lord’s discovery of the banians and persees. 54T

Thirdly, the reafons by which they do induce a dent to this tranfanimatiofi of fouls,were thefe j becaufe the lbul was impure by the fins and corruptions of the body,therefore it was needful it fhould be fublimed from this corruption, by fuch tranfmi-gration out of one body into another, as chemical fpirits gain a purer effence by paffingthrough the ftill or limbeck divers times; every diftillation taking away fome ofhis grofs part, and leaving it more refined. Again, becaufe it was meet the foul fhouldmake a fatisfacfion for the filthinefs it had contracted, by remaining in the prifon ofthe body, an exile from bleffednefs a longer time, till this paflage from one body toanother had fo purified them, that they might be fit to enter into the Elyfium, orplace of blifs.

Laftly, in confutation of this opinion for prohibition of eating«of flefh, from fuppofalof a metempfychofis, we maintain, that there is no fuch metempfychofis, or tranfani-mation of fouls.

Firft, the immortality of the foul we evince without this chimera of the fancy, by anargument drawn from man’s diifolution : this is the nature of all things that are com-pounded ; that they fhould be refolved into that which they were at firft, before their con-junction. Man is compounded of foul and body; the very diffolution of thefe two in deathdcclareth this, for that cannot be feparated that was not before conjoined. This com-pofition was by life, and a creature without life, being in the foul alone, it is manifeftthat the foul had it before ever it came to the body ; or elfe that which was dead couldnever have lived by the means of that which was likewife dead. If the foul had thislife before the body, it muff need have the fame after in his feparation, and by confe-quence is immortal.

Next, in confutation of their reafons for this opinion, we anfwer ; firft, that the foulis not cleanfed by fuch tranfmigration from body to body, but rather defiled by thatfilthinefs thofe bodies contract, as water becometh defiled by infufion into an uncleanveffel. Much more, fince they affirm the fouls of men enter into beafts, which arecreatures of greater impurity. Befides, thofe fpirits that are fubtiliated by Hills andlimbecks, the fire is effe&ual to their fubliming, but the bodies have not the goodnefsin them that may tend to the foul’s greater purity in fuch tranfmigration. To conclude,it is improbable the foul fhould be enjoined to fuch a fatisfaftion for fin, as tendeth toits greater defilement. Thefe reafons, therefore, avail little to confirm the foul’stranfmigration in the manner premifed.

We, in the laft place, fhall prove this metempfychofis to be no other than a vainimagination, by the reafons following:

1. Then, that the fouls are not derived from one another per traducem , “ byway oftraduftion,” appeareth by Adam’s fpeech to Eve, Gen. ii. 23. “ This is bone of mybone, and flefh of my flefh he doth not fay, foul of my foul, and fpirit of my fpirit.It appeareth then that, though file received her body from Adam, yet fhe had her foulfrom God . And this is that which Zachery affirmeth, Zach. xii. 1. “ The Lordformeth the fpirit of a man within him ; whence Auguftine faith, Earn infundendo ere art,et creando infundi , “ That the foul being put into man was created, and by creating, wasinto man infufed if therefore God created fome, why not all ?

2. Of fpiritual things and corporal, there fhould feem the fame manner of increafe ;but the bodies have new beings, therefore the fouls.

3. If the fouls were purified by their paflage from one body to another, then thatman that had the foul laft, fhould be capable of all that knowledge that was enjoyedby them that had it before, and fo the infant fhould be an experienced creature in paftoccurrences : but we difeern no fuch extraordinary ripenefs of knowledge in one more

than