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

 

True Christian Religion #696

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

696. The fifth experience. 1

I once prayed the Lord to be allowed to talk with the disciples of Aristotle, and at the same time with the disciples of Descartes and those of Leibnitz, in order to learn what opinions they held on the interplay between the soul and the body. My prayer was answered by the appearance of nine men, three Aristotelians, three Cartesians and three Leibnitzians. They stood round me, the admirers of Aristotle on the left, the followers of Descartes on the right, and the supporters of Leibnitz behind me. A long way off, and separated by gaps, were to be seen three men apparently wearing laurel-wreaths; and the perception flowing in from heaven made me aware that these were the actual champions or founders of the schools. Another man stood behind Leibnitz holding on to the sleeve of his robe; I was told that he was Wolff 2 .

[2] The nine men on seeing one another began with polite greetings and conversation. But soon afterwards a spirit rose up from the underworld carrying a torch in his right hand, which he shook in their faces. This made them three by three to become enemies and they glowered at one another; for they were gripped by a desire to quarrel and dispute.

The Aristotelians, who were also Schoolmen 3 , began by saying: 'Anyone can see that objects flow into the soul by means of the senses, like anyone entering a room through the door, and that what the soul thinks depends upon the inflow. When a lover sees a pretty girl or his bride, does not his eye sparkle and transmit love for her to the soul? When the miser sees bags full of money, is not every one of his senses inflamed with longing from them, and as a result he transmits this to the soul, exciting a desire to possess them? When some haughty person hears himself being praised by another, does he not prick up his ears, and they transmit the compliments to the soul? The bodily senses are like fore-courts offering the only way in to the soul. These and countless similar examples must lead one to conclude that the inflow is from nature, in other words, physical.'

[3] On hearing this the Cartesians clapped their fingers to their brows, and now took them away to say: 'Dear, dear, you are speaking from appearances. Are you not aware that it is not the eye which loves a girl or a bride, but the soul? Likewise, the bodily sense does not desire the money in the bag of itself, but under the control of the soul. Likewise, neither do the ears in any other sense scoop up the compliments paid by toadies. Surely it is perception which produces sensation? And perception is a function of the soul, not of an organ. Tell us, if you can, what it is other than thought which makes the tongue and the lips speak? What is it but the will that makes the hands work? Thought and will are functions of the soul. So what is it but the soul which makes the eye see, the ears hear, and the remaining sense-organs feel, pay attention and notice? These and countless other examples allow everyone, whose wisdom goes beyond bodily sense-impressions, to conclude that there is no inflow from the body into the soul, but from the soul into the body. We call this incidental inflow, or spiritual inflow.'

[4] On hearing this three men, who had been standing behind the previously mentioned groups of three and were supporters of Leibnitz, raised their voices and said: 'We have listened to the arguments on either side and compared them, and we have noticed that on many points one party prevails and on many others another. So, if we may, we should like to settle the dispute.'

When they were asked how, they said: 'There is no inflow from the soul into the body nor from the body into the soul, but both activities take place concordantly and instantaneously. This has been elegantly named by a famous writer, who called it pre-established harmony.'

[5] On the conclusion of this debate, the spirit carrying the torch appeared again, but now holding it in his left hand. He shook it towards the backs of their heads, so causing the ideas of all of them to become confused, and they cried out: 'Our soul does not know, neither does our body, which side to take. So let us draw lots to settle the dispute, and we will support the view represented by the first lot drawn.'

So they took three slips of paper and wrote on one 'Physical Inflow', on the second 'Spiritual Inflow' and on the third 'Pre-established Harmony'. They put the three slips into a hat held upside down and selected someone to draw one. He put his hand in and grasped with his hand the one on which was written 'Spiritual Inflow'. When they saw this and read it out, they all said, some however with a clear and fluent voice, some with a dull and withdrawn voice, 'Let us support this, since it came out first.' Then an angel suddenly appeared standing by, who said: 'Do not believe that the paper favouring Spiritual Inflow came out by chance; it was contrived. For your ideas are so confused that you cannot see its truth, but the truth of itself presented itself to his hand, so that you would support it.'

Footnotes:

1. This section is repeated from Interaction of the Soul and Body 19.

2. Christian Wolff (Arcana Coelestia 1679-1754), a follower of Leibnitz.

3. The Medieval scholars who taught logic.

  
/ 853  
  

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

From Swedenborg's Works

 

Conjugial Love #330

Study this Passage

  
/ 535  
  

330. The second account:

I once heard a friendly discussion among some men regarding the feminine sex, as to whether any woman can love her husband if she is constantly in love with her own beauty, that is, if she loves herself on account of her appearance. The men agreed among themselves, first that women have a twofold beauty, one a natural beauty having to do with their face and figure, and the other a spiritual beauty having to do with their love and demeanor. They agreed also that these two kinds of beauty are very often separated in the natural world, but that they are always united in the spiritual world; for outward beauty in the spiritual world is an expression of a person's love and demeanor. It frequently happens after death therefore that homely women become beautiful, and beautiful women homely.

[2] As the men were discussing this, some wives came to them saying, "Permit us to join you; for what you are discussing you know from observation, but we know it from experience. Besides, as regards the love possessed by wives you know so little as to know scarcely anything. Are you aware that it is a matter of prudence inherent in the wisdom of wives to hide their love for their husbands and conceal it in the recesses of their bosom or at the center of their heart?"

The discussion recommenced, and the first conclusion drawn by the men was that every woman wishes to seem beautiful in appearance and beautiful in demeanor, because she is from birth the form of an affection of love and this affection is expressed in beauty. Therefore a woman who does not wish to be beautiful is not a woman who wishes to love and be loved, and so is not truly a woman.

To this the wives said, "A woman's beauty lies in her gentle tenderness and in her consequent keen sensitivity of feeling. That is what occasions a woman's love for a man and a man's love for a woman. This is perhaps something you do not understand."

[3] The men's second conclusion was that before marriage a woman wishes to be beautiful for men in general, but after marriage, if she is chaste, for her husband only and not for other men.

To this the wives said, "After a husband has tasted the natural beauty of his wife he no longer sees it, but sees instead her spiritual beauty and returns her love because of that. If he calls to mind her natural beauty, he does so with a different view of it."

[4] The third conclusion reached by the men in their discussion was that if a woman after marriage wishes to seem beautiful in the same way as before, she loves men in general and not her husband. "For a woman who loves herself on account of her beauty," they explained, "continually wishes to have her beauty tasted; and because it is no longer seen by her husband - as you women have said - she wishes to have it tasted by men who do see it. It is patent that such a woman has a love for the opposite sex in general and not a love for just one."

At this the wives were silent, though they murmured to themselves, "What woman is so without vanity that she does not wish to seem beautiful to men in general also at the same time as to her one and only?"

Listening to this were some wives from heaven, who were themselves beautiful, being forms of heavenly affection, and they confirmed the three conclusions reached by the men. But they added, "Let women love their beauty and its ornamentation, provided it is for the sake of their husbands and inspired by them."

  
/ 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.