1919、“亚伯兰对撒莱说”表示感知，这从前面的阐述（1898节）清楚可知。“亚伯兰对撒莱说”这句话代表并表示主的感知；而“撒莱对亚伯兰说”这句话代表源于这感知的思维，或说受这些感知启发的思维；思维来自感知，或说感知启发主的思维。那些拥有感知的人所具有的思维并非来自其它源头，或说感知是他们思维的唯一源头。然而，感知是一回事，思维是另一回事。为了看到它们是不同的，以良心为例来说明。
良心是对从主通过天堂流入之物的一种总体、因而模糊的指示。所流入的那些事物在内层理性人中显现，在那里可以说笼罩在云雾中；这云雾是由关于信之真理和良善的表象和谬误产生的。思维虽不同于良心，却是从良心流出的，因为那些有良心的人照着良心思考和说话。思考几乎就是解释良心告诉我们的东西，或说解释构成良心的各种事物，并把它们分解转化成思维或观念，然后转化成词语。正因如此，主将那些有良心的人保守在对邻舍的良善思维中，并阻止他们对邻舍思想邪恶。因此，良心只能存在于那些爱邻如己，并对信之真理拥有良善思维的人里面。这个例子说明了良心如何不同于思维，顺带也说明了感知如何不同于思维。
主的感知直接来自耶和华，因而来自神性良善；而祂的思维则来自直觉真理和对它的情感，如前所述（1904，1914节）。主的神性感知无法以任何概念，甚至无法以天使的概念来理解，所以它是无法描述的。与主的感知相比，天使的感知（在1384等，1394，1395节中有描述）几乎没有。主的感知因是神性，故是对天上的一切事物的一种感知，因而也是对地上的一切事物的一种感知，因为秩序、联系和流注是这样：凡对天上的事物拥有感知的人，也对地上的事物拥有感知。
但主的人身或人性本质与祂的神性本质合一，同时变成耶和华之后，主就超越了所谓的感知，因为祂高于存在于天上，并从那里存在于地上的秩序。耶和华就是秩序的源头，所以可以说，耶和华是秩序本身。祂独自或从自己掌管秩序，不仅像人们所以为的那样从总体上掌管，甚至还从最小细节上掌管，因为总体来自这些细节，或说最小细节构成总体。谈论一个总体，却又把细节从它那里拿走，无异于在谈论一个没有部分在里面的整体，因而无异于在谈论不包含任何东西的某种事物。因此，声称主的规定是普遍的，总体上的，而不是具体细节上的，这完全是错误的，纯粹是所谓的没有对象的空虚概念，或凭空想象。因为从总体上，而不从最小细节上规定和掌管，就是完全不规定和掌管任何东西。这是一个哲学真理；然而，说来奇怪，哲学家们自己，包括最著名的，却以不同的方式理解这个问题，并以不同的方式思考。
Potts(1905-1910) 1919
1919. Abram said unto Sarai. That this signifies perception, is evident from what was said above (n. 1898). The Lord's perception was represented and is here signified by this which Abram said to Sarai; but His thought from the perception, by that which Sarai said to Abram. The thought was from the perception. They who are in perception think from nothing else; but still perception is one thing and thought another. To show that this is the case, take conscience as an illustration. [2] Conscience is a kind of general dictate, and thus an obscure one, of the things that flow in through the heavens from the Lord. Those which flow in present themselves in the interior rational man and are there as in a cloud, which cloud is from appearances and fallacies concerning the truths and goods of faith. But thought is distinct from conscience, and yet it flows from conscience; for they who have conscience think and speak according to it, and the thought is little else than an unfolding of the things which are of conscience, and thereby the partition of them into ideas and then into words. Hence it is that they who have conscience are kept by the Lord in good thoughts respecting the neighbor, and are withheld from thinking evil; and therefore conscience can have no place except with those who love their neighbor as themselves, and think well concerning the truths of faith. From what has been advanced we may see what the difference is between conscience and thought; and from this we may know what the difference is between perception and thought. [3] The Lord's perception was immediately from Jehovah, and thus from the Divine good; but His thought was from intellectual truth and the affection of it, as before said (n. 1904, 1914). The Lord's Divine perception cannot be apprehended by any idea, not even of angels, and therefore it cannot be described. The perception of the angels (spoken of n. 1354, etc., 1394, 1395) is scarcely anything in comparison with the perception which the Lord had. The Lord's perception, being Divine, was a perception of all things in the heavens, and therefore also of all things on earth, for such is the order, connection, and influx, that he who is in the perception of the former is also in the perception of the latter. [4] But after the Lord's Human Essence had been united to His Divine Essence, and at the same time had become Jehovah, the Lord was then above that which is called perception, because He was above the order that is in the heavens and thence on the earth. It is Jehovah who is the source of order, and hence it may be said that Jehovah is Order itself, for He from Himself governs order; not as is supposed in the universal only, but also in the veriest singulars, for the universal comes from these. To speak of the universal, and to separate from it the singulars, would be nothing else than to speak of a whole in which there are no parts, and therefore to speak of a something in which there is nothing. So that to say that the Lord's Providence is universal, and is not a Providence of the veriest singulars, is to say what is utterly false, and is what is called an ens rationis [that is, a figment of the imagination]. For to provide and govern in the universal, and not in the veriest singulars, is to provide and govern absolutely nothing. This is true philosophically, and yet wonderful to say, philosophers themselves, even those who soar the highest, apprehend the matter differently, and think differently.
Elliott(1983-1999) 1919
1919. That 'Abram said to Sarai' means perception is clear from what has been stated above in 1898. The perception which the Lord had was represented and is here meant by 'Abram said to Sarai', but thought which sprang from that perception is meant by 'Sarai said to Abram' - perception being the source of thought. The thought possessed by those who have perception comes from no other source. Yet perception is not the same as thought. To see that it is not the same, let conscience serve to 'illustrate this consideration.
[2] Conscience is a kind of general and thus obscure dictate which presents those things that flow in from the Lord by way of the heavens. Those things that flow in manifest themselves in the interior rational man where they are enveloped so to speak in cloud. This cloud is the product of appearances and illusions concerning the goods and truths of faith. Thought is, in truth, distinct and separate from conscience; yet it flows from conscience, for people who have conscience think and speak according to it. Indeed thought is scarcely anything more than a loosening of the various strands that make up conscience, and a converting of these into separate ideas which pass into words. Hence it is that the Lord holds those who have conscience in good thoughts regarding the neighbour and withholds them from evil thoughts. For this reason conscience can never exist except with people who love the neighbour as themselves and have good thoughts regarding the truths of faith. These considerations brought forward here show how conscience differs from thought, and from this one may recognize how perception differs from thought.
[3] The Lord's perception came directly from Jehovah, and so from Divine Good, whereas His thought came from intellectual truth and the affection for it, as stated above in 1904,1914. No idea, not even an angelic one, is adequate as a means to apprehend the Lord's Divine perception, and thus this lies beyond description. The perception which angels have - described in 1384 and following paragraphs, 1394, 1395 - adds up to scarcely anything at all when contrasted with the perception that was the Lord's. Because the Lord's perception was Divine, it was a perception of everything in heaven; and being a perception of everything in heaven it was also a perception of everything on earth. For such is the order, interconnection, and influx that anyone who has a perception of heavenly things has a perception of earthly as well.
[4] But after the Lord's Human Essence had become united to His Divine Essence, and had become at the same time Jehovah, the Lord was then above what is called perception, for He was above the order which exists in the heavens and from there upon earth. It is Jehovah who is the source of order, and therefore one may say that Jehovah is Order itself, for from Himself He governs order, not merely, as is supposed, in the universal but also in its most specific singulars, for it is these singulars that make up the universal. To speak of the universal and then separate such singulars from it would be no different from speaking of a whole that has no parts within it and so no different from speaking of something consisting of nothing. Thus it is sheer falsity - a figment of the imagination, as it is called - to speak of the Lord's Providence as belonging to the universal but not to its specific singulars; for to provide and govern universally but not specifically is to provide and govern absolutely nothing. This is true philosophically, yet, strange to say, philosophers themselves, including the more eminent, understand this matter in a different way and think in a different way.
Latin(1748-1756) 1919
1919. `Dixit Abram ad Sarai': quod significet perceptionem, constat ab illis quae supra n. 1898 dicta sunt: perceptio Domini repraesentata fuit et hic significatur per id quod Abram dixit ad Sarai, sed cogitatio ex perceptione per id quod Sarai dixit ad Abram; perceptio erat ex qua cogitatio; qui in perceptione sunt, non aliunde cogitant; sed usque perceptio est aliud quam cogitatio; ut sciatur quod aliud, sit ad illustrationem conscientia; [2] conscientia est quoddam dictamen commune ita obscurum illorum quae influunt per caelos a Domino; quae influunt, sistunt se in interiore rationali homine et ibi sicut in nube, quae nubes est ex apparentiis et fallaciis de veris et bonis fidei; cogitatio vero distincta est a conscientia, sed fluit a conscientia, nam qui conscientiam habent, secundum illam cogitant et loquuntur, estque cogitatio vix aliud quam explicatio illorum quae sunt conscientiae, et sic illorum partitio in ideas et dein in voces; inde est quod qui conscientiam habent, teneantur a Domino ut cogitent bene de proximo, atque detineantur a cogitando male; quare conscientia nusquam dabilis est nisi apud illos qui amant proximum sicut semet et bene cogitant de veris fidei: ex allatis constare potest quae differentia est conscientiae et cogitationis, unde sciri potest quae differentia perceptionis et cogitationis. [3] Perceptio Domini fuit immediate ex Jehovah, ita ex Divino Bono, cogitatio autem ex vero intellectuali et ejus affectione, ut supra n. 1904, 1914 dictum. Perceptio Divina Domini non aliqua idea, ne quidem angelica, capi potest, ita nec describi; perceptio angelorum, de qua n. 1384 seq. 1394, 1395, vix aliquid est, respective ad perceptionem quae fuit Domino; perceptio Domini quia Divina, fuit omnium quae in caelis, et quia omnium quae in caelis, fuit omnium quae in terris, ordo enim est talis, nexus et influxus, ut qui in illorum perceptione est, etiam in horum sit: [4] at postquam Humana Domini Essentia unita facta Divinae Ipsius, et simul Jehovah, tunc Dominus supra illud quod perceptio dicitur, fuit, quia supra ordinem qui in caelis, et inde in terris; est Jehovah, a Quo ordo, inde dici potest quod Jehovah sit Ipse Ordo, a Se Ipso enim regit ordinem, non ut putatur, solum in universali, sed (x)etiam in singularissimis; singularissima enim sunt ex quibus universale, dicere universale et inde separare singularia, foret non aliud ac dicere totum in quo nullae partes, sic dicere aliquid in quo nihil; ita falsissimum et, sicut vocatur, ens rationis est, dicere quod Providentia Domini sit universalis et non singularissimorum, nam providere et regere {1}in universali et non in singularissimis, est prorsus nihil providere et regere: hoc {2}philosophice verum est, sed usque mirum quod ipsi philosophi etiam sublimiores aliter capiant et aliter cogitent. @1 universale et non singularissima.$ @2 pure philosophicum est, et philosophice verum.$