[2] The interior natural is what 'Pharaoh king of Egypt' represents, while the exterior natural is what 'the cupbearer and the baker' represents. The nature of the difference between the two becomes clear from the different ways they look at things, that is, from their thoughts and their conclusions based on those thoughts. The person who uses the interior natural to think with and to form conclusions is rational, and is so insofar as he has absorbed what comes to him through rational thought; but the person who uses the exterior natural to think with and form conclusions is governed by his senses, and is so insofar as he has absorbed what comes to him from sensory evidence. Such a person is called one governed by his senses, whereas the other is called one who is rational-natural. When a person dies he has the entire natural with him; and its form remains the same as that which it took in the world. He is also rational-minded to the extent he has absorbed ideas from rational thought, but sensory-minded to the extent he has absorbed ideas from his senses. The difference between the two is that, to the extent it has absorbed ideas from rational thought and made them its own, the natural looks down on the senses belonging to the exterior natural and controls them by disparaging and casting aside illusions formed by the senses. But to the extent that it has absorbed ideas formed by the bodily senses and made them its own the natural looks down on rational thought by disparaging this and casting it aside.

[3] An example of the difference between the two may be seen in the ability of the rational-natural man to comprehend that no one's life is self-existent but that it comes to him through an influx of life from the Lord by way of heaven, and the inability of one governed by the senses to comprehend the same. For the latter says his senses tell him and he can plainly see that his life is self-existent and that it is pointless to contradict the evidence of the senses. Let another example be given. The rational-natural man comprehends the existence of a heaven and a hell; but one governed by his senses denies the existence of these because he has no conception of another world purer than the one he sees with his eyes. The rational-natural man comprehends the existence of spirits and angels who are not visible to him; but one governed by the senses cannot comprehend the same, for he imagines that what he cannot see or touch has no existence.

[4] Here is another example. The rational-natural man comprehends that it is the mark of an intelligent being to have ends in view, and with foresight to be directing means towards some final end. When he looks at the natural creation from the point of view of the order of everything, he sees the natural creation as a complex system of means and realizes that an intelligent Supreme Being has given them direction, though to what final end he cannot see unless he becomes spiritual. But a person governed by his senses does not comprehend how anything distinct and separate from the natural creation can exist or how some Being superior to the natural order can do so. He has no notion of what exercising intelligence, exercising wisdom, having ends in view, or giving direction to means may be unless all these activities are being spoken of as natural ones; and when they are spoken of as such, his idea of them is like that of one who is designing a machine. These few examples show what is meant by the interior natural and the exterior natural, and by the powers of the senses being cast aside - not sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch in the body, but the conclusions reached by these about interior matters.