when separated from the body. 301

solving the problem (as I said above) than one.la our present condition, we have ways of

, applying

Now to apply this to the main subject of the section,0r to the soul in a state of separation. This cannot bere flected on but with much pleasure, I think; and wenow speak with more assurance of the enlarged lifeWhich the soul shall have when separated from the body.^or, s mce ;t ;§ contradictory that its perception shouldbe effected by the modification of motion, as communi-cated by material organs; it is even inconceivable thatprodigious limitation should not be taken off from it,When freed from the confinement of these organs. So^philosophical is Lucretius 's objection, that the foulcould not perceive material objefis, but by the help ofmaterial organs ; i. e. could not perceive matter, but bythe help of matter! And now if we consider perceptionby organs in this view, the wonder will be, not that thefoul is endued with perception, by the mechanism of theeyes, ears, (esc. which hath hitherto been the generalP r ejudice in considering this instance of the Creator 'sPower, and is indeed contradictory; but that the other-wise not bounded perceptivity of the foul, should at allbe made consistent with, or actual perception in any de-gree be preserved, in the union and application of deadmatter to the soul. We carry over our wonder to theimpossible side, and think nothing worth admiring un-less an impossibility is wrought. Though this is onlyone particular instance of our general prejudice in con-sidering the several parts of nature, where all efficiency13 ascribed by us to natural activities and powers of astuggish, substance. Farther*

%