9002. 'If he takes another one for himself' means being joined to an affection for truth stemming from some other source. This is clear from the meaning of 'taking (or betrothing) another' as being joined to, as in 8996; for in the spiritual sense marriage, which is implied here by betrothal, is the joining of the life of one to that of another. Divine order decrees that the life of the truths of faith and the life of the good of charity should be joined together; this is where all spiritual joining together begins, from which, as its origin, natural joining springs. 'Taking another one' means being joined to an affection for truth stemming from some other source, because 'a female slave', dealt with before, is an affection for truth springing from natural delight, 8993, and therefore 'another one' is an affection for truth stemming from some other source

[2] An idea of what an affection from some other source is may be gained from the consideration that every affection belonging to love is very broad and wide indeed, so broad that it extends far beyond all human understanding. Human understanding cannot go so far as to know even the genera of the varieties of such affection, still less the species making up the genera, and least of all the particular aspects and individual details of those aspects. For all that exists within the human being, especially that which belongs to affection or love there, is infinitely varied. This becomes perfectly clear from the consideration that the affection for what is good and true, an affection that belongs to love to the Lord and love towards the neighbour, constitutes the whole of heaven, and yet in respect of good those in the heavens, where millions live, are all different from one another. And they would still all be different even if multiplied into countless millions of millions. For it is not possible in the universe for one thing to be exactly like another and have separate existence. It must vary, that is, be different from another, if it is to be something by itself, see 684, 690, 3241, 3744, 3745, 3986, 4005, 4149, 5598, 7236, 7833, 7836, 8003. All this gives some idea of what one should understand by an affection from some other source, namely an affection which is different from another but can nevertheless be joined to the same spiritual truth. Such affections, which are represented by female slaves betrothed to the same man, belong to the same genus but different species, the difference between them being called a specific difference. Various examples could be used to illustrate these matters; but the general idea conveyed by the things that have just been said is better.

[3] So that the joining of such affections to the same spiritual truth, and their subordination to it, might be represented, it was permissible within the Israelite and Jewish nation for men to have a number of concubines. Abraham had them, Genesis 25:6, and so did David, Solomon, and others. For anything permitted among that nation existed because of what that thing represented; or to be more precise, it existed so that by means of outward things that nation might represent the inner realities of the Church, 3246. But when the inner realities of the Church were disclosed by the Lord, representations of inner realities through outward things came to an end; for now it was the inner realities - forms of faith and love - that were to be apprehended by a member of the Church and to be the means by which he worshipped the Lord. For this reason they were no longer permitted to have a number of wives, or concubines as well as wives, see 865, 2727-2759, 3246, 4837.

3246. 'And to the concubines' sons, whom Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts' means that places in the Lord's spiritual kingdom were allotted to spiritual people adopted by the Lord's Divine Human. This is clear from the meaning of 'the concubines' sons' as those who are spiritual, to be dealt with below; from the representation of 'Abraham' here as the Lord's Divine Human (so that the words 'whom Abraham had' mean that they - those who were spiritual - were adopted by the Lord's Divine Human); and from the meaning of 'the gifts which Abraham gave them' as allotted places in the Lord's spiritual kingdom.

[2] From what has been shown several times already about those who constitute the Lord's spiritual kingdom and who are called the spiritual, as in 3235 and elsewhere, it becomes clear that they are not sons of the marriage itself of good and truth, but of a certain covenant not so conjugial. They are indeed descended from the same father but not from the same mother, that is, from the same Divine Good but not from the same Divine Truth. Indeed with those who are celestial, since they are the product of the marriage itself of good and truth, good exists and truth rooted in that good. They never make investigations into what the truth may be but have a perception of it from good. Nor in conversation do they say more than this regarding what is true, 'Yes, that is so', in keeping with the Lord's teaching in Matthew,

Let your words be Yes, yes; No, no; anything beyond this is from evil. ¹ Matthew 5:37.

But those who are spiritual, since they are the product of a covenant not so conjugial, do not have any perception from which they can know what is true. Instead they call that the truth which parents and teachers have told them to be the truth. Consequently with them there is no marriage of good and truth. Nevertheless that which they believe to be the truth for the reason just given is adopted by the Lord as truth when goodness of life exists with them; see 1832. This now explains why the spiritual are here called 'the concubines' sons', which is used to mean all the sons of Keturah mentioned already, and also those descended from Hagar, dealt with shortly below in verses 12-18.

[3] In former times - to enable both those who are celestial and those who are spiritual to be represented in marriages - a man was allowed to have a concubine in addition to a wife. That concubine was given to the husband by his wife (uxor), in which case the concubine was called his wife (mulier), or was said to have been given to him as a wife (mulier), as when Hagar the Egyptian was given to Abraham by Sarah, Genesis 16:3, when the servant-girl Bilhah was given to Jacob by Rachel, Genesis 30:4, and when the servant-girl Zilpah was given to Jacob by Leah, Genesis 30:9. In those cases they are called 'wives' (mulier), but elsewhere concubines, as is Hagar the Egyptian in the present verse, Bilhah in Genesis 35:22, and even Keturah herself in 1 Chronicles 1:32.

[4] The reason why those men of old had concubines in addition to a wife, as not only Abraham and Jacob did, but also their descendants, such as Gideon, Judges 8:31; Saul, 2 Samuel 3:7; David, 2 Samuel 5:13; 15:16; Solomon, 1 Kings 11:3, was that they were permitted to do so for the sake of the representation. That is to say, the celestial Church was represented by the wife, and the spiritual Church by the concubine. They were permitted to do so because they were the kind of men with whom conjugial love did not exist; so that to them marriage was not marriage but merely copulation for the sake of begetting off-spring. With such persons those permissions were possible without any harm being done to love or consequently to the conjugial covenant. But such permissions are never possible among people with whom good and truth are present and who are internal people, or potentially so. For as soon as good and truth, and internal things, exist with the human being, such permissions come to an end. This is why Christians are not allowed, as the Jews were, to take a concubine in addition to a wife, and why such is adultery. Regarding the adoption of those who are spiritual by the Lord's Divine Human, see what has been stated and shown already on the same subject in 2661, 2716, 2833, 2834.

Poznámky pod čarou: