PART XQ;;

'chap. V.
Ill9ether Bodies be incom^rehenfthk ?
* My ( Tome of them fay, ) »
A { tliey think ) dcA, or M^rctb ■. _Bat ac-
«r,^nijfo this notion it wc havc (hewn.
ther there be a Caiife, we cannot fay whether there be a Patient, for the Patient fntfeis from theCaufe ; Thus both the Caufe and the Pati¬ ent being incomprebenlible, a Body alfo mult e
“S^ trABociy is that which hath a tnple
dimcnlion and refillence : For a point ( they fav) is that which hath no part, a hne is a length without breadth : How when thefe have lecei- ved depth alfo, and
the Bodv we fpaak of, corjhfting of length, hre-d’-h depth and refiftence. But thefe are eafdv difproved’*, for, either they mult fay, that a Bodv is nothing but thefe, or tha^ thing elfe different from thefe: * That it is fomething elfe different from thefe we cannot conceive i for we cannot conceive there n a Body, where there is not length, breadth,
. depth, and refiftence. But if a Body be theft,
fSS S'y,and we prove that thefe are not exiftent, we take SSr/fd M J\way Body ; for the Whole if you take away all themmeos. ji-g Parts, is taken away alfo. ^ 1 here may ^ Page 368. confuted feveral ways, of which we lhall on.>
alledge this ; If there are terms, either they are
Lines, or Superficies, or Bodies ; if they fhah fay, that there is Line or Superficies, they muft grant that each of them can exift by itftlf, or is confidered only in the Bodies. That a Line 01 Superficies exifts by it felf, none perhaps is 10 • foolifh asto imagine : If they fay, that they exift not by themfelves but in the Body ; ^hey
grant that Bodies are maderf them for
* The Test feem; lele- and to
bethusluppU- ed out of his
muiL Idiaiii. Liiau - - - '
then they muft firft have had a fubfiftence by themfelves, and afterwards concur to the mak¬ ing of a Body. Again, neither do they eXift in the things which are called Bodies as, (to omit other Inftances ) we ihall fhew from Contract only: For if the Bodies whichare clapt toge¬ ther touch one another mutually, they muit touch mutually by their terms, that is, by their Superficies - But the Superficies touch not each other in whole, for then they would be united 'one to the other by the aft of touching, tne touch would confound the fubftance? • fo as tc divide two things that touch one another, woulc be a Divulfion. Neither doth a Superficies by fome parts touch the Superficies of the Body which is applyed to it, and by others is united to the Body, whofe terra it is ; certainly no Man can confider this to be without depth and con- fequently, not a Superficies but a Body In like ■ manner if we fuppoft two Superficies, laid one upon the other, according to their terms or bounds J It follows, that, according to tha. which is called their length, (chat is, according to their lines,') thoft lines, by which the Su¬ perficies are faid to touch one another, mail not ' touch one another totally, for then they would be .onfounded^ Neither doth any one line or t; 'm touch, by fome parts, the line to which it
is applyed, and by others is united to the Super¬ ficies, whofe bound it is, for then it would no£ be without breadth, and conftquently no Line c Now if in a Body there is neither Line nor Su¬ perficies, there is neither length, breadth, nor depth in a Body.
If any fhall fay thefe Terms are Bodies ; they may be confuted briefly thus : It length be a Bo¬ dy, it is divided into its three Dimenfions, and each of thoft being a Body, is again divided into its three Dimenfions, and fo into Infinite. Thus a Body will be of infinite Magnitude, be¬ ing divided into Infinite ^ but that is abfurd ; Therefore the forefaid Dimenfions are not Bo¬ dies : And if neither Bodies nor Lines, nor Su¬ perficies, it may well be conceived that they arc not at all. _
Refiftence likewift is not to be comprehend¬ ed or underftood ; tor if it might be compre¬ hended, it would be comprehended from the Touch. Now if we Ihew that the Touch it fclf is incomprehenfible, it will appear that it is ira- polTible to comprehend Refiftence ; That Touch is incomprehenfible, we collect thus 3 Whatfo- ever things touch one another, either touch one another mutually by their Parts ^ or the Whole, the Whole. Not the Whole, the Whole , for that were not to touch, but to be made one 5 neither the Parts, the Parts ; for thoft Parts, though in refpea: of their Wholes they arc Parts, yet in refped of their own Parts arc Wholes, for they have Parcs within themfelves. But Wholes touch not Wholes, for the reafon alledged j and conftquently neither do^ Parts touch Parts ^ thefe Parts, in refpeft of their own Parts, being Wholes. Now, if we cannot com¬ prehend, that Touch may be made either by Whole, or by Parts ; Touch muft be mcompre- henfible, and conftquently fo muft a 6^_y i for if it be nothing more than theft three Dimenfi- ons and Refiftence, and we have ftiewn that each of thefe is incomprehenfible. Body alfo is in¬ comprehenfible. Thus therefoie, as to the no¬ tion of Body it felf, it is incomprehenfible, whe¬ ther there is a Body. ^ r
Moreover, of Bodies, fay they , fome are fen- fible, others intelligible thefe are comprehend¬ ed by Intelled, thoft by the SenftSi The Sen- fes are fimply paflible, but the IntellecL cometh to the comprehenfion of intelligible things, through comprehenfion of Senfibles. If there¬ fore a Body be fomething, it muft either be ftn- fible or intelligible ; Senfible it is no^ for it ftemeth to be comprehended by colleamn ot length, and breadth, and depth, and refiftence, and colour, and fuch like, together with which it is confidered : but the Senfts they hold fimply pajfsve. If they fay, a Body is Intelligi¬ ble there muft be fomething in the nature of Senfible things, by which Bodies, being intelligi¬ ble may be underftood : But there is nothing befides Body and Incorporeal,whereof the l^ncor- poreal is it felf intelligible, the Body therefore is not ftnfible, as we proved ^ and there not in the nature of things any Senfible, by which Body might be underftood, neither will Body be intelligible 1 and if neither ftnfible nor intelligr- ble, and there be nothing befides thefe, we may fay a Body is nothing. Wherefore oppoling theft Reafons, which prove there is no Body^