When I become new, I do not simply accept the "new" into myself, as if into some empty sack, but in the most authentic way I become this "new". Therefore, my acceptance of the "new" or the descent of the "new" into me is at the same time my own becoming it. It cannot even be said that the "other" conditions me and my becoming, although it is a condition for me to become one. Here the descent of the "other" into me and my becoming it merge into one and the same act. It is my becoming, my movement, my acceptance that is denoted by the old term "communion" (methexis, participatio).

Every instant, through my participation in my perfection, in which is contained all my imperfect being (present, future, and past) and more than it, through my communion with God, I freely arise from non-being into being, from non-being (ex uk onton) I become being. Every moment I experience the experience of my coming into being (and in relation to God and from God's side, the experience of my creation) from nothing, All the time God creates me, or (which is the same thing) I freely arise, "putting on" God or becoming Him. And it is clear that the act of creation does not depend on time, while temporality is a quality of communion.

The opposition of me, the imperfect, to me, the perfect, does not coincide with my opposition to God (§ 4). The first is a confrontation within myself and, as it were, my inner duality, the second is recognized by me as my opposition to the absolute-other. In the first, I am always a person, even if extremely limited, a "something"; in the second, it is absolute nothing, impersonal, qualityless, non-existent. To overcome the second confrontation, I must not be at all; the former is overcome in my true and full being, which is defined as mine by his opposition to God. Only in opposition to my God is it revealed that my being is not something, but is not at all, thanks to which my inner division is possible. In the experience of our self-perfection we find the basic experience of creation-arising from nothing. It is so basic and "ordinary" that we do not even notice it, as, for example, a scientist developing the theory of evolution does not notice what he says about the emergence of something new from non-existence. We do not notice that we are instantly "clothed" with God.

10. Let's try to mentally "expose" ourselves. All my sensations, feelings, thoughts, all the "states of my consciousness," everything in general that is in me, I recognize as having received from God, by whom we "live, and move, and are." All these things in which I oppose Him, I mentally return to Him. I reserve for myself only my "being," which is qualityless, indefinable, incomprehensible, for without it there is no opposition to my God, and in it is my highest likeness to God, my incomprehensibility. However, this "being" of mine, which I have left to myself, is also "something", also qualitatively, although incomprehensible. Let us be consistent: it is also not "mine", but God's. And if I want to find myself, I must also get rid of being. In search of myself, I irresistibly strive into the "utter darkness," into the abyss of absolute non-existence from which I arose (cf. § 8). And I already see myself on the last edge of my being, I see myself hanging over the terrible abyss of absolute nothingness, One more moment — and I will be completely gone. I feel "eternal death", from which the blood freezes in my veins, my heart stops beating and the hairs on my head stand on end... We are not always perceptible and difficult to perceive this terrible coldness of non-existence, this terrifying inexpressibility of absolute emptiness. Often we talk and think about it, but we do not understand our own words—we do not find and do not feel it. And you can not think about it at all, live, enjoy — and suddenly suddenly experience an icy horror, from which

"The stains of anger are instantly extinguished, The heat of voluptuousness runs."

Somewhere, in the very depths of his consciousness, the icy sharp sting of Death is constantly moving. Feel it, and you will immediately throb like a mortally wounded animal that has no way out, something will hit you in the head, your eyes will darken, your heart will shrink, and you will breathe the last silence.

Without God and outside of God, I do not exist, I do not exist absolutely. By myself and in myself I am nothing, not I, I do not exist. But in so far as I think, will, and exist, that is, in so far as I partake of God and become God, I oppose Him, I oppose Him as another substratum (not a person—cf. § 4) of His divine content, and so inseparably that without Him, outside of Him, in myself, I am nothing, I do not exist. And in communing with God, in making Him (though not entirely, but immeasurably participating) by me, I freely receive Him, freely and graciously giving Himself to me. Every moment of my being is wholly Divine in its content and even in its very being, and each is two-subject: both God's and mine, although mine does not exist. God's creation of me out of nothing is at the same time my free self-generation. And nowhere, in nothing, is my conditioned by God's or God's by mine.

It is usually assumed that God created something, some originality, although derivative, but still quite different from Him, and that this something agrees or does not agree with God. It is obvious that the "primordial nature," "primordial quality," "nature," or "nature" of such something already predetermines its revelation, i.e., the creature is not free at all, and God is to blame for its failures and sins. Such a formulation of the problem is fundamentally wrong and makes it insoluble, which is confirmed by the history of Western Christian disputes about predestination, grace and freedom. For the Orthodox consciousness, these disputes simply do not exist. Orthodox theologians consider it necessary to say something about predestination and freedom, but not because of an inner need, but out of scholarly decency and because Catholics and Protestants speak about them. The living experience of all-unity in Orthodoxy solves the problem before it is posed.

God, Who is wholly existent and wholly bestows Himself upon me in me, for me and as me, is not entire, not complete. I do not fully accept Him, and therefore I do not fully become Him. I do not fully partake of God and do not fully adore myself, but I participate, I belittle God in me, for me, as me. Thus, my imperfection and the imperfection of the universal world as a whole do not in the least detract from the perfection of God. God remains invariably perfect, self-sufficient and cannot diminish; in Him there is not a shadow of change. After all, the creature, the created world, the diminution of the Godhead in the creature and in the creature is not God. However, there is no created subject outside of God, and God is everything, i.e. also the created subject. Therefore, created imperfection must also be Divine imperfection. How is the imperfection of the Most Perfect possible (cf. §§ 5 f., 8)? And how is it possible that God is and is not a created subject?

— Совершеннейшее Божество есть все и единственное. Относительное, умаленное, обусловленное, несовершенное — не есть Бог, а есть «иное». Оно противостоит Богу, становится Богом из ничто и в освоении Бога или обожении себя участняет Бога. Но это участнение Бога «иным», тварью, есть усовершение «иного» и, вместе, Самоуничижение и Самоуничтожение Бога, прохождение Его в то самое абсолютное ничто, над бездной которого мы повисаем, когда стремимся найти себя. —

«Почему же Самоуничижение Бога? — Ты сам только что утверждал, что Бог не умаляется от умаления Его тварью в самой себе. Разве нельзя себе представить, что от причастия к Нему твари Бог нисколько не изменяется? Если даже это и непонятно, почему этому не быть? Кто познал ум Господень? Или кто был советником Ему?»

— Рано или поздно, но неизбежно мы приходим к непостижимости Божьей. И я не притязаю на что–либо сверх прикосновения к ней. Но оно истинно и возможно только тогда, когда изнемогаешь в стремлении ее преодолеть, не тогда, когда, ссылаясь на нее, перестаешь думать и искать. Есть два вида признания непостижимости: признание равнодушия и признание изнеможения. Только второе дает возможность истинного прикосновения к Богу. Конечно, Бог непостижим, но никогда не следует отказываться от попытки постичь Его еще немножко, дабы тем полнее ощутить Его непостижимость. — Разумеется, Бог не умаляется от того, что тварь Его в себе самой умаляет. Это справедливо, поскольку тварь есть «иное», не–Бог, справедливо еще и в другом, более глубоком смысле, пока еще не раскрытом нами. Но в умалении Бога тварью Бог умаляется не только в твари, айв Себе, хотя в Себе Он и не умаляется. Он отдает Свое и Себя твари, «иному». Он отдает ей столько, сколько она приемлет. И поскольку тварь есть и Бог, Бог, отдавая ей Себя, от нее и в ней восприемлет обратно отданное Им ей. В меру Своего умаления Он и восполняется. Он активно Себя умаляет и уничтожает, как Бога, в твари; тварь активно Его восстановляет. А так как тварь есть и Бог, активное восстановление ею Бога есть и Его активное самовосстановление. —

«Какая кощунственная арифметика!»

— Самоуничтожение Бога есть и Его Самовосстановление. В Боге словно круговорот Его бытия — погибания — небытия — восстановления — пакибытия, но так, что все эти моменты — одно. Представь себе описываемое круговращение бесконечно скорым. Тогда ты сможешь говорить о самоумалении без умаленности, о небытии, которое бытия не отрицает. Тогда и небытие, которого ты страшишься, не покажется тебе только ужасным. —