9058. And when a man shall smite the eye of his manservant. That this signifies if the internal man shall injure the truth of faith in the external man, is evident from the signification of “smiting,” as being to injure (as above); from the signification of “man” [vir], here a man of the sons of Israel, as being one who is of the church and consequently is in spiritual truth, which is the truth of faith (see n. 9034), thus the internal man, for the truth of faith is in the internal man and makes its life, which is called spiritual life-it is said “the internal man” on account of its relation to the external man, which is signified by “manservant;” from the signification of “the eye,” as being the interior intellectual, and therefore the truth of faith (n. 9051); and from the signification of “manservant,” as being the memory-truth which is in the external man (n. 1895, 2567, 3835, 3849, 8993, 8994), thus also the external or natural man (n. 5305, 7998, 8974). In the sense of the letter it is said “a man” and his “servant,” and thus there are meant two persons; but in the internal sense, in which “man” denotes the internal man, and “servant” the external man, they are in one person. The reason is that in the internal sense no attention is paid to persons, but only to things (n. 5225, 5287, 5434, 8343, 8985, 9007).

1895. And she had a handmaid, an Egyptian. That this signifies the affection of memory-knowledges [scientiae], is evident from the signification of a “handmaid,” and from the signification of “Egypt.” Sarai, who was the mistress or lady, represents and signifies truth adjoined to good, as already said. Truth adjoined to good is intellectual truth in the genuine sense, but rational truth is beneath this and therefore is lower; and this rational truth is born from knowledges [scientiae et cognitiones] vivified by the affection that corresponds to them, and this affection, being of the exterior man, ought to serve the intellectual truth that appertains to the inmost man, as a handmaid serves her lady, or a household servant her mistress; and therefore this affection is what is represented and signified by the “handmaid Hagar.”

[2] How these things stand cannot well be stated to the apprehension, for it must first be known what intellectual truth in the genuine sense is, and also how the rational is born, namely, from the internal man as a father, and from the exterior or natural man as a mother, for without the conjunction of these two nothing rational can possibly come forth. The rational is not born (as is supposed) of knowledges [scientiae et cognitiones], but of the affection of these knowledges, as may be seen from the mere fact that no one can ever become rational unless some delight or affection of these knowledges aspires thereto. The affection is the maternal life itself; and the celestial and spiritual itself, in the affection, is the paternal life; therefore in proportion to the affection, and in accordance with the quality of the affection, in the same proportion, and in the same quality, does the man become rational. In themselves these knowledges are nothing but dead things, or instrumental causes, which are vivified by the life of affection; and such is the conception of the rational man in everyone. The reason why the handmaid was an Egyptian, and the reason why this fact is stated, is that “Egypt” signifies memory-knowledges [scientiae], as before shown (n. 1164, 1165, 1186, 1462).