3614. 'Until your brother's wrath turns back' means until the state changes; and 'until your brother's anger turns back from you' means the subsequent stage of the state with natural good. This is clear from the meaning of 'wrath' and of 'anger' as states that are antagonistic to each other, dealt with below. And when these states become such that they cease to be antagonistic any longer and begin to join together, wrath is said to turn back and anger to turn back. Consequently 'until your brother's wrath turns back' means until the state changes, and 'until your brother's anger turns back' means the subsequent stage of the state with natural good. 'Wrath' implies something different from 'anger', as may be seen from the fact that in addition to their being similar expressions it is a pointless repetition to say, 'Until your brother's wrath turns back' and then 'until your brother's anger turns back'. What each implies is evident from the general explanation and also from that to which wrath and anger are each used to refer. 'Wrath' is used in reference to truth, in this case to the truth of good, represented by 'Esau', while 'anger' is used in reference to that good itself.

[2] 'Wrath' and 'anger' are mentioned many times in the Word, but in the internal sense they do not mean wrath or anger but that which is antagonistic. The reason for this is that whatever is antagonistic towards any affection produces wrath or anger; so that in the internal sense simply forms of antagonism are meant by those two expressions. 'Wrath' is used to describe that which is antagonistic towards truth and 'anger' that which is antagonistic towards good; but in the contrary sense 'wrath' describes that which is antagonistic towards falsity or the affection for it, that is, towards false assumptions, while 'anger' describes that which is antagonistic towards evil or the desire for it, that is, towards self-love and love of the world. Also, in this contrary sense actual wrath is meant by 'wrath', and actual anger by 'anger'; but when those expressions are used in reference to good and truth the wrath and anger which are manifestations of zeal are meant. And because this zeal is to outward appearance like wrath and anger it is called such in the sense of the letter.

[3] As regards 'wrath' or 'anger' in the internal sense meaning simply forms of antagonism, this may be seen from the following places in the Word: In Isaiah,

Jehovah's indignation is against all the nations, and wrath against all their host. Isaiah 34:2.

'Jehovah's indignation against the nations' stands for antagonism towards evil - 'the nations' meaning evils, see 1259, 1260, 1849, 1868, 2588 (end). 'Wrath against all their host' stands for antagonism towards falsities derived from that evil, for by 'the stars' - here called 'the host of heaven' - are meant cognitions, and so truths, and in the contrary sense falsities, see 1128, 1808, 2120, 2495, 2849. In the same prophet,

Who gave Jacob over to plunder, and Israel to spoilers? Was it not Jehovah against whom we have sinned? And He poured out upon him the wrath of His anger. Isaiah 42:24-25.

'Wrath of anger' stands for antagonism towards falsity stemming from evil, 'Jacob' for people under the influence of evil, and 'Israel' for those under the influence of falsity.

[4] In the same prophet,

I have trodden the winepress alone, and from the peoples there was no man (vir) with Me. I trod them in My anger, and destroyed them in My wrath. And I trod down the peoples in My anger, and made them drunk in My wrath. Isaiah 63:3, 6.

This refers to the Lord and His victories in temptations. 'Treading' and 'treading down in anger' stand for victories over evils, 'destroying' and 'making drunk in wrath' for victories over falsities. In the Word 'treading down' has reference to evil, and 'making drunk' to falsity. In Jeremiah,

Thus said the Lord Jehovih. Behold, My anger and My wrath have been poured out on this place, on man, and on beast, and on the tree of the field, and on the fruit of the ground; and it will burn and not be quenched. Jeremiah 7:20.

Both are mentioned - 'anger' and 'wrath' - because both evil and falsity are the subject.

[5] In the Prophets, whenever evil is mentioned so also is falsity, even as whenever good is mentioned so also is truth, the reason being the heavenly marriage, which is the marriage of good and truth in every detail of the Word, 683, 793, 801, 2173, 2516, 2712. It is also why 'anger' and 'wrath' are both mentioned; otherwise one of them would be enough. In the same prophet,

I Myself will fight against you with outstretched hand and strong arm, and in anger, and in wrath, and in great indignation; and I will smite the inhabitants of this city, both man and beast. Jeremiah 21:5-6.

Here in a similar way 'anger' has reference to the punishment of evil, 'wrath' to the punishment of falsity, and 'indignation' to that of both. Since anger and wrath describe antagonism they also mean punishment, for things antagonistic to one another also clash with one another; and in that case evil and falsity suffer punishment. For evil holds within itself antagonism towards good, and falsity holds within itself antagonism towards truth. And because there is antagonism a clash also occurs; and from this punishment results, see 696, 967.

[6] In Ezekiel,

And My anger will be accomplished, and I will make My wrath on them die down, and I will be comforted; and they will know that I Jehovah have spoken in My zeal, when accomplishing My wrath on them - when executing judgements on you in anger and in wrath and in wrathful rebukes. Ezekiel 5:13, 15.

Here also 'anger' stands for the punishment of evil, and 'wrath' for the punishment of falsity, that result from antagonism and consequent aggression. In Moses,

Jehovah will not be pleased to pardon him, for then the anger of Jehovah, and His zeal, will smoke against that man, and Jehovah will separate him as evil from all the tribes of Israel. The whole land will be brimstone and salt, a burning; it will not be sown, and it will not sprout, nor will any plant come up on it, as at the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah, of Admah and Zeboiim, which Jehovah overthrew in His anger and His wrath. And all the nations will say, Why has Jehovah done this to this land? What means the heat of this great anger? Deuteronomy 29:20-21, 23-24.

Since 'Sodom' means evil, and 'Gomorrah' falsity deriving from this, 2220, 2246, 232, and the nation to which Moses is referring here is compared to those nations as regards evil and falsity, the expression 'anger' is used in reference to evil, 'wrath' in reference to falsity, and 'the heat of anger' to both. Such passions as these are attributed to Jehovah or the Lord according to the appearance, for the Lord does seem to man to display such when man enters into evil and evil punishes him, see 245, 592, 696, 1093, 1683, 1874, 2335, 2395, 2447, 3605.

801. This description of these people before the Flood shows the nature of the style used by the most ancient people, and consequently of the prophetical style. From here down to the end of this chapter these people are described, in the present verses as regards their persuasions, and in verse 23 that follows as regards their desires. That is, they are described as regards the state of the things of their understanding, and after that as regards the state of those of their will. Although the proper things of the understanding and of the will did not exist in them, the things in them that were the reverse of these must nevertheless be called things of the understanding and will. Though in no sense things of the understanding, persuasions of falsity must be called such because they are matters of thought and reasoning; and the same applies to desires which are in no sense things of the will. Those people are described, as I say, first of all as regards their persuasions of falsity, and after that as regards their desires. This is the reason why verse 23 which follows repeats, though in a different order, the things referred to in this verse 21.

[2] Such also is the prophetical style, the reason being that there are two kinds of life with man - the first belonging to things of the understanding, the second to those of the will - which are very distinct and separate from each other. Man is composed of both, and although they are separated in man nowadays, they still flow one into the other and for the most part unite. The fact that they unite, and how they do so, could be established and illustrated in many ways. Since man is therefore composed of these two parts - understanding and will - and one flows into the other, the Word when describing man describes each part separately, which is the reason for repetitions; otherwise the description would be defective. As with the will and understanding here, so with everything else. It is their subjects that make things exactly what they are. Being the product of their subjects, they are attributes of those subjects. Things separated from their subject, that is, from their substance, are not anything. This is the reason why when the Word describes something it does so as regards both areas. In this way the description of everything is made complete.