3819. 'The name of the elder was Leah' means the nature of the affection for external truth; 'and the name of the younger Rachel' means the nature of the affection for internal truth. This is clear from the representation of 'Leah' as the affection for external truth, and of 'Rachel' as the affection for internal truth, both dealt with in 3793; and from the meaning of 'the name' as the nature of, dealt with in 144, 145, 1754, 1896, 2009, 2724, 3006. Leah is called 'the elder' because external truth is learned first, and Rachel 'the younger' because internal truth is learned from then on after that; or what amounts to the same, a person first of all feels an affection for external truths, and from then on after that an affection for internal truths. external truths provide the basic outline for internal truths, for they are the general outlines into which particular details are added. Unless a person has a general outline of the idea of a thing he does not make sense of any particular aspect of it. This explains why the literal sense of the Word contains general truths but the internal sense particular truths. General truths are called external, but particular truths internal. And because truths devoid of affection are not truths because there is no life to them, the affections for them are therefore meant when external and internal truths are referred to.

4113. 'By not giving him any indication that he was fleeing' means through the separation. This becomes clear without explanation. The statement that 'Jacob stole the heart of Laban the Aramean by not giving any indication that he was fleeing' is used in the historical sense to mean that Jacob deprived Laban of the hope of gaining possession of everything that was his and drove him into a state of dismay. For Laban believed that because Jacob served him everything belonging to Jacob would become his - not only his own daughters, who were Jacob's wives, and his daughters' sons, but also Jacob's flocks, according to the law known and accepted in those times, which is recorded in Moses,

If you buy a Hebrew slave he shall serve you six years; and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If his master has given him a wife and she has borne him sons and daughters, the wife and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out by himself. ¹ Exodus 21:2, 4.

The fact that Laban had this law in mind is evident from Jacob's words later on in this chapter,

Unless the God of my father, the God of Abraham and the Dread of Isaac, had been with me, you would now have sent me away empty-handed. Genesis 31:42.

And from Laban's words,

Laban answered and said to Jacob, The daughters are my daughters, and the sons are my sons, and the flock is my flock, and all that you see is mine. Genesis 31:43.

Laban was not taking into consideration the fact that Jacob had not been bought as a slave, nor indeed was a slave, or that he belonged to a more illustrious family than he himself did, or also that Jacob had received his wives as well as the flock as wages. All this being so, that law did not apply to Jacob. Because by his fleeing Jacob now deprived Laban of that hope and as a consequence drove him into a state of dismay it is said that 'he stole the heart of Laban the Aramean by not giving any indication that he was fleeing'. In the internal sense however these words mean a change as regards good of the state meant by 'Laban' through separation. Concerning a change of state effected through separation, see what has been stated just above in 4111.

Note a piè di pagina: