4763. 'And he rent his clothes' means mourning. This is clear from the meaning of 'rending clothes' as mourning, that is to say, mourning on account of the loss of truth, or the fact that no faith exists. In the Word, especially the historical part, one often reads about people rending their clothes, but the origin of that practice is not known at the present day. Nor is it known that it was representative of grief on account of the loss of truth. This practice became representative from the fact that 'clothes' meant truths, as has been shown and may be seen in 4545. Further on in this chapter it is also said that when Jacob recognized his son's tunic he rent his clothes, verse 34, by which mourning for lost truth is meant. Similar instances of this practice occur elsewhere in the Word, where it is stated that when the Rabshakeh was sent by Sennacherib king of Asshur and uttered insults against Jerusalem, Eliakim who was over the king's house, and Shebna the secretary, and Joash the recorder ¹ rent their clothes and reported these things to king Hezekiah; and when he heard them the king too rent his clothes and covered himself with sackcloth, Isaiah 36:22; 37:1; 2 Kings 18:37; 19:1. The insults he uttered were directed against God, the king, and Jerusalem, and so against Divine Truth, as is even more evident from the internal sense of this narrative. It was to express mourning therefore that their clothes were rent.

[2] When Jehudi had read before the king the scroll which Jeremiah wrote, it is said that he threw it into the fire, but the king and his servants who were listening to all those words did not tear their clothes apart, Jeremiah 36:23-24. 'They did not tear their clothes apart' meant that they did not mourn on account of the non-acceptance of Divine Truth. Something similar is implied by Joshua the son of Nun and Caleb the son of Jephunneh rending their clothes, when the spies spoke in opposition to them, by speaking unfavourably about the land of Canaan, Numbers 14:6; for 'the land of Canaan' means the Lord's kingdom, and 'to speak in opposition to this' describes falsity in opposition to Divine Truth. Mourning over the loss of Divine Truth and Divine Good is meant where it is said, in 1 Samuel 4:11-12, that when the ark of God was captured by the Philistines and both of Eli's sons died, a man ran from the line of battle to Shiloh, with rent clothes and dust on his head. Because 'the ark' represented the Lord's kingdom, and in the highest sense the Lord Himself, and consequently represented everything holy in the Church, 'rent clothes' meant grief over the loss of Divine Truth, while 'dust on his head' meant grief over the loss of Divine Good.

[3] In the narrative about Samuel and Saul one reads,

When Samuel turned to go away Saul took hold of the skirt of his tunic, and it was torn away. Therefore Samuel said to him, Jehovah has torn the kingdom of Israel from upon you this day and has given it to your companion. I will not return with you, for you have rejected the word of Jehovah, and Jehovah has rejected you from being king over Israel. 1 Samuel 15:26-28.

The tearing away by Saul of the skirt of Samuel's tunic represented that which Samuel then stated - that the kingdom would be torn from him and that he would not be the king of Israel any longer. For 'the kingdom' in the internal sense means Divine Truth, 1672, 2547, 4691, as also does 'king' and 'kingship', 1672, 1728, 2015, 2069, 3009, 3670, 4575, 4581, especially the king and the kingdom of Israel, since 'Israel' represented the Lord's kingship. The meaning is similar in what is recorded concerning Jeroboam and Ahijah the prophet,

When Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, and Ahijah the prophet found him on the road, when he was covered with a new garment and both were alone in the field, Ahijah took hold of the new garment that was on him and rent it into twelve pieces; and he said to Jeroboam, Take for yourself ten pieces; for thus said Jehovah, the God of Israel, behold, I am rending [the kingdom] from the hand of Solomon and I will give you ten tribes. 1 Kings 11:29-31.

[4] The second Book of Samuel likewise records that when Saul was killed in battle they tore their clothes apart,

When Saul was killed in battle, on the third day a man came from the camp, whose clothes had been rent. And when David heard about the death of Saul, David took hold of his garments and tore them apart; and so did all his servants who were with him. 2 Samuel 1:2, 10-12.

This too represented mourning because of Divine Truth, lost and cast away by those who adhered to faith separated from charity. For as stated above, 'kingship' meant Divine Truth, while 'the Philistines' by whom Saul was slain represented adherents to faith separated from charity, 1197, 1198, 3412, 3413. The same is also evident from David's lament over him, in verses 18-27 of the same chapter.

[5] When Absalom had slain Amnon his brother and the news reached David that Absalom had slain all the king's sons, David tore his clothes apart and lay on the ground; and all his servants standing by tore their clothes apart, 2 Samuel 13:28, 30-31. This too was done for the sake of the representation that truths from the Divine were lost, those truths being meant in the internal sense by 'the king's sons'. A similar meaning exists in the reference to Hushai the Archite who with his tunic torn apart came to meet David when he fled from Absalom, 2 Samuel 15:32; for in the Word 'a king', and in particular David, represents Divine Truth. The meaning is also very similar in the reference to Ahab, who tore his clothes apart and put sackcloth over his flesh when Elijah told Ahab the king of Israel the words of Jehovah, to the effect that he would be completely wiped out for the evil he had done, 1 Kings 21:27-29.

[6] The fact that tearing apart or rending clothes represented mourning the loss of Truth is additionally clear from the following: Hilkiah the priest found the Book of the law in the house of Jehovah. When Shaphan read it before king Josiah and the king heard the words of the Book of the law, he tore his clothes apart, 2 Kings 22:11. Plainly the king did so because the Word, that is, Divine truth, had been lost for so long and in their hearts and life had been blotted out.

[7] The tearing apart of his own clothes by the high priest, when the Lord confessed He was the Christ the Son of God, and his declaration that He had spoken utter blasphemy, Matthew 26:63-65; Mark 14:63-64, meant that the high priest was absolutely convinced that the Lord had spoken against the Word and so against Divine truth. When Elijah went up in the whirlwind, and Elisha saw it, it is said,

He took hold of his own clothes and tore them into two pieces. And he took up Elijah's tunic that had fallen from upon him, and he struck the waters and they were divided this way and that, and Elisha went over. 2 Kings 2:11-14.

Elisha tore his own clothes apart at that time to express mourning the loss of the Word, that is, of Divine Truth; for 'Elijah' represents the Lord as regards the Word, that is, Divine Truth, 2762. When the tunic fell from Elijah and was picked up by Elisha, the continuation of Elijah's representation by Elisha was represented, 'the tunic' meaning Divine Truth, see 4677. This also explains why the garment torn apart when such mourning took place was the tunic, as is evident from some of the places that have been quoted. Because 'a garment' meant the truth possessed by the Church, and in the highest sense Divine Truth, it was therefore shameful, except when one was mourning, to go about with clothes that were torn. This is evident from what was done to David's servants by Hanun king of the children of Ammon, when he cut off half the beard of each one, and their garments at the middle even to their buttocks, for which reason they were not allowed to come to David, 2 Samuel 10:4-5.

Notas a pie de página:

2362. That 'behold now, I have two daughters, who have not known a man' means the affections for good and for truth is clear from the meaning of 'daughters' as affections, dealt with in 489-491. 'They have not known a man' means that they have not been defiled by falsity, for 'a man' means rational truth, and also in the contrary sense falsity, 265, 749, 1007. There are two types of affection, namely the affection for good and the affection for truth, see 1997. The first - the affection for good - constitutes the celestial church and in the Word is called 'the daughter of Zion' and also 'the virgin daughter of Zion'.

[2] But the second - the affection for truth - constitutes the spiritual church, and in the Word is called 'the daughter of Jerusalem'; as in Isaiah,

She has despised you, she has scorned you, the virgin daughter of Zion; she wags her head behind you, the daughter of Jerusalem. Isaiah 37:22; 2 Kings 19:21.

In Jeremiah,

What shall I liken you to, O daughter of Jerusalem? What shall I equate you with and comfort you, O virgin daughter of Zion? Lamentations 2:13.

In Micah,

You, O tower of the flock, hill of the daughter of Zion, to you will it come and the former dominion will come, the kingdom of the daughter of Jerusalem. Micah 4:8.

In Zephaniah,

Shout with joy, O daughter of Zion! Make a noise, O Israel! Rejoice and exult with all your heart, O daughter of Jerusalem! Zephaniah 3:14.

In Zechariah,

Exult greatly, O daughter of Zion! Make a noise, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king will come to you. Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:5; John 12:15.

[3] That the celestial Church, which is the Lord's celestial kingdom, is called 'the daughter of Zion' from the affection for good, that is, from love to the Lord Himself, see in addition Isaiah 10:32; 16:1; 52:2; 62:11; Jeremiah 4:31; 6:2, 23; Lamentations 1:6; 2:1, 4, 8, 10; Micah 4:10, 13; Zechariah 2:10; Psalms 9:14. And that the spiritual Church, which is the Lord's spiritual kingdom, is called 'the daughter of Jerusalem' from the affection for truth and so from charity towards the neighbour, see Lamentations 2:15. Both of those Churches, and the nature of each one, have been dealt with many times in Volume One.

[4] Because the celestial Church exists from love to the Lord which is present within love towards the neighbour it is likened in particular to an unmarried daughter or a virgin. Indeed it is also called 'a virgin', as in John,

These are the ones who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins; these are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes; for they are spotless before God's throne. Revelation 14:4-5.

And so that the same might be represented in the Jewish Church, the priests were commanded not to marry widows but virgins, Leviticus 21:13-15; Ezekiel 44:22.

[5] From the contents of the present verse it becomes clear how pure the Word is in the internal sense, however else it may appear in the letter. For when these words are read, 'Behold now, I have two daughters, who have not known a man; let me now bring them out to you and you may do to them as is good in your eyes; only do nothing to those men', nothing else comes to mind than something impure, especially to those leading an evil life. Yet how chaste these words are in the internal sense is evident from the explanation already given, which is that they mean the affections for good and truth and the blessedness perceived from the enjoyment of those affections by people who do no violence to the Lord's Divinity and [proceeding] Holiness.