2654. Mocking. That this signifies not in agreement with or favoring the Divine rational, is evident from the signification of “mocking,” as being that which comes of an affection contrary to what does not agree with and favor one’s self. In the preceding verse it was said that the child grew, and was weaned, and that Abraham made a great feast when he weaned Isaac; by which is signified that when the Lord’s rational was made Divine, the former rational was separated. Therefore there now immediately follows that which concerns the son of Hagar the Egyptian, by whom this rational is meant, as was shown in the explication at the sixteenth chapter, where Ishmael and Hagar are treated of. From this it is likewise manifest that the things which are in the internal sense follow together in a continuous series.

[2] But in regard to the Lord’s first rational, seeing that it was born as with another man, namely, by means of knowledges [per scientias et cognitiones], it could not but be in appearances of truth which are not truths in themselves, as is evident from what has been shown before (n. 1911, 1936, 2196, 2203, 2209, 2519); and as it was in appearances of truth, truths without appearances, such as Divine truths are, could not agree with it or favor it, both because this rational does not comprehend them, and because they oppose it. But take examples for illustration.

[3] The human rational-that namely which has its birth ¹ from worldly things through impressions of sense, and afterwards from analogies of worldly things by means of knowledges [per scientifica et cognitiones]—is ready to laugh and mock if told that it does not live of itself, but only appears to live so; and that one lives the more, that is, the more wisely and intelligently, and the more blissfully and happily, the less he believes that he lives of himself; and that this is the life of angels, especially of those who are celestial, and inmost, or nearest to the Lord; for they know that no one lives of himself except Jehovah alone, that is, the Lord.

[4] This rational would mock also if it were told that it has nothing of its own, and that its having anything of its own is a fallacy or an appearance; and still more would it mock if told that the more it is in the fallacy that it has anything of its own, the less it has; and the converse. So too would it mock if told that whatever it thinks and does from what is its own is evil, although it were good; and that it is not wise until it believes and perceives that all evil is from hell, and all good from the Lord. In this belief, and even in this perception, are all the angels; who nevertheless have what is their own more abundantly than all others; but they know and perceive that this is from the Lord, although it altogether appears as theirs.

[5] Again: this rational would mock if it were said that in heaven the greatest are they who are least, the wisest they who believe and perceive themselves to be the least wise, and the happiest they who desire others to be the most happy, and themselves the least so; that it is heaven to wish to be below all, but hell to wish to be above all; consequently that in the glory of heaven there is absolutely nothing the same as in the glory of the world.

[6] In the same way would that rational mock, if it were said that in the other life there is nothing of space and time, but that there are states, according to which there are appearances of space and time; and that life is the more heavenly the further it is from what is of space and time, and the nearer it is to what is eternal; in which, namely, in what is eternal, there is nothing at all from the idea of time, nor from anything analogous to it: and so with numberless other things.

[7] That there were such things in the merely human rational, and that therefore this rational mocked at Divine things, the Lord saw, and indeed from the Divine spiritual (which is signified by Sarah’s seeing the son of Hagar the Egyptian, n. 2651, 2652). That man is able to look from within into the things in himself which are below, is known by experience to those who are in perception, and even to those who are in conscience; for they see so far as to reprove their very thoughts. Hence the regenerate can see what is the quality of the rational which they had before regeneration. With man such perception is from the Lord; but the Lord’s was from Himself.

Poznámky pod čarou:

2209. And I am become old. That this signifies after it should no longer be of such a nature, namely, not Divine but human, and that this latter should be put off, is evident from the signification of “becoming old,” as being to put off the human (spoken of above, n. 2198, 2203). As regards the rational in general, when it thinks about Divine things, especially from its own truth, it cannot possibly believe that there are such things; both because it does not apprehend them, and because there adhere to it the appearances born from the fallacies of the senses by which and from which it thinks; as is evident from the examples adduced above (n. 2196); to which the following may be added for the sake of illustration.

[2] If the rational be consulted, can it believe that the Word has an internal sense, and this so remote from the literal sense as has been shown? And thus that the Word is that which conjoins heaven with earth, that is, the Lord’s kingdom in the heavens with the Lord’s kingdom on earth? Can the rational believe that souls after death speak with each other most distinctly, without the speech of words, and yet so fully as to express more in a minute than a man does by his speech in an hour? And that the angels do the same, but in a speech still more perfect, and one that is not perceivable by spirits? Also, that on coming into the other life all souls know how to speak in this way, although they receive no instruction in so speaking? Can the rational believe that in one affection of man, nay, in one sigh, there are such numberless things as can never be described, and yet are perceived by angels? And that every affection of man, nay, every idea of his thought, is an image of him, being such as to contain within it in a wonderful manner all the things of his life? Not to mention thousands upon thousands of such things.

[3] The rational, which is wise from sensuous things, and is imbued with their fallacies, when thinking of such things, does not believe that they can be so, because it is unable to form to itself any idea except from such things as it perceives by some sense either external or internal; and what then must be the case when it thinks about Divine celestial and spiritual things, which are still higher? For there must always be some appearances from sensuous things, upon which the thought must lean, and when these appearances are withdrawn, the idea perishes, as has also been evident to me from novitiate spirits, who take the greatest delight in the appearances which they have brought with them from the world, saying that if these should be taken away from them, they did not know whether they could think. Such is the rational as regarded in itself.