9034. And when a man shall smite his manservant, or his maidservant, with a rod. That this signifies if anyone within the church ill-treats the truth of memory, or its affection, from his own power, is evident from the signification of “smiting,” as being to ill-treat, for “smiting” is predicated of any injury whatsoever; from the signification of “a man” [vir], here a man of the sons of Israel, as being one who is of the church, and who consequently is in spiritual truth, which is the truth of the doctrine of faith of the church from the Word (see n. 6426, 6637, 6862, 6868, 7035, 7062, 7198, 7201, 7215, 7223, 7957, 8234, 8805); from the signification of a “manservant,” as being memory-truth, which is the truth of the Word, but of its literal sense (of which below); from the signification of a “maidservant,” as being natural affection, thus the affection of memory knowledges, because these are in the natural (n. 1895, 2567, 3835, 3849, 8993, 8994); and from the signification of a “rod,” as being natural power (n. 4876, 4936, 6947, 7011, 7026), here, one’s own power, because the manservant of whom it is said, was bought. From this it is plain that by the words, “if a man shall smite his manservant, or his maidservant,” is signified if anyone within the church ill-treats the memory-truth of the Word, or its affection.

[2] The reason why a “manservant” denotes the truth of the literal sense of the Word, is that by a “servant” in general are signified lower or exterior things, because these serve higher or interior things (n. 2541, 5161, 5164, 5936, 7143); consequently by a “servant” is signified the natural, because this serves the spiritual (n. 3019, 3020, 5305, 7998), consequently memory-truth, which belongs to the literal sense of the Word, for this serves spiritual truth, which belongs to the internal sense. The truth of the internal sense of the Word is the same as the genuine truth of the doctrine of faith of the church.

[3] How the truth of the literal sense of the Word serves spiritual truth, shall be briefly told. The man of the church first learns truth from the literal sense of the Word, which is general truth accommodated to the apprehension of the external man, who is in natural light. This truth is received by an external way, that is, by hearing, and is stored up in the memory of the external man, where are also various memory-knowledges derived from the world (n. 2469-2494). Afterward the things stored up in this memory are subjected to the sight or view of the internal man, who sees from the light of heaven. The internal man calls forth therefrom by selection the truths which agree with the good which flows in from the Lord by the way of the soul, and which the man had received. There the Lord conjoins these truths with good. The truths which are thus conjoined in the internal man are called “spiritual truths,” and the good with which the truths are conjoined is called “spiritual good.” This good, formed by means of truths, is what makes the spiritual life of man. The truths themselves there are called “the truths of faith,” and the good is called “the good of charity.” The good in which truths have thus been implanted is the church with man.

[4] From this it is plain in what manner the truths of the literal sense of the Word serve for the formation of spiritual truths, in general for the formation of faith and of charity, which make the spiritual life; which life consists in being affected with truths for the sake of good, and in being affected with good from truths, and finally in being affected with truths from good.

1895. And she had a handmaid, an Egyptian. That this signifies the affection of memory-knowledges [scientiae], is evident from the signification of a “handmaid,” and from the signification of “Egypt.” Sarai, who was the mistress or lady, represents and signifies truth adjoined to good, as already said. Truth adjoined to good is intellectual truth in the genuine sense, but rational truth is beneath this and therefore is lower; and this rational truth is born from knowledges [scientiae et cognitiones] vivified by the affection that corresponds to them, and this affection, being of the exterior man, ought to serve the intellectual truth that appertains to the inmost man, as a handmaid serves her lady, or a household servant her mistress; and therefore this affection is what is represented and signified by the “handmaid Hagar.”

[2] How these things stand cannot well be stated to the apprehension, for it must first be known what intellectual truth in the genuine sense is, and also how the rational is born, namely, from the internal man as a father, and from the exterior or natural man as a mother, for without the conjunction of these two nothing rational can possibly come forth. The rational is not born (as is supposed) of knowledges [scientiae et cognitiones], but of the affection of these knowledges, as may be seen from the mere fact that no one can ever become rational unless some delight or affection of these knowledges aspires thereto. The affection is the maternal life itself; and the celestial and spiritual itself, in the affection, is the paternal life; therefore in proportion to the affection, and in accordance with the quality of the affection, in the same proportion, and in the same quality, does the man become rational. In themselves these knowledges are nothing but dead things, or instrumental causes, which are vivified by the life of affection; and such is the conception of the rational man in everyone. The reason why the handmaid was an Egyptian, and the reason why this fact is stated, is that “Egypt” signifies memory-knowledges [scientiae], as before shown (n. 1164, 1165, 1186, 1462).