434 ObjeStions to the immateriality

in weariness and slumber, than this thingwithin enters fresh upon other scenes of acti-on ; and hears and fees things worth enquir-ing into; and this without the subserviencyof its organs, which are then disabled fromtheir function. That which lives and per-ceives in us, lives and perceives at all times;if its vital and perceptive faculty could be dulyapplied to by fit objects; as from this parti-cular it appears; and from which also it ap-pears, that it can be otherwise applied to, thanby external objects through the senses. Now,without pushing this argument as far as it wasurged in the last section, or taking notice ofthe particular reasoning there, here is such acontrariety of natures obviously discoverable,that it is a wonder men could ever find intheir hearts to ascribe them to the same thing.This principle itself cannot certainly be body,nor the result of the fit disposition of body,being so incessantly active, when the bodylies in a state of temporary death, because ofindisposition (r).

XXIV. Lastly,

(r) This contrariety of natures, viz. the indefeasibleactivity of the foul, and the successive failing of the body,proceeds from the simple nature of the foul, which

hath no parts, (sect. 3.) so that it can lose nothing of

itself