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.

3670. And He will give thee the blessing of Abraham. That this signifies the conjunction of the Divine Itself with the good and truth of the natural, is evident from the signification of a “blessing,” as being conjunction (n. 3660, 3667); and from the representation of Abraham, as being the Lord’s Divine Itself which is called the “Father” (concerning which see n. 2011, 3251, 3439). And inasmuch as these words are spoken to Jacob, by whom there would be represented the Lord’s Divine natural as to the Divine good and truth therein, therefore the conjunction of the Divine Itself with the good and truth of the natural is what is signified, in the internal sense, by “He will give thee the blessing of Abraham.” In the sense of the letter, it is the possession of the land of Canaan that is meant by the “blessing of Abraham,” and also by the words which follow: “to cause thee to inherit the land of thy sojournings, which God gave unto Abraham;” and according to this sense do all apprehend the words who believe that the historicals of the Word do not contain within them things more heavenly and secret: and especially so do the Jewish nation, who on the strength of these words claim for themselves privileges above every other nation and people. Their fathers understood the words in the same manner, and especially were they so understood by Jacob, whose quality is evident from what was said just above (n. 3667), in that he would not have known Jehovah, nor have been willing to acknowledge Him, unless He had given him corporeal and worldly blessings. But that neither Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob was meant, and that by Jacob is represented the Lord as to the natural which He would make Divine, is abundantly manifest from the explications given above. That it is immaterial what is the quality of the man who represents, as to whether he is evil or good, and that evil men equally with good men can represent and have represented the Lord’s Divine, may be seen above (n. 665, 1097, 1361).

[2] The same may be seen from the representatives which exist even to this day; for all kings, whoever they may be, and of whatever quality, by the royalty itself that appertains to them represent the Lord; in like manner all priests, whoever and of whatever quality they may be, by the priestly office itself. The royal and the priestly office itself is holy, whatever be the quality of him who ministers therein; and this is the reason why the Word taught by an evil man is equally holy, and also the sacrament of baptism and the Holy Supper, and other such things. And from this it is also evident that no king can possibly claim for himself anything of the sanctity that belongs to his royalty; nor any priest anything of the sanctity that belongs to his priesthood. Insofar as either claims anything thereof to himself, or attributes it to himself, so far he brands himself with the character of a spiritual thief, or with the mark of spiritual theft; and also insofar as he does evil, that is, acts contrary to what is just and equitable, and contrary to what is good and true, so far a king puts off the representative of holy royalty, and a priest the representative of holy priesthood, and represents the opposite. For this reason in the representative Jewish Church there were so many laws enjoined concerning the holiness in which priests especially should be during their ministration-on which subject, of the Lord’s Divine mercy, more will be said in what follows.