4502. And took Dinah out of Shechem’s house, and went forth. That this signifies that they took away the affection of truth, is evident from the representation of Dinah, as being the affection of truth (see above, n. 4498). It is according to the proximate internal sense that they took away the affection of truth from those who were of the remains of the Most Ancient Church, because it is said that they “took her out of Shechem’s house,” “Shechem’s house” signifying the good of the truth of that church. But as the subject treated of is the extirpation of truth and good among the descendants of Jacob who are here signified by his sons, and as all things are to be taken in application to the subject treated of, therefore by “Shechem’s house” is here signified simply the good of truth such as had existed with the man of the Most Ancient Church; and what is signified is that this was extinguished in the nation sprung from Jacob; for in the internal sense of the Word the signification of the names and words is determined by the subject to which they are applied; yet here there is at the same time signified the breaking down of the good and truth with Hamor and Shechem and his family, because they acceded to externals, as shown above (n. 4493).

[2] That what has thus far been unfolded about Simeon and Leviticus is really so, may be seen from the prophetic utterances of Jacob just before his death:

Simeon and Leviticus are brethren, instruments of violence are their swords; let not my soul come into their secret, in their congregation let not my glory be united, for in their anger they slew a man, and in their pleasure they unstrung an ox; cursed be their anger, for it was vehement, and their fury, for it was grievous; I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel (Genesis 49:5-7);

by “Simeon and Levi” are signified the truth of faith which with the descendants of Jacob was turned into falsity, and the good of charity which was turned into evil (as shown above, n. 4499, 4500). They are called “brethren” because good is the brother of truth, or charity is the brother of faith (n. 4498). “Instruments of violence are their swords” signifies that falsities and evils inflicted violence on truths and goods (n. 4499). “Let not my soul come into their secret, in their congregation let not my glory be united” signifies disjunction as to life and doctrine, for in the Word “soul” is predicated of life (n. 1000, 1040, 1742, 3299), and “glory” of doctrine. “For in their anger they slew a man, and in their pleasure they unstrung an ox” signifies that in evil of set purpose they extinguished the truth of the church and the good of the church (for a “man” is the truth of the church, n. 3134, and an “ox” is its good, n. 2180, 2566, 2781). “Cursed be their anger, for it was vehement, and their fury, for it was grievous” signifies the penalty for turning away from truth and good (for “to curse” is to turn one’s self away, and also to be punished therefor, n. 245, 379, 1423, 3530, 3584; “anger” is a turning away from truth, and “fury,” from good, n. 357, 3614). “I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel” signifies that goods and truths will no longer be in the external and the internal of their church (“to divide” and “to scatter” denote to separate and to extirpate from them, n. 4424; “Jacob” is the external of the church, and “Israel” the internal, n. 4286).

[3] These things were said of Simeon and Leviticus in that prophecy because by them is signified the truth and good of the church in general; but when these have become null and void, and still more when falsities and evils succeed in their place, the church is then extinct. That such is the meaning of these prophetic words is evident from the fact that the tribe of Simeon and the tribe of Leviticus were not cursed above the other tribes; for the tribe of Leviticus was taken for the priesthood, and the tribe of Simeon was among the other tribes of Israel as one of them.

3614. Until thy brother’s wrath turn away. That this signifies until the state turns thereto; and that “until thy brother’s anger turn away from thee” signifies what is successive of the state with natural good, is evident from the signification of “wrath” and “anger,” as being states which are repugnant, as will be shown in what follows. When these states become such that they are no longer repugnant, but begin to conjoin themselves, it is then said that “wrath turns away,” and that “anger turns away;” hence it is that “until thy brother’s wrath turns away” signifies until the state turns thereto; and that “until thy brother’s anger turn away” signifies what is successive of the state with natural good. That “wrath” involves one thing, and “anger” another, may be seen from the words being in other respects alike, and that otherwise there would be an idle repetition, namely, “until thy brother’s wrath turn away” and “until thy brother’s anger turn away.” What is implied in each expression is manifest from the general explication, and also from the predication of wrath and the predication of anger; for “wrath” is predicated of truth, here of the truth of good, which is represented by Esau; whereas “anger” is predicated of this good itself.

[2] “Wrath” and “anger” are frequently mentioned in the Word, but in the internal sense they do not signify wrath and anger, but repugnance, and this for the reason that whatever is repugnant to any affection produces wrath or anger, so that in the internal sense they are only repugnances; but the repugnance of truth is called “wrath,” and the repugnance of good is called “anger;” and in the opposite sense “wrath” is the repugnance of falsity or its affection, that is, of the principles of falsity; and “anger” is the repugnance of evil or its cupidity, that is, of the love of self and the love of the world. In this sense “wrath” is properly wrath, and “anger” is anger; but when they are predicted of good and truth, “wrath” and “anger” are zeal; which zeal, because in external form it appears like wrath and anger, therefore in the sense of the letter is also so called.

[3] That in the internal sense “wrath” and “anger” are merely repugnances, may be seen from the following passages in the Word.

In Isaiah:

Jehovah hath heat against all the nations, and wrath against all their army (Isaiah 34:2).

The “heat of Jehovah against the nations” denotes repugnance against evil (that “nations” are evils, see above, n. 1259-1260, 1849, 1868, 2588); “wrath against all their army” denotes repugnance against the derivative falsities (that the “stars,” which are called the “army of the heavens,” are knowledges, and thus truths and in the opposite sense falsities, may be seen above, n. 1128,, 1808, 2120, 2495, 2849). Again:

Who gave Jacob for a prey, and Israel to the spoilers? Did not Jehovah? He against whom we have sinned? Therefore He poured upon him the wrath, of His anger (Isaiah 42:24-25).

The “wrath, of anger” denotes repugnance against the falsity of evil; “Jacob,” those who are in evil; and “Israel,” those who are in falsity.

[4] Again:

I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the peoples there was no man with Me; and I have trodden them in Mine anger, and destroyed them in My wrath; and I trampled the peoples in Mine anger, and made them drunk in My wrath (Isaiah 63:3, 6); where the Lord is treated of and his victories in temptations; to “tread and trample in anger” denotes victories over evils; and to “destroy and make drunk in wrath,” victories over falsities; to “trample upon,” in the Word, is predicated of evil; and to “make drunken,” of falsity.

In Jeremiah:

Thus saith the Lord Jehovih, Behold, Mine anger and My wrath shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the tree of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it shall burn and shall not be quenched (Jeremiah 7:20); where mention is made of both “anger” and “wrath,” because both evil and falsity are treated of.

[5] It is usual with the Prophets in speaking of evil to speak also of falsity, as in speaking of good to speak also of truth, and this because of the heavenly marriage, which is the marriage of good and truth, in everything of the Word (see n. 683, 793, 801, 2173, 2516, 2712); hence also both “anger” and “wrath” are mentioned; otherwise one term would have been sufficient. In the same prophet:

I myself will fight with you with an outstretched hand and with a strong arm, even in anger, and in wrath, and in great heat; and I will smite the inhabitants of this city, both man and beast (Jeremiah 21:5-6).

Here in like manner “anger” is predicated of the punishment of evil, and “wrath” of the punishment of falsity, and “heat” of the punishment of both; “anger” and “wrath,” because they denote repugnance, also denote punishment; for things which are repugnant come into collision, and then evil and falsity are punished; for in evil there is repugnance to good, and in falsity there is repugnance to truth; and because there is repugnance, there is also collision; that from this comes punishment may be seen above (n. 696, 967).

[6] In Ezekiel:

Thus shall Mine anger be consummated, and I will make My wrath to rest upon them, and I will comfort Myself, and they shall know that I Jehovah have spoken in My zeal when I have consummated My wrath upon them, when I shall do judgments in thee in anger and in wrath and in the reproofs of wrath (Ezekiel 5:13, 15); where also “anger” denotes the punishment of evil; “wrath,” the punishment of falsity, from its repugnance and consequent attack.

In Moses:

It shall not please Jehovah to pardon him, because then the anger of Jehovah and his zeal shall smoke against that man. And Jehovah shall separate him unto evil out of all the tribes of Israel. The whole land thereof shall be brimstone and salt, and a burning; it shall not be sown, and shall not bud, neither shall therein any herb come up; like the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim, which Jehovah overthrew in His anger and in His wrath; and all the nations shall say, Wherefore hath Jehovah done thus unto this land? What meaneth the heat of this great anger? (Deuteronomy 29:20-24).

Inasmuch as “Sodom” denotes evil, and “Gomorrah” the derivative falsity (n. 2220, 2246, 2322), and the nation of which Moses here speaks is compared thereto in respect to evil and falsity, therefore “anger” is spoken of in respect to evil, and “wrath” in respect to falsity, and “heat of anger” in respect to both. That such things are attributed to Jehovah or the Lord is according to the appearance, because it so appears to man when he runs into evil and the evil punishes him (see n. 245, 592, 696, 1093, 1683, 1874, 2395, 2447, 3235, 3605).