4563. And Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died. That this signifies that hereditary evil was expelled, is evident from the signification of “dying,” as being the end, or that a thing ceases to be such (see n. 494, 3253, 3259, 3276), here therefore expelled, because the subject treated of is hereditary evil; and from the representation of Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, as being hereditary evil. In nourishing and suckling an infant a nurse properly signifies the insinuation of innocence by means of what is celestial spiritual, for milk denotes the celestial spiritual (n. 2184), and the infant she suckles denotes innocence (n. 430, 1616, 2126, 2305, 2306) But here by “Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse,” is signified that which was received from the mother and nourished from infancy. That this was the hereditary evil from the mother against which the Lord fought, may be seen from what has been shown regarding this hereditary (n. 1414, 1444, 1573), and from His expelling it, so that at last He was not the son of Mary (see n. 2159, 2574, 2649, 3036).

[2] It is known that man derives evil from both his parents, and that this evil is called hereditary evil. He is therefore born into it, but still it does not manifest itself until the man becomes an adult and acts from his understanding and the derivative will, and meanwhile it lies hidden, especially during infancy. And as of the Lord’s mercy no one is blamed for what is hereditary, but for what is actual (n. 966, 2308), and what is hereditary cannot become actual until the man acts from his own understanding and his own will, therefore infants are led by the Lord by means of infants and angels from Him, and hence they appear in a state of innocence while hereditary evil still lurks in everything they do (n. 2300, 2307, 2308). This hereditary evil yields them nourishment, or is as a nurse, until the time when they judge for themselves (n. 4063); and then if they are being regenerated they are brought by the Lord into a state of new infancy, and at last into heavenly wisdom; thus into genuine infancy, that is, into innocence; for genuine infancy or innocence dwells in wisdom (n. 2305, 3183). The difference is, that the innocence of infancy is without, and hereditary evil within; whereas the innocence of wisdom is within, and evil both actual and hereditary is without. From these and other things that have been already stated, it is evident that hereditary evil acts as a nurse from the earliest infancy to the age of new infancy; and hence it is that by a “nurse” is signified hereditary evil, and also that by a “nurse” is signified the insinuation of innocence by means of the celestial spiritual.

[3] As in the internal sense of this chapter the disposition and arrangement of truths by good in the Lord’s natural is treated of (n. 4536), and the consequent progression to interior things, therefore hereditary evil is also treated of, in that it was expelled. This is the reason why mention is made in this verse of Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, that she died and was buried under an oak, which is not a thing of sufficient moment to interrupt the series unless it involved such things.

[4] The very mystery that is specifically signified by “Rebekah’s nurse” cannot as yet be disclosed, for before this is done it is necessary to know the nature of the influx of the rational into the natural, namely, that it is from the good of the rational immediately into the good of the natural, and from the good of the rational mediately, through the truth there into the good of natural truth. “Rebekah” is the truth of the rational (n. 3012, 3013, 3077); and “Isaac” is the good of the rational (n. 3012, 3194, 3210); “Esau” is the good of the natural by immediate influx from the good of the rational, or “Isaac;” and “Jacob” is the good or good of truth of the natural by mediate influx through the truth of the rational, or “Rebekah.” (In regard to this influx, mediate and immediate, see above, n. 3314, 3573.) This must be known before it is possible to have any specific knowledge of the mystery why by “Rebekah’s nurse” is here signified and described hereditary evil; for it is from this that the nature of this evil can be seen.

2649. On the day when he weaned Isaac. That this signifies the state of separation, is evident from the signification of “day,” as being state (see n. 23, 487, 488, 493, 893); and from the signification of “being weaned,” as being to be separated (see n. 2647). From the first verse of this chapter the uniting of the Lord’s Divine Essence with His Human Essence has been treated of, in this order: The presence of the Divine in the Human for the sake of unition (verse 1). The presence of the Human in the Divine, and thus a reciprocal unition (see n. 2004) (verse 2). From this unition the Human was made Divine (verse 3). And this successively and continually while the Lord lived in the world (verse 4). And this commenced when the rational was in a state to receive (verse 5). The state of the unition is described as to its quality, with its arcana (verses 6-7). Now follows the separation of the maternal human, and this is continued down to verse 12; which separation is signified in this verse by the weaning of Isaac, and is represented in the following verses by Hagar’s son being sent away out of the house. And as the union of the Lord’s Divine with His Human and of His Human with His Divine is the very marriage of good and truth, and from it is the heavenly marriage, which is the same as the Lord’s kingdom, therefore a great feast is mentioned which Abraham made when he weaned Isaac, by which the beginning of marriage or the first union is signified; which feast and weaning, but for the signification, would never have been mentioned.

[2] As the separation of the first human, which the Lord had from the mother, now follows, and at length the full removal of it, it is to be known that the Lord gradually and continually, even to the last of His life when He was glorified, separated from Himself and put off that which was merely human, namely, that which He derived from the mother, until at length He was no longer her son, but the Son of God, not only as to conception but also as to birth, and thus was one with the Father, and was Jehovah Himself. That He separated from Himself and put off all the human from the mother, so that He was no longer her son, is manifest from His words in John:

When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said unto Him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what [belongs] to Me and to thee ? (John 2:3-4).

In Matthew:

One said, Behold, Thy mother and Thy brethren stand without, seeking to speak to Thee. But Jesus answering said unto him that told Him, Who is My mother? and who are My brethren? And stretching forth His hand toward His disciples, He said, Behold My mother, and My brethren; for whosoever shall do the will of My Father who is in the heavens, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother (Matthew 12:47-50; Mark 3:2-35; Luke 8:20-21).

In Luke:

A certain woman out of the multitude lifting up her voice, said unto Him, Blessed is the womb that bare Thee, and the breasts which Thou didst suck. But Jesus said, Blessed are they that hear the Word of God, and keep it (Luke 11:27-28).

[3] Here, when the woman spoke of His mother, the Lord spoke of those described above, namely, “Whoever shall do the will of My Father, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother;” which is the same as this, “Blessed are they that hear the Word of God, and keep it.”

In John:

Jesus seeing His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing by, said unto His mother, Woman, behold thy son. Then said He to the disciple, Behold thy mother. Therefore from that hour the disciple took her to his own home (John 19:26-27).

From these words it is manifest that the Lord spoke to her according to her thought when she saw Him on the cross, and even then not calling her mother, but “woman;” and that He transferred the name of mother to those who are signified by the disciple; on which account He said to the disciple, “Behold thy mother.” Still more manifest is this from the Lord’s own words, in Matthew:

Jesus asked the Pharisees, saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is He? They say unto Him, David’s. He saith unto them, How then doth David in the spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand until I make Thine enemies Thy foot stool? If David therefore call Him Lord, how is He his Son ? And no one was able to answer Him a word (Matthew 22:41-46 Mark 12:35-37 Luke 20:42-44).

Thus He was no longer the Son of David as to the flesh.

[4] And further, in regard to the separation and putting off of the maternal human those do not comprehend this who have merely corporeal ideas respecting the Lord’s Human, and think of it as of the human of any other man; hence to such these things are stumbling-blocks. They do not know that such as the life is such is the man, and that the Divine Esse [Being] of life, or Jehovah, was in the Lord from conception, and that a similar Esse of life came forth in His Human by means of the union.