1954、“你是看见我的神”表示流注，这从刚才的话清楚可知。从高层看见或洞察低层，或也可说，从内层看见或洞察外层，被称为流注，因为它通过流注发生。以人的内在视觉为例：除非他的内在视觉不断进入外在视觉，也就是眼睛的视觉，否则眼睛决不能盯住任何物体并把它看清楚；因为正是内在视觉利用眼睛盯住眼睛所看到的事物。决不是眼睛在这样做，尽管表面上看是这样。由此也可以看出，一个相信是眼睛在看的人被感官幻觉欺骗到何等程度；而事实上，是他灵的视觉，即他的内在视觉藉着眼睛在看。
与我同在的灵人藉着我的眼睛看见世上的事物，和我自己看得一样清楚（对此，参看1880节）。然而，其中一些灵人仍被感官幻觉左右，以为他们是通过自己的眼睛在看。但我向他们展示事实并非如此，因为当我闭上眼睛时，他们就看不见物质世界中的任何东西了。人也是如此：不是眼睛在看，而是他的灵藉着眼睛在看。梦也说明了这一点，因为人有时在梦中看得和白天一样清楚。就这内在视觉，即灵的视觉而言，情况非常相似。这内在视觉不是凭自己看见，而是从更内在的视觉，也就是人的理性视觉看见。理性同样不是凭自己看见，而是从还要内在的视觉，就是内在人的视觉（对此，参看1940节）看见。甚至这内在人也不是凭自己看见，而是主藉着内在人看见。唯独主看见，因为唯独祂拥有生命，使人能够看见，并且使他觉得似乎是凭自己看见。这就是流注的情况。
Potts(1905-1910) 1954
1954. Thou God seest me. That this signifies influx, is evident from what has just been said. Mental view from the higher into the lower, or what is the same, from the interior into the exterior, is termed influx, for it takes place by influx; just as in the case of man's interior sight: unless this continually inflowed into his outer sight, which is that of the eye, this latter could not possibly apprehend and discern any object; for it is the interior sight which, through the eye, apprehends the things which the eye sees; and by no means is it the eye, although it so appears. From all this we may also see how much that man is in the fallacies of the senses who believes that the eye sees; when in fact it is the sight of his spirit, which is the interior sight, that sees through the eye. [2] Spirits who were with me have seen through my eyes things in the world as well as I did (concerning which see n. 1880); yet some of them who were still in the fallacies of the senses supposed that they had seen through their own eyes; but they were shown that it was not so, for when my eyes were closed they saw nothing in this atmospheric world. It is the very same with man: it is his spirit that sees, not his eye: the spirit sees through the eye. The same thing may be seen from dreams, in which a man sometimes sees as in the day. The case is the very same in regard to this interior sight, or that of the spirit; this again does not see from itself, but from a still more interior sight, or that of man's rational. Nay, neither does this see of itself, but does so from a still more internal sight, which is that of the internal man (concerning which, n. 1940). And even this does not see of itself, for it is the Lord who sees through the internal man, and He is the Only One who sees because He is the Only One who lives, and He it is who gives man the ability to see, and this in such a manner that it appears to him as if he saw of himself. Such is the case with influx.
Elliott(1983-1999) 1954
1954. You are a God who sees me' means influx. This is clear from what has just been stated. The act of seeing from what is higher into what is lower, or what amounts to the same, from interior into exterior, is called influx, for it takes place by means of influx. This is how it is with man's inner sight. Unless his inner sight were entering in constantly into his external sight, that of the eye, the eye would never be able to fix itself on and make out any object; for it is the interior sight which, through the eye, fixes itself on the things seen by the eye. It is in no way the eye that does so, though that seems to be the case. From these considerations it also becomes clear how much a person is swayed by the illusions of the senses who believes that the eye sees, when in fact it is the sight of his spirit, his interior sight, which sees by means of the eye.
[2] Spirits present with me have seen things in the world through my eyes as clearly as I myself have done, regarding which see 1880. Some of them however who were still swayed by the illusions of the senses supposed that they had been seeing through their own eyes. But they were shown that this was not so, for when my eyes were closed they saw nothing existing in this physical world. So also with man; it is not the eye which sees but his spirit by means of the eye. The same point is also evident from dreams in which one sometimes sees as though in the daytime. It is very similar with this interior sight, which is that of the spirit. This too does not see of itself but from a sight more interior still, which is that of the rational. Nor again does the rational see of itself, but there is a sight more interior still, which is that of the internal man, referred to in 1940. Yet not even this internal man sees of itself; it is the Lord who does so by means of the internal man. He Alone sees, since He Alone has life and enables man to see, and to seem to himself to see of himself Such is the situation with influx.
Latin(1748-1756) 1954
1954. `Tu Deus videns me': quod significet influxum, constat ex illis quae nunc dicta sunt: intuitio a superiore in inferiorem, se quod idem, ab interiore in exteriorem, appellatur influxus, nam fit per influxum; sicut visus interior apud hominem, nisi is continue influeret in visum ejus externum seu oculi, nusquam hic capere posset discernere ullum objectum, nam visus interior est qui per oculum capit illa quae oculus {1} videt, nusquam oculus tametsi ita apparet: ex iis quoque constare potest quantum homo in fallaciis sensuum est qui credit quod oculus videat, cum tamen est visus ejus spiritus, qui est visus interior, qui per oculum videt; [2] spiritus qui apud me, tam bene viderunt per oculos meos illa quae in mundo, ac ego, de quo n. 1880, at illorum quidam qui in fallaciis sensuum adhuc erant, putarunt {2} quod per suos oculos vidissent; sed ostensum illis quod non ita esset, clausis enim oculis, nihil in mundo hoc atmosphaerico viderunt; ita quoque se habet cum homine, ejus spiritus est qui videt, non oculus sed per oculum; idem etiam constare potest a somniis, in quibus quandoque homo videt sicut in die; sed usque similiter se habet cum visu hoc interiore seu spiritus, hic non videt ex se, sed ex adhuc interiore se rationalis ejus, immo nec hic videt a se, sed est adhuc interior qui est interni hominis, de quo n. 1940; sed usque non [est] hic, sed est Domini per internum hominem qui Solus videt, quia Solus vivit et dat homini ut videat, utque ei appareat sicut ex se videret: ita se habet cum influxu. @1 A is indistinct but might be oculo.$ @2 i etiam.$