In the ancient world cities were nearly nations unto themselves – they existed within walls, with their own laws and customs, generally centered on the common purpose of trade. This is not as much the case in the modern world, but we still tend to divide ourselves city by city in terms of sports teams, accents, music and culture, and still tend to generalize the character of people from other cities. It follows, then, that in the Bible cities represent various doctrines – collections of inter-related ideas about spiritual reality. Such doctrines can be based on anything from the Lord’s true teachings – the New Jerusalem seen by John in Revelation – to the falsity and heresy of Sodom and various cities obliterated by the people of Israel at God’s command. On the most personal level, a city can also represent the natural mind of one person – which makes sense since we each to some extent have our own doctrine and our own set of ideas and beliefs.

3679. 'Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob' means the thought which natural good had regarding the joining [to the Divine Rational] through the good of truth, represented by 'Jacob'. This is clear from the meaning of 'seeing' as thinking, for thinking is nothing else than inward seeing, or internal sight; from the representation of 'Esau' as the good of the natural, dealt with in 3300, 3302, 3322, 3404, 3504, 3576, 3599; from the meaning of 'being blessed' as a joining together, dealt with in 3504, 3514, 3530, 3565, 3584; from the representation of 'Isaac' as the Lord's Divine Rational as regards Divine Good, dealt with already; and from the representation of 'Jacob' as the good of truth, dealt with in 3669, 3677. From all this it is evident that 'Esau saw that Isaac had blessed Jacob' means the thought which natural good had regarding the joining through the good of truth.

[2] But as to what thought which natural good had regarding the joining through the good of truth may be, no wholly intelligible explanation is possible. Even so, let a brief explanation be given. The thought which natural good has is the thought which exists in the rational or internal man and from there in the natural or external man, in particular from the good of the rational man. It is the rational or internal man which thinks, not the natural or external; for the rational or internal man dwells in the light of heaven, a light which holds intelligence and wisdom from the Lord within it, 3195, 3339, 3636, 3643, whereas the external man dwells in the light of the world, a light which does not hold any intelligence or indeed life within it. Consequently unless the internal man thought within the external no thought at all could ever exist. Yet to the person himself it seems as though his thought were located within his external, for it is from things which have come in by way of the senses and belong to the world that he thinks.

[3] This matter is like the sight of the eye. A sensory-minded person imagines that the eye sees of itself, when in fact the eye is no more than an organ in the body by means of which the internal man sees things outside of the body, that is, things in the world. The same matter is also like speech. The sensory-minded person might imagine that the mouth and tongue spoke of themselves, and anyone who thinks somewhat more deeply that the larynx and interior organs activated by the lungs did so, when in fact it is the thought which speaks by means of those organic parts - for speech is nothing else than thought expressed in speech. Such delusions of the senses are very many. The matter under consideration is also similar to all the life manifested in the external man, in that the life of the internal is within it, as within its own material or physical organ. The same is so with thought.

[4] As long as he is living in the body a person thinks from the rational within the natural; but it is one thing when the natural corresponds to the rational, quite another when the natural does not correspond. When the natural does correspond a person is rational and thinks spiritually; but when the natural does not correspond, he is not rational, and is unable to think spiritually. For with one whose natural does correspond to his rational, a line of communication is open enabling the light of heaven to flow in from the Lord by way of the rational into the natural, and to enlighten it with intelligence and wisdom. As a consequence he is rational and thinks spiritually. But with one whose natural does not correspond to his rational the line of communication is closed, and no more than a limited amount of light exists in general round about which enters in through chinks by way of the rational into the natural. Consequently he is not rational and does not think spiritually. For as is the influx of the light of heaven into a person, so is his thinking. From this it is evident that the nature of every person's thought is determined by the way in which, as regards good and truth, the natural corresponds to the rational.

[5] But spirits and angels scarcely think in the same way as men do. Their thought, it is true, is likewise based ultimately in the natural; for they have with them the whole natural memory and its affections, though they are not allowed to use that memory, 2475-2479. But although they are not allowed to use this, it nevertheless serves them as the ground-work or foundation for the ideas comprising their thought. Consequently the ideas which comprise their thought are interior, and their speech does not take the form of verbal expressions as with men but the form of real things. From this it is evident that with them also the nature of their thought is determined by that of the correspondence of their natural with their rational. Evident also is the fact that there are some spirits who are rational and think spiritually, and others who are not rational and do not think spiritually, the difference between the two depending entirely on the nature of their affections and consequent thoughts of things during their lifetime, that is, depending on the state of the life which they have acquired to themselves in the world.

[6] Therefore what thought may be which natural good possesses is evident to some extent from what has just been said above. That is to say, it is thought existing within the good of the natural. (According to spirits' way of thinking it is called the thought which natural good has, but according to men's it is called thought within the good of the natural.) It is within the latter - within the good of the natural - that the rational thinks. When good is the end in view, the thought which natural good has regarding the joining through the good of truth is accordingly thought within the natural - regarding the end in view. That is to say, it is thought about how truth can be joined to it, and joined according to Divine order, by the ordinary way, which, as often stated already, comes from the kinds of things that are external and therefore exist - in the ordered sequence of things - as those that are last or outermost. The entire regeneration of the natural begins with these. These outermost or last things are initial cognitions, such as those learned by infants and children, dealt with in 3665 (end).

[7] At first the truth of good, represented by 'Esau', is not in outward form joined to the good of truth, represented by 'Jacob', for in relation to the truth of good the good of truth exists inversely, 3669. Nevertheless they are joined together inmostly, that is, as regards ends in view. For the end that truth springing from good has in view is, as has been stated that truths may be joined according to order to itself, while the end in view of good springing from truth is the same. And since it is the end in view that joins them together, those two also are therefore so joined together, 3562, 3565. The inversion of order in the early stages is merely the means to an attainment of the end in view.