463. I. THAT THERE ARE TWO KINDS OF CONCUBINAGE, WHICH GREATLY DIFFER FROM EACH OTHER; ONE CONJOINTLY WITH THE WIFE, THE OTHER IN SEPARATION FROM THE WIFE. There are two kinds of concubinage, which greatly differ from each other. The one kind is the adjoining of an additional partner to the bed and living conjointly and simultaneously with her and the wife. The other kind is the taking of a woman as companion of the bed in place of the wife, after legitimate and just separation from the latter. [2] That these two kinds of concubinage are as alien to each other as dirty linen to washed, can be seen by those who look at things clearly and distinctly, but not by those who look at things confusedly and indistinctly. Yea, it can be seen by those who are in conjugial love, but not by those who are in the love of adultery. The latter are in night respecting all the derivations of love of the sex, but the former in day. Yet, those who are in adultery can see these derivations and their distinctions, not indeed in themselves from themselves but from others when they hear about them; for with an adulterer, there is the same faculty of elevating the understanding as with a chaste partner. Yet, after acknowledging the distinctions heard from others, the adulterer, when he immerses his understanding in his own filthy pleasures, obliterates them; for the chaste and the unchaste, and the sane and the insane, cannot abide together, though they can be distinguished by the understanding when separated. [3] Once, in the spiritual world, some spirits who had not reputed adulteries as sins, being asked by me whether they knew a single distinction between fornication, pellicacy, the two kinds of concubinage, and the degrees of adultery, said, "The one is like the other." Asked whether marriage also was like, they looked around to see whether any of the clergy were present, and none being present, they said, "In itself it is." It was different in the case of those who, in the ideas of their thought, had reputed adulteries as sins. These said that in their interior ideas which pertain to perception they saw the differences but had not yet taken pains to discern them and distinguish between them. This I can affirm--that by angels of heaven those distinctions are perceived in their least details. In order therefore that it may be clear that there are two kinds of concubinage opposed to each other, of which the one abolishes conjugial love and the other does not, the damnable kind shall first be described, and afterwards the other which is not hurtful.