1187# “石磨的响声在你中间决不能再听见”表示不再有出于对良善的意愿而对真理的任何理解。这从“石磨”的含义清楚可知，“石磨”是指真理从良善中的产生（对此，参看AE1182节），因而也指出于对良善的意愿而对真理的理解，因为理解力是真理的接受者，意愿是良善的接受者。
（续）
由于目的，也就是人的意愿之爱，通过理解力为自己提供或获取方法，以便最终目的可以通过这些方法存在，最初目的通过方法发展到最终目的，这最终目的是进入存在的目的，也就是功用，所以可推知，当这些方法履行或促进这功用时，目的就爱它们，当它们不履行或促进这功用时，目的就不爱它们，而是弃绝它们，并通过理解力为自己提供或获取其它方法。这清楚表明，如果人的首要目的是对显赫的爱，或对荣耀和名誉的爱，或对财富的爱、对金钱或财物的爱，那么他的品质是什么样，即：他视一切方法为有助于他实现最终目的的仆人，这最终目的就是进入存在的爱，这爱对他自己来说，就是功用。
以一个牧师为例，如果他的首要目的是对金钱或财物的爱，那么他的方法就是事工，圣言，教义，教育或学习，基于它们的讲道，以及通过这些对教会之人的教导、改造和拯救。他照着目的并为了目的而评估这些方法；然而，它们仍不会被爱，尽管对有些人来说，它们看似被爱；那被爱的，是财富，或说财富是他爱的对象，因为它是最初和最终的目的，这目的是方法里面的一切，或说完全在方法里面，如前所述。事实上，他说，他的愿望是教导、改造和拯救教会成员；但由于他是出于作为目的的财富来说这些事的，所以这些事并没有形成他爱的一部分；它们只是他为了目的而获得名声和利益的手段或方法。
如果一个牧师的首要目的是对胜过他人的显赫的爱，情况也是这样；把利益或名誉与这些方法分离，你就会看到这一点。当对灵魂的教导、改造和拯救是首要目的，财富和显赫是方法或手段时，情况就完全不同了；那时，牧师是个完全不同的人，因为他是个属灵人，而在前一种情况下，他是个属世人。对一个属灵牧师来说，财富和显赫是祝福，而对一个属世牧师来说，财富和显赫是诅咒。灵界的大量经历已经证明，情况就是这样。在灵界已经看到并听到，许多人声称他们教导人，著述写作，改造人；但当他们意愿的目的或爱显露出来时，显而易见，他们做一切事都是为了自我和世界，没有一件事是为了神和邻舍而做的；事实上，他们甚至诅咒神，向邻舍行恶，伤害邻舍。他们就是那些马太福音（7:22–23）和路加福音（13:26–27）中所指的人。
1187. And the voice of the mill shall be heard in thee no more.- That this signifies no longer any understanding of truth from the will of good, is evident from the signification of a mill (mola), as denoting the production of truth from good, concerning which see above (n. 1182); thus also the understanding of truth from the will of good, because the understanding is the recipient of truth, and the will the recipient of good.
Continuation.- Now, since the end, which is the love of man's will, provides or procures for itself through the understanding the means by which the ultimate end may exist, and this end to which the first end advances by means is the existing end; and since this is use, it follows that the end loves the means, when they perform this use, and that if they do not perform it, it does not love them, but rejects them, and by the understanding provides or procures for itself others. It is therefore evident what a man's quality is, if his principal end is the love of eminence, that is the love of glory and honours, or if his principal end is the love of opulence, that is the love of money and possessions, namely, that he regards all means as subservient to him for the attainment of the ultimate end, which is the love existing, and this is use to himself.
[2] Take as an example the case of a priest, whose principal end is the love of money or possessions. His means are the ministry, the Word, his doctrine, his erudition, and his preaching founded on them, and by these the instruction of the members of the church, their reformation and salvation. These means are estimated by him according to the end and for the sake of the end, but still they are not loved - although with some it appears as if they were loved - for opulence is the object of his love, because it is the first and ultimate end, and this end, as was observed, is altogether in the means. He says, indeed, that his desire is that the members of the church should be instructed, reformed, and saved; but because he says those things with opulence as an end, they form no part of his love; they are only the means of his acquiring reputation and gain on their account. It is similar with a priest, whose principal end is the love of preeminence. Let profit or honour be separated from the means, and you will see.
[3] The case is entirely different if the instruction, reformation, and salvation of souls are the principal end, while opulence and eminence are the means; for the priest is then of an altogether different character. In the latter case he is spiritual, while in the former case he is natural. With a spiritual priest opulence and eminence are blessings, but with a natural priest they are curses. That this is the case can be proved from much experience in the spiritual world. Many have been seen and heard there, who said that they had taught, and written, and had brought reformation about, but when the end or love of their will was made manifest, it was then clear that they had acted in everything for the sake of themselves and the world, and in nothing for the sake of God and their neighbour, yea, in fact, that they had cursed God and injured their neighbour. Such are those meant in Matthew 7:22, 23; and in Luke 13:26, 27.
1187. And the voice of the millstone shall not be heard in thee any more signifies no more any understanding of truth from the will of good. This is evident from the signification of "millstone," as being the production of truth from good (See n. 1182); thus also the understanding of truth from the will of good, since the understanding is the recipient of truth, and the will the recipient of good.
(Continuation)
Now as the end, which is the love of man's will, provides or acquires for itself through the understanding the means through which the final end may exist, to which the first end advances through the means, and this is the end coming into existence, which is the use, it follows that the end loves the means when they promote that use, and does not love them when they do not promote it, but then rejects them, and through the understanding provides or acquires for itself other means. This makes clear the quality of a man whose chief end is the love of eminence, or the love of glory and honor, or whose chief end is the love of wealth, or love of money or possessions, namely, that he regards all means as servants that are serviceable to him for his final end, which is love coming into existence, and this love is use to himself.
[2] Take, for example, a priest whose chief end is love of money or possessions, his means are the ministerial office, the Word, doctrine, learning, preaching from these, and instruction of men of the church and their reformation and salvation by means of these. These means are valued by him according to the end and for the sake of the end, and yet they are not loved, although with some they appear to be loved; for wealth is what is loved, since this is the first and the final end, and that end, as has been said, is everything in the means. Such assert, indeed, that their desire is that men of their church be taught, reformed, and saved; but as wealth is the end from which this is said, it is not said from their love, but only as means of acquiring reputation and gain for the sake of the end.
[3] The same is true of a priest whose chief end is a love of eminence over others, as will be seen if gain or honor is separated from the means. It is wholly different when instruction, reformation, and salvation of souls is the chief end, and wealth and eminence are the means; for a priest is then a wholly different man, for he is a spiritual man, while the former is a natural man. With a spiritual priest wealth and eminence are blessings, but with a natural priest wealth and eminence are curses. This has been made evident by much experience in the spiritual world. Many have been seen and heard there who asserted that they had taught, had written, and had reformed men; but when the end or love of their will was disclosed, it was clear that they had done all things for the sake of self and the world, and nothing for the sake of God and the neighbor, and that they even cursed God and did evil to the neighbor. Such are meant in Matthew 7:22-23; and in Luke 13:26-27.
1187. "Et vox molae non audietur in te amplius." - Quod significet quod non aliquis intellectus veri sit ex voluntate boni, constat ex significatione "molae", quod sit productio veri ex bono (de qua [supra] , n. 1182), ita quoque intellectus veri ex voluntate boni, quoniam intellectus est recipiens veri ac voluntas recipiens boni.
(Continuatio.)
Nunc quia finis qui est amor voluntatis hominis, per intellectum, sibi providet seu comparat media per quae existat finis ultimus, ad quem finis primus per media progreditur, [qui] est finis existens, et hic est usus, sequitur quod finis amet media quando praestant illum usum, et quod non amet illa si non praestant, et quod tunc rejiciat illa, et sibi per intellectum provideat seu comparet alia. Exinde patet qualis est homo cui finis principalis est amor eminentiae, seu amor gloriae et honorum, aut cui finis principalis est amor opulentiae seu amor pecuniae et possessionum, quod nempe spectet omnia media sicut famulitia sibi inservientia ad finem ultimum, qui est amor existens, et hic sibi usus.
[2] Sit exemplum; sacerdos, cui principalis finis est amor pecuniae seu possessionum: ejus media sunt ministerium, Verbum, doctrina, eruditio, ex illis praedicatio, et per illas instructio hominum ecclesiae, ac illorum reformatio et salus; haec media ab illo aestimantur ex fine et propter finem, sed usque non amantur, tametsi apud quosdam apparet sicut amentur; est enim opulentia quae amatur, quoniam haec est finis primus et ultimus, ac ille finis est omne in mediis, ut dictum est. Dicunt quidem quod velint ut ecclesiae suae homo instruatur, reformetur et salvetur; sed quia dicunt illa ex fine opulentiae, non sunt amoris ejus, sed sunt media famae et lucri propter illa.
[3] Simile est apud sacerdotem cui principalis finis est amor eminentiae super alios: si aufertur a mediis lucrum aut honor, videbitur. Aliter prorsus si instructio, reformatio et salus animarum est finis principalis, ac opulentia et eminentia sunt media; tunc homo sacerdos est prorsus alius, est enim spiritualis, prior autem naturalis: apud sacerdotem spiritualem sunt opulentia et eminentia benedictiones; apud naturalem autem sunt opulentia et eminentia maledictiones. Quod ita sit, ex multa experientia e mundo spirituali testatum fieri potest: visi ibi et audit sunt plures qui dixerunt se docuisse, se scripsisse, se reformavisse; at cum finis seu amor voluntatis eorum manifestatus est, apparuit quod propter se et mundum omnia fecerint, et nihil propter Deum et proximum, immo quod Deo maledicerent, et proximo malefacerent; sunt tales qui intelliguntur apud Matthaeum, cap. 7:22, 23; et apud Lucam cap. 13:26, 27.