4368. 'If now I have found favour in your eyes, then take my gift from my hand' means the reciprocation of that affection, in order that it might be instilled. This is clear from what comes both before and after, for the subject is the joining together of good and truths within the natural and so the instilling of affection from good into truth. As shown above in 4366, this is the reason why the refusal of the gift sent from Jacob has the meaning it does, namely that an affection might be instilled into truth, and in 4367 why the immediately previous exclamation 'No, I beg of you' means the birth of that affection. Consequently these words 'If now I have found favour in your eyes, then take my gift from my hand' means a reciprocation of that affection, in order that it might be instilled; for Jacob says this from a desire for what is good, that is, from affection. Hence also the reference further on to his urging him.

[2] The reciprocation of that affection which is instilled by the good, meant by 'Esau', into the truth, meant by 'Jacob', is used to mean the affection for truth. For two affections that are heavenly exist - the affection for good and the affection for truth. These have been the subject several times already. The affection for truth has no other origin than good, the affection coming from there also; for by itself truth has no life but acquires it from good. Consequently when someone feels an affection for truth that affection does not originate in the truth but in the good which flows into the truth and creates the affection itself. This is what is meant at this point by the reciprocation of that affection in order that it might be instilled. It is well known that there are many within the Church who feel an affection for the Word of the Lord and put a lot of effort into reading it; but those whose end in view is to learn about what is true are only a few. The majority cling to their own dogmas, and are anxious only to confirm these from the Word. These people seem to be moved by an affection for truth, but they are not. The affection for truth exists solely with those who love to learn about truths, that is, to know what is true, and who search the Scriptures with that end in view. Nobody is moved by this affection except one who is governed by good, that is, one who is governed by charity towards the neighbour, and more so who is governed by love to the Lord. With people of this kind good itself flows into truth and creates the affection, for the Lord is present within that good.

[3] This can be illustrated by the following examples: Take those who are governed by the good of genuine charity and who read the following words which the Lord addressed to Peter,

I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Matthew 16:15-19.

These people - that is to say, those who are moved by an affection for truth that originates in the good of genuine charity - like to be told what these words were really used to mean. When they hear that 'the rock' referred to here, on which 'the Church will be built', means faith rooted in charity, and that 'Peter' therefore has that meaning; and when they hear that the keys for opening and closing heaven are given to that faith, see Preface to Chapter 22 of Genesis, they are delighted and are stirred with affection for that truth, because it is in that case the Lord alone, the Source of faith, who possesses that power. But people who are not moved by an affection for truth that originates in the good of genuine charity but by an affection for truth originating in some other kind of good, and more so if it originates in self-love and love of the world, are not stirred by any affection for that truth, but become depressed and also angry since they wish to lay claim to that power as a priestly one. They are angry because they are deprived of the power to control, and depressed because they are deprived of other people's deference to them.

[4] Take another example. If people who are moved by an affection for truth that originates in the good of charity hear that charity makes the Church, and not faith separated from charity, they accept that truth joyfully, whereas those who are moved by an affection for truth originating in self-love and love of the world do not accept it. Furthermore when those who are moved by an affection for truth that originates in the good of charity hear that love towards the neighbour does not begin in themselves but in the Lord they are delighted, whereas those who are moved by an affection for truth originating in self-love and love of the world do not accept that truth but fiercely defend the idea that love begins in themselves. Consequently they do not know what loving the neighbour as themselves really is. When people who are moved by an affection for truth that originates in the good of genuine charity hear that heavenly blessedness consists in doing good to others out of a desire to do it, with no selfish end in view, they are delighted, whereas those who are moved by an affection for truth originating in self-love and love of the world, want none of this; nor can they even understand what it is.

[5] When people who are moved by an affection for truth that originates in the good of genuine charity learn that the works of the external man are nothing if they do not proceed from the internal man, and so from the desire to do what is good, they accept it joyfully, whereas those who are moved by an affection for truth originating in self-love and love of the world applaud the works of the external man but show no interest in the desire to do good present in the internal man. Nor indeed are they even aware that this desire, if present in the internal man, remains after death and that when the works performed by the external man have no connection with the internal man they are dead and come to nothing.

The same may be seen in every other example that might be mentioned. The examples that have been given show that the truths of faith cannot possibly be joined to anyone if he is not governed by the good of genuine charity, and so cannot be joined to anything other than good. They show also that all genuine affection for truth originates in that good. Anyone can see a confirmation of this from his daily experience - when he sees that people moved by evil have no real belief, unlike those moved by good. From this it is quite evident that the truth of faith is joined to good and never to evil.

4345. 'And he put the servant-girls and their sons first, and Leah and her sons further back, and Rachel and Joseph even further back' means an ordering beginning with quite general things in which all else is included. This becomes clear from what has been stated directly above about the meaning of 'the servant-girls, Leah, Rachel, and their sons' to the effect that 'the servant-girls' means the affections for knowledge and for cognitions, 'Leah' the affection for exterior truth, and 'Rachel' the affection for interior truth. The affections for knowledge and for cognitions are the most external ones since knowledge and cognitions are the foundations out of which truths arise and on which they are based. The affection for external truth follows them and is more interior, while the affection for interior truth is more interior still. The more external they are the more general they are too, and the more internal they are the less general they are and in relation to the general are called particular and specific.

[2] With regard to general truths, they are called general because they are made up of the particular truths and so include the particular ones within them. General truths without particular ones are not general truths, but are called such from the particular. They are like a general whole and its parts. No general whole can be called a whole if there are no parts, for the parts make up the whole. Indeed nothing exists in the nature of things which does not first exist from and then continue to exist from things other than itself. That which exists and continues to exist from things other than itself is called general, and the things which compose it and keep it in existence are called particular. Being composed of internal things, external ones in relation to internal are therefore general. The same applies to the human being and his mental faculties: the more external these are the more general they are since they are composed of things that are more interior, while these in turn are composed of those that are inmost.

[3] In relation to the rest of the human being the actual body and the things belonging to the body, as its external senses and its actions are called, are most general. The natural mind and the things belonging to the natural mind are less general because they are more internal, and in relation to the body and bodily things are called particulars. The rational mind however and the things belonging to the rational mind are more internal still, and are - in relation to the body, the natural mind and the things belonging to these - called specifics. These differences are clearly observable by a person when he casts aside his body and becomes a spirit, for then he is able to observe clearly that the things of the body had been nothing more than the most general forms taken by the things of his spirit, and that bodily things received their existence and were kept in existence by those of his spirit. Thus he sees that the things of his spirit in relation to those of his body were particulars. And when the same spirit becomes an angel, that is, when he is raised up into heaven, he is able to observe that the same things which previously he has seen and experienced in an obscure light he now sees and experiences in their particular form and in bright light. For he now observes countless details which previously he had seen and experienced as a single entity.

[4] The same is also evident from what is the case while that person is living in the world. The things which he sees and experiences in early childhood are most general, whereas those which he sees and experiences in later childhood and youth are the particular aspects of those general ones; and those that he sees and experiences in adult years are the specific details of those particular aspects. For as a person advances in years he introduces the particular ideas into general ones acquired in early childhood, and after that specific notions into the particular ideas; for he advances gradually towards more interior things, filling what is the general with the particular, and the particular with the specific. From this one may now see the implications of an ordering beginning with general things in which all else is included, which is the meaning of 'he put the servant-girls and their sons first, Leah and her sons further back, and Rachel and Joseph even further back'.

[5] A similar situation exists when a person is being regenerated, or what amounts to the same, when in him truths are being joined to good; and this situation is the subject here. During that time general affections together with their truths, meant here by 'the servant-girls and their sons', are the first to be introduced into good; after that the less general are introduced, that is, those which in relation to the general are particular, meant here by 'Leah and her sons'; and finally the less general still, that is, those which in relation to the same are specific, meant here by 'Rachel and Joseph'. For when being regenerated a person passes so to speak through comparable phases of life - he experiences early childhood first; after that later childhood and youth; and finally adult years.