4573. About the hells of the Sirens

What sirens are like has been described several times before [see the index]. These women are extremely malicious and have learned in the world how to simulate those who are good, as if they were angels. For the purpose of doing this they radiate good affections and thus slip in among simple spirits that relate to a person's outward qualities of thought or earthly characteristics. In this way they keep themselves in the world of spirits and can be forced out only with difficulty, for such things elevate evil spirits from hell for quite a long time and through such things they enter into people's thoughts and lead them entirely. Consequently, because they are of an inward nature, they are the very worst of spirits who take possession of a person's mind, from whom a person can never be defended except by the Lord. They act very stubbornly and fear nothing, trust in their own arts, and know how to slip in by labyrinthine gyres. They speak from these, sometimes in such a way that they are heard elsewhere than where are they really are, so that they are sought in vain. It has granted me to learn this by many actual experiences.

[2] They are of two kinds. Certain ones have the goal of ruling over others and over every society to which they can gain access, doing so by possessing and leading their thoughts. These women are the most annoying. The second kind does likewise but does not have such a wild obsession with ruling. They take freedom entirely away from those who want to have good thoughts and give freedom to those who want to have evil thoughts. These are very obscene women; they are sorceresses and are against everything good and true. Where this gang comes from has been explained before [cf. 3205 ff]. Their hell was in front at some distance toward the left there; the men who want to rule, a little toward the right, in various caverns. But I saw that their hells had been changed and moved to the back toward the left, rather deep down, from which they can never again break out and attack spirits and people on earth. They are there under a thick cloud which their tricks can in no way get through. They were forced in there in crowds of between fifty and a hundred sirens. This went on for many hours.

Above the hell, there is something like a maw with jaws that open. And the moment they arrived, it opened the maw, twisting and bending it like labyrinths into which they put themselves, and it swallowed them up and then thrust them deep under the disreputable earth there, from which they cannot emerge, this appeared to me in 1752, Aug. 5, 6., for they form snakelike connections, in which they fix themselves and then cannot be moved by others except by means of similar connections. Such it is in the other life.

5351. 'And Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh' means a new area of will within the natural, and the essential nature of it. This is clear from the representation of 'Manasseh' in the Word as spiritual good within the natural, and so a new area of will there, dealt with below. This name also implies the essential nature of that good or new area of will. The fact that the name implies the essential nature of this may be recognized from the names given to other people. An explanation of the essential nature accompanies each name, like that given for Manasseh in the following words, For God has made me forget all my labour and all my father's house. These words describe the essential nature of what is meant by 'Manasseh'. What is more, when the phrase 'he called the name' is used, the meaning is that the actual name too contains that essential nature, since 'name' and 'calling the name' mean the essential nature, 144, 145, 1754, 1896, 2009, 2724, 3006, 3421.

[2] The reason why the firstborn who was given the name Manasseh means spiritual good within the natural, or a new area of will there, is that good is in actual fact the firstborn in the Church. That is, with someone who is in the process of becoming a Church, truth is not the firstborn, though it appears to be so, see 352, 367, 2435, 3325, 3494, 4925, 4926, 4928, 4930. The same may also be recognized from the consideration that a person's will takes precedence over his understanding; for the desires in a person's will are the primary constituents of his life, while the ideas in his understanding are secondary to them; and he acts in accordance with the desires of his will. What goes forth from the will is called good in the case of those who through regeneration have received from the Lord a new will; but it is called evil in the case of those who have had no wish to receive such. What goes forth from the understanding however is called truth in the case of the regenerate but falsity in the case of the unregenerate. But because no knowledge of a person's will is possible except through his understanding - for the understanding is the outward form that the will possesses or the outward form taken by the will which enables it to be known - people therefore imagine that truth which goes forth from the understanding is the firstborn. But this is nothing else than the appearance, for the reason that has been stated.

[3] This explains the controversy that existed in former times over whether the truth which is the essence of faith was the firstborn of the Church or whether good which is the essence of charity was such. Those who based their conclusions on the appearance said that truth was the firstborn, whereas those who did not base theirs on the appearance acknowledged that good was. This also explains why at the present day people make faith the primary and absolutely essential constituent of the Church, but charity the secondary and non-essential element. But by supposing that faith alone is what saves a person they have sunk into far deeper error than the ancients. (In the Church faith is used to mean all the truth of doctrine, while charity is used to mean all the good of life.) They do, it is true, call charity and the works of charity the fruits of faith. Yet does anyone believe that those fruits make any contribution to salvation when the belief exists that someone can be saved by faith in the final hour of his life, no matter what kind of life he led before then? More than this, does anyone believe that those fruits contribute in any way to salvation when people use doctrine to set faith apart from works that are the product of charity, saying that faith alone saves without good works, or that works which are matters of life contribute nothing to salvation? Dear, dear! What kind of faith is that, and what kind of Church is it when people cherish faith that is dead and reject faith that is living? For faith without charity is like a body without a soul. But a body without a soul is removed from sight and put away because it stinks, as everyone knows; and in the next life faith without charity is just like this. All who possessed faith so-called which was devoid of charity are in hell; but all who had charity are in heaven. For everyone's life remains with him, whereas doctrine does so only insofar as it draws on that life.

[4] It is less easy to show from other places in the Word that 'Manasseh' means a new area of will within the natural - or what amounts to the same, spiritual good there - than it is to show that 'Ephraim' means a new area of understanding within the natural, or spiritual truth there. Even so, inferences can be drawn regarding the meaning of 'Manasseh' from what is said about 'Ephraim', because in the Word when two are mentioned together in the way these are, one means good, the other truth. Therefore Manasseh's meaning - spiritual good within the natural, which is the essence of the new will there - will be seen in what follows shortly where Ephraim is the subject.