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 #293

Study this Passage

  
/ 535  
  

293. To this I will append two narrative accounts. Here is the first:

I once looked out my window toward the east and saw seven women sitting next to a rose garden by a spring drinking water. I strained my eyes intently to see what they were doing, and the intensity of my gaze caught their attention. With a motion of the head one of them therefore invited me over. Accordingly I left the house and hurried in their direction. And when I arrived, I politely asked them where they were from.

They then said, "We are wives. We are talking here about the delights of conjugial love, and we have concluded from a good deal of evidence that these delights are also delights of wisdom."

This response so delighted my heart that I seemed to be more interiorly in the spirit and to have on that account a more enlightened perception than ever before. So I said to them, "Permit me an opportunity to ask you some questions about those pleasant delights." And they nodded their assent.

So I asked, "How do you wives know that the delights of conjugial love are at the same time delights of wisdom?"

[2] They then replied, "We know it from the correspondence that exists between wisdom in our husbands and the delights of conjugial love in us. For the delights of this love in us heighten or diminish and take on altogether different qualities according to the wisdom in our husbands."

On hearing this I inquired further, saying, "I know you are affected by gentle words from your husbands and cheerful states of mind on their part, and that you take delight on account of these with all your heart. But I wonder at your saying that it is in response to their wisdom. However, tell me what wisdom is and what sort of wisdom you mean."

[3] To this the wives replied with annoyance, "You think we do not know what wisdom is and what sort of wisdom we mean, even though we continually reflect on it in our husbands and daily learn it from their mouths. Indeed, we wives think about the state of our husbands from morning to evening, with scarcely any time intervening in a day when this is interrupted or in which our instinctive thought is entirely withdrawn or gone from them. Our husbands in contrast spend very little time in the course of a day thinking about our state. As a result we know what sort of wisdom in them finds delight in us. Our husbands call this wisdom a spiritual-rational wisdom and a spiritual-moral one. Spiritual-rational wisdom, they say, is a matter of the intellect and its intellectual concepts, while spiritual-moral wisdom is a matter of the will and its mode of life. Yet they join the two together and regard them as one; and they maintain that the pleasant delights of this wisdom are transposed from their minds into delights in our hearts, and from our hearts back to their hearts, so that these return to the wisdom from which they originated."

[4] I then asked whether they knew anything more about this wisdom in their husbands - "wisdom," I said, "which finds delight in you."

"We do," they said. "It is a spiritual wisdom, and from that a rational and moral one. Spiritual wisdom is to acknowledge the Lord our Savior as God of heaven and earth, and through the Word and discourses from it to acquire from Him truths connected with the Church, from which comes a spiritual rationality; and in addition to live from Him according to those truths, from which comes a spiritual morality. Our husbands call these two the wisdom which in general works to produce truly conjugial love. We have also heard from them the reason, namely, that this wisdom opens the inner faculties of their mind and thus of their body, providing free passage from the firsts to the last of these for the stream of love, on whose flow, sufficiency and strength conjugial love depends for its existence and life.

"As regards marriage in particular, the spiritual-rational and spiritual-moral wisdom of our husbands has as its end and goal to love only their wives and to rid themselves of all desire for other women. Moreover, to the extent they achieve this, to that extent that love is heightened in degree and perfected in quality, and the more clearly and keenly do we then feel matching delights in us corresponding to the contented pleasures of our husbands' affections and the pleasant exaltations of their thoughts."

[5] I asked them next whether they knew how the communication took place.

They said, "All conjunction by love requires action, reception, and reaction. The state of our love and its delights is the agent or that which acts. The state of our husbands' wisdom is the recipient or that which receives. And this same wisdom is also the reagent or that which reacts in accordance with their reception. This reaction is then perceived by us with feelings of delight in our hearts according to our state and the measure in which it is continually open and ready to receive those elements which in some way are connected with and so emanate from virtue in our husbands, thus which in some way are connected with and so emanate from the final state of love in us."

At that point they also inserted, "Take care you do not interpret the delights we have mentioned to mean the end delights of conjugial love. We never talk about these, but only about the delights of our hearts which constantly correspond to the state of wisdom in our husbands."

[6] After that there appeared in the distance what looked like a dove in flight with a leaf from a tree in its mouth; but as it drew near, instead of a dove we saw a little boy with a piece of paper in his hand. Coming over to us then, he held it out to me and said, "Read it in the presence of these maidens of the spring."

So I read the following:

Tell the inhabitants of the earth among whom you live that there is such a thing as truly conjugial love, offering a million delights scarcely any of which are yet known to the world. But they will be discovered when the church betroths itself to her Lord and becomes His bride and wife.

Then I asked the wives, "Why did the boy call you 'maidens of the spring'?"

"We are called maidens when we sit by this spring," they replied, "because we are forms of affection for the truths of our husbands' wisdom; and an affection for truth in form is termed a maiden. The spring likewise symbolizes the truth of wisdom, and the rose garden we are sitting next to its delights."

[7] One of the seven wives then wove a garland of roses; and sprinkling it with water from the spring, she placed it over the cap the boy had on, fitting it around his little head and saying, "Receive the delights of intelligence. Your cap, you see, symbolizes intelligence, and the garland from this rose garden its delights."

Thus adorned the boy then departed, and in the distance he looked once more like a dove in flight, but this time with a little crown on its head.

  
/ 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 #161

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

161. The third experience 1 .

Once in the spiritual world I heard a noise like a mill; it was in the northern region. To begin with I wondered what it was, but then I remembered that a mill and milling mean seeking support for doctrine from the Word. So I approached the place where I had heard the noise, and when I came close the noise disappeared. Then I saw a covered area above ground, the approach to which was through a cave. On seeing this I went down and went inside.

There was a room there in which I saw an old man sitting among his books, holding a copy of the Word in front of him and looking out passages in it in support of his doctrine. Slips of paper were lying around, on which he had copied out supporting passages. In the next room were scribes, who were collecting the slips and writing out what was on them on clean sheets of paper. I asked first about the books he had around him.

He said that they were all on the subject of justifying faith. 'Those from Sweden and Denmark are profound, more profound those from Germany, still more profound those from Britain, and the most profound are those from Holland.' He added that they differed in various respects, but all agreed on the subject of justification and salvation by faith alone. He went on to say that he was now gathering support from the Word for the first tenet of justifying faith, that God the Father withdrew His favour from the human race on account of its wrong-doing, and God therefore needed in order to save men to receive satisfaction, be reconciled, propitiated and have as mediator someone who would take upon himself the righteous condemnation; and there was no way this could be done except through His only Son. When this had been done, the way was opened up to God the Father for His sake, for we say: 'Father, have mercy on us for the sake of the Son.' 'I see,' he said, 'and have long done so, that this is in accordance with all sound reason and Scripture. How else could anyone approach God the Father, except through faith in the merit of the Son?'

[2] On hearing this I was amazed that he asserted it to be in accordance with sound reason and Scripture, when in fact it is contrary to both, as I told him plainly. This provoked an outburst of zeal and he retorted: 'How can you talk like that?'

So I stated my opinion and said: 'Is it not contrary to sound reason to think that God the Father withdrew His favour from the human race, reproved it and cut off communication with it? Surely Divine favour is an attribute of the Divine Essence? So withdrawing His favour would be withdrawing His Divine Essence, and that would mean ceasing to be God. Surely God cannot become estranged from Himself? Believe me, favour on God's part is both infinite and eternal. God's favour can be lost on man's part, if he fails to accept it, [but never on God's part]. 2 If the favour shown by God were taken away, it would be the end of the whole of heaven and the whole human race. Therefore favour on God's part is shown permanently and for ever, not only to angels and men, but even to the devils in hell. Since this is in accordance with sound reason, why do you say that the sole approach to God the Father is through faith in the Son's merit, when in fact God's favour ensures that the approach is perpetually open?

[3] 'But why do you talk about approaching God the Father for the sake of the Son, rather than through the Son? Is not the Son the mediator and saviour? Why do you not approach the mediator and saviour Himself? Is He not God and Man? On earth does anyone approach directly any emperor, king or prince? Surely he finds a chamberlain to introduce him? Do you not know that the Lord came into the world so that He should introduce us to the Father, and that it is impossible to approach Him except through the Lord? This approach is perpetually open when you directly approach the Lord Himself, because He is in the Father and the Father is in Him. Now consult Scripture and you will see that this is in accordance with it, and that your approach to the Father is contrary to it, just as it is contrary to sound reason. I tell you too, it is presumptuous to go up to God the Father, except through Him who is in the Father's bosom, and who alone is with Him. Have you not read John 14:6?'

On hearing this the old man was so enraged he jumped up from his chair and shouted to his scribes to throw me out; and when I had immediately of my own accord gone out, he threw after me out of the door the book which he happened to be holding in his hand. The book was the Word.

Footnotes:

1. This section is repeated from Apocalypse Revealed 484.

2. These words are inserted from the earlier use of the passage in Apocalypse Revealed 484.

  
/ 853  
  

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