Bible

 

創世記 38

Studie

   

1 那時,猶大離開他弟兄去,到一個亞杜蘭名叫希拉的家裡去。

2 猶大在那裡見一個迦南名叫書亞的女兒,就娶他為妻,與他同房,

3 他就懷孕生了兒子,猶大給他起名珥。

4 他又懷孕生了兒子,母親給他起名俄南。

5 他復又生了兒子,給他起名示拉。他生示拉的時候,猶大正在基悉。

6 猶大長子珥娶妻,名叫他瑪。

7 猶大長子珥在耶和華眼中看為惡,耶和華就叫他死了。

8 猶大對俄南:你當與你哥哥妻子同房,向他盡你為弟的本分,為你哥哥生子立後。

9 俄南知道生子不歸自己,所以同房的時候便遺在,免得哥哥留後。

10 俄南所做的在耶和華眼中看為惡,耶和華也就叫他死了

11 猶大心裡:恐怕示拉也,像他兩個哥哥一樣,就對他兒婦他瑪:你去,在你父親裡守寡,等我兒子示拉長大。他瑪就回去,在他父親裡。

12 過了許久,猶大妻子書亞的女兒死了猶大得了安慰,就和他朋友亞杜蘭人希拉上亭拿去,到他剪毛的人那裡。

13 有人告訴他瑪說:你的公公上亭拿剪毛去了。

14 他瑪見示拉已經長大,還沒有娶他為妻,就脫了他作寡婦的衣裳,用帕子蒙著臉,又遮住身體,在亭拿上的伊拿印城口。

15 猶大見他,以為是妓女,因為他蒙著臉。

16 猶大就到他那裡去,罷!讓我與你同寢。他原不知道是他的兒婦。他瑪:你要與我同寢,把甚麼我呢?

17 猶大:我從羊群裡取一隻山羊羔,打發人送來你。他瑪:在未送以先,你願意我一個當頭麼?

18 :我你甚麼當頭呢?他瑪:你的印、你的帶子,和你裡的杖。猶大就了他,與他同寢,他就從猶大懷了孕。

19 他瑪起來走了,除去帕子,仍舊穿上作寡婦的衣裳。

20 猶大託他朋友亞杜蘭人送一隻山羊羔去,要從那女人裡取回當頭來,卻不著他,

21 就問那地方的人:伊拿印旁的妓女在那裡?他們:這裡並沒有妓女。

22 他回去見猶大:我沒有著他,並且那地方的人:這裡沒有妓女。

23 猶大:我把這山羊羔送去了,你竟不著他。任憑他拿去罷,免得我們被羞辱。

24 約過了,有人告訴猶大:你的兒婦他瑪作了妓女,且因行淫有了身孕。猶大:拉出他來,把他燒了!

25 他瑪被拉出來的時候便打發去見他公公,對他:這些東西是誰的,我就是從誰懷的孕。請你認一認,這印和帶子並杖都是誰的?

26 猶大承認:他比我更有,因為我沒有將他我的兒子示拉。從此猶大不再與他同寢了。

27 他瑪將要生產,不料他腹裡是一對雙生。

28 到生產的時候,一個孩子伸出一隻來;收生婆拿紅線拴在他上,說:這是頭生的。

29 隨後這孩子把收回去,他哥哥生出來了;收生婆:你為甚麼搶著來呢?因此給他起名法勒斯。

30 後來,他兄弟上有紅線的也生出來,就給他起名謝拉。

   

Ze Swedenborgových děl

 

Arcana Coelestia # 4823

Prostudujte si tuto pasáž

  
/ 10837  
  

4823. And she conceived again, and bare a son. That this signifies evil, is evident from the signification of a “son,” as being truth, and also good (n. 264); thus in the opposite sense falsity and also evil, but the evil which is from falsity. This evil in its essence is falsity, because it is from it; for one who from a false doctrine does what is evil, does also what is false; but because it is done in act, it is called evil. That by the firstborn son is signified falsity, and by this one evil, is evident from its being related of this son that he did evil in act, namely, that “he destroyed the seed to the earth, that he might not give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did was evil in the eyes of Jehovah; and He caused him also to die” (verses 9 and 10). Here also it is evident that this evil was from falsity. Moreover, in the ancient churches by the second son was signified the truth of faith in act; and therefore by this son falsity in act, that is, evil. That evil is what is signified by him, may be seen also from the fact that Er the firstborn was named by his father, or Judah; while this son, or Onan, was named by his mother, the daughter of Shua, as may be seen in the original tongue. For in the Word by a “man” is signified falsity, and by a “woman” the evil thereof (see n. 915, 2517, 4510). That by the daughter of Shua is signified evil, may be seen above (n. 4818, 4819). Wherefore Er, because he was named by his father, signifies falsity, and Onan, because he was named by his mother, signifies evil; for the former was thus as it were the father’s son, but the latter as it were the mother’s.

[2] In the Word “man and wife,” and also “husband and wife,” are often mentioned; and when “man and wife” are mentioned, by “man” is signified truth, and by “wife” good, and in the opposite sense by “man” is signified falsity, and by “wife” evil; but when “husband and wife” are mentioned, good is signified by “husband,” and truth by “wife,” and in the opposite sense evil is signified by “husband,” and falsity by “wife.” The reason of this mystery is this: in the celestial church the husband was in good, and the wife in the truth of this good; but in the spiritual church the man is in truth, and the wife in the good of this truth; such were they in fact then, and such are they now, for the interiors of man have undergone this change. Hence where celestial good and celestial truth from it are treated of in the Word, it is said “husband and wife;” but where spiritual good and spiritual truth from it are treated of, it is said “man and wife,” or rather “man and woman.” From this, as also from the expressions themselves, it is known what good and what truth are treated of in the Word, in its internal sense.

[3] This too is the reason of its having been occasionally stated that marriages represent the conjunction of good and truth, and of truth and good. Moreover, conjugial love has its origin from this conjunction of good with truth; and conjugial love with the spiritual from the conjunction of truth with good. Marriages also actually correspond to these conjunctions. From all this it is evident what is involved in the father’s naming the first son, and the mother’s naming the second, and also the third-as appears from the original tongue-namely, that the father named the first son, because by him was signified falsity, and that the mother named the second, because by him was signified evil.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Foundation for the permission to use this translation.