Книга 12

In the eleven previous books we have examined the text of the sacred Scripture called Genesis, from its very beginning to the place where the first man was expelled from paradise, either by establishing and defending what is known to us, or by exploring and examining what is unknown - not so much prescribing what everyone should think about obscure subjects, but showing the necessity of studying what we remain in doubt and not allowing ourselves to be insolent. statements where they were unable to give a convincing judgment. The present twelfth book, treated as carefully as was required of us by the text of the Holy Scripture to be considered, will be devoted to a detailed disclosure of the question of paradise, so that it does not seem that we are shying away from explaining the words of the Apostle, in which by the third heaven, in our opinion, he means paradise, saying: “I know a man in Christ, who fourteen years ago (whether in the body - I don’t know, or out of the body - I don’t know: God knows) was caught up to the third heaven. And I know about such a person (I just don’t know - in the body or outside the body: God knows) that he was caught up into paradise and heard unspeakable words that it is impossible for a person to utter” (2 Cor. 12:2-4). It is often asked what the apostle means by the third heaven, and also whether he wanted it to mean paradise, or whether after he was caught up to the third heaven, he was caught up to paradise, wherever that paradise was, so if he was caught up to the third heaven, this does not mean that he was caught up to paradise, but first to the third heaven, and then to paradise. This question, it seems to me, can be resolved only if someone, based not on the actual words of the apostle, but either on other passages of Scripture, or on other obvious data, finds something that will prove whether heaven is in the third heaven or not, since it seems unclear what the third heaven itself is and how to understand it - whether in relation to physical or spiritual things. One could, of course, say that a person with his body can be caught up only to some bodily place, but since the apostle says that he does not know whether he was caught up in the body or outside the body, then who would dare to say about himself that he knows what the apostle did not know? With all this, if neither the spirit without a body can be raptured into corporeal places, nor the body into spiritual places, then his very doubt (if we only assume that the apostle is writing about himself) seems to force us to understand in the same way the place where he was raptured, that is, in such a way that it is impossible to determine and recognize whether it is corporeal or spiritual. For when bodily images appear to us in sleep or ecstasy, we do not at all distinguish them from the bodies themselves, until, having returned to the bodily senses, we realize that we were dealing with images that we did not perceive with the help of the bodily senses. Who, in fact, having awakened from sleep, does not immediately feel that he has seen dreams, although, when he saw them while sleeping, he could not distinguish them from the bodily sensations of those awake? However, it happened to me (and therefore, I have no doubt, it can happen to others) that, seeing something in a dream, I felt that I was seeing in a dream, and even while sleepy I understood that the images that usually strike us with their incongruity in dreams are not true bodies, but only dreams. But sometimes, however, I was mistaken: seeing, for example, my friend in a dream, I tried to convince him that the bodies we see are not true bodies, but images of those sleeping in a dream, although he himself appeared to me in a dream just like them - even what we are talking to him together is not true, but now, sleepy, he sees something else, and does not know whether I see the same thing; however, when I tried to convince him that it was not himself, I was partly inclined to think that it was he, to whom I, of course, would not have spoken if I had been convinced that it was not him. Thus the sleepy soul, although surprisingly awake, can be deceived by the images of bodies, as if they were the bodies themselves. In ecstasy, I had the opportunity to hear only one person, and a commoner at that, who could barely express his feelings, but knew that he was both awake and seeing something not with his eyes: “I saw him,” he said (I use, as far as I can remember, his own words), “my soul, not my eyes.” But he did not know whether it was a body or a bodily image. For he was not one who could distinguish such things, but at the same time he was so innocently sincere that I listened to him with such confidence as if I myself had seen what he said he saw. That is why, if Paul saw heaven as Peter saw the basket descending from heaven 3 (Acts 10:11), or as John saw everything that he describes in the Apocalypse (Rev. 1:12–20), or as Ezekiel saw a field with the bones of the dead and their resurrection (Ezek. 37:1–10), or as Isaiah saw God sitting, with seraphim and seraphim around Him. the altar, taken from which coal cleansed the mouth of the prophet (Isa. 6:1-7), it is clear that he might not know whether he saw in the body or outside the body. But if he saw outside the body and - not the body, then the question is possible whether these were bodily images, or a substance that does not represent any resemblance of the body, such as God, like the mind, understanding or understanding of a person, like the virtues - prudence, justice, purity, love, piety and all that only we mentally count, dismember, define, without seeing their outline, color, or how they sound, what they smell, what they taste like, whether they are warm or cold, soft or hard, thin or hard; but contemplating them with the help of sight, light and imagination of a different kind, and, moreover, one that is much more excellent and undoubted than the rest. Let us return to the words of the apostle and consider them with greater care, recognizing first that undoubtedly the apostle knew much better and more fully than we did what we are trying to learn in one way or another about the incorporeal and corporeal natures. So, if he knew that in no case should he see either spiritual objects through the body, or corporeal objects apart from the body, then why, from what he saw, did he not recognize how he could see it? For if he was sure that these were spiritual objects, then why was he not at the same time sure that he saw them outside the body? If he knew that these were bodily objects, then why didn’t he know that he could see them only through the body? Where did the doubt arise in him, whether he saw them in the body or outside the body; Didn’t he also doubt whether they were bodies or bodily images? So, first of all, let us consider what there is in his words about which he did not doubt, and if later there remains something in them about which he doubted, then perhaps from what he did not doubt, the question of how he doubted the rest will be resolved. “I know,” he says, “a man in Christ, who fourteen years ago (whether in the body - I don’t know, whether outside the body - I don’t know: God knows) was caught up to the third heaven” (2 Cor. 12:2). So, he knows a man in Christ, fourteen years ago caught up to the third heaven: of this he does not doubt at all; therefore, we should not doubt either. But whether in the body or outside the body that man was caught up, he doubts this, and from here, since he doubts, who of us dares to be sure of this? But will not this raise doubts about the third heaven itself, where, as he says, that man was caught up? For if the words of the apostle indicate something real, then the third heaven is indicated in them; the apostle, as it seemed to him, had reached the first heaven, above which he again saw heaven, having reached which he saw a new heaven, and having already reached the last, he could say that he was caught up to the third heaven. But that there was a third heaven into which he was caught up, he does not doubt this and does not want us to doubt either, for he begins his speech with the word “I know”; So, since the apostle knew what he was saying, then his words can only be considered untrue by someone who does not believe the apostle at all. So, the apostle knew a man caught up to the third heaven; consequently, the heaven into which (that man) was caught up was really the third heaven, and not some kind of corporeal sign, which Moses distinguished both from the very substance of God, and from the visible creation in which God appeared to human and bodily senses, so much as to say: “Show me your glory” (Ex. 33:18), and also not some image of a corporeal thing, seeing which in the spirit, John asked what it meant, and received in response that it was either pride, or people, or something else, when I saw a beast, or a woman, or water, or something else like that (Rev. 13:1, Rev. 17:3, 15-18); but, he says, “I know a man in Christ who... was caught up to the third heaven” (2 Cor. 12:2). If he wanted to call a spiritual image, similar to the bodily sky, heaven, then his body was also only an image of the body in which he was caught up there; Consequently, he called the image of the body his body, just as he called the image of the sky the sky. In this case, he would not try to distinguish between what he knows and what he does not know - he knows a person caught up to the third heaven, but does not know whether he is in the body of the raptured person or outside the body - but would simply talk about the vision, calling what he saw by the names of the objects he saw. And we, when we talk about our dreams or about any revelations in them, we say: “I saw a mountain, I saw a river, I saw three people,” etc., attributing to these images the names that the objects themselves have, the likeness of which we saw; the apostle says: “I know this, but this I do not know.” And if both were presented to him figuratively, in this case he knew both equally or did not know; if the sky appeared to him in its own form, and therefore he knew about it, then how could the body of that man appear to him in a figurative form? In fact, if he saw the bodily sky, why did he hide whether he saw it with his bodily eyes? If he was not sure whether he saw it with his bodily eyes or in his spirit, then he was therefore not sure whether he really saw the bodily sky, or whether it appeared to him figuratively? On the other hand, if he saw an incorporeal substance not in the image of some body, but as we contemplate justice, wisdom, etc., and the sky was like that, then it is clear: nothing like that can be seen with bodily eyes, and therefore, if he knew that he had seen something similar, then he could not doubt that he did not see with the help of the body. What do you know and, for fear of leading the believers astray, do you distinguish from what you do not know? A man, he says, caught up to the third heaven. But this heaven was either body or spirit. If it was a body and was visible through bodily eyes, why does he know that it exists and not know what was visible to him in the body? And if it was a spirit, in that case it either represented a bodily image, and then it is equally unknown whether it was a body, and whether it was visible to it in the body, or whether it was visible as wisdom is contemplated by the mind, that is, without any bodily images, and in this case it is known that could not be visible through the body; Consequently, either both are known, or both are unknown, or what was visible is known, but that through which it was visible is unknown. For incorporeal nature obviously could not be visible through the medium of the body. Although bodies can be visible outside the body, but, of course, not in the same way as with the help of the body, but in a completely different way (if such exists), why would it be surprising if this method could lead the apostle into such error or doubt that, seeing the corporeal sky with non-corporeal eyes, he could say that he does not know whether he saw it in the body or outside the body. It remains, therefore, to admit that since the apostle, who so carefully distinguished what he knew and what he did not know, could not be mistaken, then when he was caught up into heaven, he himself did not know whether he was in the body, as the soul exists in the living body of a sleeping or waking person, or in detachment from the bodily senses in ecstasy; or he completely left the body, leaving it dead until his soul, at the end of the vision, returned to the dead members and he not only woke up, having previously been sleepy, or came to his senses, having previously been immersed in ecstasy, but came to life. Therefore, what he saw there when he was caught up into heaven, and what he claims to know, he saw in his own sense, and not in dreams. But since his soul, detached from the body, left him either completely dead, or was itself in him in some way characteristic of a living body, and its mind was enraptured to contemplate the ineffable secrets of the vision, he did not know whether he was then in the body or not. And what happens visibly not figuratively, but in the proper sense, and at the same time not through the medium of the body, then visibly happens in (this kind of) vision, which surpasses all others. I will try, with the help of the Lord, to explain this in more detail. In one commandment: “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:39), when we read it, there are three types of vision: firstly, through the eyes with which we see the letters themselves, then through the human spirit, with which the neighbor and the absent are mentally imagined, and finally, through mental contemplation, with which conceivable love itself is seen. Among these three kinds, the first is the most obvious: contemplation of heaven and earth and, in general, everything that our eyes see, belongs to it. It is not difficult to understand the second kind, in which absent corporeal objects are thought of, for we imagine both the sky and the earth with everything that we can see on them in the dark, when, not seeing anything with our bodily eyes, we contemplate with our spirit the images of bodies, whether true, as we see the bodies themselves and retain them in memory, or fictitious, as our thinking can imagine them. For in one way we imagine Carthage, which we know, and in another way we imagine Alexandria, which we do not know. The third kind, by which mental love is contemplated, embraces objects that do not have images similar to themselves. For a person, a tree, the sun and in general all celestial or earthly bodies, when they are in our field of vision, we see in their own forms, and when they are absent, we mentally imagine them in their images, imprinted in our spirit; all these objects form two kinds of vision: one through the bodily senses, and the other through the spirit, in which their images are contained. But do we see love in one way as present, in its own form, and in another as absent, in some similar image? Of course not; but, as far as it can be contemplated by the mind, it is contemplated more by some and less by others; if it is thought of as a certain bodily image, then it is not contemplated at all. We have already said something about these three types of vision, as far as, in our opinion, the matter required, in previous books, but did not indicate their numbers. In the present case, in view of the fact that the issue raised requires a somewhat more detailed disclosure on our part, after a brief indication of the types of this view, we must designate them with precise and appropriate names, so as not to return to their description later. So, we will call the first kind bodily, for it is carried out with the help of the body and is perceived by the bodily senses. The second is spiritual, since everything that is not a body and, however, exists, can rightly be called spirit; and the image of the absent body, although similar to the body, is, of course, neither the body nor the vision by which the body is distinguished. The third is reasonable, because calling it mental, from the word “mind,” seems absurd due to the novelty of this name. If I were now to turn to a more subtle explanation of these names, my speech would be drawn out and become very confusing; Yes, there is no urgent need for this. It is enough to know that something is called corporeal either in the proper sense, when it comes to bodies, or figuratively, as, for example, it is said: “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Col. 2:9). Divinity is not a body, but calling the sacraments of the Old Testament a shadow of the future (Col. 2:17), the apostle, in connection with this comparison with shadows, said that in Christ dwells the fullness of the Divinity bodily, since in Him everything that was formed in those shadows was fulfilled and, thus, He represents in some way the body of these shadows, that is, the truth of images and prototypes. Hence, just as he called the images themselves shadows allegorically and in a figurative sense, so in the words that the fullness of the Divinity dwells bodily in Christ, he uses an allegorical turn of phrase. The name “spiritual” is used in many different ways. Thus, the apostle calls the body that will be in the resurrection of the saints spiritual, saying: “A spiritual body is sown, a spiritual body is raised” (1 Cor. 15:44), spiritual in the sense that it will be miraculously adjusted to the spirit for complete bliss and incorruption and will be quickened by one spirit, apart from any need for bodily food, and not in that which will have an incorporeal substance, for the body with which we are clothed now, has no soul substance, and is called soul because the soul dwells in it. Also called spirit is the air itself, or its breath, i.e. movement, as it is said: “Fire and hail, snow and fog, stormy wind” (Ps. 149:8). The souls of animals and people are also called spirit, as it is written: “Who knows whether the spirit of the sons of men ascends upward, and whether the spirit of animals descends down to the earth?” (Eccl. 3:21). The mind itself is also called spirit, in which there is a kind of eye of the soul and to which belongs the image and likeness of God. Therefore, the apostle exhorts to be renewed in the spirit of the mind and to put on the new man created according to God (Eph. 4:23-24), and in another place he speaks of the inner man: “And having put on the new man, who is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him who created him” (Col. 3:10). Also saying: “With my mind I serve the law of God, but with my flesh the law of sin” (Rom. 7:25), and in another place recalling the same saying in the words: “The flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh: they oppose each other” (Gal. 5:17), the apostle then called what he had previously called mind and spirit. Finally, God is also called spirit, as the Lord says in the Gospel: “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). But not from these quotations I cited, where the name of the spirit appears, we borrowed the word from which we called the second kind of vision spiritual, which we are now talking about, but from one place in the letter to the Corinthians, where the spirit most obviously differs from the mind: “For,” says the apostle, “when I pray in an unknown tongue, then, although my spirit prays, my mind remains unfruitful” (1 Cor. 14:14). If by this place the idea is given that the tongue utters hidden and mysterious signs, by which, if they are incomprehensible to the mind, no one is edified by hearing what he does not understand, which is why it was said earlier: “For whoever speaks in an unknown tongue speaks not to men, but to God; images and similarities of bodily things, the understanding of which requires the vision of the mind. And since they are not understood, in which case, according to the apostle, they are in the spirit, and not in the mind, why does he say with even greater clarity: “If you bless with the spirit, then how will one who stands in the place of a commoner say: “Amen” at your thanksgiving?” (1 Cor. 14:16). Hence, since the tongue with which we move in the mouth when we speak gives signs of things, and not the things themselves, the apostle in a figurative sense called language this or that pronunciation of signs before they are understood; when understanding, which already constitutes the property of the mind, is united with them, either revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or teaching appears. Therefore, the apostle says: “If I come to you, brethren, and begin to speak in unknown tongues, what benefit will I bring you if I do not speak to you either by revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or teaching?” (1 Cor 14.6). Therefore, those who, through any similarity of bodily objects, utter signs in the spirit do not yet possess the gift of prophecy, unless the understanding of the mind is added to this to understand them; and he who interprets the vision of another is more of a prophet than he who himself sees the vision. From here it is clear that prophecy belongs rather to the mind than to the spirit in its proper sense, as some lower spiritual force in comparison with the mind, in which ideas about bodily objects are imprinted. Thus, Joseph, who interpreted what the seven ears of corn and seven cows meant, was more of a prophet than the Pharaoh who saw them in a dream (Gen. 41:26). Pharaoh had a spirit tuned to vision, and Joseph had a mind enlightened to understanding. Pharaoh had a tongue, but Joseph had a prophecy, because the former had the representation of only objects, and the latter had the interpretation of representations. Hence, to a lesser extent, a prophet is one who in the spirit, through the images of bodily objects, sees only the signs of things, and to a much greater extent is one who is gifted only with the understanding of these images; but a true prophet is one who possesses both, that is, he sees in the spirit the signifying similarities of bodily objects, and vividly understands them with the mind, as, for example, the superiority of Daniel was tested and proven, who told the king the dream he had seen and explained what this dream meant (Dan. 2:31-45; Dan. 4:17-24). For bodily images were imprinted on his spirit, and their understanding was open to his mind. Based on precisely this difference of spirit, in view of which the apostle said: “I will pray with the spirit, I will also pray with the mind” (1 Cor. 14:15), so that the signs of objects are reflected in the spirit, and their understanding is reflected in the mind - on the basis of this, I say, difference, we now call spiritual that kind of vision in which we mentally imagine images of even absent objects. The rational is that most excellent kind that belongs to the mind itself. I have never seen the mind called in such a variety of ways as the spirit. And whether we use the word reasonable or intelligible, we mean the same thing. Some, however, allow such a difference between these words that the intelligible is an object that can be perceived only by the mind, and the intelligible is the mind itself, which comprehends; but this is still a question, and an important and difficult question, that there should be any object that could be contemplated only by reason, and at the same time not understood by itself. I don’t think that anyone would think or say that there is an object that can be perceived by the mind, but which itself cannot be perceived by the mind. The mind is contemplated in no other way than by the mind. Hence, since the mind can be intuited, it is also intelligible, and since, in accordance with the above distinction, it is intuited, it is also intelligible. Therefore, leaving aside the very difficult question of whether there is anything that is only intelligible, but not itself intelligible, we will now understand the rational and the intelligible as one and the same. Let us now consider these three types of vision, bodily, spiritual and rational, separately, ascending from the lowest to the highest. Previously, we gave an example of how all three types of vision are seen in one saying. For when we read: “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:39), then we physically see the letters, spiritually we think about our neighbor, and with our minds we contemplate love itself. But absent letters can also be spiritually conceivable, and a present neighbor can be physically visible; love, by its substance, can neither be seen with bodily eyes, nor represented by the spirit in an image similar to the body, but can only be cognized and perceived by the mind. Physical vision does not control any of these genera, but the sensation obtained with its help is transmitted to the spiritual family as the governing one. For when we see something with our eyes, the image of what we see is immediately imprinted in the spirit, but is recognized by us as such only when, having taken our eyes away from the object seen with our eyes, we find in the spirit the image of what we saw. And if this is an unreasonable spirit, like the spirit of cattle, then the image of what is visible remains in the spirit. And if it is a rational soul, then it is transferred to the mind, which also controls the spirit; so that what the eyes saw and conveyed to the spirit, so that the image of what was seen was formed in it, is a sign of this or that thing, whether its meaning is immediately understood, or only sought, for it can be understood and found only by the mind. King Belshazzar saw the fingers of a hand writing on the wall (Dan. 5:5), and immediately, through the medium of a bodily sense, the image of this bodily object that appeared to him was imprinted on his spirit, and remained in his thought after the vision itself had already taken place and passed. He contemplated this image in spirit, but did not yet understand it - he did not understand it even when this sign appeared to him bodily and was visible; however, with the help of his mind he already guessed that this was a sign. And since he was searching for what this sign could mean, this search itself was a matter of his mind. Knowing nothing about this vision, Daniel appeared and, having a mind enlightened in the prophetic spirit, revealed to the confused king the meaning of this sign, being, by the kind of vision that belongs to the mind, a greater prophet than the one who saw the sign that physically appeared to him, and mentally contemplated its image in the spirit, but with his mind he could only know that it was a sign, and only seek what it meant. Peter, in a frenzy of mind, saw a vessel descending from heaven, tied at the four corners and filled with various animals, and heard a voice: “Arise Peter, kill and eat” (Acts 10:11–13). When, having come to his senses, he was reflecting on the vision, the Spirit told him about the men sent by Cornelius, saying: “Behold, three men are looking for you; get up, get down and go with them, without any doubt; for I have sent them” (Acts 10:19–20). How the voice he heard in a vision was understood: “What God has purified, do not consider unclean” (Acts 10:15), he showed when he came to Cornelius, in the words: “God has revealed to me that I should not consider any person unclean or unclean” (Acts 10:28). Thus, when, having renounced his bodily senses, he saw the vessel, he heard in his spirit the words: “Kill and eat,” and also: “What God has cleansed, do not consider unclean.” Having come to his senses, he began to reflect in spirit on what his memory retained from what he had heard and seen in vision: all these were not bodily objects, but images of bodily objects, both when he saw and heard them in a frenzy, and now, when he began to remember them and mentally imagine them. But when he was perplexed and searched, trying to understand their meaning, this was already the work of an inquisitive mind, although the solution had not yet been found until those who came from Cornelius appeared; and when a vision was added to the physical one, in which the Holy Spirit, and again in the spirit, said to him: “Get up, get down and walk,” then with a mind illuminated from above, he finally understood the meaning of all the signs that were given to him. From a careful consideration of these and similar examples, it is clear that bodily vision is related to the spiritual, and this latter is related to the rational. But when in the waking state, while our mind is not detached from bodily feelings, we remain with bodily vision, then we distinguish from this vision spiritual vision, with the help of which we mentally imagine absent bodies, either remembering those that we knew, or somehow forming in the spirit an idea of ​​those that we did not know, but which, however, exist, or, finally, inventing those that never existed. From all this we distinguish bodily objects, visible to us and subject to our bodily senses, so that no doubt arises in us that these are bodies, and those are images of bodies. When, either as a result of extreme tension of thought, or due to some illness, as for example this usually happens with phrenetics during fever, or, finally, due to the intervention of some good or evil spirit, the images of bodily objects are reflected in the spirit as if these bodies were accessible to the bodily senses, and tension remains in the bodily senses: in this case, the bodily images appearing in the spirit are contemplated in the same way as bodies are contemplated through bodies; so that at the same time it happens that we see with our eyes some present person, and another, absent person, with our spirit, but also, as it were, with our eyes. I know people who have experienced similar states and talked both with those present and with others who were absent, but also, as it were, with those present. Having come to their senses, some reported what they saw, while others could not do it. So dreams are remembered by some, and forgotten by others. When the attention of the spirit is completely detached from the bodily senses, such a state is usually called ecstasy. In this state, a person does not see any bodies present, even with open eyes, or hear any sounds: all the attention of his soul is directed either to bodily images with the help of bodily vision, or to incorporeal objects that cannot be represented in any bodily image with the help of spiritual vision. But when spiritual vision, with the soul completely detached from the bodily senses in dreams or in ecstasy, stops at the images of bodily objects, then what is contemplated, if it does not mean anything in itself, constitutes the imagination of the soul itself, just as those who are awake, healthy and not in a state of detachment, with the help of thinking, create images of many bodies that are not subject to their senses; the only difference is that they firmly distinguish these images from the present and true bodies. If it means something, whether it appears sleepy or awake, when they see with their eyes the bodies present, and with their spirit they contemplate the images of absent bodies, but as if these latter were before their eyes, or, finally, in the so-called ecstasy, with the soul completely detached from the bodily senses: in this case, this is an extraordinary way (of vision); but due to the intervention of an outside spirit, cases are possible that what the spirit itself knows, through this kind of images, it suggests to the one with whom it connects, whether this latter understands it, or receives clarification from another. For since such revelations are received and, of course, cannot be received from the body, then what remains but to assume that they are received from some spirit? Others believe that the human soul in itself has some power of divination. But if so, why can’t she always, although she always wants to? Maybe because she doesn’t always get the help she could? And when it receives, is it possible that this help does not belong to anyone, or belongs to the body? It remains, therefore, to think that it belongs to the spirit. Then, how does this help come about? Is there something happening in the body that the attention of the soul is, as it were, distracted and retreating from the body, as a result of which it comes to a state where it contemplates in itself significant images that existed in it before, but were not noticed by it, just as in memory we have many things that we do not notice, or in this case something arises that was not previously in the soul itself, but existed in some spirit, in which, renouncing and freeing itself from the body, it does he see these images? But if they were already in her soul as something that belonged to her, why does she so often not understand them? Because in most cases she does not understand them. Is it possible to make the following assumption: just as her spirit receives help to see them, so, in turn, her mind cannot understand them if it does not receive help? Or, perhaps, it is not the physical obstacles that hinder the soul in its desire for visions that are removed and, as it were, resolved, but rather the soul itself is directly carried away into these visions, either only by spiritually contemplating them, or by understanding and rationally? Or, finally, sometimes she sees these images in herself, sometimes through the intervention of some other spirit. Whichever of these assumptions we accept, it, in any case, should not be affirmed categorically, and therefore boldly. One thing is beyond doubt: that the bodily images contemplated by the spirit in those who are awake, or sleepy, or sick, do not always serve as signs of other objects; meanwhile, it would be surprising if ecstasy could ever take place without the images of bodily objects meaning anything. It is not surprising that those possessed by a demon sometimes speak the truth about what is not subject to the feelings of those present; because as a result of some, I don’t know what, hidden infusion of this spirit, it becomes as if one with the spirit of the suffering and possessed. When in these visions the human spirit admires the good spirit, then in no case should one doubt that the images he contemplates serve as signs of other objects, and, moreover, those that are useful to know, for this is already the work of God. It is very difficult to distinguish (these states) in the case when the spirit of malice acts calmly and speaks, without causing any bodily suffering, sometimes even the truth, predicting useful things and taking the form, as it is written, of an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), with the aim of catching it in its nets, gaining trust in what is obviously good. I think that this distinction is possible only with the help of the gift that the apostle is talking about when he speaks of the gifts of God, that to others “discernment of spirits” is given (1 Cor. 12:10). For it is not difficult to recognize him when he leads to something that is contrary to good morals and the rule of faith: in this case he is recognized by many. With the help of the mentioned gift, at the very beginning, when many still seem good, he is immediately recognized as evil. However, both through bodily vision and with the help of images of bodily objects revealed in the spirit, both the good ones teach and the evil ones deceive. Reasonable vision does not make mistakes. For either he who takes something to be other than what it is does not understand, or, if he understands, it is certainly true. The eyes would not know what to do if they saw a body that they could not distinguish from another, or what would the attention of the soul do if the spirit received such a representation of the body that it could not distinguish from the body itself? But reason comes to the rescue, looking for what all this means and what useful things it teaches, and having found it, it achieves its goal, and having not found it, it leaves the question open, so that some dangerous extreme does not lead it into a harmful error. A sober mind, assisted from above, judges what or how much there is of which to think, even otherwise than it is, is not dangerous for the soul. For if, on the part of the good, someone is considered good, even if secretly he was bad, then there is nothing harmful for him or dangerous for those who think so about him, unless he sins regarding the objects themselves, that is, the good itself, from which everyone is good. Otherwise, it would be harmful in some way for all people that during sleep they consider true the bodies of which they dream, the likeness of which, or it would be harmful in some way for Peter what happened to him when he was miraculously freed from his bonds and followed the angel (Acts 12: 7-9) or when he answered in ecstasy: “No, Lord, I have never eaten anything bad or unclean” (Acts. 10:14), considering everything in the vessel to be true animals. All this, as long as it turns out to be different from what was perceived during the vision, should not cause in us a feeling of repentance, unless it reveals gross unbelief or a vain and even godless mood. Therefore, when the devil leads into deception with bodily visions, there is nothing harmful in the fact that the eyes are led into deception, unless in this case a person sins against the truth of faith and common understanding, which God teaches to those who obey Him. If he deceives even the soul in spiritual vision with bodily images to such an extent that it imagines a non-existent body to exist, then this is not at all harmful to the soul if it does not succumb to this dangerous temptation. Sometimes they ask about the ideas of those sleeping when they dream that they are copulating either against their desire, or even contrary to permitted morals. This happens only when objects that we think about in the waking state not by the will of the will, but as we speak for some reason about similar things (as, for example, in the present case, I could not, of course, talk about this if I had not thought about it), are presented to us in a dream and are imprinted on us so much that the flesh is naturally excited by them, and what it naturally collects in itself and emits through the reproductive canals. Let us now assume that the images of bodily things, which I thought of out of necessity in order to talk about them, are represented in a dream with the same force with which the bodies themselves appear to the waking person: in this case, something happens that cannot happen to a waking person without sin. Who, in fact, while speaking and necessarily saying something about his copulation, can not think about what he is talking about? But once the fantasy, which is also active in the thinking of the speaker, appears in the dream so much that the difference between it and the actual bodily mixture disappears, in this case the flesh is immediately aroused and what usually follows follows, although this is done without sin in the same way as without sin serves as the subject of the speech of the waking person that which, without a doubt, is thought by him to be the subject of his speech. With all this, thanks to the good mood of the soul, when it, purified by the best desire, mortifies many desires that are not related to the natural movement of the flesh, which waking people, pure in spirit, curb, but sleepy people cannot do this, because they have no power over what appears to them as an imprint of a bodily image, in no way distinguishable from the body itself, - thanks to such a good mood of the soul, some of its merits are reflected in sleep. So, Solomon, even sleepy, preferred wisdom over everything and, ignoring everything else, asked it from the Lord and thereby, as Scripture testifies, he pleased God and received a reward for his good desire (1 Kings 3:5-15). If all this is so, then bodily vision is related to bodily feeling, which is divided, as it were, into five separately operating channels. Since the most subtle and therefore more than others, closest to the soul element in the body, light, first spreads alone through the eyes and shines in the optic nerves for the contemplation of visible objects, and then in a certain mixture, firstly, with clean air, secondly, with stormy and foggy air, thirdly, with denser humidity, fourthly, with the earth’s mass, then with the sense of vision, in which light acts predominantly, it forms the five senses; as I said about this in the fourth and seventh books. Meanwhile, the visible sky, from which luminaries and stars shine, takes precedence over all bodily elements, just as the sense of vision takes precedence in the body. And since every spirit is, without a doubt, superior to every body, it follows that the spiritual nature, even that in which the images of bodily objects are imprinted, is superior to the corporeal heaven itself, not in location, of course, but in the dignity of nature. Here we are faced with some amazing phenomenon, namely: although the spirit exists before the body, and the bodily image appears later than the body itself, however, arising in time later, but appearing earlier in the existing by nature, the bodily image in the spirit is more excellent than the body itself in its substance. And one should not at all think that in the spirit the body produces anything, as if the spirit were subordinate to the producing body, like matter. Undoubtedly, that which produces is superior to that from which it produces something, and in no case is the body superior to the spirit, but, on the contrary, the spirit is superior to the body. Hence, although we first see some body that we have not seen before, and then its image appears in our spirit, with the help of which we remember what was previously absent; however, this image produces not the body in the spirit, but the spirit itself with amazing speed, far outstripping the slowness of the body, which, as soon as the eye sees, its image already arises in the spirit of the seer without any intermediate moment of time. The same must be said regarding hearing: if the spirit did not immediately perceive in itself the image of the sound perceived by the ear and did not retain it in memory, then it would be impossible to say about the second syllable whether it is the second, since the first, having touched the ear, has already disappeared and does not exist; and in this case, every phrase, every pleasant impression from singing, every bodily movement in our actions would disappear, and there would be no improvement if the movements performed by the body were not retained in the spirit with the help of memory. And they would not have been kept in the spirit if he had not figuratively reproduced them in himself. We even create images of our future movements. For what do we do through the medium of the body that the spirit does not mentally precede, does not first contemplate within itself, and in some way does not arrange for the likeness of all our visible actions? But on the other hand, it is difficult to explain how mental similarities of bodily objects become known to even unclean spirits, and what serves as an obstacle for our soul in its earthly body, that we, on the contrary, cannot see them in our spirit. Nevertheless, based on the most undoubted evidence, we know of cases of detection of people’s thoughts by demons, who, however, if they could see the inner appearance of virtues in people, they would not tempt them; so, for example, if the devil could see noble and amazing patience in Job, then, of course, he would not want to be defeated by the tempted one (Job 2:1-10). We should not be surprised, however, that they reveal to us here and there (information) about events that actually take place a few days later. They can do this thanks not only to the ability to see bodily objects with an acuteness incomparably more excellent than ours, but also to the amazing speed of their bodies themselves, much more subtle than ours. We know of a case in which a priest possessed by an unclean spirit, while in his own house, indicated the time when the presbyter was going to come out to him from his house, twelve miles away, where he was at that moment on his way, how he approached and when he entered the yard, the house and the bedroom, until he appeared before his eyes. The patient does not see all this with his eyes; however, if he had not somehow seen this, he would not have given such correct testimony; but he was sick with a fever and spoke as if in a feverish delirium. He may have been a phreneticist, but for this reason he was considered to be possessed by a demon. He did not accept any food from his household, but only from the elder. He offered fierce resistance to his family as best he could, and only with the arrival of the presbyter did he calm down; he only obeyed him and responded with humility. However, even for the presbyter himself, the patient’s insanity and rage succumbed only when he recovered from the fever, as phreneticists usually recover, and never again experienced anything like it. We also know of such a case that an undoubted phreneticist predicted the future death of one woman, and predicted not in the form of a prophecy, but in the form of a story about a past event. “She died,” he said, leading his story, “I saw how her body was taken out and carried here,” although she was alive; A few days later she suddenly died and was carried exactly where he had predicted. We also had a boy who, upon entering adolescence, suffered severely from a disease of the genital organs; Moreover, the doctors could not guess what was wrong with him - they only saw that his penis was hidden inside so that without cutting off the extreme, extremely long and saggy flesh, it was impossible to see it, and even after that it was barely found. Meanwhile, his groin was burned by the leaking sticky and smelly liquid. But he did not constantly experience acute pain, and when he experienced attacks of it, he howled and shook terribly, although he retained full consciousness, as usually happens during physical suffering. Then, amidst his screams, he fainted and fell with his eyes closed. After some time, as if awakening and no longer feeling pain, he told what he saw. A few days later he was again subjected to the same suffering. In all or almost all of his visions, he said, he saw two people, one elderly and the other a boy, who told him and showed him what he said he saw and heard. Once he saw a host of righteous people singing and rejoicing in a wondrous light and various cruel torments of the wicked; and those two led him and showed him the bliss of some and the torment of others. He saw this on the day of the Lord's Passover, when during the entire Lent of Lent he did not experience suffering, from which he had previously barely been freed for even three days. On the eve of Pentecost, he saw those two who promised him that for forty days he would not feel any pain, and then they gave him medical advice: circumcise the foreskin; after which he was not sick for a long time. When he fell ill again and began to see similar visions, he again received advice from them: to enter the sea up to his beard and after a while come out, and they promised that from now on he would no longer be subject to severe illness, but only to an unpleasant discharge of sticky liquid. And so it happened: after that, he was never again subjected to the same frenzy and did not see anything like what he had seen before, when suddenly, amidst the suffering and terrible screams, subsiding, he was carried away into visions. Subsequently, however, when the doctors cured him of the rest, he could not resist the saints’ favor. If anyone could explore and truly understand the reasons and methods of such visions and prophecies, then I would rather listen to him than reason about it myself. However, I will not hide the fact that I myself think about this subject; Let neither the learned ridicule me as a person who asserts something, nor the unscientists mistake me for a person who teaches, and let both consider me rather an investigator than a knower. I equate all these visions to sleepy visions. How these are sometimes false, and sometimes true, sometimes completely similar to the future, sometimes alarming, and sometimes calm, and when true, sometimes they are indicated in dark hints and, as it were, allegorically; that's exactly what they are. But people love to ask about the unknown and investigate the causes of unusual phenomena, ignoring everyday phenomena, although very often these latter have a more hidden origin. As in the field of sounds, that is, signs that we use in our speech, when they hear a rare word, they ask what it means, and having become familiar with its meaning, they ask further where such a word came from, although with regard to many expressions in everyday life they do not try to find out where they came from; In the same way, they diligently search for causes and foundations and demand clarification from learned people when they encounter something unusual, both in the field of physical and spiritual things. When someone asks me what, for example, the word catus (smart) means, and I answer - prudens (prudent) or acutus (sharp), but he is not satisfied with this, but continues to ask where the word catus came from, then I usually ask him, in turn, where the word acutus came from, which, of course, he does not know, but since this word is in common use, he patiently remains unaware of its origin, believing in at the same time that he will know the meaning of a new word that strikes his ear if he finds out where it comes from. Therefore, anyone who asks me where, in the ecstasy that rarely happens to the soul, visions similar to bodily objects come from, I, in turn, ask where do sleeping people have visions that the soul experiences every day and, however, no one tries, and if they try, then not too much, to investigate this subject. As if the nature of these visions is less amazing just because it is everyday, or less worthy of attention just because it is common to everyone, or if those who do not enter into the study of these phenomena act correctly, then they would act less correctly if they were not interested in those! And I am much more surprised and amazed at the speed and ease with which the soul composes images of bodies that it sees with the help of the eyes, rather than the visions of sleepy and even ecstatic people. However, whatever the nature of the visions, there is no doubt that they are not the body. And for those who are not satisfied with this, let them ask others where they come from; For my part, I admit that I don’t know this. This is said to be inferred directly from examples taken from experience; so, for example, pallor, redness, trembling, even illness of the body have a cause sometimes in the body, and sometimes in the soul - in the body, when either moisture is poured over it, or food or something else enters it from the outside - in the soul, when it is either worried by fear, or embarrassed by shame, or angry, or loves, or experiences something similar, and quite naturally: being more agitated itself, it shakes more strongly what it loves and what it controls. In the same way, if the soul is immersed in visions that are revealed to it not by the bodily senses, but by an incorporeal substance, and is immersed in such a way that it does not distinguish whether it is a body or the likeness of bodies, then the reason for this comes sometimes from the side of the body, and sometimes from the side of the spirit, from the side of the body, or as a result of natural changes occurring in it, such as, for example, dreams occur (because it is natural for a person to sleep according to the body), or as a result of some painful condition of the body, when the bodily senses or they become upset, for example, when phrenetics see bodies at the same time, and visions so similar to bodies, as if the bodies themselves were before their eyes, or when (bodily feelings) are completely absent, for example, when extremely exhausted by some gradually intensifying illness, they seem to leave their body and then return to it again, often telling at the same time what they saw - in the spirit, when, with a completely healthy body, people either fall into such a frenzy that they see through the bodily senses of the body and in the spirit - some similarities, which are not distinguished from bodies, or are completely detached from bodily feelings and, not feeling anything, remain during this spiritual vision in the field of bodily similarities. But when an unclean spirit puts a person in such states, then either demon-possessed or false prophets appear, and when a good spirit appears, then faithful ones speak secrets, or true prophets, when at the same time understanding is also added, or men who see visions and narrate about them in addition to the time that should be indicated by them. But if the cause of such visions occurs from the side of the body, then it is not the body itself that produces them, because the body does not have the power to form anything spiritual; but during sleep, or in disorder, or even when the path of attention (of the soul) is closed from the side of the brain, from where the movement of sensation is directed, the soul itself (which, by its own impulse, cannot stop its activity), being presented or almost confronted with the fact of the impossibility of receiving sensations from bodily objects or directing the power of its attention to them through the body, creates similarities of bodily objects with the help of the spirit or contemplates those that are communicated to it by the spirit; moreover, if she herself creates them, these will be only fantasies, but if she contemplates those communicated by the spirit, these will be signs (of bodily objects). Thus, when the eyes hurt or are completely blind, then although in this case an obstacle to the contemplation of bodily objects exists in the body, however, vision of this kind does not exist at all because the reason lies in the seat of the brain, from where the very feeling attention of the soul is directed. Indeed, blind people see more in their sleep than when they are awake. In sleepy people, the path of sensation leading the attention (of the soul) to the eyes is lulled in the brain, and therefore this attention, being diverted to something else, contemplates dreams, as if bodily forms exist in their presence, so that the sleepy person sees himself awake and thinks that he sees not the likeness of bodies, but the bodies themselves; when the blind are awake, then visual attention follows its own path, but, reaching the eyes, it does not go out, but remains here, so that they feel that they are awake, and at the same time they remain more in the dark even during the day than when they are sleeping at night. And people who see very often sleep with their eyes open, not seeing anything with them, and yet they cannot be called not seeing anything, because they dream with their spirit; and if they wanted to have their eyes closed while awake, they would become incapable of either sleepy or awake vision. However, the only thing that matters here is that from their brain to their very eyes there is a nerve that is not lulled, not upset or closed, and leads the attention of the soul to the very, albeit closed, doors of the body, so that they mentally imagine images of bodies, but in no case mistake them for the bodies that they see with their eyes. The only important thing is where the obstacle to the contemplation of bodily objects is located, when it occurs in the body. If at the very entrance, so to speak, at the doors of the senses, for example, in the eyes, ears and other bodily organs, then only the perception of bodily objects becomes difficult, but the attention of the soul is not distracted by anything else, and therefore does not mistake bodily images for bodies; and if the cause is located inside the brain, from where the paths to the sensation of what is outside are directed, then the instruments of the soul’s very attention, with the help of which it strives to contemplate and feel what is outside, are weakened, upset and closed. And since the soul does not lose this desire, it forms similarities with such clarity that, not being able to distinguish the images of bodily objects from the bodies themselves, it does not know whether it is in the region of images or bodies, and when it knows, it knows in a completely different way than when it deals with the similarities of bodies in thinking. This method can be understood to a certain extent only by experienced people. For it happened to me that while I was sleeping, I knew that I was seeing a dream, and, however, I did not distinguish the similarities of bodily things that I saw from the bodies themselves in the same way as we usually distinguish them, thinking even with our eyes closed or being in the dark. What matters here is whether the attention of the soul is brought even to the closed senses, or whether in the brain, from where it is directed to them, it is for some reason distracted by something else, so that although sometimes the soul knows that it sees not bodies, but the likenesses of bodies, or, considering them, as less experienced, as bodies themselves, it feels that it sees them not with the body, but with the spirit, yet it is far from being in the state in which it is present in its body; hence the blind know that they are awake when the mental likenesses of bodies are clearly distinguished from bodies that they cannot see. And if the soul, with a completely healthy body and not lulled feelings, admires in a vision some hidden spiritual action, then this method differs from the previous one not at all because the reason for the visions itself is different, since in the reasons from the side of the body there is, of course, a difference, and sometimes even to the point of opposites. Thus, phreneticists have disordered pathways of sensation in the head rather in the waking state, so that they see such things as are usually seen by sleepers, whose attention in sleep is diverted from the sensation of wakefulness and turned to the contemplation of dreams. Hence, although the former occurs in the waking state, and the latter in sleep, yet what both see belongs to the same nature of the spirit, from which or in which the likenesses of bodies are obtained. Thus, although the cause of abstract attention is different in the case when in the healthy body of a waking person the soul admires some hidden spiritual power so that instead of bodies it sees the likenesses of bodily objects imprinted in the spirit, the nature of the visions is the same, and it cannot be said that when the cause of the visions lies in the body, then the soul, without any premonition of the future, produces images of the body from itself, as it usually produces them during thinking; and when the spirit is caught up in these visions, they are revealed from above, for the Scripture clearly says: “I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy; Your old men will dream dreams, and your young men will see visions” (Joel 2:28), attributing both to divine action, and the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying: “Do not be afraid to receive Mary your wife,” and also: “Arise, take the Child and His Mother, and flee to Egypt” (Matt. 1 and Matt. 2:13). So, when the spirit of a person is delighted by the contemplation of images with a good spirit, then, I think, these images mean something, and when the reason that the human spirit strives to contemplate them lies in the body, then it is not always necessary to think that they mean anything, but they mean only when they are inspired by a pointing spirit to a sleepy person or someone who is undergoing something from the body that he is detached from carnal feelings. Yes, and people who were awake, not possessed by any illness and not subject to demons, as we know, were inspired by some innermost instinct with such thoughts, which they expressed not only by doing something else in this case, as, for example, Caiaphas uttered a prophecy, although he had no desire to prophesy, but also by beginning to say something in the form of a prophecy. So, during the trip, some young men pretended to be mathematicians, for fun, although they had not the slightest idea about the twelve signs (of the zodiac). When they noticed that their master was surprised at their words and confirmed that they were the pure truth, they became even more emboldened. He was still surprised, confirming their words. Finally, he asked them about the health of his son, whom he was expecting after a long absence and was worried due to the unexpected delay whether something had happened to him. They, without thinking about what would happen after, and wanting to console this man, answered, ready to set off on their journey, that his son was healthy, that he was close and would come on the very day that they indicated, without allowing the thought that after this day he would decide to catch up with them in order to catch them in a lie. Why is there much to say? Just as they were about to leave, their son suddenly appeared. Another young man danced in front of the orchestra, located in a place where, on the occasion of some pagan holiday, there were many idols, and he was not delighted with any spirit, but imitated the frenzied and amusingly imitated acquaintances standing nearby. For according to the customs (of those places) it was allowed for one of the young men, after the sacrifice performed before breakfast, to amuse himself and amuse others in a similar way. Meanwhile, tired of dancing and taking a break, being surrounded by a laughing crowd, he jokingly predicted that the next night in the local forest a man would be torn to pieces by a lion, and as the day came, a crowd would come to look at whose corpse and therefore the place of the real celebration would be empty. And so it happened, although everyone present could see from all his movements that he said this as a joke, without being in a state of mental disorder or frenzy; and even he himself was very surprised at what happened, for he did not know in what state of mind he made his prediction. How do these visions arise in the human spirit? Are they formed directly in it, or are they communicated to it and are contemplated by them as already ready thanks to the entry of something from the outside (so that the angels, just as they communicate to people their knowledge and the likeness of bodily objects, which they foresee in advance in their spirit, so they see our thoughts; of course, not with the eyes, but with the spirit, with the difference, however, that they know our thoughts, although we do not want it, but we can know their thoughts only if they reveal them to us, because I think they have the power to hide their thoughts in some spiritual way, just as we sometimes hide our bodies when we do not want other people’s eyes to see them), and that in our spirit is the reason that it sometimes only contemplates significant images, but does not know whether these images have any meaning, sometimes it feels that they have a meaning, but what exactly it does not know, and sometimes the soul the human, as if by virtue of a more complete revelation, contemplates these images themselves in the spirit, and their meaning in the mind - all this is extremely difficult for us to understand, and to disassemble and explain, even if we understand, is even more difficult. Now, I think, it is enough to point out as undeniable that there is a certain spiritual nature in us, in which similarities of bodily objects are formed, when we touch some body with a bodily sense, and immediately its image is formed in the spirit and reproduced by memory; or we mentally imagine bodies that are absent, but already known to us, so that we form a certain spiritual image of what existed in the spirit even before we began to think about it; or we contemplate the similarities of such bodies, which we do not know, but which, however, we do not doubt - we contemplate not as they exist, but as it seems to our thoughts; or we arbitrarily imagine others that do not exist, or we do not know whether they exist; or from somewhere else various forms of bodily resemblances arise in our spirit, although we did nothing of the kind and did not desire; or, when preparing to do something physically, we mentally anticipate (this action); or in the action itself, whether we say or do something, bodily movements are internally preceded by their similarities in the spirit, for there would not be a single syllable, even the shortest, if it were not foreseen by us; either the sleepy person sees dreams, or they mean nothing, or they mean something; or, when the paths of sensation are disordered and blocked due to bodily ill-health, bodily images of the spirit are so intertwined with actual bodies that they can hardly be distinguished from them at all, no matter whether they have meaning or not; or during some depressing bodily illness or sorrow that blocks the internal paths by which the soul’s attention is directed to the sensation of external objects, images of these objects appear in the spirit much deeper than in sleep; or without any reason in the body, admired by some spirit and at the same time using the bodily senses, the soul is carried away into similar visions, mixing with them bodily visions; or, finally, during this admiration the spirit is so distracted and detached from all bodily sense that it deals only with bodily likenesses with the help of spiritual vision, and I don’t know whether something that has no meaning can be contemplated. Thus, the spiritual nature, in which not bodies, but bodily likenesses are imprinted, has a vision of a lower kind in comparison with the mental or rational light, with which the objects of this lower vision are discussed, and that which is not a body and does not have forms similar to bodies is contemplated, such as, for example, the mind itself and any spiritual virtue, to which the rightly accused and condemned vices of the soul are opposed. For in what other way is reason contemplated, if not with the help of reason? In the same way, love, joy, generosity, benevolence, kindness, faith, custom, abstinence and other similar things are contemplated, by which we draw closer to God, and, finally, God Himself, from Whom are all things and in Whom are all things. So, although in one and the same soul there is the ability to see both what is felt with the help of the body, for example, the bodily sky, earth and everything that can be cognized on them, and what is contemplated by the spirit as the likeness of bodies (which we have already said above), and what, being comprehended by the mind, is neither bodies nor their likenesses; however, all these types of vision have their own order and one is superior to the other. Thus, spiritual vision is superior to physical vision, and rational vision is superior to spiritual vision. The corporeal cannot exist without the spiritual, for at the very moment when the body is felt with the help of the bodily sense, something appears in the soul that is not the body itself, but its likeness; and without this, the sense itself, with the help of which objects outside are felt, would not exist. For it is not the body that perceives, but the soul through the medium of the body, which it uses as a messenger for the formation within itself of what is communicated to it from the outside. Therefore, bodily vision can only be simultaneously with spiritual vision, and is separated from this latter only when the sense is distracted from the body, so that the object visible through the body is imprinted on the spirit. On the contrary, spiritual vision can occur in addition to physical vision, when similarities of absent objects appear in the spirit, many of them either a figment of fantasy or an accidental discovery. In turn, spiritual vision needs the rational for its discussion, but the rational does not need the spiritual as inferior, and therefore bodily vision is subordinate to the spiritual, and both of them are subordinate to the rational. Hence, when we read: “He who is spiritual judges all things, but no one can judge him” (1 Cor. 2:15), then these words should be understood not in the sense of the spirit from which the mind differs, as, for example, the words: “I will pray with the spirit, I will pray with the mind also” (1 Cor. 14:15), but in the sense in which it is said that you need to “be renewed in the spirit of your mind” (Eph. 4:23). For above we showed that the spirit by which the spiritual “judges everything” is also called spirit. Therefore, it seems to me that it would be quite appropriate to think that spiritual vision occupies a kind of intermediate place between rational and bodily vision. For that which is not a body, but is similar to a body, I believe, can be called the average between that which is a true body, and that which is neither a body nor its likeness. Meanwhile, the soul becomes a plaything of bodily likenesses, however, not because of them, but because of its own fault, when, due to a lack of understanding, it mistakes the likenesses for the very objects of which they serve as likenesses. Thus, she is deceived in bodily vision when she believes that what happens in bodies is what (in fact) happens only in the bodily senses, when, for example, it seems to seafarers that what is standing in one place is moving on land, and to those looking at the sky as if luminaries that are actually moving are standing in one place; or when one is mistaken for another (based on some) similarity, either by color, or smell, by sound, by taste or by touch, for in this case sometimes some plaster boiled in a pot is mistaken for peas, the rumble of a passing cart is mistaken for thunder, and if other senses are not taken into account and the matter is limited to touch alone, then a pumpkin is mistaken for an herb known as bee grass, food flavored with a sweetish juice, for prepared from honey, a cheap ring in the dark - for gold, although it is only copper or silver; or when the soul, disturbed by sudden and unexpected bodily visions, thinks that it is either dreaming, or is in a state of some similar spiritual vision. That is why in all bodily visions the evidence of both the other senses and the mind, that is, the mind, is required in order to find, as far as possible, what is true in this kind of objects. In spiritual vision, that is, in bodily likenesses that are contemplated by the spirit, the soul is deceived when it thinks that the images it contemplates are the bodies themselves, or when what appears to it by (some) false guesswork it also attributes to bodies, without seeing which it also assumes (these bodies) by guesswork. But in rational visions the soul is not mistaken, for either it understands, in which case it is true, or, if it is not true, then it does not understand; hence, it is one thing for the soul to be mistaken in what it sees, and quite another to be mistaken because it does not see. Therefore, when the soul is enraptured by visions that are contemplated by the spirit as similarities to bodily objects, so that (it) renounces all bodily feelings much more completely than in sleep, but less than at death, then if at the same time it knows that the spirit sees not bodies, but visions similar to bodies, just as those who are sleepy before waking up know that they are seeing a dream, then this is already a matter of divine suggestion. And if she also contemplates the future, and, moreover, knows that this is precisely the future, either through the human mind itself, assisted from above, or through someone else’s explanation, as happened with John in the Apocalypse, then in this case it will already be a great revelation, although the one to whom such revelations are given may not know whether he has left the body, or is still in the body, but sees all this with a spirit detached from feelings, for the one who is raptured may not know this unless it is communicated to him. But if the soul admires even above these similarities contemplated by the spirit, so that it is transferred to the region of intellectual and intelligible objects, in which the truth is contemplated without any bodily similarities and is not obscured by any fog of false opinions, then in this case the spiritual virtues are no longer difficult and not heavy, for there are neither desires that must be curbed with the help of moderation, nor misfortunes that must be endured with the help of courage, nor lewdness, which must be punished with justice, nor failure, which must be tolerated with the help of prudence. The only virtue there is to love what you see, and the highest bliss is to possess what you love. There, blessed life is drunk from its very source, which also waters some aspects of human life here, so that people in the trials of this age can live moderately, courageously, justly and prudently. For for the sake of reward, where there will be peace and an ineffable vision of the truth, work is undertaken here, abstaining from pleasures, and enduring misfortunes, and helping the poor, and restraining the erring. There the glory of the Lord is seen not through physical vision, as it was visible at Sinai (Ex. 24:16), and not through the spiritual, as Isaiah and John saw it (Is. 6:1; Rev. 1.10), but clearly, insofar as it can be perceived by the human mind by the grace of God. For, as we read in the book of Exodus, Moses wished to see God not as he saw Him on the mountain, and not as he saw Him in the tabernacle, but in His very essence, without any mediation of a corporeal creature, which appears to the senses of mortal flesh, and not through the mediation of bodily likenesses formed in the spirit, but in His true form, as far as a rational creature can perceive Him, having renounced all bodily sense and all signifying divination of the spirit. For it is written like this: “Therefore, if I have found favor in Your sight, then I pray: open Your way to me, so that I may know You” (Exodus 33:13), although a little higher it is said that the Lord “spoke to Moses face to face, as if a man were speaking to his friend” (Exodus 33:11). Therefore, Moses understood what he saw, but desired what he had not yet seen. For a little lower, when God said to Moses: “You have found favor in My sight,” Moses answers God: “Show me Your glory” and receives from the Lord a significant answer: “You cannot see My face; because man cannot see Me and live.” And then the Lord added: “This is my place: stand on this rock; When My glory passes by, I will set you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with My hand until I pass through. And when I remove My hand, you will see Me from behind, but My face will not be visible” (Ex. 33:17–23). However, Scripture does not further say that this happened in a bodily way; and from here it is clear that what was said applies to the Church. For this is the place with the Lord, since the Church is His church and was created on stone, and everything else said then corresponds precisely to this understanding. But, on the other hand, if Moses had not been worthy to see the glory of the Lord he desired, then in the book of Numbers God would not have said to Aaron and Miriam, his brother and sister: “If there is a prophet of the Lord among you, then I reveal myself to him in a vision, I speak to him in a dream; but not so with My servant Moses - he is faithful in all My house: I speak to him mouth to mouth, and openly, and not in fortune-telling, and he sees the image of the Lord” (Num. 12:6-8). This must be understood no longer by the corporeal substance, which appears to the carnal senses, for through the corporeal creature, of course, God spoke to Moses face to face; in the same way, that is, through the medium of a bodily creature accessible to the bodily senses, He spoke in the present case with those whom He reproached and to whom He praised the merits of Moses. Therefore, He speaks incomparably more mysteriously and clearly in ineffable words in His form, in which no one can see Him and remain alive, unless he dies in some way, either completely leaving the body, or detaching himself from bodily senses so that, as the apostle says, he no longer knows whether he is in the body or is outside the body when he is caught up and transferred into such a vision. Therefore, it can be assumed that the apostle called the third heaven that third kind of vision, which is superior not only to the physical vision, by which bodily objects are contemplated, but also to the spiritual, by which bodily likenesses are contemplated through the medium of the spirit - that (third) kind by which the glory of God is contemplated, for the contemplation of which hearts are purified, as it is written: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God” (Matt. 5:8), is contemplated not in the form of any physical or spiritual sign, but “face to face” (Ex. 33:11), or, as it is written about Moses, “mouth to mouth” (Num. 12:8), i.e. in the form in which God exists one way or another, no matter how little our mind is able to comprehend Him, different from Him even in the case when cleansed from all earthly filth and cut off from all body and bodily likeness, for while we are on a journey far from Him, even if we live here righteously. Why shouldn’t we think that God wanted to show the great apostle, teacher of languages, caught up in such an extraordinary vision, the life in which we will live forever after this life? Why not call it paradise, which is coming to replace the one in which Adam lived physically among the shady and fruitful trees? For the Church, which gathers us into the bosom of its love, is called paradise with the apple fruit. But it is so named allegorically on the assumption that under the paradise in which Adam was, the Church was foreshadowed, although, perhaps, under that paradise the life of the saints was also foreshadowed, which they now lead in the Church, and the life that awaits them in the future after the earthly one. Thus, Jerusalem, which in translation means “vision of the world” and at the same time is a city, also means eternal Jerusalem - our common fatherland in heaven, together with those who are saved by hope and wait patiently, hoping for what they do not see (Rom. 8:24–25), and (with those saved) through the Church of the manifold wisdom of God, as well as with the holy Angels, with whom, after this journey, we will have to contemplate it (the wisdom of God) endlessly. But if the third heaven, to which the apostle was caught up, is understood in the sense that above it there is, as they think, a fourth and even several more heavens, among which the third occupies the lowest place (some count them seven, others - eight, others - nine, and some even ten, arguing, on the other hand, that in that sky, which is called the firmament, there are successively many (heavens), and therefore they conclude that they are all corporeal, which, however, is to argue inappropriate in the present case), then perhaps someone will insist or, perhaps, even prove that there are many degrees in both the spiritual and rational kind of vision, and, moreover, different degrees, depending on the greater or less clarity of the revelations. But no matter how everyone understands and imagines this object, one this way, another another, I don’t know any others besides the indicated three types of vision, and therefore I can’t say anything. Frankly speaking, I do not know how many differences there are in each of these genera, so that in each of them, taken separately, one would be consistently better than the other. But just as in bodily light there is the sky, which we see above the earth and from which luminaries and stars shine for us, representing better bodies than earthly bodies, so in the spiritual kind of vision, in which the likenesses of bodies are contemplated with the help of incorporeal light, there are some extraordinary and truly divine visions, which angels amazingly reveal, whether making their own visions ours, or in some unknown way forming in our spirit our own vision - this difficult to understand and even more difficult to put into words. There are also ordinary, human visions that either arise from our spirit, or are somehow aroused in the spirit from the side of the body. For people not only in the waking state pay the attention of their thoughts to bodily similarities, but also in their sleep they dream about what they lack; They go about their business, driven by spiritual desires, and if they fall asleep hungry and thirsty, they persistently dream about food and drink. All this, in comparison with angelic revelations, I believe, should be considered as if in visible nature we began to compare earthly bodies with heavenly ones. Likewise, in the rational kind of vision there is one thing - that which is contemplated in the soul, such as virtues and vices opposite to them, whether they will remain in the future, such as piety, or whether they are useful only in the present life, and then they will not exist, such as faith, with the help of which we believe in what we do not yet see; hope by which we patiently hope for the future; finally, patience itself, with the help of which we endure misfortunes until we arrive where we want. These and similar virtues, which are very necessary in the present life, although they will not exist in the future life, are contemplated by the mind, for they are neither bodies nor images similar to bodies. The other is the light itself, with which the soul is illuminated, so that everything rationally conceivable can be contemplated either in itself or in it: this is God Himself, and that, although rational and created in His image, is still a creature that, when it strives to contemplate this light, struggles with its weakness and because of this has little success. From here, however, she understands everything (the rest) as best she can. Therefore, when she admires the contemplation of the other world, and, having renounced her bodily senses, is more vividly carried away to this vision, of course, not through space and distance, but in her own special way, then even there, at the top of everything, if she finally sees that with the help of which she sees everything, she sees as she understands in herself. If now they ask me whether the soul is transferred to some corporeal places when it leaves the body, or to incorporeal places, but similar to corporeal ones, or even not here, but there, which is superior to both bodies and corporeal likenesses, then I will briefly answer this: to corporeal places it is either transferred only with some body, or it is not transferred. And whether she has any body when she leaves her body, let him who can prove it assert; I don't think so. I consider it spiritual, not physical. It is transferred to spiritual places depending on merit, that is, or to places of punishment similar to bodily ones, which are often referred to by people who were raptured from their bodily senses and, remaining like the dead, saw hellish punishments, since they had on themselves the likeness of both their body, thanks to which they could be transported to those places, and the likeness of feelings, experiencing torment with them. But I see no reason why the soul, having the likeness of its body when its body lies unconscious, although it is not completely dead, while it itself sees the things that people talk about in a state of similar admiration, should not have this likeness when, at the moment of complete death, it leaves the body completely. So, she is transferred either to these places of torment, or to similar bodily places of peace and joy. Meanwhile, it would be a mistake to call both these punishments and this peace and joy false: they are false when they are mistaken for something else. Thus, Peter was mistaken not only when he saw a vessel and mistook its contents not for the likeness of bodies, but for the bodies themselves, but also when, freed by an angel from his shackles, he followed it in a bodily form and, brought face to face with bodily forms, thought that this was a vision. For just as the vessel contained spiritual images that were only similar to bodies, so the bodily liberation from shackles due to the miracle was only similar to the spiritual. But his soul was mistaken only because it took both for something else. Therefore, although the fact that souls, having been separated from their bodies, experience good or bad is not corporeal, but similar to the corporeal, since the souls themselves seem to be similar to their bodies, but both this joy and this languor are true, originating from spiritual substance. So in dreams, it matters whether we see ourselves in a joyful or painful state. Some people regret waking up if they see things in a dream that are pleasant to them, and on the contrary, frightened and shocked by horrors and torment, when they wake up, they are afraid to fall asleep, lest they dream the same thing again. But it goes without saying that the torments of hell are much more terrible, and therefore they are felt much more strongly. And indeed, people who were in a state of detachment from bodily feelings, although not the same as what happens during real death, but deeper than in a dream, say that they saw things much more terrible than those seen in a dream. So, hell undoubtedly exists, but its essence, I think, is not physical, but spiritual. One should not listen to those who claim that hell takes place in real life, but does not exist after death. Let them imagine it in the same way as poetic inventions interpret hell - we must not deviate from the authority of the divine Scriptures, which alone must be believed regarding this subject. However, we could show that their sages had no doubt at all about the essence of hell, which receives the souls of the dead after this life. Meanwhile, it is appropriate to ask why they say that hell is underground if it is not a physical place, or why it is called the underworld if it is not underground. I must admit that I not only think, but also positively know that the soul is incorporeal; however, if anyone can deny that the soul has the likeness of the body and all bodily feelings, he will also be able to deny that the soul sees in a dream, or walks, or sits, or moves here and there and is transported by walking or flying, which cannot happen without some likeness of the body. And if she carries this likeness on herself in hell, then he is not corporeal, but is similar to the body, and likewise she herself, it seems to me, is not in corporeal, but in similar corporeal places, whether in peace or sorrow. I confess, however, that I do not know of such a case that the place where the souls of the righteous rest was called hell. True, the soul of Christ descended to the very places where sinners endure torment (Acts 2:24) in order to free from this torment those whom, as we believe, He judged to save according to His truth, hidden for us. But I don’t know how else to understand the saying: “God has highly exalted Him and given Him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth” (Phil. 2:9-10), if not that He, by His power, resolved the tribulations of some in hell, but He Himself, by that same power, could not be subject to these tribulations. These sorrows were also not subject to Abraham and him in his bosom, that is, in the mystery of his peace, the poor man, between whose peace and the torments of hell, as we read, “a great abyss” (Luke 16:26); and it is not said that they were in hell, but it is said: “The beggar died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. And in hell, being in torment, he raised his eyes and saw Abraham in the distance and Lazarus in his bosom,” and so on. (Luke 16:22–23). From this it is clear that the mention of hell was made in application not to the peace of the beggar, but to the punishment of the rich. Even the words spoken by Jacob to his sons: “With sorrow I will go down to my son into the grave” (Gen. 37:35) were spoken by him, it seems to me, rather out of fear that he would not fall into such excessive sadness that he would go not to the peace of the blessed, but to the torment of sinners. For sorrow is no small evil for the soul, if the apostle feared with such great concern for someone, “so that he would not be consumed by excessive sorrow” (2 Cor. 2:7). But, as noted above, I have not found and am still looking, but I do not find a case where canonical Scripture uses the word “hell” anywhere in a good sense; I don’t know if anyone has heard that Abraham’s bosom and that peace where the beggar was taken by the angels should be understood as something bad, and therefore I don’t understand how one can think that this peace is in hell. But while we are looking for it, we don’t know whether we will find it; our book has gone on so long that it’s time to finish it somehow. Therefore, since we started talking about paradise in connection with the words of the apostle that he knows a man caught up to the third heaven, but does not know whether he was caught up in the body or outside the body, and since that man was caught up to paradise and heard “unspeakable words” there (2 Cor. 12:4), then (based only on these words of the apostle) we do not undertake to say whether heaven is in the third heaven, or whether that man was caught up to the third heaven, but already then from there to heaven. For if paradise in the proper sense is a shady place, and figuratively a spiritual country where the soul is prosperous, then paradise will be not only the great and beautiful third heaven, whatever that may mean in itself, but also a certain joy in man himself, stemming from a clear conscience. Therefore, the Church of saints who live moderately, righteously and piously is rightly called a paradise, filled with blessings and pure pleasures, for even in her very sorrows she is glorified by patience, rejoicing especially in the fact that, due to the many illnesses in her heart, the consolations of God gladden her soul (Ps. 93:19). Isn’t it all the more likely to call Abraham’s bosom paradise, where there are no longer any trials and where peace comes after all the sorrows of this life? There is also its own special light, a great light, in which the rich man, although he was in the darkness of hell and, of course, was very far away, for he was separated from this light by a great abyss, saw and discerned the beggar. If all this is so, then, as they think, hell is located underground, because this is exactly how it appears to our spirit by the indication of the likenesses of bodily things: the souls of the dead, worthy of hell, sinned with carnal love, and therefore, guided by the likeness of bodily things, they represent hell as the same thing that is inherent in dead flesh itself, i.e., descending underground. Then, in Latin, the underworld is called so because it is below; hence, both in relation to bodies, if we adhere to the order of their weight, those that are heavier lie lower, and in relation to the spirit, those that are more oppressed by sadness are lower. Therefore, in the Greek language, the word that is used to call hell (hades) is said to come from the fact that there is nothing pleasant. However, our Savior, who died for us, did not disdain to visit this region in order to free from there those who, as He could not help but know, were to be saved by divine and hidden justice. Therefore, for the soul of the thief, who was told that he would be with Him in paradise that same day, He did not prepare hell, where the punishment of sinners takes place, but either rest in the bosom of Abraham, for Christ is everywhere, since He is the very Wisdom of God, or paradise in the third heaven, or somewhere else where after the third heaven the apostle was raptured, if, however, this is not the same thing, only called different names the place where the souls of the blessed are. So, if by the first heaven we mean everything corporeal that is above water and earth, and by the second - that which is contemplated by the spirit in bodily likeness, like that heaven from where a basket full of animals descended to Peter, finally, by the third - that which is seen by the mind so concentrated and in-depth, detached and purified from all bodily feelings, that everything that exists there, the very substance of God and the Word of God, by which everything was created everything, in the love of the Holy Spirit he can see and hear in an indescribable way: then it is permissible to think that it was here that the Apostle was caught up and here is the best paradise of all, so to speak, the paradise of paradises. For if joy is revealed to the virtuous soul in every good creature, then what could be higher for it than the joy that lies in the Word of God, by whom all things were created? And if anyone is interested in the question, what is the need for the dead to take upon themselves their bodies in the resurrection, if the highest bliss is possible for them even without bodies, then although this question, due to its difficulty, cannot be sufficiently revealed in this speech, in no case should one doubt that the mind of a person, detached from carnal feelings and after death having laid aside the very flesh, even having crossed the line of similarity to the body, cannot see the immutable Substance as they see it holy Angels, for some other more hidden reason, or because he has a certain natural desire to control the body, which desire to a certain extent prevents him from passing with full effort to the highest heaven, until he is united with the body, the control of which will give satisfaction to this desire. But if this body is such that it is difficult and difficult to control, like our real body, which, receiving its existence from a criminal principle, is damaged and burdens the soul, then all the more the mind will turn away from contemplating this sky; he needs to renounce the senses of the flesh in order to receive an indication of how he can achieve vision of the sky. That is why, when our mind receives a body not of the soul, but, as a result of a future change, of the spiritual, then, having become equal with the angels, it will achieve the complete balance of its nature, obeying and commanding, quickening and reviving with such indescribable ease that for it will become glory what was previously a burden. For even then, without a doubt, the same three types of vision will remain, but they will show one instead of the other without any error, both in bodily and spiritual visions, and even more so in rational visions, which will be so clear and obvious that at the present time, with much less obviousness, the corporeal forms themselves, which are subject to our bodily senses, appear to us, to which many are so devoted that they are considered to exist only, and everything that is not such is completely non-existent. The sages stand in such an attitude towards bodily visions that, although they consider them more obvious, they are more confident that one way or another they mentally imagine beyond the bodily form and bodily likeness, although, however, they cannot contemplate this with their minds in the same way as they contemplate those bodily ones with their senses. Meanwhile, the holy Angels are in charge of judgment and administration in the realm of the physical, but do not incline towards it, as it is more obvious, and represent in their minds its signifying similarities and, so to speak, touch them with such power that they can communicate them in revelation even to the human spirit; finally, they contemplate the immutable substance of the Creator in such a way that contemplation of Her and love for Her are preferred to everything, they judge everything in accordance with Her, they are directed towards Her in their activities and from Her they draw everything they do. In a word, the apostle, although raptured from the bodily senses to the third heaven and paradise, for the full and perfect knowledge of things, which is inherent in angels, turned out to be precisely the shortcoming that he did not know whether he was in the body or outside the body. This lack, of course, will no longer exist when, after receiving bodies in the resurrection of the dead, this corruptible will put on the incorruptible and this dead will put on immortality (1 Cor. 15:53). Then everything will be obvious without any error, without any ignorance, the bodily, spiritual and rational will be distinguished according to their orders in pure nature and perfect bliss. I know that some, renowned for their studies of the Holy Scriptures, explained the words of the Apostle about the third heaven in such a way that in this case the differences between bodily, mental and spiritual man are understood, and that the Apostle was delighted to contemplate the order of incorporeal objects, which order in real life spiritual people prefer to everything else and want to enjoy it. But in the first half of this book I have shown clearly enough why I preferred to call "spiritual" and "reasonable" what they would perhaps have called "spiritual" and "spiritual," so that I only gave other names to the same things. But if we, to the best of our ability, have explained this subject correctly, then either the reader will confirm what was said, if he is spiritual, or, with the help of the Holy Spirit, he will use something from this book to become spiritual. This is where we will finish our twelve-volume work. “and he sees the heavens opened and a certain vessel coming down to it”: You might be interested in: