3024. That thou shalt not take a woman for my son of the daughters of the Canaanite. That this signifies that the Divine rational was not to be conjoined with any affection disagreeing with truth, is evident from the signification of “taking a woman,” as being to be conjoined by a covenant of marriage; from the signification of “my son,” namely Isaac, as being the Lord’s Divine rational (see n. 1893, 2066, 2083, 2630); from the signification of “daughters,” as being affections (see n. 489-491, 568, 2362); and from the signification of the “Canaanite,” as being evil (see n. 1444, 1573, 1574); from which it is that the “daughters of the Canaanite” are affections that do not agree with truth. The subject here treated of is the Divine truth that was to be adjoined to the Divine good of the Lord’s rational, as may be seen from the Contents (n. 3013). By the “woman” who was to be associated by a covenant of marriage, is meant that truth itself, which was to be called forth from the natural man by the common way; by “my son” is meant the Lord’s rational in respect to good, to which it was to be adjoined or associated; hence it may be known that by “not taking a woman from the daughters of the Canaanite,” is signified that this rational was not to be conjoined with any affection that disagreed with truth. All conjunction of truth with good is effected by means of affection; for no truth can possibly enter into man’s rational and be conjoined there, except by means of affection; for in affection is the good of love, which alone conjoins (n. 1895); as may also be known to anyone who reflects.

[2] That the “daughters of the Canaanite” signify affections which disagree with truth, that is, affections of what is false, is evident from the signification of “daughters;” for daughters are mentioned in many passages of the Word, and everyone can see that daughters are not there meant, as where it is said, the “daughter of Zion,” the “daughter of Jerusalem,” the “daughter of Tarshish,” the “daughter of My people.” That by these are signified affections of good and of truth, has been shown in passages quoted above. And because they are affections of good and of truth, they are also churches, for churches are churches from these affections. Thus by the “daughter of Zion” is signified the celestial church, and this from the affection of good; but by the “daughter of Jerusalem” is signified the spiritual church, from the affection of truth (n. 2362); this is also signified by the “daughter of My people” (Isaiah 22:4; Jeremiah 6:14, 26; 8:19, 21-22; 14:17; Lam. 2:11; 4:6; Ezekiel 13:17).

[3] From this it is evident what is signified by the “daughters” of the nations; as by the “daughters of the Philistines,” the “daughters of Egypt,” the “daughters of Tyre and of Zidon,” the “daughters of Edom,” the “daughters of Moab,” the “daughters of the Chaldeans” and “of Babel,” and the “daughters of Sodom,” namely, the affections of evil and falsity from which were their religious systems, and thus the religious systems themselves. That such is the signification of “daughters,” may be seen from the passages that follow.

In Ezekiel:

The daughters of the nations shall lament for Egypt. Wail for the multitude of Egypt, and cause her to go down, her and the daughters of the famous nations, unto the earth of the regions below, with them that go down into the pit (Ezekiel 32:16, 18).

The “daughters of the famous nations” denote the affections of evil.

In Samuel:

Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon; lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph (2 Samuel 1:20).

In Ezekiel:

Thou hast committed whoredom with the sons of Egypt; I have delivered thee unto the will of them that hate thee, the daughters of the Philistines, before thy wickedness was discovered, as at the time of the reproach of the daughters of Syria, and of all that are round about her, the daughters of the Philistines which do despite unto thee round about (Ezekiel 16:26-27, 57).

That daughters are not meant here, anyone can see; but the religiosities of such as are signified by the Philistines, which are of such a kind that they talk much about faith and lead no life of faith (see n. 1197, 1198); for this reason they are also called the “uncircumcised,” that is, those who are devoid of charity.

[4] In Jeremiah:

Go up into Gilead, and take balm, O virgin daughter of Egypt. O thou daughter that dwellest in Egypt, make thee vessels of exile. The daughter of Egypt shall be put to shame, she is delivered into the hand of the people of the north (Jeremiah 46:11, 19, 24).

The “daughter of Egypt” denotes the affection of reasoning from memory-knowledges concerning the truths of faith, as to whether they be so; thus she denotes the kind of religion that arises from this, which is such that nothing is believed except that which is comprehended by the senses, and thus nothing of the truth of faith (see n. 215, 232, 233, 1164, 1165, 1186, 1385, 2196, 2203, 2209, 2568, 2588).

[5] In Isaiah:

He said, Thou shalt no more exult, O thou oppressed daughter of Zidon (Isaiah 23:12).

And in David:

The daughter of Tyre with a gift, the rich among the people shall entreat thy faces (Psalms 45:12).

What is meant by the “daughter of Zidon” and the “daughter of Tyre,” is evident from the signification of Zidon and of Tyre (see n. 1201).

In Jeremiah:

Rejoice and be glad O daughter of Edom. Thine iniquity is consummated, O daughter of Zion. He will no more cause thee to migrate; thine iniquity shall be visited, O daughter of Edom (Lam. 4:21-22).

In Isaiah:

As a wandering bird, a nest sent forth, shall the daughters of Moab be (Isaiah 16:2).

Again:

Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babel; sit on the earth, without a throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans. Sit thou silent, and enter into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldeans, for thou shalt no more be called the lady of kingdoms (Isaiah 47:1, 5).

In Jeremiah:

A people cometh from the north set in array as a man to the battle, against thee, O daughter of Babel (Jeremiah 50:41-42).

The daughter of Babel is like a threshing-floor, it is time to thresh her (Jeremiah 51:33).

In Zechariah:

Alas O Zion, escape, thou that dwellest with the daughter of Babel (Zech. 2:7).

In David:

The daughter of Babel is laid waste (Psalms 137:8).

In Ezekiel:

Thy sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their ancient estate, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their ancient estate (Ezekiel 16:55).

[6] Anyone can see that in these passages by “daughters” are not meant daughters, but affections that disagree with truth, and thus religiosities that come from this source; but what these religiosities are, is evident from the signification of the peoples named-as Edom, Moab, the Chaldeans, Babel, Sodom, and Samaria, which have been treated of in many places in the explications of the foregoing chapters of Genesis. Hence now it is evident what is here meant by the “daughters of the Canaanite.”

[7] That the Israelites were not to contract marriages with the daughters of the Canaanites, also had regard to the spiritual laws that good and falsity, and evil and truth are not to be joined together; for thence comes profanation. The prohibition was also representative of the matter concerning which we read in Deuteronomy 7:3; and in Malachi:

Judah hath profaned the holiness of Jehovah, in that he hath loved and hath married the daughter of a strange god (Malachi 2:11).

1573. And the Canaanite and the Perizzite were then dwelling in the land. That this signifies evils and falsities in the external man, is evident from the signification of “the Canaanite,” as being the hereditary evil from the mother in the external man (as before shown, n. 1444); and from the signification of “the Perizzite,” as being the derivative falsity (concerning which see below). That there was with the Lord an evil heredity from the mother in His external man, may be seen above (n. 1414, 1444); and that there was falsity from this, is a necessary consequence; for where there is hereditary evil, there is also falsity; the latter being born of the former. But the falsity that is from evil cannot be born until the man has been imbued with knowledges [scientifica et cognitiones]. Evil has nothing but these into which it may operate or flow; for in this way the evil which is of the will part is turned into falsity in the intellectual part; so that this falsity also was hereditary, because it was born of what was hereditary, and yet was not the falsity that is derived from principles of falsity; but it was in the external man, and there the internal man could see it to be false.

[2] And because there was hereditary evil from the mother before the Lord had been imbued with knowledges, or before Abram sojourned in Egypt, it is said in the preceding chapter, verse 6, that “the Canaanite was in the land,” but not the Perizzite; but here, after He had been imbued with knowledges, it is said that “the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled in the land;” from which it is evident that by “the Canaanite” is signified evil, and by “the Perizzite” falsity. It is also evident from this, that the mention of the Canaanite and the Perizzite is not in any historical series, for in what goes before and in what follows they are not treated of at all; and the same is true of the mention of the Canaanite in the foregoing chapter, verse 6 from all which it is evident that some arcanum lies hidden here which cannot be known except from the internal sense.

[3] Its being said that there was with the Lord hereditary evil from the mother may cause surprise, but as it is here so plainly declared, and as the Lord is treated of in the internal sense, it cannot be doubted that so it was. For no human being can possibly be born of another human being without thence deriving evil. But the hereditary evil derived from the father is one thing, and that from the mother is another. The hereditary evil from the father is more internal, and remains to eternity, for it cannot possibly be eradicated; but the Lord had not such evil, because He was born of Jehovah the Father, and thus as to internals was Divine or Jehovah. But the hereditary evil from the mother is of the external man; this did exist with the Lord, and it is called “the Canaanite in the land;” and the falsity from this is “the Perizzite.” Thus was the Lord born as are other men, and had infirmities as have other men.

[4] That He derived hereditary evil from the mother is clearly evident from the fact that He underwent temptations; no one can possibly be tempted who has no evil; it is the evil in a man which tempts, and through which he is tempted. That the Lord was tempted, and that he underwent temptations a thousandfold more grievous than any man can ever endure; and that He endured them alone, and overcame evil, or the devil and all hell, by His own power, is also evident.

Concerning these temptations we read thus in Luke:

Jesus was led in the spirit into the wilderness, being forty days tempted by the devil, so that He did not eat in those days. But after the devil had ended every temptation, he departed from Him for a season. Thence He returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee (Luke 4:1-2, 13-14).

[5] And in Mark:

The Spirit impelling Jesus made Him go forth into the wilderness. And He was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted, and He was with the wild beasts (Mark 1:12-13); where hell is signified by “the wild beasts.” Moreover, He was tempted even unto death, so that His sweat was drops of blood:

And being in an agony, He prayed the more earnestly; and His sweat became as drops of blood falling down upon the earth (Luke 22:44).

[6] No angel can ever be tempted of the devil; because, while he is in the Lord, evil spirits cannot approach him, even distantly, without being instantly seized with horror and terror. Much less would hell have been able to approach the Lord if He had been born Divine; that is, without evil adhering from the mother.

[7] It is likewise a common expression with preachers, that the Lord also bore the iniquities and evils of the human race; but for Him to admit into Himself iniquities and evils, except by the hereditary way, is utterly impossible; for the Divine is not susceptible of evil. And therefore in order that He might conquer evil by His own powers-which no man has been able to do, or is able to do-and so might alone become righteousness, He was willing to be born as are other men. If it had not been for this, there would have been no need of His being born; for the Lord could have assumed the Human Essence without birth, as He did sometimes assume it, when seen by the Most Ancient Church, and likewise by the prophets, but for the additional purpose of putting on evil, against which He might fight, and which He might conquer, and might thus conjoin in Himself the Divine Essence with the Human Essence, He came into the world.

[8] But the Lord had no evil that was actual, or His own, as He also says in John:

Which of you convicted Me of sin? (John 8:46).

From what has been said it is now clearly evident what is signified by there being “strife between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and the herdmen of Lot’s cattle,” which words immediately precede. The reason was that “the Canaanite and the Perizzite were then dwelling in the land.”