----中文待译----
990. And they gnawed their tongues for anguish. That this signifies, that by reason of loathing they are not willing to perceive and to know genuine goods and truths, is evident from the signification of gnawing their tongues, as denoting not to be willing to perceive and know genuine goods and truths (of which we shall speak presently), and from the signification of anguish, as denoting loathing.
The reason why by gnawing their tongues is signified not to be willing to perceive and know genuine goods and truths is that by the tongue is signified the perception of truth, and by gnawing the tongue its retention. For the tongue signifies various things, because it is the organ both of speech and taste; and, as the organ of speech, it signifies confession, thought, doctrine, and religion; and, as the organ of taste, it signifies the natural perception of good and truth; whereas the smell corresponds to the spiritual perception of good and truth. For the tongue tastes and relishes meat and drink; and by meat and drink are signified goods and truths, which nourish the natural mind. Not to be willing to have that perception, or not to be willing to perceive genuine goods and truths, is signified by gnawing their tongues.
These things are said concerning those who separate faith from the goods of life, for they comprise everything of the church, or of religion, in one article of faith, by which they say that a man is justified. And because a man is justified and saved by this one article only, it follows that all other things of faith, which are the truths of the church, are loathed by them, so that they do not wish to perceive or to know them. For they say in their heart, "To what will these conduce, when this alone saves, that God the Father sent the Son, who has redeemed me from hell by the passion of the cross? Therefore the works of the law neither condemn nor save me, but to think and believe this with confidence." This, now, is why they are not willing to perceive or to know genuine truths and goods because of loathing. The reason why they also nauseate them is, that those who are in faith alone are inwardly opposed to the goods and truths of heaven and the church; also, because they must be inwardly thought of, for they transcend their material ideas. This nausea and this loathing are here signified by anguish.
Continuation concerning the Sixth Precept:-
[2] It was said above, that the difference between the love of marriage and the love of adultery is like that between heaven and hell. There is a similar difference between the respective delights, for delights derive all their quality from the loves in which they are. The delights of the love of adultery derive their qualities from the delights of doing evil uses, thus of doing evil; and the delights of the love of marriage from the delights of doing good uses, thus of well-doing. According, therefore, to the delight that the evil have in doing evil, such is the delight of their love of adultery, because the love of adultery descends therefrom. That such is the case can scarcely be believed, but nevertheless it is so. It is therefore evident that the delight of adultery ascends from the lowest hell. But, on the contrary, the delight of the love of marriage, because it is from the love of the conjunction of good and truth, and from the love of doing good, is a heavenly delight. It descends also from the inmost or third heaven, where love to the Lord from the Lord reigns.
[3] Hence it is evident that the difference between these two delights is like that between heaven and hell. Yet, what is wonderful, it is believed that the delight of marriage and the delight of adultery are similar, when nevertheless the difference between them is such as above stated. But the difference can be discerned and perceived by none but those who are in the delight of conjugial love. He who is in this delight plainly feels that in the delight of marriage there is nothing impure and unchaste, thus nothing lascivious; and that in the delight of adultery there is nothing but what is impure, unchaste, and lascivious. He feels that unchastity ascends from beneath, and that chastity descends from above. But he who is in the delight of adultery cannot feel these things, because what is infernal he feels as heavenly. From these things it follows, that the love of marriage, even in its ultimate act, is purity itself and chastity itself; and that the love of adultery, in its acts, is impurity itself and unchastity itself.
Because the delights of both loves appear to be outwardly alike, although inwardly they are altogether unlike, since they are opposites, it is therefore provided by the Lord that the delights of adultery shall not ascend into heaven; also, that the delights of marriage shall not descend into hell. Still, there is some correspondence of heaven with prolification in adulteries, though none with delight in them.
990. And they gnawed their tongues for distress, signifies that from loathing they are unwilling to perceive and know genuine goods and truths. This is evident from the signification of "gnawing their tongues," as being to be unwilling to perceive and know genuine goods and truths (of which presently); also from the signification of "distress," as being loathing. "Gnawing their tongues" signifies to be unwilling to perceive and know genuine goods and truths, because the "tongue" signifies perception of truth, and "to gnaw the tongue" to repress it. For the tongue has various significations, because it is an organ both of speech and of taste; as an organ of speech it signifies confession, thought, and religion; and as an organ of taste it signifies the natural perception of good and truth; while the sense of smell corresponds to the spiritual perception of good and truth. For the tongue tastes and relishes foods and drinks; and foods and drinks signify the goods and truths which nourish the natural mind. To be unwilling to have that perception, or to be unwilling to perceive genuine goods and truths, is signified by "gnawing their tongues." This has been said of those who separate faith from the goods of life; for they bring together all things of the church or of religion into one article of faith; and contend that by this man is justified. And as man is justified and saved by this alone, it follows that they loathe the remaining things of faith, which are truths of the church, even so as to be unwilling to perceive or to know them; for they say in their heart, "Of what use are these when this one thing is what saves, namely, that God the Father sent the Son, who has redeemed me from hell by the passion of the cross? Therefore the works of the law neither condemn nor save me, because I am saved simply by thinking and believing this with confidence." This, then, is why they are unwilling from loathing to perceive or know genuine truths and goods. They are nauseated at them, because being in faith alone they have an inward antagonism to the goods and truths of heaven and the church, also because these goods and truths are subjects of interior thought, and therefore transcend their material ideas. This loathing and nausea are here signified by "distress."
(Continuation respecting the Sixth Commandment)
[2] It has been said abode that the difference between the love of marriage and the love of adultery is like that between heaven and hell. There is a like difference between the delights of these loves; for delights derive their all from the loves from which they spring. The delights of the love of adultery derive what they are from the delights of doing evil uses, thus of evil doing; and the delights of the love of marriage from the delights of doing good uses, thus of well-doing. Therefore such as the delight of the evil is in doing evil such is the delight of their love of adultery; because the love of adultery descends therefrom. That it descends from that scarcely anyone can believe; and yet such is its origin. From this it is evident that the delight of adultery ascends from the lowest hell. But the delight of the love of marriage, since it is from the love of the conjunction of good and truth and from the love of doing good, is a heavenly delight; and it comes down from the inmost or third heaven, where love to the Lord from the Lord reigns.
[3] From this it can be seen that the difference between these two delights is like that between heaven and hell. And yet, what is wonderful, it is believed that the delight of marriage and the delight of adultery are similar; nevertheless the difference between them is such as has now been described. But the difference can be discerned and felt only by one who is in the delight of conjugial love. One who is in that delight very clearly feels that in the delight of marriage there is nothing impure or unchaste, thus nothing lascivious; and that in the delight of adultery there is nothing but what is impure, unchaste, and lascivious. He feels that unchastity comes up from beneath, and that chastity comes down from above. But one who is in the delight of adultery is incapable of feeling this, because he feels what is infernal as his heavenly. From all this it follows that the love of marriage, even in its ultimate act, is purity itself and chastity itself; and that the love of adultery in its acts is impurity itself and unchastity itself. Since the delights of these two loves are alike in outward appearance, although inwardly they are wholly unlike, because opposites, the Lord provides that the delights of adultery shall not ascend into heaven and that the delights of marriage shall not descend into hell; and yet that there shall be some correspondence of heaven with prolification in adulteries, though none with the delight itself in them.
990. "Et mandebant linguas suas prae molestia." - Quod significet quod prae fastidio non velint percipere et scire genuina bona et vera, constat ex significatione "mandere linguas", quod sit non velle percipere et scire genuina bona et vera (de qua sequitur); et ex significatione "molestiae", quod sit fastidium. Quod per "mandere linguas" significetur non velle percipere et scire genuina bona et vera, est quia per "linguam" significatur perceptio veri, et per "mandere linguam" retentio ejus; "lingua" enim varia significat, quia est organum tam loquelae quam gustus; et sicut organum loquelae significat confessionem, cogitationem et religionem, et sicut organum gustus significat perceptionem boni et veri naturalem; "olfactus" autem perceptionem boni et veri spiritualem; lingua enim gustat et sapit cibos et potus, et per "cibos" et "potus" significantur bona et vera, quae nutriunt mentem naturalem; perceptionem illam non velle habere, seu non velle percipere genuina bona et vera, significatur per "mandere linguas." Haec de illis qui fidem separant a bonis vitae, dicta sunt; nam illi omnia ecclesiae seu religionis compingunt in unum fidei, per quod dicunt hominem justificari; et quia per id unicum homo justificatur et salvatur, sequitur quod reliqua fidei, quae sunt vera ecclesiae, fastidiant, usque ut non percipere nec scire illa velint; dicunt enim corde, "Ad quid conducunt, dum hoc unum salvat, nempe quod Deus Pater miserit Filium, qui per passionem crucis ab inferno me redemit? opera ergo legis me non damnant, nec me salvant, quia solum illud ex fiducia cogitare et credere, salvat": inde nunc est, quod prae fastidio non velint percipere nec scire genuina vera et bona. Quod nauseent ad illa, est quoque quia illi qui in sola fide sunt, interius contra bona et vera caeli et ecclesiae sunt; tum quia interius, cum de illis, cogitandum est, transcendunt enim ideas illorum materiales; haec nausea, et hoc fastidium est, quod per "molestiam" hic significatur.
[2] (Continuatio de Sexto Praecepto.)
Dictum est supra quod discrimen inter amorem conjugii et amorem adulterii sit sicut inter caelum et infernum; simile discrimen est inter jucunda amorum illorum, nam jucunda trahunt omnia sua ex amoribus ex quibus sunt. Jucunda amoris adulterii trahunt sua ex jucundis faciendi usus malos, ita malefaciendi; et jucunda amoris conjugii ex jucundis faciendi usus bonos, ita benefaciendi: quale itaque jucundum est malis in malefaciendo, tale est jucundum amoris adulterii illorum, quia amor adulterii descendit inde; quod ex eo descendat, vix ab aliquo potest credi, sed usque inde ejus origo est: inde patet quod jucundum adulterii ascendat ex infimo inferno. At vero jucundum amoris conjugii, quia est ex amore conjunctionis boni et veri, et ex amore faciendi bonum, est jucundum caeleste; descendit etiam ex intimo seu tertio caelo, ubi amor in Dominum a Domino regnat.
[3] Inde constare potest quod discrimen inter duo illa jucunda sit sicut inter caelum et infernum. Sed quod mirum est, creditur quod jucundum conjugii et jucundum adulterii sint similia, sed usque tale est discrimen inter illa, quale nunc dictum est: at discrimen non alius potest discernere et sentire, quam qui in jucundo amoris conjugialis est; qui in hoc jucundo est, perspicue sentit quod jucundo conjugii non insit aliquid impuri ac incasti, ita non aliquid lascivi; et quod in jucundo adulterii nihil nisi quam impurum, incastum et lascivum sit; sentit quod ab infra ascendat incastum, et quod desuper descendat castum: at qui in jucundo adulterii est, non potest sentire illa, quia sentit infernale sicut suum caeleste. Ex his sequitur quod amor conjugii etiam in suo ultimo actu sit ipsa puritas, et ipsa castitas; et quod amor adulterii in suis actibus sit ipsa impuritas et ipsa incastitas. Quoniam jucunda utriusque amoris apparent exterius similia, tametsi sunt interius prorsus dissimilia, quia opposita, ideo providetur a Domino ne jucunda adulterii ascendant in caelum, tum ne jucunda conjugii descendant in infernum; sed usque quod aliqua correspondentia caeli sit cum prolificatione in adulteriis, non autem cum ipsa jucunditate in illis.