6o A TREATISE 



without the man : which alfo is the effect of her being fixed to 

 Exigence ; for by reafon of that, fhe ftill apprchendeth every im- 

 preflion as a thing. 



But noWj whether her apprehenfion doth include the very im- 

 preflion , which is in the fenfe or in the fanfie,fo that by its own 

 likentffc it be in the foule, er whether the impreflion in the fan- 

 fiemaketha change in the foule, which we cannot difcerne in 

 it felfe,but conceive it to be the imprefiion which is in the fan- 

 lie, becaufethatimpreffionisatthe firft continually prefent at 

 the faid mutation ; is more obfcure and hard todifcover. But 

 when we reflect that after fome time, words doe fuccecd in lieu 

 of this impreflion, aud doe performe the fame effect as the rigi- 

 nall imprefllon,in what language foever they be ottered, fo they 

 beunderftood; we may conclude out of this evident figne, that 

 the impreffion is in the underftandingnot in its owne likeneffe, 

 but in another fhape, which we doe not difcover ; and which is 

 excjtated, as well by the naine.as by the impreflion, in a man that 

 is uled to the names, 



Againe, in a man that learneth things by himfclf,thefeimpref- 

 {lonsferve for words, and not for things; for fuch a man never 

 looketh into his fanfic to difcoarfe upon any thing,but onely up- 

 on the mutation heconceiveth is made in theexterne (cnG. : out 

 of which he gathereth by little and little, the nature of the thing, 

 whofe notion was raade at firft in him by this impreffion. Oat of 

 which it is manifeft, that our knowledge is as different a thing, 

 from the Phantafmes which beat at the ibules doore,as the thing 

 fignifycd is from the found of the word,or as the wine in the cellar 

 is from the bulh : and therefore, it is impoffiblethat thefeule (in 

 which that knowledge rciideth, and which indeed is that know- 

 ledge) (hould be a corpereall or bodily thing : fince of all bodily 

 things, the motions that arc made by the fenfible qualitics,arrivc 

 nc-ereft to afpirituall nature. 



It remaineth now,that we fhould argae for the immateriality 

 Theapprcbn- ? thcfoulc,OHtof thecxtcntof o\x AftrchcnfHH : whichTeemeth 

 fion of negati- to be fo exceffive,as not to be comprehenfible by the limitations 

 ons and priva- of bodies ; and therefore cannot belong unto a body : but bccaufe 

 tions do prove a n t h a t needeih to be faid in this particular, ,followeth plainly out 

 of grounds already urged,and that this point containeth not any 

 notable particularity dcferving mention here; we will not en- 

 Urge 



