5128. 'When you were his cupbearer' means as is the normal position for sensory impressions of this kind. This is clear from the meaning of 'cupbearer' as the powers of the senses, that is, those of them that are subject to the understanding part of the mind, dealt with in 5077, 5082 - the normal position being meant by the expression 'when you were'. The need for sensory impressions to be subject and subordinate to rational ideas has been referred to already in what has gone before; but since the subjection and subordination of them is the subject here in the internal sense, something more must be said about the nature of this.

[2] The person with whom the senses have been made subject is called a rational person, but a person with whom they have not is called one ruled by his senses. But whether a person is rational or whether he is one ruled by his senses is scarcely discernible by others; only the individual himself can know, if he examines himself inwardly, that is, if he examines what he wills and what he thinks. Others cannot know from a person's speech whether he is one ruled by his senses or whether he is a rational person, nor can they know it from his actions, because the life of his thought held within his speech and the life of his will held within his actions cannot be perceived by any of the physical senses. These hear merely the sound he utters, or they see the movement made by his body together with the affection that impels him to make it. One cannot tell whether this affection is artificial or genuine. In the next life however those who are governed by good perceive clearly both what is held within a person's speech and what is held within his actions, and so perceive the nature of the life within them and where that life has its origin. Yet even in the world several indications exist which enable one to deduce to some extent whether the senses are subject to the rational, or the rational to the senses; or what amounts to the same, whether a person is rational or ruled solely by his senses. Those indications are as follows: If one notices that a person who makes false assumptions is not ready to become more enlightened but casts truths altogether aside, dispenses with reason, and obstinately defends falsities, this is an indication that he is ruled by his senses and is not a rational person. His rational is closed, so that it does not let in the light of heaven.

[3] Ruled even more by their senses are those who are quite convinced by what is false, for such a conviction closes the rational altogether. It is one thing to make false assumptions, another to be convinced by what is false. Those convinced by what is false do have some light shining within their natural, but this is like the light in winter. When it shines among them in the next life that light is as bright as snow; but as soon as the light of heaven falls on it, it becomes a dull light, the degree and nature of their conviction making it dark as night. The same is also evident in these people while they are living in the world, for during that time they are unable to see the faintest glimmer of truth. Indeed because of the dullness and benightedness due to the falsity of which they are convinced, they see no value at all in truths and laugh at them. To the simple those people sometimes give the impression that they are rational, for by means of that snowy-white wintry light they are able to employ clever reasonings to substantiate falsities and make them look like truths. This kind of conviction exists in many of the learned, more than in every other kind of person, for they have used syllogistic and philosophical reasonings, and finally much factual knowledge to become firmly convinced by falsities. Among the ancients such people were called serpents belonging to the tree of knowledge, 195-197, but today they may be called those who are ruled inwardly by their senses and are devoid of true rationality.

[4] The main indication that shows whether someone is ruled wholly by his senses or whether he is a rational person exists in the life he leads. By this one does not mean the kind of life that is evident in his words and deeds but the kind that is held inwardly in these. For the source of the life within his words is his thought, and the source of the life within his deeds is his will, both having their origin in his intentions or end in view. The nature therefore of the intentions or end in view present within his words and deeds determines the nature of the life they hold within them, for without the life within them words are mere sounds, while deeds are mere motions. This kind of life is also what is meant when one speaks of life continuing after death. If a person is rational his words flow from right thinking and his deeds from right willing; that is, his words are a product of faith and his deeds a product of charity. But if a person is not rational he can, it is true, make a pretence of acting as one who is rational, and likewise of speaking as one who is such; but no life at all is coming from his rational. For a life of evil closes entirely the path to or communication with the rational, which causes him to be a merely natural person or one ruled by his senses.

[5] There are two things which not only close that path of communication but also rob a person of the ability ever to become rational - deceit and profanation. Deceit is like a subtle poison which affects the inward parts, while profanation is that which mixes up falsities with truths and evils with forms of good. The two completely destroy the rational. Present with everyone there are forms of good and truth which have been stored away by the Lord since earliest childhood. In the Word these forms of good and truth are called remnants, regarding which see 468, 530, 560, 561, 661, 1050, 1738, 1906, 2284; and it is these remnants that deceit poisons and that profanation mixes up with falsities and evils. For what profanation is, see 593, 1008, 1010, 1059, 1327, 1328, 2051, 2426, 3398, 3402, 3489, 3898, 4289, 4601. All these indications show to some extent who a rational person is and who one ruled by his senses is.

[6] When the senses have become subject to the rational, the sensory powers that serve to form a person's first mental images receive light which comes through heaven from the Lord; they are at the same time brought into a state of order that enables them to receive that light and agree with the rational. Once they exist in this condition sensory impressions are no longer a barrier that prevents truths from being either acknowledged or seen, for those that are not in keeping with truths are instantly set aside, while those which are in keeping are accepted. Those that are in keeping are now so to speak at the centre and those that are not are on the fringes. Those at the centre are so to speak raised up towards heaven, while those on the fringes are hanging downwards. Those at the centre receive light from the rational, and when they are manifested visually in the next life they look like small glittering stars which radiate light, gradually decreasing, out to the fringes. This is the kind of form that natural or sensory images are being brought into when the rational has dominion and the senses exist subject to it. This is what happens to a person while he is being regenerated, bringing him as a consequence into a state in which truths can be seen and acknowledged by him in abundance. But when the rational is subject to the senses the opposite happens, for in this case falsities are in the middle or at the centre and truths are on the fringes. The falsities at the centre dwell in a certain kind of light, which however is an inferior and deceptive one, like that emitted by a coal fire. Into this there is flowing light on every side from hell. This inferior light is that which is called darkness, for as soon as any light from heaven flows into it, it is converted into darkness.

1010. That 'shedding man's blood in man' means destroying charity, and 'in man' means residing with man, is clear from the meaning of 'blood', dealt with already, as the holiness of charity, and from the fact that the expression 'man's blood in man' is used, that is, his internal life, which does not reside in him but with him. For the Lord's life is charity, which does not reside within man, since man is filthy and unholy, but with him. That 'shedding blood' is doing violence to charity is clear from places in the Word, including those quoted already in 374, 376, where it has been shown that violence done to charity is called 'blood'.

[2] In the sense of the letter 'shedding blood' is killing, but in the internal sense it is hating the neighbour, as the Lord teaches in Matthew,

You have heard that it was said to the men of old, You shall not kill, and whoever skills will be liable to judgement. But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without cause will be liable to judgement. Matthew 5:21-22.

Here 'being angry' means departing from charity - about which see what has been said already in 357 - and consequently hatred. Someone who hates not only has no charity but also does violence to it, that is, he 'sheds blood'. It is in hatred that murder lies, as is quite clear from the fact that the one desire of him who hates another is to have him killed. And but for the external restraints holding him back he would kill him. This is why killing 'a brother' and 'shedding his blood' is hatred. And being hatred, it is present in every idea he has against him. It is similar with profanation. As has been stated, a person who profanes the Word not only hates the truth but also annihilates it or slays it. This is quite clear in the next life from people who have been guilty of profanation. Although in outward appearance they have been honest, wise, and devout during their lifetime, in the next life they hold in deadly hatred the Lord, and also all goods that stem from love, and all truths of faith, the reason being that these are contrary to all their inner hatred, robbery, and adultery which they have covered over with a display of holiness while adulterating those goods and truths to their own advantage.

[3] That profanation is meant by 'blood' is clear from the following in Moses, in addition to the places quoted already in 374,

Anyone from the house of Israel who slays an ox or a lamb or a goat in the camp, or who slays it outside the camp, and does not bring it to the door of the Tent of Meeting, to offer it as a gift to Jehovah before the dwelling-place of Jehovah, blood will be imputed to that man; he has shed blood, and that man will be cut off from among his people. Leviticus 17:3-4.

Sacrificing anywhere else than on the altar at the Tent of Meeting represented profanation, for 'offering sacrifice' was holy, but offering it 'in the camp' or 'outside the camp' was unholy.