660.由于善属于意愿，真属于觉知，也由于尘世的众多事物对应于良善，比如果实与用途，而报应本身则对应于估价和价值，所以可知，在此所说关于报应的话能在所有受造物中找到相似之处。因为如前所示，宇宙万物皆关系到善与真，反之则关系到恶与假。因此，可用教会作对比，因为它凭其仁和信，而非附加的仪式获得声誉。还可拿教会牧师作对比，因为他的价值取决于他的意愿和爱，连同他在属灵事上的觉知，而非取决于他的亲切感和牧师服。
同样可用敬拜和举行敬拜所在的神殿作对比。敬拜本身在意愿中进行，而在觉知中进行则如同在其神殿中进行；神殿被称为圣不是凭它自己，而是凭那里所进行的神性教导。也可以作这样一个对比，被善与真主宰的帝国为人所爱，而被缺乏善的真理所主宰的帝国不被人爱。谁判断国王是通过他的随从、马匹与马车，而非通过他身上所公认的王权？而王权由爱和审慎的政府构成。观看凯旋阅兵式的人，谁不看重胜利者，并由于他而看重阅兵式，而不是由于阅兵式而看重他？由此可见，人由于本质而看重形式，而不是相反。意愿就是本质，思维就是形式。人只会将源自本质的东西归于形式，所以，报应适用于本质，而非形式。
660. 由于善属于意愿, 真属于觉知, 也由于尘世的众多事物对应于良善, 比如果实与用途, 而归算本身则对应于估价和价值, 所以可知, 在此所说关于归算的话能在所有受造物中找到相似之处。 因为如前所示, 宇宙万物皆关系到善与真, 反之则关系到恶与假。 因此, 可用教会作对比, 因为它凭其仁和信, 而非附加的仪式获得声誉。 还可拿教会牧师作对比, 因为他的价值取决于他的意愿和爱, 连同他在属灵事上的觉知, 而非取决于他的亲切感和牧师服。
同样可用敬拜和举行敬拜所在的神殿作对比。 敬拜本身在意愿中进行, 而在觉知中进行则如同在其神殿中进行; 神殿被称为圣不是凭它自己, 而是凭那里所进行的神性教导。 也可以作这样一个对比, 被善与真主宰的帝国为人所爱, 而被缺乏善的真理所主宰的帝国不被人爱。 谁判断国王是通过他的随从, 马匹与马车, 而非通过他身上所公认的王权? 而王权由爱和审慎的政府构成。 观看凯旋阅兵式的人, 谁不看重胜利者, 并由于他而看重阅兵式, 而不是由于阅兵式而看重他? 由此可见, 人由于本质而看重形式, 而不是相反。 意愿就是本质, 思维就是形式。 人只会将源自本质的东西归于形式, 所以, 归算适用于本质, 而非形式。
660. Because goodness belongs to the will and truth to the intellect, and many things in the world, such as fruits and useful things of all kinds, correspond to goodness, and because the assignment of spiritual credit or blame corresponds to the setting of values and prices, it follows that what has been said here about the assignment of spiritual credit or blame could be compared with the way everything in creation is valued. As has been shown here and there so far in the work, everything in the universe relates to goodness and truth, or on the other hand to evil and falsity.
Therefore you could draw a comparison with the fact that a religion is valued for its goodwill and faith, not for the rituals that accompany them.
You could also make a comparison with the fact that ministers in a given religion are valued for their will and their love, and also their understanding of spiritual matters, not their affability or their clothing.
[2] There is a comparison too with worshiping and with the church building in which it occurs. The will worships; the intellect is its church building, so to speak. The building is esteemed as holy not on its own account but because of the divine things that are taught there.
A comparison also exists with an empire. We value an empire where goodness rules along with truth, but not an empire where there is truth but no goodness.
Who values monarchs for their attendants, horses, and carriages rather than for the regal quality that is recognized in the monarchs themselves, a regal quality that consists of love for, and prudence in, governing?
Surely everyone at a victory parade is looking at the people who were victorious and judges the parade by their accomplishments, not their accomplishments by the parade.
Everyone in general, therefore, assesses forms based on their essences and not the reverse. The will is the essence. Thought is the form. No one can assign any value to the form except the value it derives from its essence. The essence, then, is what is truly valued, and not the form.
660. Since good has to do with the will and truth with the understanding, and since there are many things in the world, such as profit and service, which correspond to good - imputation itself corresponds to valuing and price - it follows that the remarks made here about imputation can find a parallel in all created things. For, as has been shown in various places in this book, everything in the universe has reference to good and truth, or in the opposite case to evil and falsity. One might therefore make a comparison with the church, for it gets its reputation from charity and faith, not from its ceremonies, which are an extra. One might also make a comparison with a minister of the church being valued for his will and his love, together with his understanding in spiritual matters, not for his affability or clerical garb.
[2] There is also a comparison with worship and with the building in which it is held. Worship itself takes place in the will, and in the understanding which is a kind of church for it; and this is called holy not on its own account, but because of the Divine instruction given there. A comparison is also possible with an empire ruled over by good, together with truth, which is much loved; but not with one where truth rules without good. Does anyone judge a king from his attendants, his horses and carriages, and not from the royalty which they know is in him? Royalty consists in a loving and prudent government. Does anyone watching a victory parade fail to look at the victor and judge the procession from him, not him from the procession? It follows that one judges the formal aspect from the essential, not the reverse. The will is the essential, and thought is the formal. No one can impute to the form anything but what it derives from the essential; so imputation applies to the essential, not the formal.
660. As good belongs to the will and truth to the understanding, and many things in the world correspond to good, such as fruit and use, while imputation itself corresponds to the estimate and price it follows that what has here been said of imputation may find its counterpart in all created things; for as before shown in various places, all things in the universe have relation to good and truth, and on the contrary to evil and falsity. A comparison may therefore be made with the church, in that its value is estimated by its charity and faith, and not by its rituals, which are adjoined to it. A comparison may also be made with the ministry of the church, in that they are valued according to their will and love, together with their understanding in spiritual things and not according to their affability and mode of dress.
[2] A comparison may also be made with worship and the temple in which it is performed; worship itself takes place in the will, and in the understanding as in its temple; and the temple is called holy not from itself, but from the Divine that is there taught. Again a comparison may be made with a government where good reigns and truth along with it. Such a government is beloved, but not one where truth reigns without good. Who judges of a king by his attendants, horses, and carriages, and not by the royalty which is recognized in him? Royalty is a matter of love and prudence in governing. In a triumph who does not consider the victor, and because of him the pomp, not the pomp and because of that the victor, thus the formal because of the essential, and not the reverse? The will is the essential and thought is the formal; and no one can impute to the formal anything but what it derives from the essential; thus the imputation is to the essential, not to the formal.
660. Since good is of the will and truth is of the understanding, and many things in the world correspond to good, as fruit and use, while imputation itself is according to estimation and value, it follows that all created things may be regarded from the point of view of imputation; for, as has been shown before in various places, all things in the universe have relation to good and truth, and in the opposite sense, to evil and falsity. Thus the Church is valued for its charity and faith, and not for the ritual which has become associated with it. A minister of the Church is esteemed for his good will and love, and at the same time for his understanding in spiritual things, and not for his affability and clerical garb.
[2] Worship and the temple in which it is performed may be similarly regarded. Worship itself is performed in the will, and it is conducted in the understanding as in its proper temple; and the temple is called holy, not on its own account, but from the Divine which is there taught. A government also is loved where good reigns together with truth, but not where truth rules without good. No one judges of a king from his retinue, his horses and carriages, but from the royalty which he is known to possess; and royalty consists in loving and prudent governing. In a triumphal procession every one looks to the conqueror, and from him to the pomp, and not from the pomp to the conqueror; thus from the essential to the formal, and not the reverse. Now, the will is the essential, and thought is the formal, and no one can impute to the formal anything but what it derives from the essential; hence the essential and not the formal is the subject of imputation.
660. Quoniam bonum est voluntatis et verum est intellectus, et multa in Mundo correspondent bono, sicut fructus et usus, ac ipsa imputatio aestimationi et pretio, sequitur quod illa quae de imputatione hic dicta sunt, possint cum omnibus creatis comparari, nam sicut prius hic et ibi ostensum est, omnia in universo se referunt ad bonum et verum, et e contra ad malum et falsum. Comparatio itaque fieri potest cum Ecclesia, quod illa reputetur ex charitate et fide, et non ex ritualibus, quae adjunguntur. Comparatio etiam fieri potest cum ministro Ecclesiae, quod aestimetur ex ejus voluntate et amore, et simul ex ejus intellectu in spiritualibus, et non ex affabilitate et amictu.
[2] Comparatio etiam datur cum cultu et cum templo in quo ille fit; ipse cultus fit in voluntate, ac in intellectu sicut in suo templo, et hoc sanctum vocatur non ex se, sed ex Divino quod ibi docetur; et quoque comparatio datur cum Imperio, ubi bonum regnat et simul verum, quod adamatur, non autem ubi verum et non bonum. Quis de Rege judicat ex satellitiis, equis et curribus, et non ex Regio, quod sciunt apud illum; Regium est amoris et prudentiae gubernandi. Quis in triumpho non aspicit Victorem, et ab illo pompam, et non ex hac illum; consequenter ab essentiali formale, et non vicissim; voluntas est essentiale, et cogitatio est formale, et nemo potest imputare formali, nisi id quod trahit ex essentiali, ita huic et non illi.