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.

4903. 'Saying, Tamar your daughter-in-law has committed whoredom' means a perception at this point that to say anything of marriage exists between them is a falsity. This is clear from the meaning of 'saying' in the historical descriptions of the Word as perception, dealt with above in 4892; from the meaning of 'committing whoredom' as falsity, dealt with in 2466, 2729, 3399, 4865; from the representation of 'Tamar' as the internal aspect of the representative Church, also dealt with above, in 4864; and from the meaning of 'a daughter-in-law' as the truth of the Church, dealt with in 4843, 4869. Consequently the words 'saying, Tamar your daughter-in-law has committed whoredom' means a perception at this point that to say anything of marriage exists between them is a falsity. The implications of all this may be seen above in 4864-4866; with its semblance of religion the Jewish nation perceived the internal aspect of the Church to be nothing else than a harlot, and its preaching and life based on this to be nothing else than whoredom. For those people who are confined to what is external devoid of anything internal do not look on the internal aspect of the Church in any other way. They give the name falsity to that which is true, and the name truth to that which is false. They do so for the reason that being confined to what is external does not enable anyone to see whether a thing is false or true; only what is internal makes this possible internal sight is a necessary ability which can make judgements about things seen by external sight; and to make such judgements internal sight must be fully in the light of heaven. But it is not in the light of heaven unless the person has faith in the Lord and this faith leads him to read the Word.

[2] The fact that the Jewish nation were confined to what was external devoid of anything internal, so that it believed what was true to be falsity, and conversely what was false to be the truth, is quite evident from their teaching that one was allowed to hate an enemy and also from their life of hating all who did not belong to their semblance of religion. Indeed it is quite evident from their belief that they pleased and served Jehovah when they treated gentile nations in a savage and cruel fashion, that is to say, when they exposed the bodies of those whom they had slaughtered to be devoured by wild animals or birds, cut up those who were still alive, hacked them to pieces with iron picks and axes, or made them pass through the brickkiln, 2 Samuel 12:31. Indeed their teachings asserted that even an ally who for some reason had been declared an enemy was to be treated in much the same way. From these considerations it becomes quite clear that nothing internal at all lay within their semblance of religion. If anyone at that time had told them that such actions were contrary to the inner spirit of the Church they would have replied that this was a falsity. The fact that they were confined to what was external, having no knowledge at all of anything internal and leading lives contrary to what was internal, is also evident from what the Lord teaches in Matthew 5:21-48.