編者前言
編者為第三章所作前言
Introductory Note to Chapter III by the Editor讀者,尤其是那些不太熟悉經院哲學的讀者,也許會很高興在這裡找到各種哲學的簡短解釋。視覺和言語、下士、想像和智力。味覺、觸覺和嗅覺並不常受到神秘現象的影響,但我們將要說的關於視覺和聽覺的內容,經過必要的修改,也適用於這些感覺。
1. 1. 身體視覺是指看到一個身體物體。下士言語是指人們聽到人類舌頭說出的單字。在這兩種情況下,各自的感官都在發揮其正常功能,這種現象與普通的視覺或聽覺的不同之處僅在於,在後者中,所看到的物體是真實的身體,感知到的詞語來自真實的舌頭,而在視覺或言語中,物體要么只是明顯的,要么至少不是看起來的那樣。因此,當年輕的托比亞斯踏上旅程時,他的同伴阿扎里亞斯並不是真正的人類,而是一個人形的大天使。託拜厄斯確實看到了他,聽到了他的聲音,感受到了他的手的握力。莎拉和她的父母,以及託拜厄斯的父母也看到和聽到了他,但大天使一直透過一個假定的身體,或者可能是一個明顯的身體,讓自己可見和聽到。將這種現象描述為幻影而不是異象更為正確,事實上,我們復活的主向聖女和使徒顯現就屬於這一類。因為,儘管祂是一個真實的身體,但它已經得到了榮耀,因此不再受制於支配純粹人類事物的相同法則。 (聖湯瑪斯,《神學大全》III,第 54 條,第 I-3 條)。
聖女德蘭不只一次告訴我們,她從未見過下士的幻象,也從未聽過下士的言語。
二.想像中的景像或位置是指視覺或聽覺感官看不到或聽到任何東西,但所接收到的印象與感官感知到某些真實物體時在想像中產生的印象相同。因為,根據經院哲學家的說法,想像力位於感官和智力之間,從前者接收印象並將其傳遞給後者。這就是為什麼想像中的異象和言語如此危險,以至於根據聖德蘭、聖十字約翰和其他精神作家的說法,它們不僅不應該被尋找,而且應該盡可能地避開,在任何情況下都不應該被忽視。因為想像力與記憶緊密相連,因此通常不可能確定幻像等是否是所目睹場景的半意識或無意識再現。正是在這裡,欺騙,無論是有意的還是無意的,自欺欺人的還是上級機構的欺騙,都是令人恐懼的。因此,一般規則是,只有在最有力的基礎上才應信任此類願景或說法。根據聖多瑪斯‧阿奎那(Summa theol. IIa IIæ, gu. 175, art. 3 ad q.),《啟示錄》中的以賽亞斯、聖約翰等的異像都是想像的。
作為想像異象的一個例子,我們可以提到聖斯蒂芬,他看到「天開了,人子站在天主的右邊」;他看到「天開了,人子站在天主的右邊」。或是聖彼得,他看見「天開了,有一個器皿從天而降,就像一塊巨大的亞麻布,從天上的四個角垂到地上」。 。 。有聲音對他說:「彼得,起來,宰了吃。」(使徒行傳,七,55;十,11-13)。
這些幻象、言語等並非幻覺。後者是由於身體障礙影響了記憶,導致記憶以一種無序且常常怪誕的方式再現了以前接收到的印象。想像中的視覺獨立於病態狀態而發生,是由一種無關的力量(善或惡)引起的,並且其對像是記憶既沒有也從未認識到的事物。
三.理智的願景或位置是眼睛和耳朵看不到或聽不到任何東西,想像力也接收不到任何感覺的願景或位置。但是,如果想像透過感官傳遞給智力,那麼印象就會直接印在智力上。要理解這一點,有必要記住,我們透過感官獲得的印像在到達智力之前必須經歷轉變——必須被精神化。這是心理學中最困難的問題之一;各個哲學流派提供的解決方案似乎都沒有使它完全擺脫晦澀難懂的狀態。根據聖托馬斯·阿奎那的說法,眼睛收到的印象(Species sensibilis)被一種名為 Intellectus agens 的能力透過抽象(Species impressa)精神化,並被珍藏在記憶中,就像燈籠幻燈片一樣,按需提供。心靈將自己等同於物種印記,產生「心靈之言」(Verbum mentis),其中包含理解或心理概念的行為。 在理智的視覺或言語中,天主在沒有感官、想像或記憶的配合的情況下,直接在心靈上產生了物種印象。由於它的起源是超自然的,而且往往就其對象而言也是超自然的,所以理所當然的是,它太崇高了,以至於記憶無法接受它,因此,正如聖德蘭告訴我們的那樣,這些幻象和言語常常只能被不完全地記住,有時甚至完全被遺忘。另一方面,它們比下士或想像中的幻象和言語危險得多,因為感官和想像力與它們無關,而邪靈無法直接作用於心靈,並且出於聖德蘭所述的原因,完全排除了自欺欺人。聖保羅提到了這樣一個異象的例子:「十四年前,我在基督裡認識一個人(無論是在身體裡我不知道,還是在身體外我不知道:天主知道),這樣的人甚至全神貫注到第三層天。」我認識這樣一個人(無論是在體內還是在體外,我不知道:天主知道): 他被提到樂園裡,聽到了人不能說出口的密語」(哥林多後書十二章 2-4)。
THE readers, especially those not well acquainted with Scholastic philosophy, will, perhaps, be glad to find here a short explanation of the various kinds. of Vision and Locution, Corporal, Imaginary, and Intellectual. The senses of Taste, Touch, and Smell are not so often affected by mystical phenomena, but what we are about to say in respect of Sight and Hearing applies, mutatis mutandis, to these also.
1.
1. A CORPORAL VISION is when one sees a bodily object. A Corporal Locution is when one hears words uttered by a human tongue. In both cases the respective senses are exercising their normal function, and the phenomenon differs from ordinary seeing or hearing merely by the fact that in the latter the object seen is a real body, the words perceived come from a real tongue, whereas in the Vision or Locution the object is either only apparent or at any rate is not such as it seems to be. Thus, when young Tobias set out on a journey, his companion, Azarias, was not a real human being, but an archangel in human form. Tobias did really see and hear him, and felt the grip of his hand; Sara and her parents, as well as Tobias’s parents, saw and heard him too, but all the time the archangel made himself visible and audible by means of an assumed body, or perhaps of an apparent body. It would be more correct to describe such a phenomenon as an APPARITION than as a Vision, and in fact the apparitions of our Risen Lord to the holy women and the apostles belong to this category. For, though His was a real body, it was glorified and therefore no longer subject to the same laws which govern purely human things. (St. Thomas, Summa theol. III., qu. 54, art. I-3).
St. Teresa tells us more than once that she never beheld a Corporal Vision, nor heard a Corporal Locution.
II. AN IMAGINARY VISION OR LOCUTION is one where nothing is seen or heard by the senses of seeing or hearing, but where the same impression is received that would be produced upon the imagination by the senses if some real object were perceived by them. For, according to the Scholastics, the Imagination stands half-way between the senses and the intellect, receiving impressions from the former and transmitting them to the latter. This is the reason why imaginary Visions and Locutions are so dangerous that, according to St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and other spiritual writers, they should not only never be sought for, but as much as possible shunned and under all circumstances discountenanced. For the Imagination is closely connected with the Memory, so that it is frequently impossible to ascertain whether a Vision, etc., is not perhaps a semi-conscious or unconscious reproduction of scenes witnessed. It is here also that deception, wilful or unwilful, self-deception or deception by a higher agency, is to be feared. Hence the general rule that such Visions or Locutions should only be trusted upon the strongest grounds. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, (Summa theol. IIa IIæ, gu. 175, art. 3 ad q.) the visions of Isaias, St. John in the Apocalypse etc., were Imaginary.
As an example of Imaginary Visions we may mention St. Stephen, who saw ‘the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God’; or St. Peter, who saw ‘the heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending, as it were a great linen sheet, let down by the four corners from heaven to the earth . . . and there came a voice to him: Arise, Peter, kill and eat.’ (Acts, vii. 55; X. 11-13).
These Visions, Locutions, etc., are not hallucinations. The latter are due to physical disorder which affects the memory and causes it to represent impressions formerly received by it, in a disorderly and often grotesque manner. The Imaginary Vision takes place independently of a morbid state, is caused by an extraneous power, good or evil, and has for its object things of which the memory neither has nor ever has had cognizance.
III. AN INTELLECTUAL VISION OR LOCUTION is one where nothing is seen or heard by the eyes and ears, and where no sensation is received by the imagination. But the impression which would be delivered by the imagination to the intellect, had it come through the senses and been handed on to the imagination, is directly imprinted upon the intellect. To understand this it is necessary to bear in mind that the impressions we receive through the senses must undergo a transformation—must be spiritualized—before they reach the intellect. This is one of the most difficult problems of psychology; none of the solutions offered by various schools of philosophy seem to render it entirely free from obscurity. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, the impression received by the eye (Species sensibilis) is spiritualized by a faculty called Intellectus agens by means of abstraction (Species impressa), and is treasured up in the memory, like lantern slides, available at demand. The mind, identifying itself with the Species impressa, produces the ‘Word of the mind’ (Verbum mentis), wherein consists the act of Understanding or Mental Conception. In the Intellectual Vision or Locution, God, without co-operation on the part of the senses, the imagination, or the memory, produces directly on the mind the Species impressa. As this is supernatural with regard to its origin, and often also with respect to its object, it stands to reason that it is too exalted for the memory to receive it, so that such Visions and Locutions are frequently only imperfectly remembered and sometimes altogether forgotten, as St. Teresa tells us. On the other hand they are far less dangerous than Corporal or Imaginary Visions and Locutions, because the senses and imagination have nothing to do with them, whilst evil spirits are unable to act directly upon the mind, and self-deception is altogether excluded for the reasons stated by St. Teresa. An instance of such a vision is mentioned by St. Paul: ‘I know a man in Christ above fourteen years ago (whether in the body I know not, or out of the body I know not: God knoweth), such an one rapt even to the third heaven. And I know such a man (whether in the body or out of the body, I know not: God knoweth): that he was caught up into paradise, and heard secret words, which it is not granted to man to utter’ (2 Cor. xii. 2-4).