Letter 13: 1. I do not feel pleasure in writing of the subjects which I was wont to discuss; I am not at liberty to write of new themes. I see that the one would not suit you, and that for the other I have no leisure.

Augustine of HippoNebridius|c. 388 AD|augustine hippo
friendship

Augustine to his dear friend Nebridius -- greetings.

1. I take no pleasure in writing about the subjects I used to discuss, and I am not free to take up new themes. The old topics would not suit you now, and for the new ones I have no leisure. Since I left you, I have had neither the opportunity nor the time to pick up and turn over in my mind the questions we used to investigate together. The winter nights are long, certainly, and I do not spend them entirely asleep -- but when I do have free time, other subjects push themselves forward as more urgent.

So what am I to do? Should I be like someone who cannot speak, or like someone who will not? Neither you nor I want that. Very well, then -- here is what the late hours of the night managed to draw out of me while I was pursuing the subject of this letter.

2. You will certainly remember the question that kept coming up between us, leaving us breathless and excited: whether there is some kind of body that permanently belongs to the soul -- what some call its "vehicle." Now, if this thing moves from place to place, it clearly cannot be grasped by pure intellect. And whatever cannot be grasped by the intellect cannot truly be understood.

It is not entirely impossible, however, to form a reasonable opinion about something that lies beyond the intellect if it at least falls within the reach of the senses. But when something is beyond both intellect and sense perception, any speculation about it is too groundless and trivial to bother with. And the thing we are discussing is precisely of this nature -- if it even exists at all. So I ask you: why do we not finally set aside this unimportant question, and with prayer to God raise ourselves to the supreme serenity of the highest Nature?

3. Perhaps you will reply: even though bodies themselves cannot be perceived by the intellect, we can perceive many things about material objects through the intellect -- for example, we know that matter exists. Who would deny this, or claim we are dealing here with mere probability rather than truth? Matter itself may belong to the realm of sense perception, but the assertion that it exists is an intellectual truth -- it cannot be known any other way. So perhaps this unknown body attached to the soul, while not perceptible to our senses, might be perceptible to senses more powerful than ours; and the question of whether it exists might at least be answerable by our minds.

4. If that is what you intend to argue, let me point out that the mental activity we call understanding works in two ways: either the mind grasps something within itself directly -- as when we understand that the intellect itself exists -- or it grasps something prompted by the senses, as when we understand that matter exists. In the first kind, we understand through ourselves, by seeking instruction from God about what is within us. In the second, we understand by seeking instruction from God about what our body and senses have pointed us toward.

If this is correct, then no one can discover by intellect alone whether this body you speak of exists -- only someone whose senses have given them some indication of it could do that. If there is any living creature whose senses provide such an indication, we at least can plainly see that we are not among them. So I consider my earlier conclusion confirmed: this question about the soul's "vehicle" is simply not our problem to solve.

I wish you would think this over carefully and let me know where your reflections lead you.

Modern English rendering for readability. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek for scholarly use.

Related Letters