4171. “被野兽撕裂的, 我没有带来给你” 表那良善所具有的邪恶并非因祂的过错. 这从 “被野兽撕裂” 的含义清楚可知, “被野兽撕裂” 是指别人所造成的死亡, 因而是指非他过错的邪恶. 人所具有的邪恶有许多来源. 第一个来源在于遗传, 从祖父辈和曾祖父辈到父辈, 再从父辈传到他这里, 邪恶在父辈里面就已经堆积如山了. 第二个来源在于他自己实际造作的, 也就是说, 在于人通过邪恶的生活为自己所获得的. 这邪恶部分地由他从遗传, 如同从邪恶的海洋所得来并付诸实践的东西组成, 部分地由他在此之上为自己大量添加的东西组成. 这就是人给自己所获得的自我. 人将其变成自己的这种实际邪恶也有各种来源, 不过通常有两种: 第一种是他从别人那里, 但非因自己的过错而得来的东西; 第二种是他自愿, 因而通过自己的过错而得来的东西. 在圣言中, “被 (野兽) 撕裂的” 就表示人从别人那里, 非因自己的过错而得来的东西; 而 “(动物) 尸体或尸首” 则表示人自愿, 因而通过自己的过错而得来的东西.

正因如此, 无论在古教会还是犹太人当中, 他们都禁止吃自死的, 也就是动物尸体, 以及被 (野兽) 撒裂的. 以下经文就有这项禁令:

凡吃自死的, 或是被野兽撕裂的灵魂, 无论是本地人, 是寄居的, 必不洁净到晚上, 都要洗衣服, 用水洗身, 到了晚上, 才为洁净. 但他若不洗衣服, 也不洗身, 就必担当他的罪孽. (利未记 17:15-16)

又:

自死的或是被野兽撕裂的, 他不可吃, 因此污秽自己. 我是耶和华. (利未记 22:8)

“被 (野兽) 撕裂的” 表示出于虚假的邪恶, 是由林中撕裂的野兽所指的恶人造成的; 因为在圣言中, 凡在地狱者都好比野兽. 出埃及记:

你们要归我作圣洁的人; 因此, 田间被野兽撕裂的肉, 你们不可吃, 要丢给狗. (出埃及记 22:31)

以西结书:

先知对耶和华说, 我的灵魂素来未曾被玷污, 从幼年到如今没有吃过自死的, 或被野兽撕裂的, 那可憎的肉也未曾入我的口. (以西结书 4:14)

又:

无论是鸟是兽, 凡自死的或是撕裂的, 祭司都不可吃. (以西结书 44:31)

这论及主的国度, 新地就在那里.

从这些经文可以看出, “被 (野兽) 撕裂的” 在内义上是什么意思; 为了使这一点显得更清楚, 我们举个例子. 某人过着良善的生活, 也就是出于愿意别人好而向他行善. 假如这人允许自己被陷入邪恶的人说服, 从而相信良善的生活无助于救恩, 因为所有人都生在罪中, 没有人能凭自己意愿良善, 因而行出良善. 假如他由此允许自己被这一观念说服: 所提供的得救方法就是那被称为信的; 因此人凭着信得救, 无需过良善的生活, 即便在临终的那一刻接受信也可以. 如果过着良善生活的这个人允许自己被这样的观念说服, 然后不再关心生活, 甚至蔑视它, 就可以说他 “被 (野兽) 撕裂了”; 因为 “被撕裂” 论及虚假被引入的良善, 那良善由此就不再活着了.

再以婚姻为例, 如果有人一开始将婚姻视为天上的制度, 但后来他 (或许还有他的配偶) 允许自己被说服相信, 婚姻的设立纯粹是为了这个世界的秩序, 为了抚养和照料孩子, 以及继承财产. 另外, 他还允许自己被说服相信, 婚姻的纽带无非一种契约, 若对方同意, 任意一方都可终止或放宽这个契约. 一旦接受了这些观念, 对于婚姻, 他就不再视为天上的事了. 假如这一切导致放荡, 那么后果就是所谓的 “被撕裂”. 其它例子也一样.

恶人就是那 “撕裂” 者, 他们通过基于外在事物的推理而这样做, 而内在事物由于生活的邪恶而无法被引入外在事物. 这一事实从以下经文可以看出来, 耶利米书:

林中的狮子必害死尊大的人, 野地的豺狼必灭绝他们, 豹子要在城外窥伺他们, 凡出城的必被撕碎; 因为他们的罪过极多, 背道的事也加增了. (耶利米书 5:5-6)

阿摩司书:

以东拿剑追赶兄弟, 毁尽怜悯, 他的怒气不断撕裂, 他永怀忿怒. (阿摩司书 1:11)

3310. 'A man of the field' means the good of life that has its origin in matters of doctrine. This is clear from the meaning of 'the field'. In the Word reference is made in many places to the earth (or the land), the ground, and the field. When used in a good sense 'the earth' means the Lord's kingdom in heaven and on earth, and so the Church, which is the Lord's kingdom on earth. 'The ground' is used in a similar though more limited sense, 566, 662, 1066-1068, 1262, 1413, 1733, 1850, 2117, 2118 (end), 2928; and the same things are also meant by 'the field', though in a more limited sense still, 368, 2971. And since the Church is not the Church by virtue of matters of doctrine except insofar as these have the good of life as the end in view, or what amounts to the same, unless matters of doctrine are joined to the good of life, 'the field' therefore means primarily the good of life. But in order that such good may be that of the Church, matters of doctrine from the Word which have been implanted within that good must be present. In the absence of matters of doctrine the good of life does indeed exist, but it is not as yet that of the Church, and so not as yet truly spiritual, except in the sense that it has the potentiality to become so, like the good of life as this exists with gentiles who do not possess the Word and therefore do not know the Lord.

[2] That 'the field' is the good of life in which the things of faith, that is, spiritual truths existing with the Church, are implanted, becomes quite clear from the Lord's parable about the sower in Matthew,

A sower went out to sow, And as he sowed some fell on the pathway, and the birds came and devoured them. Some fell on rocky ground where they did not have much soil, ¹ and immediately they sprang up, since they had no depth of soil ² , but when the sun rose they were scorched; and since they had no root they withered away. Some fell among thorns, and the thorns came up and choked them. But some fell on good soil ² and yielded fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. He who has an ear to hear let him hear. Matthew 13:4-9; Mark 4:3-9; Luke 8:5-8.

This describes four types of land or ground within the field, that is, within the Church. The fact that here 'the seed' is the Lord's Word, and so the truth which is called the truth of faith, and that 'the good soil' is the good which is called the good of charity is evident to anyone, for it is the good in man that receives the Word. 'The pathway' is falsity, 'rocky ground' is truth which is not rooted in good, 'thorns' are evils.

[3] With regard to the good of life which has its origin in matters of doctrine being meant by 'a man of the field', the position is that those who are being regenerated first of all do good as matters of doctrine direct them, for they do not of themselves know what good is. They learn to do good from matters of doctrine concerning love and charity; from these they know who the Lord is, who the neighbour is, what love is, and what charity is, and so what good is. Those who have come into this stage are stirred by the affection for truth and are called 'men (vir) of the field'. But after that, once they have been regenerated they do good not from matters of doctrine but from love and charity, for the good itself which they have learned about through matters of doctrine exists with them, and they are in that case called 'men (homo) of the field'. It is like someone who is by nature inclined to commit adultery, steal, and murder but who learns from the Ten Commandments that such practices belong to hell and so refrains from them. In this state he is influenced by the Commandments, for he fears hell and learns from those Commandments and similarly from much else in the Word how he ought to conduct his life. In his case when he does what is good he does it from the Commandments. But when good exists with him he starts to loathe adultery, theft, and murder to which he was previously inclined. In this state he no longer does what is good from the Commandments but from the good which by now resides with him. In the first state the truth he learns directs him to good, but in the second state good is the source of truth taught by him.

[4] The same also applies to spiritual truths which are called doctrinal and are more interior Commandments still. For matters of doctrine are interior truths which the natural man possesses, the first truths there being sensory ones, the second truths being factual, and interior truths matters of doctrine. The latter are based on factual truths inasmuch as a person can have and retain no idea, notion, or concept of them except from factual truths. But the foundations on which factual truths are based are sensory truths, for without sensory truths nobody is able to possess factual ones. Such truths, that is to say, factual and sensory, are meant by 'a man skilled in hunting', but matters of doctrine are meant by 'a man of the field'. Such is the order in which those kinds of truths stand in relation to one another in man. Until a person has become adult therefore, and through sensory and factual truths possesses matters of doctrine, he is incapable of being regenerated, for he cannot be confirmed in the truths contained in matters of doctrine except through ideas based on factual and sensory truths - for nothing is ever present in a person's thought, not even the deepest arcanum of faith there, which does not involve some natural or sensory idea, though generally a person is not aware of the essential nature of such ideas. But in the next life the nature of them is revealed before his understanding, if he so desires, and also a visual representation before his sight, if he wants it; for in the next life such things can be presented before one's eyes in a visual form. This seems unbelievable but it is nevertheless what happens there.

Poznámky pod čarou: