2649. On the day when he weaned Isaac. That this signifies the state of separation, is evident from the signification of “day,” as being state (see n. 23, 487, 488, 493, 893); and from the signification of “being weaned,” as being to be separated (see n. 2647). From the first verse of this chapter the uniting of the Lord’s Divine Essence with His Human Essence has been treated of, in this order: The presence of the Divine in the Human for the sake of unition (verse 1). The presence of the Human in the Divine, and thus a reciprocal unition (see n. 2004) (verse 2). From this unition the Human was made Divine (verse 3). And this successively and continually while the Lord lived in the world (verse 4). And this commenced when the rational was in a state to receive (verse 5). The state of the unition is described as to its quality, with its arcana (verses 6-7). Now follows the separation of the maternal human, and this is continued down to verse 12; which separation is signified in this verse by the weaning of Isaac, and is represented in the following verses by Hagar’s son being sent away out of the house. And as the union of the Lord’s Divine with His Human and of His Human with His Divine is the very marriage of good and truth, and from it is the heavenly marriage, which is the same as the Lord’s kingdom, therefore a great feast is mentioned which Abraham made when he weaned Isaac, by which the beginning of marriage or the first union is signified; which feast and weaning, but for the signification, would never have been mentioned.

[2] As the separation of the first human, which the Lord had from the mother, now follows, and at length the full removal of it, it is to be known that the Lord gradually and continually, even to the last of His life when He was glorified, separated from Himself and put off that which was merely human, namely, that which He derived from the mother, until at length He was no longer her son, but the Son of God, not only as to conception but also as to birth, and thus was one with the Father, and was Jehovah Himself. That He separated from Himself and put off all the human from the mother, so that He was no longer her son, is manifest from His words in John:

When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said unto Him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what [belongs] to Me and to thee ? (John 2:3-4).

In Matthew:

One said, Behold, Thy mother and Thy brethren stand without, seeking to speak to Thee. But Jesus answering said unto him that told Him, Who is My mother? and who are My brethren? And stretching forth His hand toward His disciples, He said, Behold My mother, and My brethren; for whosoever shall do the will of My Father who is in the heavens, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother (Matthew 12:47-50; Mark 3:2-35; Luke 8:20-21).

In Luke:

A certain woman out of the multitude lifting up her voice, said unto Him, Blessed is the womb that bare Thee, and the breasts which Thou didst suck. But Jesus said, Blessed are they that hear the Word of God, and keep it (Luke 11:27-28).

[3] Here, when the woman spoke of His mother, the Lord spoke of those described above, namely, “Whoever shall do the will of My Father, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother;” which is the same as this, “Blessed are they that hear the Word of God, and keep it.”

In John:

Jesus seeing His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing by, said unto His mother, Woman, behold thy son. Then said He to the disciple, Behold thy mother. Therefore from that hour the disciple took her to his own home (John 19:26-27).

From these words it is manifest that the Lord spoke to her according to her thought when she saw Him on the cross, and even then not calling her mother, but “woman;” and that He transferred the name of mother to those who are signified by the disciple; on which account He said to the disciple, “Behold thy mother.” Still more manifest is this from the Lord’s own words, in Matthew:

Jesus asked the Pharisees, saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is He? They say unto Him, David’s. He saith unto them, How then doth David in the spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand until I make Thine enemies Thy foot stool? If David therefore call Him Lord, how is He his Son ? And no one was able to answer Him a word (Matthew 22:41-46 Mark 12:35-37 Luke 20:42-44).

Thus He was no longer the Son of David as to the flesh.

[4] And further, in regard to the separation and putting off of the maternal human those do not comprehend this who have merely corporeal ideas respecting the Lord’s Human, and think of it as of the human of any other man; hence to such these things are stumbling-blocks. They do not know that such as the life is such is the man, and that the Divine Esse [Being] of life, or Jehovah, was in the Lord from conception, and that a similar Esse of life came forth in His Human by means of the union.

2004. And thou shalt be for a father of a multitude of nations. That this signifies the union of the Human Essence with the Divine Essence, cannot be seen so well from an unfolding of the several words in the internal sense, unless they are viewed in a kind of general idea, by which this sense is presented, for such is sometimes the nature of the internal sense, and when it is so, it may be called more universal, because more remote. From the explication of the several words there results this proximate sense: that all truth and all good come from the Lord, for, as we shall see presently, the expression “father” here signifies from Him, that is, from the Lord; “multitude” signifies truth; and “of nations” signifies the good thence derived. But because these-that is, truths and goods-are the means through which the Lord united the Human Essence to the Divine Essence, there arises from this that more universal and more remote sense. The angels perceive these words in this way, and have at the same time a perception of reciprocal union, namely, that of the Lord’s Divine Essence with the Human Essence and of the Human Essence with the Divine Essence; for, as before said, “I, My covenant is with thee” signifies the union of the Divine Essence with the Human Essence; and consequently the words now under consideration signify the union of the Human Essence with the Divine Essence.

[2] That the union was effected reciprocally, is an arcanum which has not yet been disclosed, and it is such an arcanum as can scarcely be explained to the apprehension; for as yet no one knows what influx is, and without a knowledge of influx no idea can possibly be formed in regard to what is reciprocal union. Yet this may in some measure be illustrated from the influx in the case of man, for with man too there is a reciprocal conjunction. From the Lord, through man’s internal (treated of just above, n. 1999), life continually flows into man’s rational, and through this into his external, and in fact into his knowledges [scientifica et cognitiones], and this life not only adapts them to receive the life, but also disposes them into order, and so enables the man to think, and finally to be rational. Such is the conjunction of the Lord with man, without which man could not think at all, still less be rational, as everyone can see from the fact that there are in man’s thoughts numberless arcana of science and analytical art-too numerous to render their exploration possible to all eternity-and which do by no means flow in through the senses or through the external man, but through the internal. Man however, on his part, by means of knowledges [scientifica et cognitiones], advances to meet this life which is from the Lord, and thereby reciprocally conjoins himself.

[3] But as regards the union of the Lord’s Divine Essence with His Human Essence, and of His Human Essence with His Divine Essence, this infinitely transcends the reciprocal conjunction between man and the Lord, for the Lord’s internal was Jehovah Himself and therefore was life itself; whereas man’s internal is not the Lord, and therefore is not life but a recipient of life. Between the Lord and Jehovah there was union, but between man and the Lord there is not union, but conjunction. The Lord united Himself to Jehovah by His own power, and He therefore also became Righteousness; whereas man by no means conjoins himself by his own power, but by the power of the Lord; so that the Lord conjoins man with Himself. It is this reciprocal union that is meant by the Lord, where He attributes what is His own to the Father, and what is the Father’s to Himself, as in John:

Jesus said, He that believeth on Me, believeth not on Me, but on Him that sent Me: I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth in Me may not abide in the darkness (John 12:44-46), in which words lie hidden the deepest arcana-arcana concerning the union of good with truth, and of truth with good; or what is the same, concerning the union of the Divine Essence with the Human Essence, and of the Human Essence with the Divine Essence; and therefore the Lord says, “He that believeth on Me, believeth not on Me, but on Him that sent Me;” and then almost immediately adds, “He that believeth on Me;” with words between that refer to this union, namely, “he that seeth Me seeth Him that sent Me.”

[4] Again in the same gospel:

The words that I speak unto you I speak not from Myself; the Father that abideth in Me, He doeth the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me. Verily I say unto you, He that believeth in Me, the works that I do shall he do also (John 14:10-12).

In these words are contained the same arcana, namely, those concerning the union of good with truth, and of truth with good; or what is the same, of the Lord’s Divine Essence with His Human Essence, and of His Human Essence with His Divine Essence; and He therefore says, “The words that I speak unto you I speak not from Myself; the Father who is in Me doeth the works;” and then He almost immediately adds, “the works that I do;” and here, as before, there are intervening words concerning the union, which declare, “I am in the Father, and the Father in Me.” This is the mystical union of which many speak.

[5] From all this it is evident that the Lord was not another than the Father, although He spoke of the Father as of another, and this on account of the reciprocal unition that was to be effected and that was effected; for He so many times openly says that He is one with the Father, as in the passages just cited: “He that seeth Me seeth Him that sent Me” (John 12:45) also, “The Father that abideth in Me; believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me” (John 14:10-11); and in the same, “If ye had known Me, ye would have known My Father also” (John 8:19); and again, “If ye have known Me, ye have known My Father also; and from henceforth ye have known Him, and have seen Him; Philip saith unto Him, Lord, show us the Father; Jesus saith unto him, Am I so long time with you, and hast thou not known Me, Philip? He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; how sayest thou then, Show us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in Me?” (John 14:7-10 and again, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30 Hence it is that in heaven they know no other Father than the Lord, because the Father is in Him, and He is one with the Father; and when they see Him, they see the Father, as He Himself says (see n. 15).