New Christian Bible Study

Commentary

 

Memorable Occurrences in Swedenborg's Writings

This list of Memorable Occurrences in Swedenborg's Writings was originally compiled by W. C. Henderson in 1960 but has since been updated.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Conjugial Love #233

Study this Passage

  
/ 535  
  

233. The third account:

After this, one of the angels said, "Follow me to the place where they are crying out, 'Oh, how wise!'" And he added, "You will see human monstrosities. The faces and bodies you see will be like those of a human being, and yet they are not human."

So I said, "Are they animals, then?"

The angel replied, "No, they are not animals, but animal-like. For they are people who cannot see at all whether truth is true or not, and yet whatever they wish they can make to be true. Among us, people like that are called confirmers."

We then followed the clamor and came to the place. And lo, we found a group of men surrounded by a crowd of people, and in the crowd some people of noble lineage. The men were confirming whatever the latter said and agreeing with them with such manifest accord that when they heard it, they turned to each other and said, "Oh, how wise!"

[2] However, the angel said to me, "Let us not go over to them but instead call one of them out of the group."

So we called one of them to us, and going aside with him, we talked about various matters. And he confirmed each point so thoroughly that they all appeared entirely as true.

We then asked him whether he could also confirm the converse of these. He said that he could, just as well as he did the previous ones. At which point he said openly and from the heart, "What is truth? Is there any truth in the nature of things other than what a person makes true? Say to me anything you please and I will make it to be true."

So I said, "Make this true, that faith is everything in the church." And he did so, so cleverly and skillfully that some learned bystanders looked on in admiration and applauded. I asked him next to make it true that charity is everything in the church, which he did, and afterwards that charity is nothing in the church. And he dressed up both propositions and arrayed them in such verisimilitudes that the bystanders looked at each other and said, "Isn't he wise!"

But I said, "Do you not know that to live rightly is charity, and to believe rightly is faith? If anyone lives rightly, does he not also believe rightly? Thus showing that faith is connected with charity, and charity with faith? Do you not see that this is true?"

He replied, "I will make it true and then I will see." And having done it he said, "Now I see." But shortly he made the converse of it to be true, and then he said, "I see as well that this is true."

We chuckled at this and said, "But are these not contradictory conclusions? How can you see two contrary conclusions as true?"

Nettled by our response, he replied, "You are wrong. Both conclusions are true, since truth is only what a person makes true."

[3] Standing nearby was someone who in the world had been an ambassador of the highest rank. He marveled at this and said, "I recognize that something of this sort goes on in the world, but still you are insane. Make it to be true, if you can, that light is darkness, and darkness light."

To which he replied, "I will do it easily. What are light and darkness but conditions of the eye? Does light not turn to darkness when the eye comes in out of bright sunshine? Or when it gazes intently at the sun? Who does not know that the state of the eye then changes and that light consequently appears as darkness? And conversely, that when the condition of the eye recovers, the darkness appears as light?

"Does an owl not see the darkness of night as the light of day, and the light of day as the darkness of night? Does it not see the sun itself as a dark and shadowy orb? If a person had eyes like an owl's, what would he call light and what would he call darkness?

"What then is light but a condition of the eye? And if it is a condition of the eye, is not light darkness and darkness light? Consequently the one proposition is true and the other is true."

[4] After that the ambassador asked him to make it to be true that a raven is white and not black.

To which he replied, "I will do this easily, too. Take a needle or razor," he said, "and open up the feathers or quills of a raven. Are they not white inside? Then remove the feathers and quills and look at the raven's skin. Is it not white? What is the blackness surrounding it but an opaqueness to light, which is hardly a basis on which to judge the raven's color? If you do not know that blackness is only an absence of light, ask experts in the science of optics and they will tell you. Or grind a piece of black stone or black glass into a fine powder, and you will see that the powder is white."

"But," said the ambassador, "does a raven look black to the eye?"

"Perhaps," replied this confirmer of ours, "but as a human being, are you willing to base what you think on an appearance? You may indeed speak in accordance with the appearance and say that a raven is black, but you cannot think it. As for example, you may speak in accordance with the appearance and say that the sun rises, travels and sets, but as a human being you cannot think it, because the sun stands still and it is the earth that moves. It is the same with the raven. An appearance is only an appearance. Say what you will, a raven is totally and utterly white. It even turns white when it grows old, as I have observed."

[5] We then asked him to tell us honestly whether he was joking or whether he really believed that there is no truth but what a person makes true. And he answered, "I swear that I believe it."

After that the ambassador asked him whether he could make it true that he was insane. To which he said, "I could, but I do not want to. Who is not insane?"

This total confirmer was afterwards sent to some angels for them to examine and determine what sort of person he was. And having examined him, they said he possessed not even a grain of understanding, because everything that exists above the level of reason in him was closed up, and only that which is below the level of reason was open.

"Above the level of reason," they said, "is the light of heaven, and below the level of reason is the light of nature. And the light of nature is such that it can confirm whatever it pleases. However, if the light of heaven does not flow into the light of nature, a person does not see whether any truth is true, and so neither whether any falsity is false. An ability to see both what is true and what is false results from the presence of light from heaven in the light of nature, and the light of heaven comes from the God of heaven, who is the Lord.

"This total confirmer is therefore neither human nor animal, but animal-like."

[6] I asked the angel with me about the fate of people like that and whether it was possible for them to be among the living, since a person has life from the light of heaven, and from it comes his intellect. And the angel said that when people of this sort are by themselves, they are incapable of thought and so have nothing to say, but stand as mute as machines, as though in a deep sleep; but as soon as something catches their ears, they awaken. He added also that people become like that who are inmostly evil. "The light of heaven cannot flow into them from above," he said, "but only some spiritual element through the world, from which they have an ability to confirm."

[7] After he said this, I heard the voice of one of the angels who had examined the man, calling to me and saying, "From what you have heard draw an overall conclusion."

So I drew the following conclusion: An ability to confirm whatever one pleases is not the mark of an intelligent person; rather, the mark of an intelligent person is to be able to see that truth is true and falsity false, and to confirm that.

I afterwards looked over at the gathering where the confirmers stood and where the crowd surrounding them was beginning to cry out, "Oh, how wise!" And suddenly a dusky cloud enveloped them, with screech owls and bats flitting about in the cloud.

It was then explained to me, "The owls and bats flitting about in the dusky cloud are correspondent forms and thus manifestations of their thoughts. For in this world, confirmations of falsities to the point that they appear as truths are represented under the forms of birds of the night, whose eyes are lit up with an illusory light from within by which they see objects in darkness as though in light. This is the kind of illusory spiritual light had by those who confirm falsities to the point that they appear as truths, and who afterwards say and believe they are truths. They all possess a kind of after-sight and not any prior sight."

  
/ 535  
  

Many thanks to the General Church of the New Jerusalem, and to Rev. N.B. Rogers, translator, for the permission to use this translation.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

True Christian Religion #696

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

696. The fifth experience. 1

I once prayed the Lord to be allowed to talk with the disciples of Aristotle, and at the same time with the disciples of Descartes and those of Leibnitz, in order to learn what opinions they held on the interplay between the soul and the body. My prayer was answered by the appearance of nine men, three Aristotelians, three Cartesians and three Leibnitzians. They stood round me, the admirers of Aristotle on the left, the followers of Descartes on the right, and the supporters of Leibnitz behind me. A long way off, and separated by gaps, were to be seen three men apparently wearing laurel-wreaths; and the perception flowing in from heaven made me aware that these were the actual champions or founders of the schools. Another man stood behind Leibnitz holding on to the sleeve of his robe; I was told that he was Wolff 2 .

[2] The nine men on seeing one another began with polite greetings and conversation. But soon afterwards a spirit rose up from the underworld carrying a torch in his right hand, which he shook in their faces. This made them three by three to become enemies and they glowered at one another; for they were gripped by a desire to quarrel and dispute.

The Aristotelians, who were also Schoolmen 3 , began by saying: 'Anyone can see that objects flow into the soul by means of the senses, like anyone entering a room through the door, and that what the soul thinks depends upon the inflow. When a lover sees a pretty girl or his bride, does not his eye sparkle and transmit love for her to the soul? When the miser sees bags full of money, is not every one of his senses inflamed with longing from them, and as a result he transmits this to the soul, exciting a desire to possess them? When some haughty person hears himself being praised by another, does he not prick up his ears, and they transmit the compliments to the soul? The bodily senses are like fore-courts offering the only way in to the soul. These and countless similar examples must lead one to conclude that the inflow is from nature, in other words, physical.'

[3] On hearing this the Cartesians clapped their fingers to their brows, and now took them away to say: 'Dear, dear, you are speaking from appearances. Are you not aware that it is not the eye which loves a girl or a bride, but the soul? Likewise, the bodily sense does not desire the money in the bag of itself, but under the control of the soul. Likewise, neither do the ears in any other sense scoop up the compliments paid by toadies. Surely it is perception which produces sensation? And perception is a function of the soul, not of an organ. Tell us, if you can, what it is other than thought which makes the tongue and the lips speak? What is it but the will that makes the hands work? Thought and will are functions of the soul. So what is it but the soul which makes the eye see, the ears hear, and the remaining sense-organs feel, pay attention and notice? These and countless other examples allow everyone, whose wisdom goes beyond bodily sense-impressions, to conclude that there is no inflow from the body into the soul, but from the soul into the body. We call this incidental inflow, or spiritual inflow.'

[4] On hearing this three men, who had been standing behind the previously mentioned groups of three and were supporters of Leibnitz, raised their voices and said: 'We have listened to the arguments on either side and compared them, and we have noticed that on many points one party prevails and on many others another. So, if we may, we should like to settle the dispute.'

When they were asked how, they said: 'There is no inflow from the soul into the body nor from the body into the soul, but both activities take place concordantly and instantaneously. This has been elegantly named by a famous writer, who called it pre-established harmony.'

[5] On the conclusion of this debate, the spirit carrying the torch appeared again, but now holding it in his left hand. He shook it towards the backs of their heads, so causing the ideas of all of them to become confused, and they cried out: 'Our soul does not know, neither does our body, which side to take. So let us draw lots to settle the dispute, and we will support the view represented by the first lot drawn.'

So they took three slips of paper and wrote on one 'Physical Inflow', on the second 'Spiritual Inflow' and on the third 'Pre-established Harmony'. They put the three slips into a hat held upside down and selected someone to draw one. He put his hand in and grasped with his hand the one on which was written 'Spiritual Inflow'. When they saw this and read it out, they all said, some however with a clear and fluent voice, some with a dull and withdrawn voice, 'Let us support this, since it came out first.' Then an angel suddenly appeared standing by, who said: 'Do not believe that the paper favouring Spiritual Inflow came out by chance; it was contrived. For your ideas are so confused that you cannot see its truth, but the truth of itself presented itself to his hand, so that you would support it.'

Footnotes:

1. This section is repeated from Interaction of the Soul and Body 19.

2. Christian Wolff (Arcana Coelestia 1679-1754), a follower of Leibnitz.

3. The Medieval scholars who taught logic.

  
/ 853  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.

©2024 New Christian Bible Study Corporation. All rights reserved. Printed from newchristianbiblestudy.org