35.我在此补充以下记事：
我曾一度困惑，为何那么多人将创造归于自然，因此将太阳之下和之上的万物归于它。无论他们看见什么，都会发自内心承认说：“这一切难道不是来自大自然吗？”当被问及他们为何说这一切来自大自然，而不是来自神时，尽管他们经常附和别人说是神创造了大自然，所以说他们所看到的一切来自神也好，来自大自然也好，都一样。但他们会用几乎听不到的声音嘟囔说：“神不就是大自然吗？”自然创造宇宙这种谬念和看似智慧的这种疯狂使得所有这类人自高自大，以致他们藐视所有承认神创造宇宙的人，觉得他们如同爬在地上的蚂蚁，踩着被踏平的老路，将一些人视为空中飞舞的蝴蝶。他们称其信条为梦幻，因为这些人看到了自己看不到的东西。他们说：“谁见过神？谁没见过大自然？”
当我惊讶于这类人如此众多时，站在我旁边的天使对我说：“你在想什么？”我回答：“我在想为何这多么人相信大自然自行存在，因而是宇宙的创造者。”然后天使对我说：“整个地狱都是由这类人组成的，他们在那里被称为撒旦和魔鬼。撒旦是那些认定支持自然，并因此否认神的人；魔鬼则是那些生活邪恶，从而发自内心完全摒弃对神的承认之人。不过，我会带你到西南地区的学校，这类人就聚集在那里，只是尚未下入地狱。”于是，他拉着我的手，带我前行。我看到一些村舍，学校就座落其中，当中一幢建筑似乎是主建筑。它是由沥青石砌成的，外面覆盖一层小玻璃板，表面仿佛金银一样闪闪发光，有点象所谓的冰长石或云母，并且处处嵌有发光的贝壳。
我们来到这幢建筑前敲了敲门，马上有人开门说：“欢迎。”然后，他跑到一张桌子旁，给我们拿来四本书，说：“这些书都包含智慧，现今在大多数国家备受推崇。这本书或智慧受到很多法国人的青睐，这本书受到很多德国人的青睐，这本书受到一些荷兰人的青睐，这本书则受到一些英国人的青睐。”他继续说，“如果你们想看，我会让这四本书在你们眼前发光。”于是，他倾泄出自己名声的荣耀，笼罩在这些书上，它们仿佛立刻放出光芒。不过，这光很快就从我们眼前消失了。然后，我们问他现在写的是什么。他回答说，他现在正从自己的宝库中提取并展示智慧的精华。这些精华概述如下：
⑴是自然缘于生命，还是生命缘于自然。
⑵是中心缘于扩展，还是扩展缘于中心。
⑶关于自然和生命的中心和扩展。
说完这些话，他又坐到桌子旁。我们便逛了逛他这所很大的学校。屋子里没有阳光，只有月亮的夜光，所以他在桌子上点了一根蜡烛。令我惊讶的是，这根蜡烛似乎四处移动，从而投射出光来。然而，由于烛芯未剪，所以它发出的光极其微弱。他在写作时，我们看到各种形状的图像从桌子飞到墙上。在夜晚的月光下，它们看似美丽的印度鸟。但我们一开门，在白天阳光的照耀下，它们看上去就象长有网状翅膀的夜鸟。因为它们是表面真理，但他通过引证巧妙地将它们联结成连贯系列，从而使其变成虚假。
看到这一幕，我们来到桌旁，问他正在写什么。他说：“我在写第一个问题，是自然缘于生命，还是生命缘于自然？”对此，他说，他能将这二者都证之为真理。不过，由于内心深处涌动着莫名的恐惧，所以他只敢证明自然缘于生命，也就是说来自生命，不敢证明反面，即生命缘于自然，也就是说来自自然。我们委婉地问他潜在的莫名恐惧是什么。他回答说，他害怕神职人员给他贴上自然主义者，甚至是无神论者的标签，还害怕被平信徒视为丧失理智。因为这两种人要么出于盲目信仰相信，要么仅通过那些确认这种信仰之人的观点来看待。
出于对真理的热爱，我们有些气愤地对他说：“朋友，你大错特错了。你的智慧无非是些文字技巧罢了，却将你诱入歧途。你对名声的渴求引诱你去证明你所不相信的东西。难道你不知道人的心智能被提升至感官事物，也就是说身体感官所孕育的思维之上吗？一旦被提升，它就能看见在上的生命之物，也能看见在下的自然之物。生命不就是爱与智慧吗？自然界不就是爱与智慧的载体，是它们借以产生结果或功用的一个工具吗？除了一个为主因，一个为工具因外，这二者还能以别的方式成为一体吗？光与眼睛，或声音与耳朵能是一个吗？这些感觉岂不是源于生命？它们的形体岂不是源于自然界？人体不就是接受生命的器官吗？其中的一切成分被有机组织起来，不就是为了产生爱所意愿的一切和理解力所思维的一切吗？人体器官不是源于自然界吗？爱与思维不是源于生命吗？这些事物岂不是彼此完全不同吗？将你敏锐的心智稍稍提升一点，你就会明白，情感和思维是生命的属性。情感属于爱，思维属于智慧，这二者都属于生命。就象我们说过的，爱与智慧构成生命。若将你的理解力本能再稍稍提升一点，你就会明白，爱与智慧若非在某个地方有一个源头，就不可能存在。而这个源头就是爱本身和智慧本身，因而是生命本身。这些就是神，自然界来自祂。”
随后，我们与他谈论了第二个问题，即是中心缘于扩展，还是扩展缘于中心。我们问他为何讨论这个话题。他回答说，是为了就自然和生命的中心和扩展，因而这二者究竟谁是谁的源头等问题得出一个结论。当我们问他持何观点时，他的答复一如从前，即他能证实其中任何一个。不过，因为害怕丧失名声，他只证明扩展缘于中心，即来自中心。“尽管如此，”他说，“我仍知道必有某种东西先于太阳存在，这种东西遍布整个穹苍，并自行使自己归入秩序，从而制造一个中心。”
我们出于义愤再次对他说：“朋友，你疯了！”一听这话，他将座椅从桌子向后撤了撤，警惕地看着我们，然后却面带微笑聆听。于是，我们继续说：“还有比中心缘于扩展更荒谬的说法吗？我们理解你所说的中心是指太阳，扩展是指宇宙。所以，你认为宇宙是在没有太阳的情况下生成的，是吗？难道不是太阳产生了自然界及其万有吗？它们不是唯独依靠太阳放射并经由大气传播的热和光吗？至于在有太阳之前它们在哪里，我们会在后面的讨论中解释它们的起源。大气和地上万物不就象表面，它们的中心不就是太阳吗？要是没有太阳，所有这些事物会怎样呢？它们还能存活片刻吗？在太阳形成之前，它们能有什么呢？它们能生成吗？持续存在不就是不断生成吗？既然自然万物依靠太阳持续存在，那么可知，它们必依靠太阳才能生成。谁都能通过亲身经历明白并承认这一点。
“在后者岂不是通过在先者存在并持续存在吗？如果表面是在先者，中心是在后者，岂不成了在先者通过在后者持续存在了吗？这岂不违背秩序法则？在后者如何产生在先者？或外在之物如何产生内在之物？又或粗糙之物如何产生精细之物？那么，形成扩展的表面如何产生中心呢？谁不知道这有违自然法则？我们通过理性分析提出这些论据，是为了证明：扩展由中心产生，而不是反过来。凡有正确思维者，即便没有这些证据也能明白这一点。你也说过，扩展一起自动流入形成中心。那么，万物流入如此奇妙和令人惊叹的秩序，以致一物为了另一物存在，并且万物都是为了人类及其永生存在，这是偶然的吗？自然界能出于爱藉着智慧预设目的，考虑原因，从而带来井然有序地产生这类事物的效果吗？它能使人类变成天使吗？能建造天使天堂、使其上的居民活到永远吗？请将这些事综合起来认真思考一下，你的自然孕育产生自然的观念就会土崩瓦解。”
之后，我们问他对于第三个问题，即自然和生命的中心和扩展，原先是怎么想的，现在又是怎么想的，是不是认为生命的中心和扩展等同于自然的中心和扩展。他说，他犹豫不决，他原以为生命就是大自然的内在活动，作为构成人生命本质成分的爱与智慧来源于它；而该活动是由太阳之火经由它的热和光、藉着大气这个媒介而产生的。但现在由于听说人死后仍活着，所以他心存疑问，这种疑问使他的心思忽上忽下。上升时，他承认有一个他以前丝毫不知的中心；下降时，他看到的是那个他原以为是独一无二的中心。因此，他情愿认为，生命来自他以前丝毫不知的那个中心，而自然来自他原以为是独一无二的那个中心，并且这两个中心各自都有一个围绕它的扩展。
对此，我们说，那样也好，只要他愿意通过生命的中心和扩展来看待自然的中心和扩展，而不是反过来。然后，我们告诉他，天使天堂之上还有一轮太阳，它是纯粹的爱，表面上象尘世太阳那样炽热。它所所放射的热就是天使和人类的意愿和爱之源头，它所放射的光则是产生他们的理解力和智慧。凡来自这太阳的，都被称为属灵的，而凡由尘世太阳所发出的，都是生命的容器或载体，被称为属世的。因此，属于生命中心的扩展被称为灵界，属于自然中心的扩展被称为尘世，它们各自通过自己的太阳持续存在。“由于爱与智慧没有时空的属性，只有状态的属性，故可知，围绕天使天堂太阳的扩展并非空间的扩展，然而它却存在于尘世太阳所属的空间扩展中，并照着世间活物的接受程度而存在于活物中，而它们的接受程度则取决于其形式和状态。”
“但是，”他问道，“尘世太阳，或说自然界的太阳之火的起源是什么？”我们回答：“它来自天使天堂太阳，这太阳不是火，而是作为爱本身的神最直接放射的神性之爱，神就在这太阳当中。”他对此感到吃惊，于是，我们作了以下解释：“爱本质上是属灵之火。正因如此，在圣言中，火的灵是指爱。因此，在教堂，牧师会祈祷天堂之火，也就是爱，充满他们的内心。以色列人会幕中的祭坛之火，还有烛台之火，无非代表神性之爱。血的热，或人类和动物总体上的生命之热，只来源于形成其生命的爱。因此，当人的爱上升为热情，或被激发为生气和愤怒时，他就被点燃、发热并燃烧起来。由于属灵之热，也就是爱，在人里面产生属世之热，甚至会点燃和燃烧他们的脸和肢体，故显而易见，尘世太阳之火只通过唯一的源头生成，该源头就是属灵太阳之火，也就是神性之爱。
“因为扩展由中心产生，而不是反过来，就象我们前面说过的，生命的中心，即天使天堂的太阳，就是从神最直接放射的神性之爱，神就在这太阳当中；也因为该中心的扩展，即所谓的灵界来自这一源头，并且属灵太阳产生尘世太阳，还产生其扩展，即所谓的尘世，所以很明显，宇宙是由那独一无二的神创造的。”说完这番话，我们离开了，他陪我们来到校区外，并与我们谈论天堂和地狱，以及神性的指引，展现出新的聪明睿智。
35. 有一次, 我正大大驚奇這麼多人將宇宙,甚至萬物的被造, 都歸功於自然。當他們看到任何事物, 發自內心地承認並說:"這不是來自自然嗎？"當問到為何來于自然而非來自上帝時, 他們跟其他人常說:上帝創造自然, 因此來自于自然與來自於上帝並沒什麼不同。他們回答的同時,內心隱藏著一種幾乎聽不到的聲音:"除了自然, 上帝會是什麼呢？"按此說法, 自然就創造了宇宙。這樣的瘋狂顯得如同有智慧, 看起來得意洋洋, 以至於到某個地步, 他們斜視那些承認上帝創造宇宙之人如同看地上爬行的螞蟻, 按部就班照著踩出來的路線爬行。他們稱上帝創世的觀點為做夢, 如同夢中看物,霧裡看花。於是他們問:"誰看見過上帝, 誰沒見過自然？"
[2]當我正大大驚奇這些事情時, 站在我邊上的天人對我說:"你想到什麼？"我回答:"這麼多人相信自然的自行存在, 且認為自然是宇宙的創造者。"天人對我說:"地獄就是由這類之人構成, 他們在那裡被稱為撒旦或魔鬼。撒旦將一切歸功於自然並自行確證,結果否認上帝; 魔鬼則活在邪惡中,因而從內心中完全摒棄對上帝的承認。不過我會帶你去西南方向的一所學校, 看看那裡尚未進入地獄之人。"
他帶我前行, 前方出現一些房子, 學校就在其中。當中有一幢建築, 是其它房屋的中心。這幢建築由瀝青般黝黑的石頭砌成, 外麵粉抹小塊玻璃片, 玻璃片形如圓碟, 閃光亮晶如同鑲上金銀,像雲母般, 牆上各處點綴著閃閃發光的貝殼。
[3]我們走近建築物並叩門, 立刻有個人開門說:"歡迎！"接著他跑到一張台前拿來四本書, 說"這些書滿有智慧, 現今被許多王國推崇:這本書的智慧在法國被許多人推崇, 這本在德國被許多人推崇, 這本在荷蘭, 這本在英格蘭被一些人推崇。"他還說:"如果你想看看究竟, 我可讓這四本書在你眼前閃閃光。"於是他將這些被推崇的聲譽榮耀倒在這些書的周圍, 這些書立刻閃亮,如同發光; 不過這閃亮很快在我們眼前消失。
接著, 我們詢問他現在在寫些什麼。他回答說, 他正在傾己所學寫一些關於最深奧智慧的題材, 總體來說包括這些:
(1)自然是生命的一種特徵, 或生命是自然的一種特徵？
(2)中心來自廣闊, 或者廣闊來自中心？
(3)關於廣闊和生命的中心。
[4]一番陳述之後, 他自己坐在桌邊, 我們就在這寬敞的建築物內到處走走。他的桌上有支蠟燭, 因為那裡沒有陽光, 只有月亮的夜光。這看起來挺方便的, 蠟燭被拿來拿去, 用來照亮, 不過只能給一點點光而已。當他寫東西時, 我們看見各種形狀的圖像從桌子飛向各面牆, 在夜間月光下顯得如同美麗的東方雀鳥。不過當我們一打開門時, 在白天光照下, 這些就顯現為如同有膜狀翅膀的夜鳥。因為它們是真理的形似, 只不過是虛假的確證, 被他巧妙地杜撰成一個系列。
[5]看過這些現象以後, 我們走近桌子問他正在寫什麼。他回答, 是關於第一個問題:自然是生命的一種特徵, 或生命是自然的一種特徵？他說他能夠證明這二者都正確。不過潛伏在內心有種莫明的恐懼, 他只敢去證明自然是生命的一個特徵, 也就是自然來自生命。而非生命是自然的一個特徵, 也就是生命來自于自然。我們禮貌地問他內心潛在的恐懼什麼。他回答, 擔心被神職人員稱為自然主義者, 因而是無神論者, 被平信徒稱為頭腦不正常之人。
[6]接著, 為了真理熱心的緣故, 我們向他說:"朋友啊, 你被大大地矇騙了, 被你的智慧(就是寫作的某種天份)帶入歧途, 被名聲榮耀帶向去證明你並不相信的。塵世事物通過身體的感官進入思想, 但你不知道人的思想可以被提升到塵世事物之上嗎？當思想被提升, 就會看到在上的生命,在下的自然。生命就是仁愛與智慧, 還有別的嗎？自然不僅僅是仁愛與智慧的容器嗎？仁愛與智慧不是藉著自然來實現它們的效果或用途嗎？生命與自然, 一個是根本,一個是輔助, 能成為一嗎？光與眼, 或者聲與耳, 能為一？不是它們的感覺源自生命, 它們的形式源自于自然嗎？除了是生命的接受器官, 人的身體還能是什麼？身體裡的所有事物及每個事物的有組織地結合, 不是為愛所願的,和認知所想的, 也就是為生命服務？不是身體器官來自于自然, 仁愛與智慧來自生命嗎？彼此間不是完全的截然不同嗎？稍稍提高你智力的敏銳度, 你就會看出, 意志和認知都屬於生命。意志屬於仁愛,認知屬於智慧。仁愛與智慧二者屬於生命, 仁愛與智慧就是生命。倘若你稍稍提高認知力, 你將看到, 若無源頭, 仁愛與智慧無法存立。這源頭就是仁愛和智慧本身, 因而就是生命本身, 這就是上帝, 自然源自於祂。"
[7]然後我們與他談論第二點:中心來自廣闊還是廣闊來自中心？我們詢問他為何查究這個。他回答, 這樣做是為了得出關於自然和生命之中心與廣闊的結論, 還有關於自然和生命之源頭的結論。於是我們請問他的主張, 他如之前一樣, 兩個觀點他都能證明成立。不過因為害怕失去名譽, 他只會證明廣闊來自中心。他說:"我知道, 在有太陽之先, 必有某些事物已經存在, 它們遍佈蒼穹, 按一定規律彙集, 且朝向一個中心。"
[8]然後, 我們再向前跟他說:"朋友, 你瘋了。"聽到這些, 他趕緊從桌邊拉開椅子, 羞怯地看著我們。我們繼續說:"有什麼比認為'中心來自廣闊'還瘋狂的呢？你所說的中心, 我們認知為太陽; 廣闊呢, 我們認知為世界。難道你會認為沒有太陽, 世界能成立？不是太陽產生自然和它的所有物？這些不是完全依賴於太陽通過大氣而來的光和熱？之前這些能在哪裡呢？我們以後再討論這萬物的源頭。大氣層和地上萬物不就像週邊, 太陽不就是這些的中心嗎？沒有太陽, 所有這些是什麼呢？它們能維持半刻嗎？那麼, 在太陽形成之前, 它們會是什麼呢？它們能存在嗎？生存不是持續的存在嗎？那麼, 由於自然萬物的生存來自於這太陽, 可得知它們的存在源自同一出處。每個人看到這些, 各人自己的眼睛所見的證據也承認這點。
[9]"不管是說生存還是存在, 之後的不是從先前的而來嗎？倘若週邊是前,中心是後, 不就是先前的由之後的而來？這不就違反了法則？之後的如何產生先前的, 或者外在產生內在, 又或粗糙的產生純淨的？那麼構成廣闊的浮表之物又如何產生出中心？誰看不出這樣違背了自然法則？我們按理性分析來陳列這些證據來證明廣闊來自中心, 而不是相反。儘管每個正確思想的人不需要這些證據都能看得出來。你之前說過, 廣闊自身向中心彙集一處。一物為了另一物, 每樣和所有事物都是為了人和人的永生, 這些不可思議,令人驚奇的定規, 難道只是偶然形成的嗎？難道自然能夠通過愛和智慧, 預先設定目的,並細想原因, 因而產生效果, 令萬物可以按它們的規律存在？或者, 是自然的能力讓人轉化為天人, 為他們構建天國, 並使他們活到永遠？將這些事情聚焦一併細想, 你的自然從自然而生的想法定會站不住腳。"
[10]在這之後, 我們問他曾經如何思考, 以及現在如何思考第三個問題:關於自然與生命的中心和廣闊, 是否相信生命的中心與廣闊相當於自然的中心與廣闊？
他說他有點迷惑, 之前相信生命是自然的內在活動, 這生命是仁愛與智慧的來源。而仁愛與智慧從根本上構成人的生命, 這樣的活動是由太陽之火,通過它的熱和光,藉著大氣而產生。不過現在, 從他聽到關於人死後的生活, 他就懷疑了。這樣的懷疑將他的思想帶向忽上忽下。當往上時, 他承認有一個他先前從未知道的中心。而當往下時, 看到的是他以前假定的那個唯一的中心。他相信生命來自於他之前從未知道的那個中心, 自然來自於之他以前假定的那個中心, 每個中心有它的廣闊圍繞其外。
[11]我們說, 從生命的中心和廣闊來看自然的中心和廣闊, 而不是相反, 就會有答案。我們告訴他, 在天國之上有一個太陽, 它是完全的仁愛, 外表的顯現是火,如同世界的太陽。從這太陽發出的熱, 使天人和人有意志和仁愛。因發出的光, 而有他們的認知和智慧。凡從這太陽而來的被稱為屬靈的; 凡從世間太陽發出的, 被稱為屬世的。因此屬於生命之中心的廣闊, 被稱為"心靈世界", 依靠心靈世界的太陽而得以存在。而屬於自然之中心的廣闊被稱為"物質世界", 依靠自然界的太陽而得以存在。然後, 由於空間和時間不能表達仁愛和智慧, 又因為狀態取代空間和時間來表達仁愛和智慧, 於是可知道圍繞天國太陽的廣闊並非空間的延伸。儘管它也存在於世間太陽所屬的延伸之中, 還存在於那裡的生物之中。世間生物按照它們接收的能力, 也就是照它們形式和狀態來接受仁愛與智慧。
[12]然後他問:"自然界太陽的火, 從哪裡來？"
我們回答, 它來自于天國的太陽, 那太陽並非火(儘管看起來像火)。而是從上帝發出,最近上帝的聖仁(神性的仁愛), 上帝在那太陽當中。他萬分驚奇, 我們詳細解釋:"愛, 其本質就是屬靈之火。因此, 在聖言中, 火的屬靈意思表示愛。也因此, 祭司們祈求屬天之火充滿人心, 這火表示愛。帳幕裡祭壇之火和燈檯之火在以色列人所代表的, 沒有別的, 就表示聖仁。血液熱度, 或者人與動物的體溫, 除了來自於構成他們生命的愛, 就沒有別的來源。這就是為什麼當他們的愛上升到高度熱情,或被激動生氣或狂恕時, 人們變得溫暖,發熱,甚至漲紅臉。屬靈之熱-就是愛, 產生了人裡面自然的熱度, 點燃並燃燒人的臉和身體。這樣的事實可以證明, 世間太陽的火, 除了來自心靈世界太陽的火——就是聖仁, 沒有別的來源。
[13]"因為廣闊來自於中心, 而非相反, 如我們之前所說。並且天國的太陽是生命的中心, 這太陽就是從上帝發出的聖仁, 祂在這太陽當中。因為這太陽是這被稱為心靈世界之廣闊的源頭, 又因為那太陽使世間太陽存在, 還使被稱為自然界的廣闊得以存在, 於是很清楚得知, 宇宙是由上帝創造。"
接著我們就離開, 他陪送我們到學校的院子, 邊走邊與我們高談關於天堂與地獄, 還有神性的指引等等, 展示他睿智的能力。
35. To these points I will add the following memorable occurrence.
At one point I was struck with amazement at the vast number of people who attribute creation - everything under the sun and everything beyond it as well - to nature. No matter what they see, they say with heartfelt conviction, "Surely this is nature's doing."
I have asked them why they say nature is responsible for everything, and why not God, especially since they repeatedly use the common expression, "God created nature," and therefore could as easily say that God, rather than nature, is responsible for what they see. Beneath their breath, in an almost inaudible voice, they reply, "What God is there except nature?"
Their conviction that the universe was created by nature - an insanity that seems like wisdom to them - makes them all feel so glorious that they look down on all who acknowledge that the universe was created by God. They picture these faithful people as ants that crawl on the ground and tread a well-worn path. Some they picture as butterflies that flit around in the air. "Dreams" - that is what they call the dogmas of the faithful, who see what they themselves do not see. "Who has seen God?" they say; "Who has not seen nature?"
[2] While I stood amazed at the vast number of such people, an angel appeared at my side and said, "What are you thinking about?"
I replied, "I'm thinking about the vast number of people who believe that nature exists from itself - that nature itself created the universe."
"All hell is made up of such people, the angel told me. There they are called satans and devils. The satans are those who have come to deny the existence of God because they have convinced themselves to believe in nature. The devils are those whose acknowledgment of God has been driven from their hearts because they have spent their lives committing crimes. I will take you to lecture halls in the southwest where there are people like this who are not yet in hell. "
The angel took me by the hand and led me there. I saw humble buildings that contained the lecture halls. In the middle I saw a building that looked like the main hall for the rest. It was built out of stones as black as tar that had been covered with little glasslike disks made to look as though they were sparkling with gold and silver, much like what we call selenite or mica; shiny seashells had also been worked in here and there.
[3] We went up to the building and knocked. Soon a man opened the door, saying, "Welcome!" Then he hurried over to a table and picked up four books [he had written]. He said, "These books contain wisdom that has now been hailed by a host of nations. This book here, this wisdom, has been hailed by many people in France; this one, by many people in Germany; this one, by some people in the Netherlands; and this one, by some people in Britain. " He added, "If you'd like to see it, I'll make these four books shine before your eyes!" Then he poured forth on all sides the glory of his own reputation, and soon the books seemed to gleam with light; but the light immediately disappeared before our eyes.
Then the angel and I asked what he was writing now. He replied that he was currently extracting matters of inmost wisdom from their hidden treasuries, in summary namely: (1) whether nature comes from life or life comes from nature; (2) whether the center comes from the expanse or the expanse from the center; and (3) a discussion of the center of the expanse and of life.
[4] After he said this, he sat back down on a chair at the table. We meanwhile wandered around his lecture hall, which was very spacious. Because no sunlight penetrated the building, only a light like that of a moonlit night, he had a candle on his table. To my amazement I saw the candle move around the building, illuminating it, although because the wick had not been trimmed it did not shed much light. As he was writing, we saw images of various kinds flying from the table toward the walls. In that light like a moonlit night, they looked like gorgeous indigo birds. In the light of day when we opened the door, though, they looked like the webbed-winged creatures that come out in the evening. They were in fact things basically true becoming false through his argumentation as he ingeniously chained them together.
[5] After seeing those visions we went over to the table and asked him what he was writing now. He said, "I'm on point one: whether nature comes from life or life comes from nature. " He said that he could argue this point either way and make it true; but because of some deeply hidden fear, he dared argue only that nature comes from and originates in life. He did not dare say that life comes from and originates in nature. We asked him in a kindly way what his deeply hidden fear was. He said he feared the possibility that clergy would call him a nature-worshiper, meaning an atheist, and that lay people would call him a man whose reason was not sound, since both lay people and clergy either believe on the basis of blind faith or adopt the perspective of those who argue for faith.
[6] At that point, feeling rather indignant because of our passion for the truth, we spoke to him and said, "Friend, you are seriously wrong. Your wisdom (which is really a genius for writing) has led you astray, and your glorious reputation has seduced you into arguing what you don't believe. Surely you are aware that the human mind can be raised above things on the sensory level - things taken into our thoughts from our bodily senses - and that when the mind is raised up, it sees above it things that relate to life, but below it things that relate to nature. What else is life but love and wisdom? What else is nature but a vessel to receive love and wisdom, through which they achieve results and accomplish useful things? Life and nature can become one only if life is the primary force and nature is its agent. Can light be one with the eye, or sound with the ear? Where do our sensations of light and sound come from if not from life? Where do the forms of our organs of sensation come from if not from nature? What else is the human body but an organ of life? Surely, all the things in the body have been formed into organs to carry out what love wants and what the intellect thinks. Aren't the organs of the body derived from nature? Aren't love and thought derived from life? Aren't they completely different from each other?
"Lift the focus of your genius just a little higher and you'll see that being moved and thinking come from life. Being moved has to do with love, and thinking has to do with wisdom. Both have to do with life, because love and wisdom are life, as we stated before.
"If you raise your intellectual faculty even a little higher, you will see that love and wisdom do not exist unless they have a source somewhere. Their source is love itself and wisdom itself, and therefore life itself. These are the God from whom nature comes. "
[7] Next we spoke with him about point two: whether the center comes from the expanse or the expanse from the center. The angel and I asked him why he was discussing this. He replied that his purpose was to arrive at a conclusion about the center and the expanse of nature and of life - about the origin, then, of one and the other.
When we asked what his position was, his answer was similar to the one he had given before: he could argue it either way, but because he feared losing his reputation he argued that the expanse comes from or originates in the center. "I know, though," he added, "that before the sun existed there was something. That something was throughout the expanse. Of its own accord it flowed together into some order, namely, the center. "
[8] Again indignant because of our passion for the truth, we spoke to him and said, "Friend, you are insane!"
When he heard this he pushed his chair away from the table and looked at us nervously. Then he gave us his attention again, but with a smile on his face.
"What is more insane," we continued, "than saying that the center comes from the expanse? When you say 'center,' we take you to mean the sun. When you say 'expanse,' we take you to mean the universe. You seem to be saying that the universe came into existence without the sun. Doesn't the sun make nature? Doesn't it make all the features of nature that depend solely on heat and light emanating from the sun through the atmospheres? Where were those things before [there was a sun]? (But we'll say where they came from in a moment.) Surely the atmospheres, and everything else on the earth, are like outer surfaces that have the sun as their center. What were all those things before the sun took shape? Could they have continued to exist for one moment? What would all those things do without the sun? Could they have come into being? Continuing to exist is the same as perpetually coming into being. Since the continued existence of all things in nature depends on the sun, it follows that their original coming into being also depended on the sun. Everyone sees this and acknowledges it from personal observation.
[9] As something subsequent comes into existence from something prior, so it also continues to exist from that something prior. If the outer surface came first and the center came later, something prior would be dependent on something subsequent for its continued existence. But that is against the laws of the divine design. How can things that come later produce things that come first? How can outer things produce inner things? How can denser things produce purer things? How then can the superficial things that make up the expanse produce the center? This is against the laws of nature, as anyone can see. We have presented these arguments from rational analysis in order to convince you that the expanse comes into existence from the center, and not the reverse, although anyone who thinks well sees this without these arguments.
"You said that the expanse of its own accord flowed together into the center. Was it just by accident, then, that it fell into such a miraculous and astounding design that one thing exists for the next, and they all exist for the sake of humankind and our eternal life? Is nature capable of drawing on some love and using some wisdom to find a purpose, make means available, and accomplish results so that things may come into existence in their own design? Can nature turn people into angels, make a heaven out of them, and provide that this heavens inhabitants will live to eternity? Give enough thought to these questions and you will let go of your idea that nature created nature. "
[10] After that we asked him what his past and current thinking was about point three: on the center and the expanse of nature and of life. We asked whether he believed that the center and the expanse of life was the same as the center and the expanse of nature. He said that he was now stuck. He had thought before that the inner energy in nature was life, that the love and the wisdom that essentially constituted human life came from nature, and that the sun's fire produced our life through the heat and light conveyed to us by the atmospheres. But now, from these points about human life after death, he was becoming uncertain. The uncertainty was causing his mind to go up one moment and down the next. When his mind was up, he was acknowledging a Center about which he had previously known nothing. When his mind was down, he was looking at the center that he had previously thought to be the only center. He was seeing that life comes from the Center about which he had previously known nothing, that only nature comes from the center that he had previously thought to be everything, and that both centers have expanses around them.
[11] We said that these realizations were good, provided he tried in addition to see the center and expanse of nature as coming from the center and expanse of life, and not the other way around. We explained to him that above the angelic heaven there is a sun that is pure love. It looks as fiery as the earths sun. From the heat that radiates from that sun, angels and people have volition and love; from its light they have understanding and wisdom. Things derived from that sun are called spiritual. Things derived from earths sun are containers or vessels of life; they are called physical.
We told him that the expanse around the center of life is called the spiritual world. That expanse has continued existence because of its sun. The expanse around the center of nature is called the physical world. It has continued existence because of its sun. Now, because units of space and time do not apply to love and wisdom, but states apply instead, it follows that the expanse around the sun of the angelic heaven is not physically extended. It is nonetheless present in the physical extension around the physical sun and is present with living entities in nature according to how receptive they are; they are receptive according to their forms and their states.
[12] Then he asked, "Where does the fire in the earths or nature's sun come from?"
"It comes from the sun of the angelic heaven," we replied, "which is not fire; it is divine love most closely emanating from God, who is within it. "
He was stunned by this, so we proved it as follows: "Love in its essence is spiritual fire. This is why fire in the Word's spiritual sense means love. This is why priests pray in church for heavenly fire to fill their hearts - they mean love. In the tabernacle among the Israelites, the fire on the altar and the fire of the lampstand represented divine love. The heat in blood, which is vital to us and to many animals as well, comes solely from the love that makes up our life. This is why we catch fire, up, and become inflamed when our love becomes impassioned or bursts into anger and blazing rage. From the fact that spiritual heat, which is love, produces physical heat in us even to the point that our faces and limbs become hot and inflamed, it stands to reason that the fire of the physical sun came into being from no other source than the fire of the spiritual sun, which is divine love.
[13] "To sum up: As we just said, the center is the origin of the expanse, and not the reverse. The center of life, which is the sun of the angelic heaven, is divine love most closely radiating from God, who is within that sun. The expanse around that center, called the spiritual world, is from that sun. The earths sun is also from that sun, and the expanse called the physical world is from the earths sun. From all these points it is clear that the universe was created by God. "
After that we went away, and he came with us beyond the entrance to his lecture hall, speaking to us about heaven and hell and God's guidance with a new keenness of mind.
35. I shall here add the following account of an experience. 1
Once I was amazed at the huge number of people who regard nature as the source of creation, and therefore of everything beneath or above the sun. When they see anything they say, and they give it heartfelt acknowledgment, 'Surely this is due to nature'; and when they are asked why, they say that this is due to nature rather than to God, when they still sometimes follow the usual view that God created nature, so that they could just as well say that what they see is due to God rather than to nature, they reply muttering almost inaudibly to themselves, 'What is God but nature?' This false belief that nature created the universe, a piece of madness they take for wisdom, makes them so puffed up that they look on all who acknowledge that God created the universe as ants, creeping along the ground, treading a worn path; and some as butterflies flying around in the air. They call their dogmas dreams, because they see things the others cannot, and they say: 'Who has ever seen God? We can all see nature.'
[2] While I was wondering at the immense number of such people, an angel came and stood beside me, saying 'What are you thinking about?'
I replied, 'How many people there are who believe that nature produces itself and is therefore the creator of the universe.'
'The whole of hell,' the angel told me, 'is composed of such people; there they are called satans and devils. Those who have formed a firm belief in nature and consequently denied the existence of God are satans; those who have spent their lives in crimes and thus banished from their hearts any acknowledgment of God are devils. But I will take you to the schools in the south-western quarter where such people who are not yet in hell live.'
So he took me by the hand and guided me. I saw some cottages containing schools and one building in their midst which seemed to be their headquarters. It was built of pitch-black stones coated with glassy plates giving the appearance of glittering gold and silver, rather like the stones called selenites or mica. Here and there were interspersed shining shells.
[3] We went up to this building and knocked. Someone quickly opened the door and made us welcome. He hurried to a table and brought us four books, saying: 'These books contain the wisdom which the majority of kingdoms approve to-day. This book contains the wisdom favoured by many in France, this by many in Germany, this by some in Holland, and this by some in Britain.' He went on: 'If you like to watch, I will make these four books shine before your eyes.' Then he poured forth and enveloped the books in the glory of his own reputation, so that at once the books shone as it were with light. But this light immediately vanished from our sight.
We asked him then what he was now writing. He replied that at present he was bringing out of his stores and displaying the very kernel of wisdom. This could by summarised as: (1) Whether nature is due to life, or life to nature; (2) whether a centre is due to an expanse, or an expanse to a centre; (3) about the centre and expanse of nature and life.
[4] So saying he sat down again at the table, while we strolled around his spacious school. He had a candle on the table, because there was no sunlight there, but only moonlight. What surprised me was that the candle seemed to roam about and cast its light; but because the wick was not trimmed it gave little light. While he was writing, we saw images of different shapes flying up from the table on to the walls. In that night-time moonlight they looked like beautiful birds from India. But as soon as we opened the door, in the sunlight of daytime they looked like nocturnal birds with net-like wings. They were apparent truths turned into fallacies by adducing proofs which he had ingeniously linked into coherent series.
[5] After seeing this we approached the table and asked him what he was now writing.
'My first proposition:' he said, 'whether nature is due to life or life to nature.' He remarked that on this point he could prove either proposition and make it appear true. But because of some lurking fear which was not explicit, he dare only prove that nature is due to life, that is to say, comes from life, and not the reverse, that life is due to, that is, comes from nature.
We asked politely what was the lurking fear he could not make explicit.
He replied that it was the fear of being called by the clergy a nature-worshipper and so an atheist, and by the laity a person of unsound mind, because both parties are either believers from blind faith or people who see that it is so by studying supporting arguments.
[6] Then our zealous indignation for the truth got the better of us and we addressed him thus: 'My friend, you are quite wrong. Your wisdom, which is no more than an ingenuity of style, has led you astray, and your desire for reputation has induced you to prove what you do not believe. Do you not know that the human mind is capable of being raised above the objects of the senses, that is to say, the thoughts engendered by the bodily senses; and when it is so raised it can see the products of life at a higher level and the products of nature below? What is life but love and wisdom? And what is nature but a receiver of love and wisdom, a means to bring about their effects or purposes? Can these be one, except as principal and instrumental? Light surely cannot be one with the eye, nor sound with the ear. What is the cause of these senses if not life, and what is the cause of their shapes if not nature? What is the human body but an organ for receiving life? Are not all its parts organically constructed to produce what love wills and the understanding thinks? Surely the body's organs spring from nature, but love and thought spring from life. Are these not quite distinct from each other? Raise the view of your mind a little higher, and you will see that emotion and thought are due to life; that emotion is due to love and thought to wisdom, and both of them are due to life, for, as has been said before, love and wisdom constitute life. If you raise your intellectual faculty a little higher still, you will see that love and wisdom could not exist unless somewhere they had a source, and that this source is Love Itself and Wisdom Itself, therefore Life Itself. These are God, who is the source of nature.'
[7] Afterwards we talked with him about his second proposition, whether the centre is due to the expanse, or the expanse to the centre. We asked his reasons for discussing this subject. He replied that it was in order to enable him to reach a conclusion about the centre and expanse of nature and life, which one was the source of the other. When we asked his opinion, he made the same reply as before, that he could prove either proposition, but for fear of losing his reputation he proved that the expanse was due to, that is to say, was the source of the centre. 'All the same,' he said, 'I know that something existed before there was a sun, and this was distributed throughout the expanse, and this of itself reduced itself to order, so creating a centre.'
[8] The zeal of our indignation made us address him again, saying: 'My friend, you are mad.' On hearing this he drew his chair back from the table and looked fearfully at us, but then listened with a smile on his face. 'What could be more crazy, 'we went on, 'than to say the centre is due to the expanse? We take your centre to mean the sun, and your expanse to be the universe; so you hold that the universe came into existence without the sun, do you? Surely the sun produces nature and all its properties, which are solely dependent upon the light and heat radiated by the sun and propagated through atmospheres? Where could these have been before there was a sun? We will explain their origin later on in the discussion. Are not the atmospheres, and everything on earth, like surfaces, the centre of which is the sun? What would become of them all without the sun? Could they last a single instant? And what of them all before there was a sun? Could they have come into existence? Is not subsistence continuous coming into existence? Since therefore the subsistence of everything in nature depends upon the sun, so must their coming into existence. Everyone can see this and acknowledge it from personal experience.
[9] Does not what is later in order subsist, just as it comes into existence, from what is earlier? If the surface were earlier and the centre later, should we not have what is earlier subsisting from what is later - something which is contrary to the laws of order? How can the later produce the earlier, or the more outward the more inward, or the grosser the purer? How then could the surfaces making up an expanse produce a centre? Anyone can see that this is contrary to the laws of nature. We have drawn these proofs from rational analysis to show that the expanse is produced by the centre, and not the reverse, although everyone who thinks correctly can see this for himself without these proofs. You said that the expanse of its own accord came together to form a centre. Did this happen by chance, that everything fell into such a wonderful and amazing order, so that one thing should be on account of the next, and every single thing on account of human beings and their everlasting life? Can nature inspired by some love and working through some wisdom have ends in view, foresee causes and so provide effects to bring such things about in due order? Can nature turn human beings into angels, build a heaven of them, and make its inhabitants live for ever? Accept these propositions and think them over; your idea of nature begetting nature will collapse.'
[10] After this we asked him what he had thought, and still did, about his third proposition, about the centre and expanse of nature and life. Did he believe that the centre and expanse of life were the same as the centre and expanse of nature?
He said that here he hesitated. He had previously believed that the inward activity of nature was life and that love and wisdom, which are the essential components of human life, come from this source. It is produced by the heat and light coming from the fire of the sun and transmitted through atmospheres. But now as the result of what he had heard about people living after death he was in doubt, a doubt which alternately lifted up and depressed his mind. When it was lifted up, he acknowledged a centre which had previously been quite unknown to him; when it was depressed he saw a centre which he thought to be the only one. Life was from the centre previously unknown to him, and nature from the centre he thought to be the only one, each centre being surrounded by an expanse.
[11] We said we approved of that, so long as he was willing to view the centre and expanse of nature from the centre and expanse of life, and not the reverse. We taught him that above the heaven of the angels there is a Sun which is pure love; it appears fiery, like the sun in the world, and the heat radiated from it is the source of will and love among angels and human beings; the light radiating from it produces their understanding and wisdom. Everything from this source is called spiritual; but the radiation from the sun of the natural world is a container or receiver of life; this is what we call natural. The expanse proper to the centre of life is called the spiritual world, and the expanse proper to the centre of nature is called the natural world, which owes its subsistence to its own sun. Now because space and time cannot be predicated of love and wisdom, but there are states instead, it follows that the expanse surrounding the sun of the heaven of angels is not a spatial extension, though it is present in the extension to which the natural sun belongs, and with the living things there, depending upon their ability to receive them, and this is determined by their forms and states.
[12] But then he asked, 'What is the origin of fire in the sun of the world, the natural sun?'
We replied that it was from the sun of the heaven of angels, which is not fire, but the Divine Love most nearly radiating from God, who is in its midst. Since he found this surprising, we gave this explanation: 'Love in its essence is spiritual fire; that is why "fire" in the spiritual sense of the Word stands for love. That is why priests in church pray that heavenly fire may fill their hearts, meaning love. The fire on the altar and the fire of the lampstand in the Tabernacle of the Israelites was nothing but a representation of Divine Love. The heat of the blood, or the vital heat of human beings, and of animals in general, comes from no other source than the love which makes up their life. That is why people become warm, grow hot and burst into flame, when their love is raised to zeal, or is aroused to anger and rage. Therefore the fact that spiritual heat, being love, produces natural heat in human beings, to such an extent as to fire and inflame their faces and bodies, can serve as a proof that the fire of the natural sun arose from no other source than the fire of the spiritual sun, which is Divine love.
[13] Now because the expanse arises from the centre, and not the reverse, as we said before, and the centre of life, which is the sun of the heaven of angels, is the Divine Love most nearly radiating from God, who is in the midst of that sun; and because this is the origin of the expanse deriving from that centre, which is called the spiritual world; and because that sun brought into being the sun of the world, and also the expanse which is called the natural world, it is plain that the universe was created by God.'
After this we went away, and he accompanied us out of the courtyard of his school, speaking with us about heaven and hell, and about Divine guidance, showing new powers of sagacity.
Footnotes:
1. This is repeated from <../cl/380.htm">Conjugial Love 380.
35. To this I will add this Memorable Relation:
At one time I was in a state of amazement at the vast multitude of men who ascribe creation, and consequently every thing that is under the sun and every thing above the sun, to nature, saying with a hearty acknowledgment, when they see anything, "Is not this from nature?" And when asked why they say it is from nature and not from God, although they often say, in common with others, that God created nature, and might therefore just as well say that what they see is from God as that it is from nature, they answer with an inner tone that is scarcely audible, "What is God but nature?" All such, from this persuasion that nature created the universe, and from this insanity that appears like wisdom, seem to be elated to such a degree that they look down upon all those who acknowledge the creation of the universe by God as ants that creep upon the ground and keep the beaten track, and upon some as butterflies flying in the air; and the opinions of such they call dreams, because they see what they do not see; and they say, "Who has seen God, and who does not see nature?"
[2] While I was wondering greatly at the multitude of such, an angel stood at my side and said to me, "What are you meditating about?"
I replied, "About the great number of those who believe that nature exists of itself, and is thus the creator of the universe."
And the angel said to me, "All hell consists of such, and those who are there are called satans and devils-satans those who have confirmed themselves in favor of nature, and in consequence have denied God; devils those who have lived wickedly and have thus cast out from their hearts all acknowledgment of God. But I will conduct you to the schools which are in the southwest quarter, where those are who are not yet in hell."
He took me by the hand and led me away; and I saw small houses in which were the schools, and in the midst of them a building which served as headquarters for the rest. This was built of pitch-black stones overlaid with little glass-like plates, sparkling as it were with gold and silver, like what are called selenites, or like mica, with glittering shells here and there interspersed.
[3] We approached this building and knocked, and immediately a person opened the door and said, "Welcome." And he ran to a table and brought four books, and said, "These books are the wisdom that is at this day applauded by many kingdoms; this book or wisdom is applauded by many in France; this by many in Germany; this by some in Holland; this by some in Britain." He said also, "If you wish to see it I will cause these four books to shine before your eyes." And he poured forth the glory of his fame round about; and immediately the books beamed as if with light; but this light quickly vanished from our sight.
We then asked what he was now writing; and he answered that he was bringing out from his treasures and setting forth matters pertaining to the deepest wisdom, which in general are these: (1) Whether nature is a property of life, or life of nature? (2) Whether the center is from the expanse, or the expanse from the center? (3) Respecting the center of the expanse and of life.
[4] After these remarks he seated himself at the table, while we walked about the building, which was spacious. He had a candle on his table, because there was no light of the sun there, but only the nocturnal light of the moon; and what seemed wonderful, the candle seemed to be carried round and round, and to give light; but not having been snuffed it gave but little light. While he wrote we saw images of various forms flying from the table to the walls, which appeared in the nocturnal moonlight there like beautiful eastern birds; but as soon as we opened the door these appeared in the light of day like those birds of night that have membranous wings; for they were resemblances of truth which through confirmations had become fallacies, and had been ingeniously woven by him into a series.
[5] After seeing this, we approached the table and asked him what he was then writing about.
He said about the first question, Whether nature is a property of life, or life of nature? And he said he could prove both sides of this and make them true; but as there was something lurking within that he feared, he dared only to prove that nature is a property of life, in other words, is from life, and not that life is a property of nature, in other words, is from nature.
We asked courteously what it was lurking within that he feared.
He replied that he was afraid of being called a naturalist, and thus an atheist, by the clergy, and a man of unsound reason by the laity, since both of these either believe from a blind faith or see only from the views of those who confirm that faith.
[6] Then with some heat of zeal for the truth we addressed him, saying, "Friend, you are very much deceived; you have been misled by your wisdom, which is a certain talent for writing, and you have been led by the glory of fame into proving what you do not believe. Do you not know that the human mind is capable of being raised above things sensual, which enter into the thought from the bodily senses; and that when the mind has been thus raised up it sees what is from life as above, and what is from nature as beneath? What is life but love and wisdom? And what is nature but the receptacle of these, by means of which they accomplish their effects or uses? Can life and nature be one except as the principal and the instrumental? Can light be one with the eye, or sound with the ear? Are not the sensations of these derived from life, and their forms from nature? What is the human body but an organ of life? Are not all things and each thing therein organically formed for the production of what the love wills and the understanding thinks? Are not the bodily organs from nature, and love and thought from life? And are not these perfectly distinct from each other? Raise the keenness of your intellect a little higher still, and you will see that to be moved by affection and to think belong to life-the former belonging to love and the latter to wisdom and both love and wisdom belong to life; for, as before said, love and wisdom are life. If you will lift your capacity to understand a little higher, you will see that love and wisdom could have no existence without having somewhere an origin, and that that origin is love itself and wisdom itself, and therefore life itself, and these are God, from whom nature is."
[7] Afterwards we talked with him upon the second point, Whether the center is from the expanse or the expanse from the center? asking why he canvassed this. He answered that he did so in order to form a conclusion about the center and the expanse of nature and of life, and so about the origin of each. And when we asked his opinion, he replied, the same as before, that he could prove either of these, but from fear of loss of reputation he would prove that the expanse is of the center, that is, from the center, "although I know," he said, "that there must have been something before there was a sun, and this throughout the whole expanse, and that this of itself flowed together into order, thus towards a center."
[8] We then addressed him again with indignant zeal, and said, "Friend, you are insane." Hearing this he drew his seat from the table, and looked at us timidly, and then gave us his attention, but with laughter. We went on to say, "What can be more insane than to say that the center is from the expanse? By your center we understand the sun, and by your expanse the universe; thus are you not contending that the universe came into existence without the sun? Does not the sun produce nature and all its properties, and do not these depend solely on the light and heat from the sun through the atmospheres? Where, then, could these have been previously? But the origin of these we will discuss hereafter. Are not the atmospheres and all things on the earth like surfaces, of which the sun is the center? What would all these be without the sun? Could they subsist for one moment? What, then, could they have been before the sun was formed? Could they have had any existence? Is not subsistence perpetual existence? As the subsistence, then, of all things of nature is from the sun, it follows that their existence is from the same source. This everyone sees, and from the evidence of his own eyes acknowledges.
[9] Does not the posterior have both its existence and its subsistence from the prior? If the surface were the prior and the center the posterior, would not the prior subsist from the posterior, and would not that be contrary to the laws of order? How can the posterior produce the prior, or the exterior the interior, or the grosser the purer? How then can the surface things which constitute the expanse produce the center? Who does not see that this is contrary to the laws of nature? We have presented these evidences from rational analysis to prove that the expanse has its existence from the center, and not the reverse, although everyone who thinks rightly can see this without these evidences.
You have said that the expanse of itself flowed together towards the center. Was it by chance that it did this in such a marvelous and amazing order that one thing is for the sake of another, and each and all things for the sake of man and his eternal life? Is nature, from any love through any wisdom, capable of premeditating ends, contemplating causes, and thus providing effects, that such things may exist in their order? Or is nature capable of converting men into angels, of making a heaven of these, and causing those who are there to live forever? Put these things together and reflect, and your idea of nature's existence from nature will fall to the ground."
[10] After this we asked him what he had thought and what he still thought about the third question, On the center and the expanse of nature and of life; whether he believed the center and the expanse of life to be the same with the center and expanse of nature?
He said that he was perplexed; that he had formerly believed life to be an interior activity of nature, and that this was the source of love and wisdom, which essentially constitute man's life, and that this activity is produced by the sun's fire, through its heat and light, by means of the atmospheres; but now from what he had heard of the life of men after death he was in doubt; and this doubt carried his mind sometimes upwards and sometimes downwards; and when upwards he acknowledged a center of which he had formerly known nothing; and when downwards he saw the center which he had supposed to be the only one; and he believed life to be from the center of which he had before known nothing, and nature to be from the center which he had formerly supposed to be the only one, each center having an expanse round about it.
[11] This, we said, would answer if he would look from the center and expanse of life to the center and expanse of nature, and not the reverse. And we informed him that above the angelic heaven there is a sun which is pure love, in appearance fiery, like the sun of the world; and that from the heat going forth from that sun angels and men have their will and love, and from its light their understanding and wisdom; and whatever is from that sun is called spiritual; while whatever proceeds from the sun of the world is a containant or receptacle of life, and is called natural; thus the expanse pertaining to the center of life is called the spiritual world, having its subsistence from its own sun, while the expanse pertaining to the center of nature is called the natural world, having its subsistence from its sun. Since, then, spaces and times cannot be predicated of love and wisdom, and since states take the place there of spaces and times, it follows that there is no extension in the expanse about the sun of the angelic heaven although this expanse is in the extension of the natural sun, and in the living subjects there in accordance with their reception, while their reception is in accordance with forms and states.
[12] Then he asked, "What is the origin of the fire of the sun of the world or of nature?"
We answered that it is from the sun of the angelic heaven, which is not fire, but the Divine love that most nearly goes forth from God, who is in the midst of that sun. As he seemed surprised at this we set it forth in this way: "Love in its essence is spiritual fire; and for this reason in the Word, in its spiritual sense, fire signifies love; and it is on this account that priests in churches pray that heavenly fire, by which they mean love, may fill the hearts of men. The fire of the altar and the fire of the candlestick in the tabernacle represented among the Israelites no other than the Divine love. The heat of the blood, or the vital heat of men and of animals in general, is from no other source than the love that constitutes their life. Therefore man is enkindled, grows warm, and is inflamed when his love is exalted to zeal or excited to anger and passion. Since, then, spiritual heat, which is love, produces in men natural heat, even so far as to enkindle and inflame their faces and limbs, it is clear that the fire of the natural sun sprang from no other source than the fire of the spiritual sun which is the Divine love.
[13] And since, furthermore, the expanse, as has just been said, originates in the center, and not the reverse, and the center of life, which is the sun of the angelic heaven, is the Divine love most nearly going forth from God, who is in the midst of that sun; and since the expanse of that center, which is called the spiritual world, is from that origin; and since from that spiritual sun the sun of the world sprang, and from it its expanse, which is called the natural world, it is plain that the universe was created by God." After this we departed; and he accompanied us out of the hall of his school, and talked with us about heaven and hell and the Divine auspices with a new intellectual sagacity.
35. MEMORABILIA.
In this connection I will now relate the following spiritual experience.
I was once reflecting with amazement on the vast number of men who ascribe Creation, and consequently all things that are under the sun and all things that are above it, to nature and who assure themselves that everything they see is the work of nature. When they are asked why they ascribe these things to nature and not to God, although they sometimes join in the general confession that God created nature, and could therefore ascribe what they see to God just as well as to nature, they reply in subdued and scarcely audible tone, "What is God but nature?" They are persuaded that Creation is the work of nature, and that this insanity is wisdom. In their conceit they regard those who acknowledge God to be the Creator of the universe as so many ants, creeping along the ground and treading the beaten track, or as butterflies fluttering through the air. They call their opinions dreams, or baseless illusions, and ask, "Who has ever seen God, and who does not see nature?"
[2] As I continued in my reflections an angel stood by my side and said to me, "What is the subject of your meditation?" I replied, "It is the great number of those who believe that nature exists from herself, and is thus the creator of the universe. Whereupon the angel said to me: "All hell consists of such persons, who are called there satans and devils: satans if they have confirmed their belief in nature and have consequently denied God, and devils if they have lived wickedly and have thus expelled all acknowledgment of God from their hearts. But let me take you to the colleges in the south western quarter, where such persons reside before they enter hell." He then took my hand and conducted me thither. There I saw small houses in which were studies, and in the centre, one which appeared to be the principal. It was built of black stones, overlaid with plates which resembled glass, sparkling like gold and silver, such as those made of selenite or mica, and here and there were interspersed glittering shells.
[3] We approached this study and knocked at the door, which was presently opened by one who bade us welcome. He then hurried to a table and brought four books, saying, "These books represent the wisdom which is lauded at this day in many kingdoms. This book, or wisdom, is esteemed by many men in France, this by many in Germany, this by some in Holland, 1 and this by some in Britain." He continued: "If you wish to see it, I shall make these four books shine before your eyes." He then poured forth and shed around them the glory of his own reputation, and the books instantly shone as with a light; but this brightness as quickly vanished from our sight. Thereupon we asked him what he was engaged in writing. He replied that he was about to bring forth from his treasure-store matters of the deepest wisdom, and would expound them under the following heads:
1. Whether nature is from life, or life from nature.
2. Whether the centre is from the expanse, or the expanse from the centre.
3. Concerning the centre of the expanse and of life.
[4] Having said this he seated himself at the table while we walked about his spacious study. He had a candle on the table, for the light of the sun did not shine into the room, but only a light like that of the nocturnal light of the moon. To my wonder the candle seemed to move round about the room, and thus to illuminate it; but because it had not been trimmed it gave out but little light. Whilst he wrote we saw images of various forms hitting from the table to the walls, like beautiful Indian birds in that pale light. When, however, we opened the door, in the bright sunlight they appeared like birds of night with wings of tracery-work; for they were appearances of truth, confirmed into fallacies and ingeniously connected by him to form a continuous theme.
[5] After we had seen these things, we approached the table and asked him what he was now writing. He replied: "On the first subject, Whether nature is from life, or life from nature." He added that he could confirm either proposition and prove it to be true; but because of a secret fear which he entertained he ventured to prove only this proposition, 'that nature is from life' but not, 'that life is from nature.' Thereupon we courteously asked him what it was he was afraid of. He replied that he was afraid he would be called a naturalist, and thus an atheist, by the clergy, and a man of unsound reason by the laity, since they believe only from a blind faith, or see with the sight of those who confirm such a faith.
[6] Then we, with a certain indignation in our zeal for the truth, said: "Friend, you are much mistaken. Your wisdom, which is only an ingenious talent for writing, has led you astray, and the glamour of renown has induced you to confirm what you do not believe. Do you not know that the human mind is capable of being raised above sensual things, which enter the thoughts through the bodily senses, and that, when it is so raised, it sees things relating to life above, and those relating to nature below? What is life but love and wisdom, and what is nature but their receptacle, through which they produce their effects or perform their uses? Can life and nature be one unless as agent and instrument are one? Can light be one with the eye, or sound with the ear? Whence come their sensations but from life, and their forms but from nature? What is the human body but an organ of life? Is not every single part of it organically formed to produce what the love wills and the understanding thinks? Are not the organs of the body from nature, and love and thought from life? And are not these entirely distinct from each other? Elevate your mental ingenuity but a little and you will see that affection and thought are related to life: that affection is related to love, that thought is related to wisdom, and that both are related to life, for, as was said above, love and wisdom are life. Now raise your faculty of understanding a little higher still, and you will see that love and wisdom cannot exist unless they have their origin somewhere: that their origin is Love itself and Wisdom itself, and consequently Life itself; and that these are God, from whom nature is derived."
[7] We then conversed with him about his second proposition: Whether the centre is from the expanse, or the expanse from the centre; and we asked him why he discussed this question. He replied: "In order to determine the centre and the expanse of nature and of life, and thus the origin of each." When we asked what his opinion was, he replied as in the former case, that he could confirm each proposition, but that, from fear of losing his reputation, he would prove that the expanse is from the centre, "Although I know," he added, "that before the sun, there existed, everywhere in the expanse, something which of itself flowed into order, and thus into a centre."
[8] Addressing him again with zealous fervour we said, "Friend, you are beside yourself." On hearing this, he drew back his chair from the table, and with a startled look in his eyes, but smiling incredulously, he listened as we continued: "What could be more insane than to say that the centre is from the expanse? For by your centre we understand the sun, and by your expanse the universe, and thus that the universe existed without the sun. But does not the sun give rise to nature and all her properties, which depend solely upon the light and heat proceeding from the sun through the atmospheres? We have already spoken about these things as being somewhere; but their origin we will now explain in what follows. Are not the atmospheres and all things upon the earth as surfaces, and the sun as their centre? What would all these be without the sun, or how could they subsist a single moment without it? What then were all these things before the sun? Could they have existed, and is not subsistence perpetual existence? Since, therefore, the subsistence of all things in nature depends upon the sun, it follows that their existence also depends upon it. Everyone sees this and acknowledges it from his own perception.
[9] Does not what is posterior subsist as well as exist from what is prior? If then the surface were prior and the centre posterior, would not the prior subsist from the posterior, which is contrary to the laws of order? For how could posterior things produce prior, or exterior things interior, or grosser things purer? How then could surfaces, of which the expanse is formed, produce the centre? Who does not see that this is contrary to the laws of nature? We have adduced these arguments from a rational analysis to prove that the expanse exists from the centre, and not the centre from the expanse, although everyone who thinks rightly sees this without such arguments. You said that the expanse of itself flowed into the centre. Did it thus by chance flow into such marvelous and stupendous order that one thing serves another, and each and all subserve man and his eternal life? Could nature, from some kind of love through some kind of wisdom, propose ends, provide for causes and so produce effects that such things should exist in their proper order? Could she make angels of men and a heaven from angels, and cause those who are there to live for ever? Consider these things well. Give due consideration to these arguments and your idea of the existence of nature from nature will vanish."
[10] We next asked him what he had thought, and what he still thought, about his third proposition: Concerning the centre and the expanse of nature and of life. 'Did he believe that the centre and the expanse of life were the same as the centre and the expanse of nature?' He replied that he was at a loss what to believe. At first he had thought that the inner activity of nature was life, and that love and wisdom, which are the essentials of the life of man, had their origin there; and that the sun's fire, by means of its heat and light, produced this activity through the medium of the atmospheres. Now, however, from what he had heard of the life of men after death, he was in doubt, and so his mind was borne now upwards, now downwards; when upwards, he recognized a centre of which he had formerly known nothing, and when downwards, he saw the centre which he had believed to be the only one. He perceived that life was from the centre of which he had formerly known nothing, that nature was from the centre which he had believed was the only one, and that each centre had an expanse around it.
[11] This, we replied, was right, provided he would also regard the centre and expanse of nature as originating from the centre and the expanse of life, and not the reverse. We then instructed him that above the angelic heaven there is a Sun which is pure love, fiery in appearance like the sun of this world; that from the heat of that Sun angels and men have their will and love, and from its light they have understanding and wisdom; and that the things from it are called spiritual, while those that proceed from the sun of this world are containants or receptacles of life, and are called natural. Further, that the expanse of the centre of life is called the spiritual world, which subsists from its own Sun, while the expanse of the centre of nature is called the natural world, which subsists from its sun. Now, since space and time cannot be predicated of love and wisdom, but instead of them, states, it follows that the expanse around the Sun of the angelic heaven is not an extension, although it is within the extension of the natural sun, and present with the living subjects of the natural world according to their reception of it; and their reception is according to their forms and states.
[12] But then he enquired, "Whence does the sun of this world or nature derive its fire?" and we answered that it comes from the Sun of the angelic heaven, which is not fire, but Divine Love, the first proceeding from God, who is in its midst. As he wondered at this we proceeded to explain it in the following way. "Love in its essence is spiritual fire: hence fire in the Word in its spiritual sense signifies love. For this reason the clergy in places of worship pray that heavenly fire may fill the heart, by which they mean heavenly love. Among the Israelites the fire on the altar and the fire in the lampstand in the Tabernacle represented nothing but the Divine Love. The heat of the blood, the vital heat of men and of animals in general, has no other origin than the love which constitutes their life. It is for this reason that man burns, grows warm and is inflamed as his love is roused to zeal, or stirred to burning wrath. Therefore, since spiritual heat, which is love, produces natural heat in men, causing their faces and limbs to burn and glow, it is evident that the fire of the natural sun has come from no other source than the fire of the spiritual Sun, which is Divine Love.
[13] Now, since the expanse arises from the centre, and not the reverse, as we said above, and the centre of life, or the Sun of the angelic heaven, is the Divine Love, the first Proceeding from God who is in the midst of that Sun; and since from it is the expanse of that centre which is called the spiritual world; since also from that Sun has come the sun of this world, and from this sun its expanse which is called the natural world, it is plain that the universe was created by God." We thereupon took our departure, and he accompanied us beyond the hall of his study, still conversing about heaven and hell and the Divine providence with newly acquired wisdom.
Footnotes:
1. Batavia, Holland.
35. His adjiciam hoc MEMORABILE. Quondam eram in stupore de ingente multitudine hominum, qui Creationem addicunt Naturae, et inde omnia quae sub Sole, et omnia quae supra Solem sunt, dicentes ex agnitione cordis, cum vident aliquid, annon hoc Naturae est; et cum interrogantur, quare dicunt illa naturae esse, et cur non Dei, cum tamen aliquoties cum Communione dicunt, quod Deus creaverit Naturam, et inde possunt tam aeque dicere, quod illa, quae vident, Dei sint, quam quod naturae sint; sed respondent 1 tono interno paene tacito, quid Deus nisi Natura: apparent illi omnes ex persuasione de creatione Universi ex Natura, et ex insania illa sicut ex sapientia, gloriosi, adeo ut aspiciant omnes qui agnoscunt Creationem Universi a Deo, sicut formicas, quae repunt humi, et terunt stratam viam, et quosdam sicut papiliones, qui in aere volant, vocantes illorum dogmata, somnia, quia vident quae non vident; dicentes, quis vidit Deum, et quis non videt Naturam.
[2] Quando in stupore de multitudine 2 talium eram, adstitit mihi a latere Angelus, et dixit mihi, quid meditaris, et respondi, de multitudine talium, qui credunt, quod Natura sit ex se, et sic creatrix Universi, et dixit mihi Angelus, totum Infernum ex talibus est, et vocantur ibi Satanae et Diaboli, Satanae qui confirmaverunt se pro Natura, et inde negaverunt Deum, Diaboli qui facinorose vixerunt, et sic e cordibus omnem agnitionem Dei rejecerunt: sed deducam te ad Gymnasia, quae in Plaga meridionali occidentali sunt, ubi tales, et nondum in Inferno sunt: et prehendit me manu, et deduxit; et vidi domunculas, in quibus Gymnasia, et in medio illarum unam, quae erat sicut Praetorium reliquorum; hoc constructum erat ex lapidibus piceis, qui superinducti erant lamellis sicut vitreis ex auro et argento quasi micantibus, quales sunt quae vocantur selenites seu lapides speculares; et hic et ibi erant interspersa Conchilia nitentia.
[3] Huc accessimus et pulsavimus, et mox unus aperuit januam, et dixit, beneventote; et cucurrit ad mensam, et apportavit quatuor libros, et dixit, hi Libri sunt Sapientia, cui multitudo Regnorum hodie adplaudit; huic Libro seu Sapientiae adplaudunt multi in Gallia, huic multi in Germania, huic aliqui in Batavia, et huic aliqui in Britannia: porro dixit, si vultis videre, faciam ut hi quatuor Libri coram oculis vestris luceant; et tunc gloriam famae 3 suae effudit et circumfudit, et Libri mox sicut ex luce fulserunt; sed haec lux coram oculis nostris illico evanuit: et tunc quaesivimus, quid nunc scribit, et respondit, quod nunc illa quae intimae sapientiae sunt e thesauris suis educat et expromat, quae in compendio sunt haec, I. Num Natura sit Vitae, vel Numeri Vita sit Naturae. II. Numeri Centrum sit Expansi, vel num Expansum sit Centri. III. De Centro et Expanso Naturae et Vitae. 4
[4] His dictis reposuit se super Solio ad mensam; nos vero in Gymnasio ejus, quod erat spatiosum, ambulavimus; ille super mensa habebat Candelam, quia non Lux solaris ibi erat, sed Lux nocturna lunaris; et, quod miratus sum, candela visa est circum circa ibi ferri, et illuminare; at quia illa non erat emuncta, illuminabat parum; et cum scripsit, vidimus imagines in variis formis e mensa in parietes volantes, quae in nocturna illa luce lunari apparebant sicut volucres pulchrae Indicae; sed cum aperuimus januam, ecce illae in Luce diurna solari apparebant sicut aves vesperae, quibus alae retiformes sunt; erant enim verisimilitudines, quae per confirmationes factae sunt fallaciae, quae ingeniose in series ab illo erant connexae.
[5] Postquam haec vidimus, accessimus ad mensam, et quaesivimus illum, quid nunc scribit; dixit, de PRIMO illo, NUM NATURA SIT VITAE, VEL Numeri VITA SIT NATURAE; et de hoc inquiit, quod possit utrumque confirmare, et facere ut sit verum; sed quia intus latet aliquod reconditum, quod timet, non ausit confirmare nisi hoc, quod Natura sit Vitae, hoc est, ex Vita, non autem quod Vita sit Naturae, hoc est, ex Natura: quaesivimus blande, quid est quod intus latet reconditum quod timet; respondit, quod sit quod vocari possit Naturalista, et sic Atheus a Clericis, et Vir non sanae rationis a Laicis, quoniam hi et illi sunt vel credentes ex caeca fide, vel videntes ex visu confirmantium illam.
[6] Sed tunc ex quadam indignatione zeli pro veritate alloquuti sumus illum, dicentes, amice, valde falleris; sapientia tua, quae est ingeniositas scribendi, seduxit te, et gloria famae induxit te ad confirmandum, quod non credis: nostine quod Mens humana sit elevabilis supra sensualia, quae sunt quae in cogitationibus sunt ex sensibus corporis, et quod cum elevatur, videat illa quae Vitae sunt supra, et illa quae Naturae sunt infra; quid Vita aliud quam Amor et Sapientia, et quid Natura aliud quam illorum receptaculum, per quod operentur suos effectus seu usus; num haec possunt unum esse, quam sicut principale et instrumentale; num potest lux unum esse cum oculo, num sonus cum aure; unde horum sensus nisi ex vita, et illorum formae nisi ex natura: quid Corpus humanum nisi quam Organum vitae; annon omnia et singula ibi organice formata sunt ad producendum illa quae Amor vult ac Intellectus cogitat; suntne organa corporis ex natura, ac Amor et Cogitatio ex vita; suntne illa inter se prorsus distincta: eleva aciem ingenii adhuc parum altius, et videbis, quod vitae sit affici et cogitare, et quod affici sit amoris, et cogitare sapientiae, ac utrumque vitae, nam, ut dictum est, Amor et Sapientia sunt vita: si adhuc facultatem Intelligendi elevas parum altius, videbis, quod non detur Amor et Sapientia, nisi alicubi sit illorum origo, et quod origo illorum sit Ipse Amor et Ipsa Sapientia, et inde Ipsa Vita; et haec sunt Deus a quo Natura.
[7] Postea loquuti sumus cum illo de ALTERO, Numeri CENTRUM SIT EXPANSI, VEL NUM EXPANSUM SIT CENTRI; et quaesivimus cur hoc ventilat; respondit propter finem, ut concludat de Centro et Expanso Naturae et Vitae, ita de origine unius et alterius; et cum interrogavimus quae ejus Mens, respondit de his similiter ut prius, quod utrumque possit confirmare, sed quod ex timore jacturae famae confirmet, quod Expansum sit Centri, hoc est, a Centro; tametsi scio quod ante Solem fuerit aliquid, et hoc ubivis in Expanso, et quod hoc in ordinem a se confluxerit, ita in Centrum.
[8] Sed tunc iterum alloquuti sumus illum ex zelo indignante, et diximus, amice, insanis; et cum hoc audivit, retraxit solium a mensa, et timide nos aspexit, et tunc attendit aurem, sed ridens: at continuavimus dicendo, quid insanius est dicere, quam quod Centrum sit ab Expanso; per Centrum tuum intelligimus Solem, et per Expansum tuum intelligimus Universum, et sic quod Universum exstiterit absque Sole; facitne Sol Naturam et omnes ejus proprietates, quae unice dependent a Luce et Calore procedentibus a Sole per Athmosphaeras; ubinam haec prius, sed unde haec in sequente ventilatione dicemus; suntne Athmosphaerae, et omnia quae 5 super Tellure, sicut Superficies, et Sol illorum Centrum; quid illa omnia absque Sole, num possunt uno momento subsistere; inde quid illa omnia ante Solem, num potuerunt existere; estne subsistentia 6 perpetua existentia: cum itaque omnium Naturae subsistentia est a Sole, sequitur quod etiam omnium existentia; hoc videt, et ex autopsia agnoscit unusquisque;
[9] annon posterius sicut existit etiam subsistit a priori; si superficies foret prius, et centrum posterius, annon prius subsisteret ex posteriori, quod tamen est contra leges ordinis; quomodo possunt posteriora producere priora, aut exteriora interiora, aut crassiora puriora; inde quomodo possunt superficies, quae faciunt Expansum, producere Centrum; quis non videt quod hoc sit contra naturae leges: adduximus haec argumenta ex Analysi rationis, ad confirmandum, quod Expansum existat a Centro, et non vicissim, tametsi unusquisque, qui juste cogitat, absque illis argumentis hoc videt. Dixisti, quod Expansum confluxerit in Centrum a se; num sic fortuito in tam mirabilem et stupendum ordinem, ut unum sit propter alterum, et omnia et singula propter hominem, et ejus vitam aeternam; num Natura ex aliquo amore per aliquam sapientiam potest intendere fines, prospicere causas, et sic providere effectus, ut talia in suo ordine existant; et num potest ab hominibus facere Angelos, et ex his Coelum, et facere, ut illi qui ibi sunt, vivant in aeternum: pone haec, et cogita, et cadet tua idea de existentia naturae a natura.
[10] Post haec quaesivimus illum, quid cogitaverat, et quid nunc cogitat de TERTIO, DE CENTRO ET EXPANSO NATURAE ET VITAE; Numeri credat quod Centrum et Expansum Vitae sit idem cum Centro et Expanso Naturae; dixit, quod haereat, et quod prius cogitaverit, quod interior activitas Naturae sit Vita, et quod Amor et Sapientia, quae essentialiter faciunt hominis vitam, sint inde; et quod ignis Solis per calorem et lucem, mediis athmosphaeris, producat illam; at quod nunc ex auditis de hominum vita post mortem, in ambiguo sit, et quod hoc ambiguum ferat mentem jam sursum jam deorsum, et cum sursum, agnoscat Centrum, de quo prius non aliquid noverat, et cum deorsum, videat Centrum quod credidit Unicum, et quod Vita sit ex Centro, de quo prius non aliquid sciverat, et quod Natura sit ex Centro, quod prius credidit unicum esse, et quod utrumque Centrum habeat Expansum circum se.
[11] Ad haec diximus, Bene, modo etiam velit ex Centro et Expanso Vitae spectare Centrum et Expansum Naturae, et non vice versa: et instruximus illum, quod supra Coelum Angelicum sit Sol, qui est purus Amor, ad apparentiam igneus sicut Sol mundi, et quod ex Calore, qui procedit ex illo Sole, sit angelis et hominibus Voluntas et Amor, et quod ex Luce inde sit illis Intellectus et Sapientia; et quod illa quae inde sunt, dicantur spiritualia, et quod illa quae ex Sole Mundi procedunt, sint continentia seu receptacula vitae, et dicantur Naturalia: tum quod Expansum 7 Centri vitae dicatur MUNDUS SPIRITUALIS, qui ex suo Sole subsistit, et quod Expansum Centri Naturae dicatur MUNDUS NATURALIS, qui ex suo Sole subsistit. Nunc quia de Amore et Sapientia non praedicari possunt Spatia et Tempora, sed pro illis Status, sequitur quod Expansum circum Solem Coeli Angelici, non sit Extensum, sed usque in Extenso Solis naturalis, et apud subjecta viva ibi secundum receptiones, et receptiones secundum formas et status.
[12] Sed tunc quaesivit, unde ignis Solis mundi seu naturae; respondebamus, quod sit ex Sole Coeli Angelici, qui non est ignis, sed Divinus Amor proxime procedens a Deo, Qui in medio ejus est: hoc quia miratus est, demonstravimus ita; Amor in sua essentia est spiritualis ignis, inde est, quod ignis in Verbo in spirituali ejus sensu significet amorem, unde orant in Templis Sacerdotes, ut Ignis coelestis impleat corda, per quem intelligunt amorem; ignis Altaris, et ignis Candelabri in Tabernaculo apud Israelitas, non aliud quam Divinum Amorem repraesentavit; Calor sanguinis, seu Calor vitalis hominum, et in genere animalium, non aliunde est, quam ex amore, qui facit vitam illorum; inde est, quod homo incendatur, incalescat et inflammetur, dum amor ejus exaltatur in zelum, aut excitatur in iram et excandescentiam: quare ex eo, quod Calor spiritualis, qui est Amor, producat calorem naturalem apud homines, usque ut accendat et inflammet illorum facies et artus, constare potest, quod Ignis Solis naturalis non aliunde exstiterit, quam ex Igne Solis spiritualis, qui est Divinus Amor.
[13] Nunc quia Expansum oritur ex Centro, et non vicissim, ut supra diximus, et Centrum vitae, quod est Sol Coeli Angelici, est Divinus Amor proxime procedens a Deo, Qui in medio illius Solis est; et quia inde est Expansum illius Centri, quod vocatur Mundus spiritualis, et quia ex illo Sole exstiterat Sol Mundi, et ex hoc Expansum ejus, quod vocatur Mundus naturalis, patet, quod Universum a Deo creatum sit. Post haec abivimus, et ille comitatus est nos extra atrium sui Gymnasii, 8 et loquutus est cum nobis de Coelo et Inferno, et de Divino auspicio, ex nova ingenii sagacitate.
Footnotes:
1. Sic prima editio, sed fortasse: sint; respondent ubi in prima editione sint; sed respondent (Rose).
2. Prima editio: multudine.
3. Prima editio: samae.
4. Sic Vera Christiana Religio 35[10], et alibi: De Centro et Expanso Naturae et Vitae ubi in prima editione De Centro Expansi et Vitae.
5. Prima editio: que.
6. Prima editio: subsistantia.
7. Sic Errores Typographici.
8. Prima editio: GymnasIII.