Bible

 

Genesis 24:10

Studie

       

10 και ελαβεν ο παις δεκα καμηλους απο των καμηλων του κυριου αυτου και απο παντων των αγαθων του κυριου αυτου μεθ' εαυτου και αναστας επορευθη εις την μεσοποταμιαν εις την πολιν ναχωρ

Ze Swedenborgových děl

 

Arcana Coelestia # 4835

Prostudujte si tuto pasáž

  
/ 10837  
  

4835. 'Come [in] to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her' means that this - that representative of the Church - might be continued. This is clear from the meaning of 'coming (or going in) to a brother's wife and performing the duty of a husband's brother to her' as preserving and continuing that which constitutes the Church. The requirement laid down in the Mosaic Law, that if a man died without issue his brother was to marry his widow and raise up seed for his brother, and that the firstborn was to receive his dead brother's name, whereas all other sons were to be his own, was called the duty of a brother-in-law. The fact that this directive was nothing new in the Jewish Church but a practice already in existence is clear from the words used here; and the same goes for many other directives given to the Israelites through Moses, such as the law forbidding them to take wives from the daughters of the Canaanites and requiring them to marry within their own families, Genesis 24:3-4; 28:1-2. From these and many other examples it is evident that a Church had existed previously in which the same kind of practices were followed as those at a later time which were declared to and demanded of the sons of Jacob. Altars and sacrifices likewise had been in use since ancient times, as is evident from Genesis 8:20-21; 22:3, 7-8. From this it is plain that the Jewish Church was not a new Church but a revival of the Ancient Church which had perished.

[2] What the law regarding the duty of a brother-in-law had been is clear in Moses,

If brothers dwell together but one of them dies, and has no son, the wife of the dead one shall not marry a stranger outside [the family]; her brother-in-law shall go in to her, and take her to himself as his wife, and so perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her. Then it will happen, that the firstborn whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, so that his name is not wiped out from Israel. But if the man is unwilling to take his sister-in-law, his sister-in-law shall go up to the gate to the elders, and she shall say, My brother-in-law refuses to raise up for his brother a name in Israel; he is unwilling to perform the duty of a brother-in-law for me. Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him; and if he stands and says, I do not desire to take her, his sister-in-law shall go up to him in the sight of the elders, and she shall remove his shoe from upon his foot and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, So will it be done to the man who does not build up his brother's house. Therefore his name will be called in Israel, The house of him who has his shoe taken off. Deuteronomy 25:5-10.

[3] Anyone who does not know what the duty of a brother-in-law represents inevitably believes that the practice existed solely for the sake of preserving a name and consequently an inheritance. But the preservation of a name and an inheritance was not in itself a great enough reason why a brother should have been required to enter into a marriage with his sister-in-law. Rather, the practice was ordained so that the preservation and continuation of the Church might be represented through it. For a marriage represented the marriage of good and truth, which is the heavenly marriage. It therefore represented the Church too, for the Church is a Church by virtue of the marriage of good and truth, and when this marriage exists within it the Church makes one with heaven, which is the true heavenly marriage. And because a marriage represented these things, 'sons and daughters' were therefore representations and also meaningful signs of truths and goods. This being so, 'being without issue' meant a lack of good and truth, and so meant that no representative of the Church existed in that house any longer, and that as a consequence it was not in communion with the Church. In addition 'brother' represented a kindred good to which the truth represented by a widow might be joined. For to be the kind of truth that has life, produces fruit, and thereby continues that which constitutes the Church, truth cannot be joined to any other good but that which is its own and a kindred one. This was how those in heaven perceived the duty of a brother-in-law.

[4] The meaning of this practice - of a sister-in-law removing the shoe from upon the foot of the man who refused to do the duty of a brother-in-law, and of her spitting in his face - was this: Anyone devoid of good and truth, external and internal, would destroy those things that constitute the Church; for 'the shoe' means that which is external, 1748, and 'the face' that which is internal, 1999, 2434, 3527, 4066, 4796. From this it is evident that 'the duty of a brother-in-law' represented the preservation and continuation of the Church. But when through the Lord's Coming representatives of internal things came to an end, that particular law was done away with. It is like a person's soul or spirit in relation to his body. A person's soul or spirit is the internal part of him and his body the external; or what amounts to the same, the soul or spirit is the true likeness of the person, whereas the body is merely a representative image of him. When a person rises again his representative image or that which is external, namely his body, is cast aside, for he is now conscious in that which is internal, namely the true likeness of him. It is also like a person who is in darkness and from there looks at things belonging to light; or what amounts to the same, like one who is in the light of the world and from there looks at things belonging to the light of heaven. For the light of the world in comparison with the light of heaven is as darkness. Within that darkness, that is, within the light of the world, things belonging to the light of heaven as they exist essentially cannot be seen, but are seen so to speak within a representative image, even as the human mind is seen in a person's face. Therefore when the light of heaven is seen in its own essential brightness, the darkness of representative images is dispelled. This was effected through the Lord's Coming.

[4835a] 'And raise up seed for your brother' means so that the Church does not perish. This is clear from the meaning of 'seed' as truth derived from good, or faith grounded in charity, dealt with in 1025, 1447, 16110, 1940, 2848, 3310, 3373, 3671. The same is also meant by the firstborn who was to succeed to the name of the dead brother, 352, 367, 2435, 3325, 3494. 'Raising up seed for a brother' means continuing that which constitutes the Church, in line with what has been stated just above in 4834, and thus means so that the Church does not perish.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.

Ze Swedenborgových děl

 

Arcana Coelestia # 4208

Prostudujte si tuto pasáž

  
/ 10837  
  

4208. 'And Jacob swore by the Dread of his father Isaac' means confirmation from the Divine Human, which in that state is called 'the Dread'. This is clear from the meaning of 'swearing' as confirmation, dealt with in 2842, 3375; and from the meaning of 'the Dread of Isaac' as the Lord's Divine Human, dealt with in 4180. The fact that when people swore oaths they did so by the Lord's Divine Human, see 2842.

[2] The reason for the use here of the expressions 'the God of Abraham, the God of Nahor, the God of their father (who was Terah)' and 'the Dread of Isaac, Jacob's father' is that Terah's sons acknowledged just so many gods, for they were idolaters, 1353, 1356, 1992, 3667. It was also a peculiar feature of that house that each family worshipped its own individual god. This is why at this point the expressions 'the God of Abraham', 'the God of Nahor', 'the God of their father', and 'the Dread of Isaac' are used. Abraham's family however was commanded to acknowledge Jehovah as its God. All the same, they did not acknowledge Him to be anything more than just another god by whom they could distinguish themselves from the gentiles, and so only His name was different. This also accounts for their defection on so many occasions to other gods, as is made clear in the historical sections of the Word. The reason why they defected was that they were interested solely in things of an external nature. What things of an internal nature were they did not know at all and did not wish to know.

[3] So far as those people's participation in them was concerned, the religious practices of their Church were wholly idolatrous because they had been separated from the things of an internal nature; for every religious practice of the Church when separated from what is internal is idolatrous. Yet it was still possible for those people to represent the genuine condition of the Church since representations have nothing to do with the person who represents, only with the thing represented, 665, 1097 (end), 1361, 3147. But in order that a representative Church might come into being, and in this way some kind of communication between the Lord and man through heaven might exist, it was particularly necessary for them to be kept in their acknowledgement of Jehovah, if not in their hearts yet with their lips. For among them representatives were not an expression of internal entities but of external ones. And this was the kind of communication they had, different from that in the genuine Church in which communication was effected through things of an internal nature. For this reason also their Divine worship made no difference to their souls, that is, it did not yield them blessings in the next life, only prosperity in the world.

[4] In order that they might be kept in external things so many miracles were therefore performed among them which would never have taken place if things of an internal nature had had a place among them. For the same reason they were also compelled on many occasions to worship Jehovah through the imposition of punishments, captivities, and threats, though no one is compelled by the Lord to engage in internal worship, for this is implanted only in a state of freedom, 1937, 1947, 2874-2881, 3145, 3146, 3158, 4031. The chief external practice required of them was that they should confess the name Jehovah, for Jehovah was the Lord who was represented in all the practices of that Church. On the point that Jehovah was the Lord, see 1343, 1736, 2921, 3035.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.