8981. If his master shall give him a woman. That this signifies good from the spiritual adjoined to truth while in combat, is evident from the signification of “master,” as here being the spiritual; for by “master” is here meant someone of the sons of Israel, and by the “sons of Israel” are signified those who are true men of the spiritual church, that is, who do what is good from the affection which is of love, or what is the same, from charity. (That “the sons of Israel” denote the men of the spiritual church, see n. 6426, 6862, 6868, 7035, 7062, 7198, 7201, 7215, 7223, 7957, 8234, 8805; consequently by the same in the abstract sense are signified spiritual truths and goods, n. 5414, 5801, 5803, 5806, 5812, 5817, 5819, 5833, 5879.) From this it is that by “master” is here signified the spiritual. And from the signification of “giving him a woman,” as being to adjoin good to truth; for “to give,” when said of a woman, denotes to adjoin, and “a manservant” denotes one who is in the truth of doctrine and not in the corresponding good (n. 8974); and “a woman” denotes delight (n. 8980), but here good, because it is given (that is, adjoined) from the spiritual; for all that which comes from the spiritual is called “good,” because the spiritual itself is the good of charity (that “a woman” denotes good, see n. 915, 2517, 4823, 6014, 8337). The reason why it denotes in combat, is that it is said that if his master have given him a woman, at the end of his service the woman should be the master’s. From this it is evident that the woman was the manservant’s while he was in service, and not afterward; thus while in combat, and not after combat; for by the service of six years is signified labor and combat (n. 8975).

[2] Who cannot see that in this statute there is a secret which cannot be known except by him to whom it has been revealed? For in the external form it appears contrary to Divine justice that a woman given to a manservant should remain the master’s when the servant went out from service, seeing that a woman ought to be her man’s forever. Of the same character are also many other things that were commanded the sons of Israel by Jehovah, as that they should ask of the Egyptians vessels of gold and of silver, and garments, and thus should spoil them; besides other things of a similar nature spoken of in their places. But although, as has been said, in the outward form these things appear contrary to Divine justice, they nevertheless are not so, for they flow from the laws of Divine order in the heavens, which laws are the very laws themselves of justice; but these laws are not clear unless they are unfolded from the sense of the letter by means of the internal sense. The law from which this statute flows is that spiritual good cannot be conjoined with those who are in the externals of the church from infancy, but can only be adjoined to them so long as they are in combat, and that after combat it recedes.

[3] That it may be clear how the case herein is (for it is a secret), it shall be briefly explained. They who from infancy have thought little about eternal life, thus about the salvation of their soul, but only of worldly life and its prosperity, and yet have lived a good moral life, and have also believed in the truths of the doctrine of their church, when they come to more adult age, cannot be reformed otherwise than by the adjoining of spiritual good when they are in combat; but still they do not retain this good, but only confirm the truths of their doctrine by means of it. The reason why they are of this character is that in their past life they have indulged worldly loves; and when these loves have been rooted in, they do not suffer spiritual good to be conjoined with truth, because these loves are altogether repugnant to that good. Nevertheless spiritual good can take possession of the thought when these loves become inactive, as is the case when they are in anxiety, in misfortunes, and in sicknesses, and the like. Then the affection of well-doing from charity flows in, but this affection serves only for confirming and rooting in more deeply the truths of doctrine; but it cannot be conjoined with truth. The reason is that this influent affection of charity fills only the intellectual part of the mind, but does not enter into its will part, and that which does not enter into the will part is not appropriated, thus is not conjoined, because the conjunction of good and truth with man is effected when truth enters the will; consequently when the man wills truth, and from willing does it. Then for the first time truth becomes good, or what is the same, faith becomes charity.

[4] This cannot be effected with those who from infancy have indulged the loves of the world, and yet are in the truth of the doctrine of their church; for their will part is possessed by these loves, which are wholly in opposition to and reject spiritual good. They merely admit this into the intellectual part of the mind, that is, into the thought, when these loves are dormant, which is the case, as said above, in a state of sickness or of misfortune, or in anxiety, consequently in labor, and in some combat. This is the secret which lies hidden in this statute. And as this statute was thus representative of the law of Divine order with respect to those who are in the truth of doctrine and not in the corresponding good, therefore in the representative church it was in agreement with Divine justice, even in the external form.

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.