5212. And behold seven ears of corn came up upon one stalk. That this signifies memory-knowledges of the natural joined together, is evident from the signification of “ears,” or spikes, of corn, as being memory-knowledges belonging to the natural (of which in what follows); and from the signification of “upon one stalk,” as being joined together; for in respect to their origin things on one stalk are joined together. The reason why “ears” or spikes of corn signify memory-knowledges, is that “corn” signifies the good of the natural (see n. 3580), because memory-knowledges are the containants of the good of the natural, as the ears are of the corn; for in general all truths are vessels of good, and so also are memory-knowledges, for these are lowest truths.

Lowest truths, or truths of the exterior natural, are called memory-knowledges, because they are in man’s natural or external memory, and because they partake for the most part of the light of the world, and hence can be presented and represented to others by forms of words, or by ideas formed into words by means of such things as are of the world and its light. The things in the inner memory, however, insofar as they partake of the light of heaven, are not called memory-knowledges, but truths; nor can they be understood except by means of this light, or expressed except by forms of words, or ideas formed into words, by means of such things as are of heaven and its light. The memory-knowledges here signified by “ears,” or spikes, are memory-knowledges of the church, in regard to which see above (n. 4749, 4844, 4964, 4965).

[2] The reason why there were two dreams, one of the seven kine and the other of the seven ears of corn, is that in the internal sense both naturals, the interior and the exterior, are treated of, and in what follows, the rebirth of both. By the “seven kine” are signified the things of the interior natural called truths of the natural (see n. 5198); and by the “seven ears of corn,” the truths of the exterior natural called memory-knowledges.

[3] Interior and exterior memory-knowledges are signified by “ears of the river Euphrates even to the river of Egypt,” in Isaiah:

It shall be in that day that Jehovah will shake off from the ear of the river even unto the river of Egypt, and ye shall be gathered one to another, ye sons of Israel. And it shall be in that day that a great trumpet shall be sounded, and they shall come that are perishing in the land of Assyria, and the outcasts in the land of Egypt; and they shall bow themselves to Jehovah in the mountain of holiness at Jerusalem (Isaiah 27:12-13);

“the perishing in the land of Assyria” denote interior truths, and the “outcasts in the land of Egypt,” exterior truths or memory-knowledges.

[4] So also in Mark the comparison with the blade, the ear, and the corn, involves the rebirth of man by means of memory-knowledges, truths of faith, and goods of charity:

Jesus said, So is the kingdom of God, as when a man casteth seed upon the earth; then sleepeth and riseth night and day, but the seed germinates and grows while he knoweth not. For the earth beareth fruit of itself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the corn in the ear. But when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come (Mark 4:26-29).

The “kingdom of God,” which is compared to the blade, the ear, and the corn, is heaven in man through regeneration; for one who has been regenerated has the kingdom of God within him, and becomes in image the kingdom of God or heaven. The “blade” is the first memory-knowledge; the “ear” is the memory-knowledge of truth thence derived; the “corn” is the derivative good. Moreover, the laws enacted in regard to gleanings (Leviticus 19:9; 23:22), and in regard to the liberty of plucking the ears from the standing corn of the neighbor (Deuteronomy 23:25), and also in regard to eating no bread, nor parched corn, nor green ears, until the offering of God was brought (Leviticus 23:14), represented such things as are signified by “ears.”

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.