3623. 'What would life hold for me?' means, and so there would not be any conjunction. This is clear from the meaning of 'life' as conjunction by means of truths and goods. For when it was not possible for any truth from a common stem or genuine source to be joined to natural truth, there could not be any alliance of the natural to the truth of the rational, in which case it seemed to the rational as though its own life were no life, 3493, 3620. This is why here 'what would life hold for me?' means, and so there would not be any conjunction. Here and in other places the word 'life' in the original language is plural, and the reason for this is that in man there are two powers of life. The first is called the understanding and is the receptacle of truth, the second is called the will and is the receptacle of good. These two forms or powers of life make one when the understanding is rooted in the will, or what amounts to the same, when truth is grounded in good. This explains why in Hebrew the noun 'life' is sometimes singular, sometimes plural. The plural form of that noun is used in all the following places, Jehovah God formed the man, dust from the ground; and He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul. Genesis 2:7. Jehovah God caused to spring up out of the ground every tree desirable to the sight and good for food, and the tree of life in the middle of the garden. Genesis 2:9. Behold, I am bringing a flood of waters over the earth, to destroy all flesh in which there is the spirit of life. Genesis 6:17.

They went in to Noah into the ark, two by two from all flesh in which there is the spirit of life. Genesis 7:15 (in 780).

Everything which had the breath of the spirit of life in its nostrils breathed its last. Genesis 7:12.

In David,

I believe [I am going] to see the goodness of Jehovah in the land of the living. Psalms 27:13.

In the same author,

Who is the man who desires life, who loves [many] days, that he may see good? Psalms 34:12

In the same author,

With You, O Jehovah, is the fountain of life; in Your light do we see light. Psalms 36:9.

In Malachi,

My covenant with Levi was [a covenant] of life and peace. Malachi 2:5.

In Jeremiah,

Thus said Jehovah, Behold, I set before you the way of life and the way of death. Jeremiah 21:8.

In Moses,

To love Jehovah your God, to obey His voice, and to cling to Him, for He is your life and the length of your days, so that you may dwell in the land. Deuteronomy 30:20.

In the same author,

It is not an empty word from you; for it is your life, and through this word you will prolong your days in the land. Deuteronomy 32:47.

And in other places too the plural form of the noun 'life' is used in the original language because, as has been stated, there are two kinds of life which yet make one. It is similar with the word 'heavens' in the Hebrew language, in that the heavens are many and yet make one, or like the expression 'waters' above and below, in Genesis 1:7-9 , by which spiritual things in the rational and in the natural are meant which ought to be one through being joined together. As for the plural form of 'life', when this is used both the life of the will and that of the understanding are meant, and therefore both the life of good and that of truth are meant. For man's life consists in nothing else than good and truth which hold life from the Lord within them. Devoid of good and truth, and of the life which these hold within them, no one is human. For devoid of these no one would ever have been able to will or to think anything. Everything that a person wills originates in good or in that which is not good, and everything he thinks originates in truth or in that which is not truth. Consequently man possesses two kinds of life and these make one when his thinking flows from his willing, that is, when truth which is the truth of faith flows from good which is the good of love.

4988. 'That his lord's wife lifted up her eyes towards Joseph' means unspiritual natural truth wedded to natural good, and its perception. This is clear from the meaning of 'wife' as truth wedded to good, dealt with in 1468, 2517, 3236, 4510, 4823, and in this case as unspiritual natural truth wedded to natural good since that kind of truth and this kind of good are described - the good to which that truth is joined being meant here by 'lord', 4973; and from the meaning of 'lifting up the eyes' as thought, attention, and also perception, dealt with in 2789, 2829, 3198, 3202, 4339.

[2] 'Wife' in this instance means natural truth, but not natural truth that is spiritual, while her husband, to whom 'lord' refers here, means natural good, but not natural good that is spiritual. But some explanation is needed to show what is meant by natural good and truth that are not spiritual and what is meant by natural good and truth that are spiritual. With the human being, good has two different origins - one being heredity and consequently that which is adventitious, the other being the doctrine of faith and charity or, in the case of gentiles, their religious belief. Good arising from the first origin is unspiritual natural good, whereas good arising from the second is spiritual natural good. Truth too comes from a like origin, for all good has its own truth wedded to it.

[3] Natural good arising from the first origin, which is hereditary and consequently adventitious, bears many similarities to natural good arising from the second origin, which is the doctrine of faith and charity or some other set of religious beliefs. But those similarities are confined to outward appearances; inwardly the two are completely different. Natural good arising from the first origin may be compared to the good that is also present among living creatures of a gentle nature, whereas natural good arising from the second is peculiar to the human being who uses his reason when he acts, and who consequently knows how to administer what is good in different ways, in keeping with useful purposes that need to be served. These different ways in which good has to be administered are what the doctrine regarding what is right and fair teaches, and in a higher degree what the doctrine regarding faith and charity teaches; and in the case of people who are truly rational, reason also serves in many instances to corroborate what doctrine teaches.

[4] Those whose performance of good arises from the first origin are moved as if by blind instinct in their exercise of charity, whereas those whose performance of good arises from the second origin are moved by an inner sense of duty and so with their eyes so to speak fully open to what they are doing. In short, those whose performance of good arises from the first origin are not led by any conscientious regard for what is right and fair, still less by any such regard for spiritual truth and good; but those whose performance of good arises from the second origin are led by conscience. See what has been stated already on these matters in 3040, 3470, 3471, 3518, and what is said below in 4992. But what is involved in all this cannot possibly be explained intelligibly; for anyone who is not spiritual, that is, not regenerate, sees good from the point of view of the outward form it takes. He does this because he does not know what is meant by charity or by the neighbour; and the reason why he does not know this is that no doctrinal teachings regarding charity exist. Such matters can be seen very clearly in the light of heaven, and they can consequently be seen clearly by spiritual or regenerate persons because they dwell in the light of heaven.