על שינוי השמות ב׳On the Change of Names 2
א׳
1[7] Do not however suppose that the Existent which truly exists is apprehended by any man; for we have in us no organ by which we can envisage it, neither in sense, for it is not perceptible by sense, nor yet in mind. So Moses the explorer of nature which lies beyond our vision, Moses who, as the divine oracles tell us, entered into the darkness (Ex. 20:21), by which figure they indicate existence invisible and incorporeal, searched everywhere and into everything in his desire to see clearly and plainly Him, the object of our much yearning, Who alone is good.
ב׳
2[8] And when there was no sign of finding aught, not even any semblance of what he hoped for, in despair of learning from others, he took refuge with the Object of his search Itself and prayed in these words: “Reveal Thyself to me that I may see Thee with knowledge” (Ex. 33:13). And yet he fails to gain his object. To know what lies below the Existent, things material and immaterial alike, is a most ample gift even for the best sort among mortals, as God judges,
ג׳
3[9] for we read, “Thou shalt see what is behind Me, but My face thou shalt not see” (ibid. 23). It means that all below the Existent, things material and immaterial alike, are available to apprehension even if they are not all actually apprehended as yet, but He alone by His very nature cannot be seen.
ד׳
4[10] And why should we wonder that the Existent cannot be apprehended by men when even the mind in each of us is unknown to us? For who knows the essential nature of the soul, that mystery which has bred numberless contentions among the sophists who propound opinions contrary to each other or even totally and generically opposed?
ה׳
5[11] It is a logical consequence that no personal name even can be properly assigned to the truly Existent. Note that when the prophet desires to know what he must answer to those who ask about His name He says “I am He that IS” (Ex 3:14), which is equivalent to “My nature is to be, not to be spoken.”
ו׳
6[12] Yet that the human race should not totally lack a title to give to the supreme goodness He allows them to use by licence of language, as though it were His proper name, the title of Lord God of the three natural orders, teaching, perfection, practice, which are symbolized in the records as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For this He says is “My age-long name,” belonging as it were to the age of human existence, not to that when age as yet was not, “a memorial” too, not set, that is, beyond memory or apprehension, and again “to generations” (ibid. 15), not to beings that were never generated.
ז׳
7[13] For those who are born into mortality must needs have some substitute for the divine name, so that they may approach if not the fact at least the name of supreme excellence and be brought into relation with it. And this is shown by the oracle proclaimed as from the mouth of the Ruler of all in which He says that no proper name of Him has been revealed to any. “I was seen,” He says, “of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, being their God, and My name of’ ‘Lord’ I did not reveal to them” (Ex. 6:3). For when the transposition is reset in the proper order it will run thus, “My proper name I did not reveal to thee,” but, He implies, only the substitute, and that for reasons already mentioned.
ח׳
8[14] So impossible to name indeed is the Existent that not even the Potencies who serve Him tell us a proper name. Thus after the wrestling-bout in which the Man of Practice engaged in his quest of virtue, he says to the unseen master, “Announce to me Thy name,” and he said “Why dost thou ask this my name?” (Gen. 32:29), and he refuses to tell his personal and proper name. “It is enough for thee,” he means, “to profit through my benediction, but as for names, those symbols which indicate created beings, look not for them in the case of imperishable natures.”