3030. Peradventure the woman will not be willing to follow me unto this land. That this signifies a doubt of the natural man concerning that affection, as to whether it was separable, is evident from the signification of “woman,” as being truth, here from the natural, which was to be conjoined with the Divine good of the rational. And as all conjunction is effected by means of affection (as was said above, n. 3024), so by “woman” is signified the affection of that truth: and also from the signification of “going after” or “following me unto this land,” as being to be separated from the natural and conjoined with the rational; for “land” here as above (n. 3026) is the good of love that is of the rational. That there is doubt is seen from its being said, “Peradventure she be not willing.”

[2] From what has been said above, it is evident what is involved in these words, and in what follows to verse 8, and further; and in order that these things may be better understood, we may say a few words more. The genuine rational is from good, but comes forth [existit] from truth. Good flows in by an internal way; but truth by an external way. Good thus conjoins itself with truth in the rational, and they cause the rational to be. Unless the good therein is conjoined with truth, there is no rational; although there appears to be, because the man can reason (n. 1944). This is the common way in which the rational is formed with man.

[3] As the Lord was born like another man, and as it was His will to be instructed like another man, so did He will to make His rational Divine in a similar way, namely, as to good by influx from His Divine by the internal way, and as to truth by influx through the external way. When therefore the rational as to good had been so far formed as to be in a state for receiving truth (which is meant by the words in the beginning of this chapter, “Abraham being old was come into days, and Jehovah blessed Abraham in all things,” by which is signified when the state was at hand that the Lord’s Human should be made Divine, and when all things should be disposed into Divine order, as may be seen above, n. 3016, 3017), there next follows that truth is to be conjoined with the good of the rational, and this, as before said, by the common way, that is, by means of memory-knowledges and knowledges from the natural man.

[4] The good itself of the rational, which is formed by the internal way, is the very ground; but truth is the seed which is to be sown in this ground. The genuine rational is never born in any other way. In order that it might come forth with the Lord in the same way, and be made Divine by His own power, the Lord came into the world, and it was His will to be born as are other men. Otherwise He might have assumed a human without birth, as was frequently done in ancient times when He appeared to men.

[5] These are the things contained in this chapter, namely, how truth, called forth from the natural man, was to be conjoined with the good of the rational; and as the good there was Divine, how the truth there should also be made Divine. To man these things (especially to one who does not know that the rational is something distinct from the natural, and who therefore does not know that the rational is formed successively, and this by knowledges) are very obscure, so that they are not understood; but still they are among things easily understood by those who have any knowledge concerning the rational and the natural man, and who are in enlightenment. The angels see them all as in clear day.

[6] Some idea of them may be obtained from what has been said and shown above, namely: That the rational as to truth is formed by influx into memory-knowledges and knowledges (n. 1495, 1563, 1900, 1964): That it is not born from these two kinds of knowledges, but from the affection of them (n. 1895, 1900): That these two kinds of knowledges are only vessels for good (n. 1469, 1496): That empty memory-knowledges must be destroyed (n. 1489, 1492, 1499, 1500): That in the rational, the affection of good is as a soul in the affection of truth (n. 2072): What is the affection of rational truth, and of the truth of mere memory (n. 2503): That by knowledges the external man is conjoined with the internal, that is, the rational man with the natural, when knowledges are being implanted in things celestial, which are those of love and charity (n. 1450, 1451, 1453, 1616).

2072. And laughed. That this signifies the affection of truth, may be seen from the origin and essence of laughter, for its origin is nothing but the affection of truth, or else the affection of what is false, from which come the gladness and merriment that in laughter display themselves in the face, which shows that the essence of laughter is nothing else. Laughter is indeed an external thing that belongs to the body because to the face; but in the Word interior things are expressed and signified by exterior things; just as all the interior affections of the mind are expressed and signified by means of the face, interior hearing and obedience being signified by the ear, interior sight or understanding by the eye, power and strength by the hand and arm, and so on, and in the same way the affection of truth by laughter.

[2] In man’s rational there is truth, which is its chief characteristic, and there is also the affection of good, but this is in the very affection of truth as its soul. The affection of good which is in the rational does not display itself by means of laughter, but by means of a certain joy and consequent pleasurable delight which does not laugh; for in laughter there is usually something that is not so good. The reason why truth is the chief characteristic in man’s rational, is that the rational is formed by means of the knowledges of truth, for by no other means can anyone ever become rational. The knowledges of good are truths, equally as much as are the knowledges of truth.

[3] That “laughter” here signifies the affection of truth, may be seen from its being related that Abraham laughed; and in like manner Sarah, both before Isaac was born, and afterwards; and also from Isaac’s being named from “laughter,” for the word “Isaac” means “laughter.” That Abraham laughed when he heard about Isaac, is evident from this verse, for it is said that Abraham laughed when he heard about a son from Sarah. That Sarah also laughed before Isaac’s birth, when she heard from Jehovah that she should bear a son, is told in the words, “When Sarah heard at the door of the tent, Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am grown old shall I have pleasure? and my lord old? And Jehovah said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, and I am become old? Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not; for she was, afraid. And He said, Nay, but thou didst laugh” (Genesis 18:12-13, 15). And later, when Isaac had been born, “Abraham called the name of his son Isaac” (meaning “laughter”); and Sarah said, “God hath made laughter for me; everyone that heareth shall laugh with me” (Genesis 21:3, 6). Unless “laughing” and the name “Isaac,” meaning “laughter,” involved such things, these matters would never have been related.