Proclus, Theologia Platonica; Michael Psellos

They say the same: that intellection is joined to the images of the intelligibles, and through them [the soul] is led back toward the hidden union of all the gods themselves. For although there are many cognitive powers within us, we are naturally suited to commune with and participate in the divine through this [power] alone. For the divine is not known by sensation, since it is not subject to touch, being removed from all tangible things; nor by opinion or discursive reason, for these are divisible and lay hold of multiform things. Nor is it known by intellection accompanied by reason; for these modes of knowledge belong to things that exist in such a manner. But the existence of the gods transcends beings, and is defined according to this union of the whole. What, then, is that knowledge of the divine, or that which has been made apprehensible to the soul, and through which it is known as far as possible? For we say everywhere that like is known by like: the sensible by sensation, obviously; the object of opinion by opinion; the object of discursive thought by discursive reason; and the intelligible by the intellect. Thus also by the "one" [in us] the most unitary [is known], and by the ineffable, the ineffable.

For rightly did Plato also say in the Kraters that, because the soul is such as she is, all divine things are beheld within the bond of her own divine knowledge. And laying aside the measure of the symmetry of life and the multitude, as well as the variety of the all-various powers within her, [she turns] toward the simple and ungraspable watch-tower of beings. And just as in the festivals of the gods, where they employ divine honors—using the first for the multiform and polymorphous projections of the gods, but others, unmixed and resembling the Ideas, so as to purely embrace the divine illumination itself—so they would say that a harmonious intellection participates in the divine; such, I think, is also that which concerns the wholes. For because the soul looks through their magnitudes, she sees the shadows and the images of beings; but turning back into herself, she unfolds her own essence and her own reasons, and beholds the First as if it were the Only.