9182. When a man shall persuade a virgin who is not betrothed. That this signifies good not conjoined with truth, is evident from the signification of “persuading,” when said of a man and a virgin, as being to entice to conjunction; from the signification of “a man” [vir] as being truth (see n. 3134, 7716, 9007); from the signification of “a virgin,” as being the church as to good (n. 3081, 4638), thus the good which is the church; and from the signification of “to be betrothed,” as being conjunction. It shall here be briefly stated what is the cause and the origin of the law relating to unlawful conjunction that is here treated of. All the laws delivered to the sons of Israel have their cause in heaven, and their origin in the laws of order there. All the laws of order in heaven are from the Divine truth and good which proceed from the Lord, consequently they are the laws of the good of love and truth of faith. The conjunction of good and truth in heaven is called the heavenly marriage, and this is represented in marriages on earth, and is also signified by “marriages” in the Word. From this it is plain what is involved in unlawful conjunctions, and also in scortations and adulteries. In these two verses an unlawful conjunction is treated of which is afterward either made lawful or is dissolved. The unlawful conjunction which afterward is made lawful, is the subject treated of in this verse; and the unlawful conjunction which afterward is dissolved, is the subject treated of in the following verse.

[2] Unlawful conjunction is that which is not made from conjugial affection; but from some other affection, as the affection of beauty, the affection of gain, or the affection of personal rank; and also which is made from lasciviousness. In the beginning these conjunctions are unlawful, because that which conjoins is external, and not at the same time internal. Nevertheless, a lawful conjunction may afterward be effected from them as means, which takes place when the minds are conjoined; and on the other hand no conjunction may result from them, as is the case when the minds are disjoined. That this is so, is generally known in the world.

[3] Lawful conjunction, which is that of minds, is effected when both are in the like good and truth; for good and truth make a man’s life; moral and civil good and truth, the life of the external man; and spiritual good and truth, the life of the internal man. Be it known that a man’s life is from no other source than good and truth, for all that a man loves is called good, and all that he believes is called truth; or, what is the same, all that a man wills is called good, and all that he understands is called truth. From this it is evident that a lawful conjunction is effected when the husband is in truth, and the wife is in the corresponding good, for in this way the heavenly marriage, which is that of good and truth, is represented in the pair. From this it is that conjugial love descends from this marriage (see n. 2727-2759, 2803, 3132, 4434, 4835).

[4] From these as premises it can be known how the case is with the conjunctions treated of in this verse and the following one. Betrothals before marriage have been in use from ancient times, and represented the first conjunction, which is that of the internal man apart from the external. The subsequent marriages themselves represented the second conjunction, which is that of the internal man with the external; for during man’s regeneration by means of the goods and truths of faith, the internal man is first regenerated, and afterward the external, because the latter is regenerated by the former (n. 3286, 3321, 3493, 3882, 8746).

[5] From this it is evident what is signified in the Word by “betrothing” and by “being betrothed,” and also what by “bridegroom” and “bride;” namely, by “betrothing” is signified the conjunction of truth and good in the internal man; by “bridegroom” (where the Lord and the church are treated of) is signified good; and by “bride,” truth: as in Isaiah.

In Jeremiah:

I remembered for thee the mercy of thy youth, the love of thy betrothals, when thou wentest after Me in the wilderness, in a land not sown (Jeremiah 2:2);

speaking of the Ancient Church and of its being set up by the Lord; “the love of betrothals” denotes the affection of spiritual life, which is from the truths of faith and the good of love; and the state of desire, when as yet they were in ignorance and in want of these things, is signified by “going after Me in the wilderness, in a land not sown.”

[6] In Hosea:

In that day I will make a covenant for them with the wild animal of the field, and with the bird of the heavens, and the creeping thing of the earth; and I will break the bow and the sword and the war; and I will betroth thee unto Me in righteousness and in judgment, and in mercy, and in compassions (Hos. 2:18-19).

The setting up of a new church is here treated of; “to make a covenant with the wild animal of the field, with the bird of the heavens, and with the creeping thing of the earth,” denotes the conjunction of the Lord through the internal and external good and truth in a man. That “a covenant” denotes conjunction, see n. 665, 666, 1023, 1038, 1864, 1996, 2003, 2021, 6804, 8767, 8778; “the wild animal of the field” denotes life from good (n. 841, 908); “the bird” denotes the life of truth (n. 40, 745, 776, 991, 3219, 5149, 7441); “the creeping thing of the earth” denotes the goods and truths of the external and sensuous man (n. 746, 909); “to break the bow, and the sword, and the war,” denotes to destroy the doctrine and the forces of falsity; “the bow” denotes the doctrine of falsity (n. 2686, 2709); “the sword,” falsity fighting against truth (n. 2799, 4499, 6353, 7102); “the war,” the combat itself, or spiritual combat (n. 1664, 2686, 8273), and “to break” these denotes to destroy them.

[7] “To betroth in righteousness and in judgment” denotes to be conjoined with the Lord in good and truth; “to betroth” denotes to conjoin with one’s self; “righteousness” is predicated of good, and “judgment” of truth (n. 2235); “to betroth in mercy and in compassions,” denotes doing so from love toward those who are in good, and in love toward those who are in truths; the Lord’s “mercy” is predicated as being directed toward those who are in need of good and who yet long for it; and His “compassions,” toward those who are in ignorance of truth and who yet long for it. From all this it is evident that “betrothal” denotes the conjunction of good and truth with a man by the Lord. Everyone can see that such things are here signified; for it is clear even to the perception from merely natural light that Jehovah does not make a covenant with the wild animal of the field, with the bird, and with the creeping thing of the earth; but with those who are in the good and truth of faith, thus with the good and truth in the man; consequently that such things are hidden in this prophecy.

[8] And in Malachi:

Judah hath dealt treacherously, for he hath profaned the holiness of Jehovah, in that he hath loved, and hath betrothed to himself, the daughter of a strange god (Malachi 2:11);

“to betroth the daughter of a strange god” denotes to be conjoined with the evil of falsity; “a strange god” denotes falsity (n. 4402, 4544, 7873).

[9] That where the Lord and the church are treated of, the “bridegroom” denotes good, and the “bride” truth, may be seen in Isaiah:

Jehovah hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, He hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom putteth on his headdress, and as a bride adorneth herself with her vessels (Isaiah 61:10).

I saw the holy city, Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband (Revelation 21:2).

The angel said, Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the lamb’s wife (Revelation 21:9); where “the bride” denotes the church.

[10] In Matthew:

Jesus said unto the disciples of John, Can the sons of the wedding mourn, so long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast (Matthew 9:15, andLuke 5:34-35);

those are called “sons of the wedding” who are in the truths of the church, and receive good, for the good which is from the Lord is “the bridegroom;” that “the sons of the wedding do not mourn so long as the bridegroom is with them” denotes that they are in a blessed and happy state, thus with the Lord, when they are in truths conjoined with their good; “they shall fast when the bridegroom is taken away from them” denotes that they are in an unhappy state when good is no longer conjoined with truths; this state is the last state of the church, but the former is its first state.

[11] The like is signified in Matthew 25:1-12 by the bridegroom whom the ten virgins went forth to meet; for the virgins who had oil in their lamps denote those who have good in their truths, but those who had no oil in their lamps denote those who have no good in their truths (see n. 4638; and that “oil” denotes the good of love, n. 886, 3728, 4582).

[12] In John:

John said, I am not the Christ, but I am sent before Him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth with joy because of the bridegroom’s voice (John 3:28-29);

“the bride” denotes the truth of faith of the church; and “the bridegroom” the good of love of the church, both from the Lord; thus they denote the man of the church with whom good has been conjoined with truths. From all this it is also plain what is meant in the internal sense by the “joy” and the “voice of the bridegroom and of the bride” in Isaiah 62:5; Jeremiah 7:34; 16:9; 25:10; 33:11; Revelation 18:23; namely, heaven and the happiness resulting from the conjunction of good and truth with man and angel.

4835. Come to thy brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother unto her. That this signifies that he should continue it, namely, the representative of the church, is evident from the signification of “to come” or “enter to a brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother unto her,” as being to preserve and continue that which is of the church. The commandment in the Mosaic law that if any man died childless, his brother should take the widow to wife and raise up seed to his brother, and that the firstborn should be called by the name of the deceased brother, but the rest of the sons should be his own, was called “the duty of the husband’s brother.” That this statute was not a new thing originating in the Jewish Church, but had been in use before, is evident from this history, and the same is true of many other statutes that were commanded the Israelites by Moses-as that they should not take wives of the daughters of the Canaanites, and that they should marry within their families (Genesis 24:3-4; 28:1-2). From these and many other instances it is evident that there had been a church before, in which such things had been instituted as were afterwards promulgated and enjoined upon the sons of Jacob. That altars and sacrifices had been in use from ancient times is plain from Genesis 8:20-21; 22:3, 7-8, 13. From this it is clear that the Jewish Church was not a new church, but that it was a resuscitation of the Ancient Church which had perished.

[2] What the law in regard to the husband’s brother had been is evident in Moses:

If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no son, the wife of the deceased shall not marry without, to a strange man; her husband’s brother shall enter to her, and take her to him to wife, and thus perform the duty of a husband’s brother unto her. Then it shall be that the first-born whom she beareth shall stand upon the name of his deceased brother, that his name be not blotted out of Israel. But if the man will not marry his brother’s wife, his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate unto the elders, and say, My husband’s brother refuses to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother unto me. Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him; and if he stand and say, I desire not to take her; then shall his brother’s wife come near unto him in the sight of the elders, and shall draw his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto the man that doth not build up his brother’s house; whence his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe taken off (Deuteronomy 25:5-10).

[3] One who does not know what the duty of a husband’s brother represents, can have no other belief than that it was merely for the sake of preserving the name, and hence the inheritance; but the preservation of a name and of an inheritance was not of so much importance that for the sake of it a brother should enter into marriage with his brother’s wife; but this was enjoined that thereby might be represented the preservation and continuation of the church. For marriage represented the marriage of good and truth, that is, the heavenly marriage, and consequently the church also, for the church is a church from the marriage of good and truth; and when the church is in this marriage it makes one with heaven, which is the heavenly marriage itself. As marriage has this representation, therefore sons and daughters represented and also signified truths and goods; wherefore to be childless signified a deprivation of good and truth, thus that there was no longer any representative of the church in that house, consequently that it was out of communion. Moreover, the brother represented kindred good, with which might be conjoined the truth which was represented by the widowed wife; for in order that truth may be the truth which has life and produces fruit, and so continue that which is of the church, it cannot be conjoined with any other than its own and kindred good. This is what is perceived in heaven by the duty prescribed to the husband’s brother.

[4] That if the man would not perform the duty of a husband’s brother, his brother’s wife should take his shoe from off his foot and spit in his face, signified that, as one who was devoid of external and internal good and truth, he would destroy the things of the church; for a “shoe” is what is external (n. 1748), and the “face” is what is internal (n. 1999, 2434, 3527, 4066, 4796). From this it is evident that by the duty of the husband’s brother was represented the preservation and continuation of the church. But when the representatives of internal things ceased by the coming of the Lord, then this law was abolished. This is circumstanced as are the soul or spirit of man and his body. The soul or spirit of man is his internal, and the body is his external; or what is the same, the soul or spirit is the very form of man, but the body is his representative image; and when a man rises again, his representative image, or his external, which is the body, is put off; for he is then in his internal, or in his form itself. It is circumstanced also as is one who is in darkness, and from it sees the things which are of the light; or what is the same as is one who is in the light of the world, and from this sees the things which are of the light of heaven; for the light of the world in comparison with the light of heaven is as darkness. In darkness, or in the light of the world, the things which are of the light of heaven do not appear such as they are in themselves, but as in a representative image, as the mind of man appears in his face; and therefore when the light of heaven appears in its clearness, the darkness or representative image is dissipated. This was effected by the coming of the Lord.

4835a. And raise up seed to thy brother. That this signifies lest the church should perish, is evident from the signification of “seed,” as being truth from good, or the faith of charity (n. 1025, 1447, 1610, 1940, 2848, 3310, 3373, 3671). The like is also signified by the “firstborn who was to stand upon the name of the deceased brother” (n. 352[1], 367, 2435, 3325, 3494). To “raise up the seed to a brother” is to continue that which is of the church, according to what was said just above (see n. 4834), thus lest the church should perish.