9002. 'If he takes another one for himself' means being joined to an affection for truth stemming from some other source. This is clear from the meaning of 'taking (or betrothing) another' as being joined to, as in 8996; for in the spiritual sense marriage, which is implied here by betrothal, is the joining of the life of one to that of another. Divine order decrees that the life of the truths of faith and the life of the good of charity should be joined together; this is where all spiritual joining together begins, from which, as its origin, natural joining springs. 'Taking another one' means being joined to an affection for truth stemming from some other source, because 'a female slave', dealt with before, is an affection for truth springing from natural delight, 8993, and therefore 'another one' is an affection for truth stemming from some other source

[2] An idea of what an affection from some other source is may be gained from the consideration that every affection belonging to love is very broad and wide indeed, so broad that it extends far beyond all human understanding. Human understanding cannot go so far as to know even the genera of the varieties of such affection, still less the species making up the genera, and least of all the particular aspects and individual details of those aspects. For all that exists within the human being, especially that which belongs to affection or love there, is infinitely varied. This becomes perfectly clear from the consideration that the affection for what is good and true, an affection that belongs to love to the Lord and love towards the neighbour, constitutes the whole of heaven, and yet in respect of good those in the heavens, where millions live, are all different from one another. And they would still all be different even if multiplied into countless millions of millions. For it is not possible in the universe for one thing to be exactly like another and have separate existence. It must vary, that is, be different from another, if it is to be something by itself, see 684, 690, 3241, 3744, 3745, 3986, 4005, 4149, 5598, 7236, 7833, 7836, 8003. All this gives some idea of what one should understand by an affection from some other source, namely an affection which is different from another but can nevertheless be joined to the same spiritual truth. Such affections, which are represented by female slaves betrothed to the same man, belong to the same genus but different species, the difference between them being called a specific difference. Various examples could be used to illustrate these matters; but the general idea conveyed by the things that have just been said is better.

[3] So that the joining of such affections to the same spiritual truth, and their subordination to it, might be represented, it was permissible within the Israelite and Jewish nation for men to have a number of concubines. Abraham had them, Genesis 25:6, and so did David, Solomon, and others. For anything permitted among that nation existed because of what that thing represented; or to be more precise, it existed so that by means of outward things that nation might represent the inner realities of the Church, 3246. But when the inner realities of the Church were disclosed by the Lord, representations of inner realities through outward things came to an end; for now it was the inner realities - forms of faith and love - that were to be apprehended by a member of the Church and to be the means by which he worshipped the Lord. For this reason they were no longer permitted to have a number of wives, or concubines as well as wives, see 865, 2727-2759, 3246, 4837.

4149. 'Anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live in the presence of our brothers' means that that truth was not 'Laban's', and that what was 'Laban's' truth could not reside in his - 'Jacob's' - good. This is clear from the meaning of 'gods' which in this case are the teraphim, as truths, dealt with in 4111, not however the truths belonging to the good meant by 'Laban' but to the affection which 'Rachel' represents. It is because those truths are meant by 'gods' here that the reference to Rachel's having stolen them is added. And more concerning them appears further on which would not have been recorded if that deed of hers had not entailed arcana which are evident solely in the internal sense. And because the truths under discussion here were not truths belonging to the good meant by 'Laban' but those belonging to the affection for truth which 'Rachel' represents, the words 'Anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live in the presence of our brothers' therefore mean that that truth was not 'Laban's', and that what was 'Laban's' truth could not reside in his - 'Jacob's' - good.

[2] The implication of this arcanum is that all spiritual good has its own truths, for wherever that good exists truths are present also. Regarded in itself good is a single whole, but it is made various by means of truths. Indeed truths may be compared to the fibres which compose some organ of the body. It is the form which these fibres take that determines the nature of the organ and therefore of its function. And this - that is to say, its function - is dependent on the life which flows in through the soul, a life that comes from good which originates in the Lord. So although good is a single whole it nevertheless varies with each individual; it is so varying that it is never exactly the same with one person as with another. This also is why one person's truth cannot possibly abide in another person's good. For all the truths residing with someone in whom good is present intercommunicate and produce some form or other. For this reason one person's truth cannot be transferred to another, for when it is transferred it passes into the form that is peculiar to the recipient and takes on a different appearance. But this arcanum demands exploration which is too deep to enable it to be revealed in just a few words. This explains why the mind of one person is never exactly like another's, but that the differences in people's affections and ways of thinking are as numerous as the people themselves. It also explains why the whole of heaven consists of angelic forms which are endlessly varying. Arranged by the Lord into the form heaven takes, those forms act as a single whole. For no single whole is ever composed of parts that are identical but of those that are various existing in a single form and which make one in keeping with that form. This now shows what is meant by the statement that what was 'Laban's' truth could not reside in his own - 'Jacob's' - good.