Bible

 

Genesis 19

Studie

   

2 Iṇṇ-asan: «Oṇsayaq-qawan, məssaw-i, a-di-tagim sadkal n a-du-təṃṃəram ehan-in, ehan n əkli-nnawan, təšširədam iḍaran-nawan, taṇsim ɣur-i, ṭufat tənzəyam, təggəzam tarrayt-nawan.» «Kala, əṇṇan-as, ad-naṇsu daɣ tarrayt daɣ aṃṃas n əɣrəm.»

3 Mišan Lot iḍgaz wəllen har ardan s iki n ahan-net. Ig-asan imeṇsewan, issəŋŋ-asan tagəlla, ətšan.

4 Harwa da wər əṇsen as əɣalayɣalayan meddan ən Sədom ehan-net, win maḍrornen əd win waššarnen kul əllan əddi, wər din-iqqim waliyyan.

5 Əɣran Lot əṇṇan-as: «Magan meddan win d-edwanen ehan-nak? Suɣəb-tan-du. A nara a dər-san nag'əzzəna.»

6 Iqqab-du Lot dat ahan ihar-t-idu dəffər-əs.

7 Təzzar iṇṇ-asan: «Kala, kala, imidawan-in, ad-wər-tagim ark-əmazal di.

8 Ələɣ šibararen ṣanatat wər nəzday meddan, a-dawan-tanat-akfa, tagim-asnat a wa taram. Mišan ad wər təɣšədam arat i meddan a da, imagaran-in a əṃosan, əhan taɣlift-in.»

9 «Əg̣məd a di! əjjəwwaban-as. Kay iṃan-nak amagar a təṃosa, tarəɣ a-dana-taga əššəriɣa daɣ akal-nana. Ad-ak-nagu aššar ogaran wa dasan-za-nagu!» Əbdaɣan-in Lot əs təɣurad əhozan-du imi n ahan fəl a-tt-arzin.

10 Assaɣa di ad obəzan meddan ann əššin, Lot, əgan-t-id daɣ aṃṃas n ahan təzzar əlasan-tu təməhirt.

11 S ig'a wen meddan win əllanen dat ahan əwatan-tan əs taḍḍarɣalt win maḍrornen əd win waššarnen, haras orn-asan ad əṣṣənan dad illa əmi n ahan. Əṇṇan meddan ann əššin i Lot: «Awak əllan-tu marwan-nak da? Əḍaggal, bararan, šibararen, madeɣ imarwan a əqqalan, əkkəs-tan daɣ əɣrəm a, fəlas ahluk a tu-za-nagu. Šiɣəttas-net aggotnen oṣanat-in Əməli, issokanaq-q-idu a-tu-nəhlək.»

14 Lot deɣ ikka iḍulan-net imal-asan: «Tarmad! Əg̣mədat edagg a da fəlas Əməli ad-ihlək aɣrəm a da.» Mišan əɣilan as addal a itag.

15 Ɣur təɣəttawt n azaɣan, əḍgazan angalosan Lot fəl ad-aglu: «Əbəz tarrayt! əṇṇan-as. Ədkəl taɣur-ək əd təbararen-nak an ṣanatat, amər wər iga a di a-kawan-əg̣mədan ṃan, as irzam əɣrəm aššar-net.»

16 As ənayan meddan as Lot ih-ay sandad, əbazan-tu s əfus ənta əd taɣur-əs əd təbararen-net an ṣanatat əkkasan-tu daɣ əɣrəm, fəlas Əməli a das ihanatten.

17 As tan əkkasan daɣ əɣrəm iṇṇa iyyan daɣ-san i Lot: «Daggag fəl ad-tassafsa təmməddurt-nak, a du wər təṣwəḍa dəffər-ək, ad wər təsəlluleɣ iṃan-nak daɣ aṃadal a da, ḍaggag s ədɣaɣ made təhləka.»

18 Ijjəwwab Lot: «Kala, kala, məšš-i, ad wər təgməya daɣ əkli-nnak a di!

19 Əṣṣanaɣ as əgrawa arraxmat aṃaran təhəkkawt zəwwərat as di-tog̣aza iṇfas-in. Mišan nak wər əfrega azzal har ədɣaɣ dat ad-i-d-awəḍ albas, təzzar ib-i.

20 Təhaṇṇaya a wen ən təɣrəmt ten ? Təkna ihəz fəl ad-azəla har den. Taɣrəmt ənḍərrat a təṃos, ayy-i a daɣ-as əlɣəsa fəl a daɣ-as əgrəwa efsan ən təməddurt-in.»

21 «Ənta di da, iṇṇ-as, ardeɣ-ak tolas s ad wər igrew arat waliyyan taɣrəmt ta as təganna.

22 Aglu tarmad, əlɣəs, fəlas wər əfrega igi n arat iket wər teweda.» (Təmməḍrəyt ən təɣrəmt ta ənta a fəlas itawagga eṣəm Tsohar)

23 Təfuk tətag̣azzay as din-ewad Lot Tsohar.

24 Assaɣa wen da a dd-issərtak Əməli əlkəbrit ibilaglagan daɣ jənnawan fəl Sədom əd Gamora.

25 Issəba tamayyamayt ən ɣərman win əd tatawla ket-net əd win tan əzdaɣnen d annabatan n aṃadal.

26 Tanṭut ən Lot a din təṣwadat dəffər-əs təqqal əwelwel n əsaləɣ.

27 Ibrahim inzay ṭufat s adag wa daɣ d-iqqal dəffər Əməli as dər-əs imməgrad.

28 Iṣwad daɣ anamod ən Sədom əd Gamora əd tatawla kul, ihaṇṇay əhu itag̣azzay daɣ aṃadal olan d eqqad zəwwəran.

29 Assaɣa wa d-ihlak Əməli iɣərman əd tatawla win as kala tan təha təməɣsurt ən Lot, ikta-ddu Məššina Ibrahim təzzar issəfsa Lot daɣ əlmihlak.

30 Lot iggəlat daɣ Tsohar iɣsar daɣ ədɣaɣ, ənta əd təbararen-net, id fəlas təh-ay ṭasa daɣ Tsohar. Izdaɣ əɣəɣi ənta əd təbararen-net an ṣanatat.

31 Təṇṇa ta waššarat i ta ənḍərrat: «Abba-nnana iwaššaran, amaran wər t-əllen meddan daɣ əhazi əngəm akkin-ana-du, a wa itawaggan daɣ əddənet kul.

32 Ayaw ad-naššašu abba-nnana esmad, a dər-əs nənəməṇsu fəl a-tu-nakfu əzzurriya.»

33 Təzzar əššəšwanat abba-nnasnat esmad ahad wədi, tənamaṇsa dər-əs ta waššarat wər ila iggi y asarod-net wala taṇakra-nnet.

34 As ṭufat təṇṇa i tamaḍrayt-net: «Əssirtaya iṃan-nin d abba-nin əṇdod, šašwanaq-qu esmad tolas ahad a tənəməṇsa dər-əs kam da fəl a-tu-nakfu əzzurriya.»

35 Ahad wədi ənta da sammaswadnat abba-nnasnat tolas tənamaṇsa dər-əs ta n tamaḍrayt, daɣ-as wər ila iggi y asarod-net wala taṇakra-nnet.

36 Əmmək wa da as əganat təbararen ən Lot šidusen əs ši-ssanat.

37 Ta waššarat təgraw barar təg-as eṣəm Mohab, ənta a dd-əg̣madan Kəl Mohab win n azala.

38 Ta ənḍərrat ənta da təgraw barar təg-as eṣəm Ben-Hammi, ənta a dd-əg̣madan Kəl Hammon win n azala.

   

Ze Swedenborgových děl

 

Arcana Coelestia # 2417

Prostudujte si tuto pasáž

  
/ 10837  
  

2417. Look not back behind thee. That this signifies that he should not look to doctrinal things, is evident from the signification of “looking back behind him,” when the city was behind him and the mountain before him. For by “city” is signified what is doctrinal (n. 402, 2268, 2392); and by “mountain,” love and charity (n. 795, 1430). That this is the signification will be evident in the explication at verse 26, where it is said that his wife “looked back behind him,” and became a pillar of salt. Everyone may know that in this expression, “looking back behind him,” there is some Divine arcanum, and that it lies too deep to be seen. For in looking back behind him there appears to be nothing criminal, and yet it is a matter of importance so great that it is said he should escape for his life, that is, should take thought for his eternal life by not looking back behind Him. But what it is to look to doctrinal things will be seen in what follows; in this place we shall merely state what these doctrinal things are.

[2] Doctrine is twofold: that of love and charity, and that of faith. At first, while it is still a little maid and a virgin, every church of the Lord has no other doctrine, and loves no other, than that of charity; for this belongs to life. But successively the church turns itself away from this doctrine, until it begins to hold it cheap, and at length to reject it; and then it acknowledges no other doctrine than that which is called the doctrine of faith; and when it separates faith from charity, this doctrine conspires with a life of evil.

[3] Such was the case with the Primitive Church, or that of the Gentiles, after the Lord’s coming. In its beginning it had no other doctrine than that of love and charity, for this the Lord Himself taught (see n. 2371 at the end). But after His time, successively, as love and charity began to grow cold, there arose the doctrine of faith, and with it dissensions and heresies, which increased as men came to lay stress on this doctrine.

[4] The like was the case with the Ancient Church that was after the flood, and was extended through so many kingdoms (n. 2385): this church also in its beginning knew no other doctrine than that of charity, because this looked to and affected the life, and by so doing they had regard for their eternal welfare. And yet after some time the doctrine of faith too began to be cultivated with some, and at length to be separated from charity; but those who did this they called “Ham,” because they were in a life of evil (see n. 1062, 1063, 1076).

[5] The Most Ancient Church which was before the flood and which in preeminence to all others was called “Man,” was in the very perception of love to the Lord and of charity toward the neighbor; thus it had the doctrine of love and charity inscribed on itself. But even then there were those who cultivated faith, and when they separated it from charity they were called “Cain;” for by “Cain” is signified such faith, and by “Abel,” whom he killed, charity (see the explication of chapter 4).

[6] This shows that there are two doctrines, the one of charity, and the other of faith, although in themselves the two are one; for the doctrine of charity involves all things of faith. But when the doctrine comes to be from those things alone which are of faith, it is then called twofold, because faith is separated from charity. That these doctrines are separated at the present day may be seen from the fact that it is altogether unknown what charity is, and what the neighbor is. They who are solely in the doctrine of faith are not aware that charity toward the neighbor consists in anything beyond giving of their own to others, and in feeling pity for anybody who may seem to need it, because they call everybody the neighbor without distinction; and yet charity is all good whatever there is in a man: in his affection, and in his zeal, and from these in his life; and the neighbor is all the good in others by which one is affected, consequently those who are in good; and this with every possible distinction.

[7] For example: that man is in charity and mercy who exercises justice and judgment by punishing the evil and rewarding the good. There is charity in punishing the evil, for to this are we impelled by our zeal to amend them, and at the same time to protect the good, lest these suffer injury at the hands of the evil. In this way does a man consult the welfare of one who is in evil, or his enemy, and express his good feeling toward him, as well as to others, and to the common weal itself; and this from charity toward the neighbor. The case is the same with all the other goods of life; for the good of life is never possible unless it comes from charity toward the neighbor, because it looks to this, and involves it.

[8] Seeing then that there is obscurity so great as regards the true nature of charity and of the neighbor, it is clear that the doctrine of charity (the doctrine of faith having assumed the first place) is among the things that are lost; when yet it was this alone that was cultivated in the Ancient Church; and that to such a degree that they reduced into classes all the goods that belonged to charity toward the neighbor, that is, all those who were in good; and this with many distinctions, to which they also gave names, calling them the poor, the miserable, the oppressed, the sick, the naked, the hungry, the thirsty, captives or those in prison, strangers, orphans, and widows; some also they called the lame, the blind, the deaf, the dumb, the maimed; besides many other names. In the Word of the Old Testament the Lord has spoken in accordance with this doctrine, on which account such terms so often occur there; and He himself again spoke in accordance with the same doctrine, as in Matthew 25:35-36, 38-39, 40, 42-45; Luke 14:13, 21 and in many other places. Hence it is that in the internal sense these names have quite a different signification. In order therefore that the doctrine of charity may be restored, it will of the Lord’s Divine mercy be stated in the following pages who those denoted by these names are, and what charity is, and what the neighbor is, both generally and specifically.

  
/ 10837  
  

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