Allen, Ethan, 1738-1789. An essay on the universal plenitude of being and on the nature and immortality of the human soul and its agency : manuscript, [1784]. MS Am 1825. Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.

of motion, which as necessarily excludes them from one place, as it introduces them into another, but for a being who is every where present, to come "down (upon) on mount Sinai," or to pass by Moses, or to move from place to place, is impossible and unnecessary, illegible since he possesses all places. Such traditions which are believed to be from God, have a natural tendency to prejudice the mind against the progressive discovery of truth and or Science, and fix (it) down to whatever tradition it may have received as sacred, however ridiculous and chimerical.~

Section 2.

Of the immortality of the Soul.

The Doctrine of a real though invisible substance of the Soul, will not (in my opinion) militate against the immortality (of) it, but on the contrary render the evidence of it more conspicuous and unexceptionable. Though our external senses and internal reflections and consciousness, are incompitent to percei(ve,) or comprehend the intrinsic Nature of the Soul, yet we may negatively understand, that it does not exist of senseless matter, since we are conscious (of) the display of rationality, which stupid matter in void of; and in as much as the essence of the Soul does not der(i)ve its existence from incogitative substances, which, in external nature, we perceive by the senses, we can not infer the dissolution of the Soul from that of the

body

body; which if material (yet if the Soul was material its dissolution) would follow of consequence.

But should we exclude in our Idea of the essence of the Soul all possible Substance from it, we should Ideally exclude its existence, for a Soul must exist of something since it can not exist of nothing. What that Substance is we can not define any farther than to say that it is a thinking Substance, or a Substance that is capable (of) reflection and consciousness, part of the property(ies) of the Soul are intelligent exertions or agency, but it is not probable that we shall be able to investigate but a partial knowledge of its properties. That immortality is an essential property of it is the question under consideration, a question of more importance to us than any or all others, this we will therefore particularly attend to, but as this subject has been largely discussed in the fourth Chapter of the volume, to which this is an appendix, we shall indeavour to omit such arguments as are therein contained, and add some that are there omitted.

As the Soul is a moral being we must rely on moral reasonings for the investigation of its eternalization; for neither mathematical nor what we call sensible demonstration (which is predicated on the Senses) can extend to it, for by the mere perception of our senses we have no conception (of) a Spiritual or conscious being, but are apprized of such an existence merely from a consciousness of it, nor has our mathematical computations or calculations, which are so essential to astronomical knowledge, and many other parts of Science, anything to do in this investigation

but

but such clear and unexceptionable sort of demonstration, is are calculated for the discovery of the existence, magnitude, distance, number, quantity, diamiter, and movements of external objects, as those of our Solar System, or any other that come within the description of number, admeasurement, or quantity and the like, so that when we reason on the immortality of the Soul, and find that we are destitute of those kind of proofs for the reality of it, that is are so certain, illegible curious and useful to us in life most of (the) concerns and vicissitudes of life, we are apt to be more or less nonplussed, and wonder that Divine providence has not given us as full and certain (a) demonstration of our immortality (as) of external and sensible objects, not considering that if the Soul had been an object of sense, it would have been material and consequently mortal with the body, and not capable of surviveing it. Hence we infer, that we (are) too apt to demand of providence such kind of demonstration for our immortality as is (utterly) inconsistent with it. The imperceptibileness of the Soul to the organs of sense, instead of being considered as militating against its endless continuance in being, s(h)ould rather be adjudged in favour of it, it is not flesh and blood and therefore may survive death, though it must have existed of Substance or it could not have been united with the body or illegible (capable of a survival of it) at death as we have before argued. If we do but duly consider this matter we may be satisfied that God could not have given us a greater or more certain evidence of our immor -tality than what he has done. Admitting the reality of it to take place in future, and to continue to

be

be taking place forever, or without end, yet it would be impossible for us (in) this stage of being, to conceive how such beings as unbodied human Souls could exist, and be conversible after the dissolution of their bodies. This is a species of knowledge which in nature is not attainable until our premised progressive future State of being and action in the order of intelligent existence takes place, for admitting the reality of such a State, how could we conceive of the manner of it, till the succession of time and revolution of events bring us into that premised future condition of being and action, and consequently into a consciousness of it: as of (things in) this life. We can not be today conscious of an existence tomorrow, nor of one moment beyond the present tense, so that the future existence taht we hope for either in this life or that which we expect beyond death, can not be made known to us, till future existence and circum -stances render the future consciousness of it to be in fact true, for consciousness is predicated on the truth of things or facts, in which there can be no deception. Thus it appears, that were our Souls (admitted to be) immortal, yet we could have no consciousness of it in this life, for that our consciousness of being and action, cannot take place in our minds any sooner or faster, than our progressive existence and actions either in this or (in) a future manner of existence will admit, nor is it in nature possible for God Almighty, to have given us a more extensive consciousness of our existence than what he has done. he could not today have made (us) is conscious of of an existence to morrow, for it would not be in fact

true,

true; nor could he in this life have given us a consciousness of a never ending existence, for the reasons already assigned, but this is no argument against such an existence, any more than that because this days consciousness does not extend to tomorrow, therfore tomorrow will never be, or because a man born blind has no conception or consciousness of colours, therefore there are none. Our ignorance of futurity may (be) an occasion of distrust of it, especially to inconsiderate minds, who collect but little or no knowledge by reasoning, from which (source) only we are able (to) apprehend anything of an existence beyond the time being. Through the medium of our senses we have a conception of external existences, and by recollection (thereon,) illegible suspect existence of them and (by) considering their properties, relations, nature, and tendencies, we in some measure explore their constitutions or at least their entity, and we find from traditions both oral and written, that rain and Sun-shine, Summer and Winter, rainy and fair Season, Monsoons & refreshing breazes, Seed time and harvest, day and night, have interchangably succeeded each other, and do not scruple but that the same order of nature will still be continued, yet are not certain that there will ever be another day, but having been used to a past succession of them, habituate our selves into an expectation and firm belief of

others