3226. We then discussed the garment left behind, out of which he seemed to speak, whether he could have lived without inward elements, because he was almost heard saying that he would remain there. But since it is impossible for anyone to live as to the body or lowest nature alone, without the inward one, it was said that it is the lowest society that still has the garment as a medium, and that another is now taking his place, who appears to them as if he were inside the clothing, for a medium appears as if in the center. However, the one who went out from there was not of that character, but as I perceived him, was upright.
3226. We then spoke concerning the left-off clothing, from which he seemed to speak, whether he could have lived apart from interiors, because it was, as it were, heard that he remains [therein], but inasmuch as this cannot be given that anyone may live only in the body or lowest nature, apart from the interior, it was said that it is the lowest society which still has clothing as a subject, and that then another succeeds in his place, who appears to them as if inwardly in the garment, for the subject appears as if in the center. Nevertheless, he who went forth from thence was not of such a character, but was, as I perceived, an upright [person].
3226. Loquutum dein de amictu relicto, ex quo videbatur is loqui, num is potuisset vivere absque interioribus, quia quasi auditus, quod is maneret, sed hoc quia non dabile est, ut quis corpore solum seu infima natura, absque interiori vivat, dictum quod societas infima sit, quae usque habeat amictum pro subjecto, et quod tunc alius succedat loco ejus, qui iis apparet sicut intus in veste, nam subjectum apparet sicut in centro. Qui tamen inde exibat, non erat talis, sed erat, ut mihi perceptum, probus.