation, but
this process takes place solely in the subjective
consciousness.
How, then, asks Baur, can this Areopapjite con-
ception of Deity be reconciled with the Christian
conception, with which it
appears to be in obvious
contradiction ?
The Areopagite speaks often of a Triad, and dwells
on the Church's Doctrine of the Trinity. But the
terms which in his system represent the Godhead are
such as the super-good, the super-divine, the super-
essential. These terms represent an abstraction. If
any distinction exists, that distinction in no case
exists within the Deity, but only in the activities
which proceed from God as the super-essential Cause.
Distinctions exist in our subjective consciousness.
But they have no objective reality. If we call the
Divine Mystery God, or Life, or Essence, or Light, or
Word, we onl}^ mean thereby the influences which
emanate from that Mystery.
In Baur's opinion, therefore, the Trinitarian con-
ception, as held in the Tradition of the Church, is in
the system of Dionysius reduced to little more than
names.
Baur's criticism on the Areopagite's notion of
Incarnation is not less severe.
The System of Dionysius allows no distinctive and
peculiar Incarnation at all. It allows no special
and new relationships, but only a continual becoming.
The Incarnation is, in the Areopagite's view, nothing^
more tlian the process from Unity to Multiplicity ;
which is essential to Its conception of Deity. If

Dionysius speaks of the God-man as an individual,
2i6 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
that is either a mere concession to Tradition, or a
lack of clearness in its own conception. The union
of God with an individual such as the Christian
Tradition postulates cannot, in Baur's opinion, be
reconciled with the system of the Areopagite.
A second modern opinion on the theological teach-
ing of Dionysius is given by that singularly clear
and sceptical Frenchman, Vacherot, in his Histoii-e
de rEcole d Alcxandrie,
185 1, Tome III, pp. 23 ff.
Vacherot considers the group of treatises ascribed
to Dionysius to be the most curious monument of
neo-Platonist influence over Christian theology.
Philosophy affirms that negations concerning Deity
are true on condition that they express nothing
definite. In the author's opinion Theology cannot
really give any positive instruction. Dionysius is under-
stood by Vacherot to teach that mystical theology is
the suppression of definite thought. To know God
we must cease to think of Him. The devout is
lost in a mystical obscurity of ignorance. Nothing
definite can in reality be said of Deity.
In Vacherot's opinion the orthodoxy of the
Areopagite is more than doubtful.
The Christian conception presents the living
personal self-conscious God, Creator and Father of
the world, in eternal inseparable relation with His
Son and His Spirit, a Trinity inaccessible in itself,
but manifested directly in Incarnation.
But in the conception of this neo-Platonist thinker
Deity is removed to an infinite distance from the
human soul, and the Trinity is reduced to a mere
abstraction. We are here far removed from the
genuine Christian theology.
Dionysius is to Vacherot a neo-Platonist philo-
sopher in disguise, who while going over to Christi-
anity retained his philosophic ideas which he adroitly
combined with the principles of his new belief.
A third modern critic of Dionysius is the Lutheran

theologian, Dorner. Dorner was concerned only
with the bearing of the Areopagite principles on
the doctrine of the Person of Christ.^
In Dorner's opinion the mystical Christology of
the Areopagite "forms an important link of con-
nection between Monophysitism and the doctrine of
"
the Church." Not that we mean to affirm that the
Areopagite was a declared Monophysite certainly, ;
however, that his entire mode of viewing the world

and God belong to this family."
With regard to the doctrine of the Trinity, Dorner
holds that on the principles of Dionysius " seeing that
God is the One Who is at once in all and above all —
yea, outweighs the negation of the many by the
—
Divine Unity all idea of distinct hypostasis in God
ought consistently to be renounced in the Super- ;
Essential God everthing sinks down into unity with-

out distinctions. Much is said, indeed, of the Many,
along with the One but the Trinity in God retains
;
merely a completely precarious position."

"
Dorner adds The result as far as Christology is
:
concerned is
very plain after laying down such
;
premises, it was impossible for the Areopagite to

justify, either anthropologically or theologically, a
specific incarnation in one individual. If he taught
it at all, it was because he had
adopted it from the
Creeds of the Church, and he was quite unable to
put himself into a sincere and true relation towards
it."
To these criticisms may be added the remarks of

a fourth modern writer, this time from the standpoint
of the Roman Church. Bach, in his very able
History of Dogma in the Middle Ages, says that,
in the works of the
Areopagite, Christ is frequently
treated in so idealistic a fashion that the concrete
*
Dorner, Doctrine of the Person of Christ, Div. II. i.
157 ff.
P
2i8 DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE
personality of the God-man is driven into the shade.

The mysticism of Dionysius is not founded on the
historical person of Christ, nor on the work of
Redemption as a fact once actualized in time.
Here may be added a criticism on Dionysius from
a Bishop of the English Church. Bishop Westcott
wrote
"
—
Many, perhaps, will be surprised that such a
scheme of Christianity Dionysius has sketched
as
should even be reckoned Christian at all." ^ Dr.
Westcott went on to say of the Areopagite's prin-
*'
ciples :It must be frankly admitted that they bear

the impress not only of a particular age and school,
but also of a particular man, which is not wholly
of a Christian type." And again elsewhere "very
much of the system was faulty and defective."
In closing this short survey of the place of Dionysius
in the history of religious thought it is evident enough
that we are confronted with an exceptional figure
of unusual ascendancy. He is not made less per-
plexing by the variety of estimates formed upon his
theology by men of different schools and of marked
ability. The student must be left to draw his own
conclusions. But if those conclusions are to be
correctly drawn he must have before his mind, at
least in outlines, the fact of the Areopagite's historic
influence.
The general impression left upon the mind by the
Areopagite's critics is that the author's strength con-
sisted in his combination of philosophy with mysticism ;
but that he was far more strong as a philosophic

thinker than he was as a Christian theologian and ;
that in his efforts to reconcile Christianity with neo-

Platonism it is the philosophy which prevails, not with-
out serious results to the theology of the Church. His
greatest admirers appear to have employed him with
^
Westcott, Religious Thought in the JVest, p. i88.
discretion to have balanced his statements with more

;
proportion, and to have read him

in the Hght of
strong Catholic presuppositions which to some extent

neutralized his over-emphasis, and supplemented his
omissions. It is an interesting speculation for the
theological student what the position of these writings

would have been if their author had never been
identified with the disciple of St Paul.
INDEX TO TEXT
Affirmative Theology, 196 Hierotheus, 76-83, 86-107
Bartholomew, 193 Plymns of Yearning, 107, 108
109
Clement, 141
Differentiations in Deity, 67 ff. Ignatius, 104
Divine Names, 51-190 Illumination, 55, 58
Incarnation, 76
Elements of Divinity, 76, 83
Elymas, 157-158 James, St., 84
Emanations, 79-80 Negative Theology, 196
Evil (Nature of), 86 ff., 1 11- 130
Outlines of Divinity, 51, 196, 197
Fatherhood, 56
God as Goodness, ^d ff. Paul, St., ?>T,
Light, 91-94 Peter, St., 84
Beauty, 95 ff.
Scriptures, 52, 53
Love, 104
Simplicity, 55
Being, 131 ff.
Super-essential, 52, 53, 54, 56,
Life, 144
59, 71, 139, 191
Wisdom, 146
Super-excellent, 191
Reason, 148-153
Super-intellectual, 52
Power, 154
Supra-Divine, 191
Righteousness, 158, 160
Great and Small, 162 Symbolical Revelation, ^lo ff.
Omnipotent, 169 Timothy, 191

Peace, 173-178
Trinity, 56, 65, 66, 79, 191
Holiness, 181
Perfection, 184 Undifferenced Names of God, 6c;,
Unity, 185-190 68
221
INDEX TO NOTES AND
INTRODUCTION
Aquinas, 3, 81, 107, 143, 151, God as Great,
162-169
171, 172, 212 5) Almighty, 169-173
Aristotle, 81, 92, loi, 171 55 Peace, 173-180
Augustine, 9, 10, 41, 42-65, 77, 55 Holy, 181-1S3
I03> 134, 136, 141, 143' 162, 55 Perfection, 184, 190
168, 181, 185, 197 Godhead, 4-6, 6-19
Bach, 217 Hierotheus, 107

Baur, 214-216 Hugh of St. Victor, 212
Bergson, 143, 152, 195
Bernard de Rubeis, 213
Ignatius, St., 104
Bernard, St., 165 Inge, 29, 210, 211
Blake, 140
Bradley, 114, 192 John of the Cross, 103
Bronte, E., 186 Julian of Norwich, 102, 143
Contemplation, 25, 30, 33 Lanssel, 213

Lateran, C. (649), 213
Damascenus, 211 Le Bon, 109
Dante, 88, 107, 140, 173, 177, Le Quien, 213
178
Lotze, 192
Dionysius, influence, 202-219 ;
writings, 47
Dorner, 217
Martin (i. Pope), 202
Maximus, 3, 202
Eckhart, 122, 181
Erigena, 3, 203-211 Nietzsche, 90, 193
Evil, problem of, 20-25
Pachymeres, 3
Fox, George, 87 Pascal, 118
Personality, 4
God as Unity, 65-80 Philosophy (Modern), D.'s rela-
5 > Goodness, 86-130 tion to, 30

5» Being, 131-143 Plato, 107
55 Life, 144-146 Plotinus, 2, 109, 138
5 5 Wisdom, 146-154 Proclus, I
Power, 1 54-1 6 1 Psychology, 33-40

222
INDEX TO NOTES AND INTRODUCTION 223
Ruysbroeck, 122 Tauler, 122

Trinity, 9, 10, 42, 44, 45
Scripture, D.'s relation to, 40
Severus, 3 Vacherot, 211, 216
Shelley, 1S2 Via Negatively 195, 196
Spencer, 107 Victorinus, 174
Super-essential, 15, 16, 17, 45, Von Hiigel, 172
51, 52, 53, 191
Super-excellent, 191 Westcott, 218
Supra-Divine, 191 Wordsworth, 95, 99
w
i
Date Due
I'MH-
wove «5fl
r^ ''i
• "i 6 i^
fJl.ftV .'
JAN 1 3 '6c;
-f»,i
II
00
vii*; #— T.
Library Bureau Cat. No. 1137
8INDERY
W'EILS
ALTHAM,MASS.
Sm. 1946
189,5[)62()
CLAPP
3 5002 00343
6131
Dionysius, the
Areopagfte, on the Divine
BR 65 . D63 D413 1920
Pseudo- Dionysius,
Dionysius the Areopagite On

thf divine names

Pseudo-Dionysius ''Divine Names, Mystical Theology'' (1920)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pseudo-Dionysius ''Divine Names, Mystical Theology'' (1920)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pseudo-Dionysius ''Divine Names, Mystical Theology'' (1920)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LIBRARY OF

DIONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE

SOCIETY FOR. PROMOTING

book, full of fine thought, brilliantly expressed, which was

He was a singularly refined and religious character,

bearing of the whole theory of the Supra-Personal Deity

reader must decide. The Introduction of course appears

It is only right to add that the translator laboured under

of Christian thought. This aspect is far too important to

Areopagite's disciples and critics.

THE PROBLEM OF EVIL 20

The Divine Names . . . .

The Mystical Theology .... 191

a later contemporary of the same thinker. The

year 533, when, at a council held in Constantinople,!

II. — His Leading Ideas: The Nature of the

Personality thus consists in the faculty of knowing

be wholly transformed into Him. And yet we dis-

tinguish between ourselves and Him because from

scious, Dead or, in the ordinary sense, non-Existent,

does It even (in our sense) exist, for Existence is

One nor Many and yet contains in an undifferenti- '

ated state that Numerical Principle which we can

III. — The Relation of the Godhead to

or rather (inasmuch as the act is timeless) stands in

eternally to the sphere of creation (which otherwise

and so a sense belongs to it.

and that of Manifested Appearance. Hence, there-

that God is but an x^ppearance^ of the Absolute.

as an axiom and then is prone to ignore. The

Godhead, but certain eternally differentiated Elements

head is the Trinity. As to the reasons of this

other hand, he sees that they must belong to

Supra-Personal, and that it is Supra-Personal be-

to our Lord's individual Human Name and speaks

seciindiim substantiani^ sed seainduvi relaiivum [De Trin. v. 6).

whereas the Godhead is incomprehensible and there-

since it is Bemo; or Existence, he does not call it

possesses no actual existence whatever. The one is

of which he is thinking when he speaks of the direct

most universal of all. And since the Super-Essence

and the abstract and bloodless tendency of nnere

untenanted by any particular colour or shape.

very notion of light cannot but be contrasted in our

so we conceive the light to be a positive thing which

yet, since it would exist if the bowl could be wholly

Time and Space. That region is thus their receptacle.

the Universal Stream perpetually advancing and the

by very nature invisible, would be in darkness

seen, and this corresponds to the Persons of the

beyond that plane and so "outside" it. Finite

of the Universal Stream (e.g., Very Being, or Very

a particular force) (4) the entire process whereby the

two Streams flow forth. This sounds confusing, but

l^'inciple {i.e. a "Person" of the Trinity), and (2) an

however, it is differentiated because it splits up into

Stream, on the other hand, is Time-non-existent as I

yet and struggling to come to the birth but unable i

to do so until it gain permanence through min-

slumbered), the two streams not only cross but actually