4835. 'Come [in] to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her' means that this - that representative of the Church - might be continued. This is clear from the meaning of 'coming (or going in) to a brother's wife and performing the duty of a husband's brother to her' as preserving and continuing that which constitutes the Church. The requirement laid down in the Mosaic Law, that if a man died without issue his brother was to marry his widow and raise up seed for his brother, and that the firstborn was to receive his dead brother's name, whereas all other sons were to be his own, was called the duty of a brother-in-law. The fact that this directive was nothing new in the Jewish Church but a practice already in existence is clear from the words used here; and the same goes for many other directives given to the Israelites through Moses, such as the law forbidding them to take wives from the daughters of the Canaanites and requiring them to marry within their own families, Genesis 24:3-4; 28:1-2. From these and many other examples it is evident that a Church had existed previously in which the same kind of practices were followed as those at a later time which were declared to and demanded of the sons of Jacob. Altars and sacrifices likewise had been in use since ancient times, as is evident from Genesis 8:20-21; 22:3, 7-8. From this it is plain that the Jewish Church was not a new Church but a revival of the Ancient Church which had perished.

[2] What the law regarding the duty of a brother-in-law had been is clear in Moses,

If brothers dwell together but one of them dies, and has no son, the wife of the dead one shall not marry a stranger outside [the family]; her brother-in-law shall go in to her, and take her to himself as his wife, and so perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her. Then it will happen, that the firstborn whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, so that his name is not wiped out from Israel. But if the man is unwilling to take his sister-in-law, his sister-in-law shall go up to the gate to the elders, and she shall say, My brother-in-law refuses to raise up for his brother a name in Israel; he is unwilling to perform the duty of a brother-in-law for me. Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him; and if he stands and says, I do not desire to take her, his sister-in-law shall go up to him in the sight of the elders, and she shall remove his shoe from upon his foot and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, So will it be done to the man who does not build up his brother's house. Therefore his name will be called in Israel, The house of him who has his shoe taken off. Deuteronomy 25:5-10.

[3] Anyone who does not know what the duty of a brother-in-law represents inevitably believes that the practice existed solely for the sake of preserving a name and consequently an inheritance. But the preservation of a name and an inheritance was not in itself a great enough reason why a brother should have been required to enter into a marriage with his sister-in-law. Rather, the practice was ordained so that the preservation and continuation of the Church might be represented through it. For a marriage represented the marriage of good and truth, which is the heavenly marriage. It therefore represented the Church too, for the Church is a Church by virtue of the marriage of good and truth, and when this marriage exists within it the Church makes one with heaven, which is the true heavenly marriage. And because a marriage represented these things, 'sons and daughters' were therefore representations and also meaningful signs of truths and goods. This being so, 'being without issue' meant a lack of good and truth, and so meant that no representative of the Church existed in that house any longer, and that as a consequence it was not in communion with the Church. In addition 'brother' represented a kindred good to which the truth represented by a widow might be joined. For to be the kind of truth that has life, produces fruit, and thereby continues that which constitutes the Church, truth cannot be joined to any other good but that which is its own and a kindred one. This was how those in heaven perceived the duty of a brother-in-law.

[4] The meaning of this practice - of a sister-in-law removing the shoe from upon the foot of the man who refused to do the duty of a brother-in-law, and of her spitting in his face - was this: Anyone devoid of good and truth, external and internal, would destroy those things that constitute the Church; for 'the shoe' means that which is external, 1748, and 'the face' that which is internal, 1999, 2434, 3527, 4066, 4796. From this it is evident that 'the duty of a brother-in-law' represented the preservation and continuation of the Church. But when through the Lord's Coming representatives of internal things came to an end, that particular law was done away with. It is like a person's soul or spirit in relation to his body. A person's soul or spirit is the internal part of him and his body the external; or what amounts to the same, the soul or spirit is the true likeness of the person, whereas the body is merely a representative image of him. When a person rises again his representative image or that which is external, namely his body, is cast aside, for he is now conscious in that which is internal, namely the true likeness of him. It is also like a person who is in darkness and from there looks at things belonging to light; or what amounts to the same, like one who is in the light of the world and from there looks at things belonging to the light of heaven. For the light of the world in comparison with the light of heaven is as darkness. Within that darkness, that is, within the light of the world, things belonging to the light of heaven as they exist essentially cannot be seen, but are seen so to speak within a representative image, even as the human mind is seen in a person's face. Therefore when the light of heaven is seen in its own essential brightness, the darkness of representative images is dispelled. This was effected through the Lord's Coming.

[4835a] 'And raise up seed for your brother' means so that the Church does not perish. This is clear from the meaning of 'seed' as truth derived from good, or faith grounded in charity, dealt with in 1025, 1447, 16110, 1940, 2848, 3310, 3373, 3671. The same is also meant by the firstborn who was to succeed to the name of the dead brother, 352, 367, 2435, 3325, 3494. 'Raising up seed for a brother' means continuing that which constitutes the Church, in line with what has been stated just above in 4834, and thus means so that the Church does not perish.

3310. 'A man of the field' means the good of life that has its origin in matters of doctrine. This is clear from the meaning of 'the field'. In the Word reference is made in many places to the earth (or the land), the ground, and the field. When used in a good sense 'the earth' means the Lord's kingdom in heaven and on earth, and so the Church, which is the Lord's kingdom on earth. 'The ground' is used in a similar though more limited sense, 566, 662, 1066-1068, 1262, 1413, 1733, 1850, 2117, 2118 (end), 2928; and the same things are also meant by 'the field', though in a more limited sense still, 368, 2971. And since the Church is not the Church by virtue of matters of doctrine except insofar as these have the good of life as the end in view, or what amounts to the same, unless matters of doctrine are joined to the good of life, 'the field' therefore means primarily the good of life. But in order that such good may be that of the Church, matters of doctrine from the Word which have been implanted within that good must be present. In the absence of matters of doctrine the good of life does indeed exist, but it is not as yet that of the Church, and so not as yet truly spiritual, except in the sense that it has the potentiality to become so, like the good of life as this exists with gentiles who do not possess the Word and therefore do not know the Lord.

[2] That 'the field' is the good of life in which the things of faith, that is, spiritual truths existing with the Church, are implanted, becomes quite clear from the Lord's parable about the sower in Matthew,

A sower went out to sow, And as he sowed some fell on the pathway, and the birds came and devoured them. Some fell on rocky ground where they did not have much soil, ¹ and immediately they sprang up, since they had no depth of soil ² , but when the sun rose they were scorched; and since they had no root they withered away. Some fell among thorns, and the thorns came up and choked them. But some fell on good soil ² and yielded fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. He who has an ear to hear let him hear. Matthew 13:4-9; Mark 4:3-9; Luke 8:5-8.

This describes four types of land or ground within the field, that is, within the Church. The fact that here 'the seed' is the Lord's Word, and so the truth which is called the truth of faith, and that 'the good soil' is the good which is called the good of charity is evident to anyone, for it is the good in man that receives the Word. 'The pathway' is falsity, 'rocky ground' is truth which is not rooted in good, 'thorns' are evils.

[3] With regard to the good of life which has its origin in matters of doctrine being meant by 'a man of the field', the position is that those who are being regenerated first of all do good as matters of doctrine direct them, for they do not of themselves know what good is. They learn to do good from matters of doctrine concerning love and charity; from these they know who the Lord is, who the neighbour is, what love is, and what charity is, and so what good is. Those who have come into this stage are stirred by the affection for truth and are called 'men (vir) of the field'. But after that, once they have been regenerated they do good not from matters of doctrine but from love and charity, for the good itself which they have learned about through matters of doctrine exists with them, and they are in that case called 'men (homo) of the field'. It is like someone who is by nature inclined to commit adultery, steal, and murder but who learns from the Ten Commandments that such practices belong to hell and so refrains from them. In this state he is influenced by the Commandments, for he fears hell and learns from those Commandments and similarly from much else in the Word how he ought to conduct his life. In his case when he does what is good he does it from the Commandments. But when good exists with him he starts to loathe adultery, theft, and murder to which he was previously inclined. In this state he no longer does what is good from the Commandments but from the good which by now resides with him. In the first state the truth he learns directs him to good, but in the second state good is the source of truth taught by him.

[4] The same also applies to spiritual truths which are called doctrinal and are more interior Commandments still. For matters of doctrine are interior truths which the natural man possesses, the first truths there being sensory ones, the second truths being factual, and interior truths matters of doctrine. The latter are based on factual truths inasmuch as a person can have and retain no idea, notion, or concept of them except from factual truths. But the foundations on which factual truths are based are sensory truths, for without sensory truths nobody is able to possess factual ones. Such truths, that is to say, factual and sensory, are meant by 'a man skilled in hunting', but matters of doctrine are meant by 'a man of the field'. Such is the order in which those kinds of truths stand in relation to one another in man. Until a person has become adult therefore, and through sensory and factual truths possesses matters of doctrine, he is incapable of being regenerated, for he cannot be confirmed in the truths contained in matters of doctrine except through ideas based on factual and sensory truths - for nothing is ever present in a person's thought, not even the deepest arcanum of faith there, which does not involve some natural or sensory idea, though generally a person is not aware of the essential nature of such ideas. But in the next life the nature of them is revealed before his understanding, if he so desires, and also a visual representation before his sight, if he wants it; for in the next life such things can be presented before one's eyes in a visual form. This seems unbelievable but it is nevertheless what happens there.

Fußnoten: