4211. 'And called his brothers to eat bread' means [an invitation] to make the good from the Lord's Divine Natural their own. This is clear from the meaning of 'brothers' as those who were now to be joined together by the covenant, that is, by friendship, and in the internal sense as those who are governed by good and truth (for such people are called 'brothers', see 367, 2360, 3303, 3459, 3803, 3815, 4121, 4191); from the meaning of 'eating' as making one's own, dealt with in 3168, 3513 (end), 3832 (for meals taken together and feasts among the ancients meant making things their own and being joined together by means of love and charity, 3596); and from the meaning of 'bread' as good that stems from love, dealt with in 276, 680, 1798, 3478, 3735, and in the highest sense means the Lord, 2165, 2177, 3478, 3813. Since 'bread' in the highest sense means the Lord it therefore means everything holy which comes from Him, that is, it means everything good and true. And since no other good exists which is good except the good of love and charity, 'bread' therefore means love and charity. Sacrifices in former times had no other meaning, and for that reason were referred to by the single word 'bread', see 2165. And some of the flesh of the sacrifices was eaten so that the heavenly feast - that is, a joining together through good flowing from love and charity - might be represented. The same is meant today by the Holy Supper, for this has replaced sacrifices and feasts of consecrated things. The Holy Supper is in the Church an external practice that has an internal reality within it, and by means of this reality it joins one who is governed by love and charity to heaven, and by means of heaven to the Lord. For in the Holy Supper too 'eating' means making one's own - 'the bread' being celestial love and 'the wine' spiritual love - so much so that while it is being eaten by one in a state of holiness nothing else is perceived in heaven.

[2] The reason why the phrase 'making the good from the Lord's Divine Natural their own' is used is that the subject is the good that exists with the gentiles, for it is this good that 'Laban' represents now, 4189. When man is joined to the Lord he is not joined to His Supreme Divine itself but to His Divine Human, for man cannot have any idea at all of the Lord's Supreme Divine, because this lies so far beyond anything he can conceive of that it fades from view altogether and ceases to mean anything to him. But he is able to have an idea of His Divine Human. For everyone is joined through thought and affection to one of whom he can have some idea but not to one of whom he cannot have any idea. If, when a person thinks about the Lord's Human, holiness is present in his ideas he also thinks of the holiness which comes from the Lord and fills heaven, and at the same time he thinks of heaven, since heaven in its entirety corresponds to a complete human being, which correspondence has its origin in the Lord, 684, 1276, 2996, 2998, 3624-3649. This explains why it is not possible to be joined to the Lord's Supreme Divine, only to His Divine Human, and through that Divine Human to His Supreme Divine. Hence the statement in John 1:18 about nobody, except the only begotten Son, ever having seen God, also the statement about there being no way to the Father except through Him; as well as from the statement that He is the Mediator. The truth of all this can be plainly recognized from the fact that all within the Church who declare their belief in a Supreme Being and yet set the Lord at nought are people who have no belief in anything at all, not even in the existence of heaven or of hell, and who worship nature. And if such people are ready to learn from experience it will be clear to them that the wicked, even those who are extremely so, declare a like belief.

[3] But the way in which people think of the Lord's Human varies, one person's ideas being different from another's, and one person's more holy than another's. Those within the Church are able to think that His Human is Divine, and also that He is one with the Father, as He Himself says that the Father is in Him and He is in the Father. But those outside the Church are unable to do this, for one thing because they do not know anything about the Lord and for another because their idea of the Divine is gained solely from visible images and tangible idols. Nevertheless the Lord joins Himself to them by means of the good they do from the charity and obedience present within their crude notions of Him. And this is why mention is made here about them making the good from the Lord's Divine Natural their own. For when the Lord is joined to man the state of thought and consequent affection in him determines the exact nature of that conjunction. Those who have an entirely holy conception of the Lord and who at the same time have a true knowledge of and affections for what is good and true - as those within the Church are able to have - have been joined to the Lord as to His Divine Rational. Those however who do not have so holy a notion of Him and who do not have so interior a notion and affection, and yet the good of charity exists with them, have been joined to the Lord as regards His Divine Natural. And those whose holiness is cruder still are joined to the Lord as to His Divine Sensory Perception. This last type of joining is what is represented by 'the bronze serpent', in that those who looked at it recovered from serpent-bites, Numbers 21:9. This is the type of joining together which those among the gentiles have who worship idols and yet lead charitable lives in accordance with their own religion. From these considerations one may now see what is meant by making the good from the Lord's Divine Natural their own, meant by 'Jacob called his brothers to eat bread'.

3803. 'Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother' means the kinship of the good represented by 'Jacob' and of the good represented by 'Laban'. This is clear from the meaning of 'telling' as making known; from the representation of 'Jacob' as good, dealt with already; from the representation of 'Rachel', to whom it was made known, as the affection for interior truth, dealt with in 3793; from the meaning of 'brother', who in this place is Jacob, as good, dealt with in 367, 2360, 3303, 3459; and from the meaning of 'father', who in this place is Laban, as good also, dealt with in 3703. From these meanings and from the train of thought it is evident that 'Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother' means the kinship of the good meant by 'Jacob' and of the good meant by 'Laban'. To explain the actual kinship however and so the joining together of the two through the affection for interior truth meant by 'Rachel' would only throw the matter into obscurity, for few know what the good of the natural is and that this is distinct and separate from the good of the rational. Neither do they know what a parallel good springing from a common stock is, nor also what the affection for interior truth is. Anyone who has not by finding out for himself gathered some idea of these matters gains merely a superficial idea, if any at all, from a description of them; for a person takes in only as much of a description given by others as fits in with ideas of his own or else which he acquires by coming to see the thing in himself. All else passes him by. It is enough if one knows that countless kinships of good and truth exist, and that heavenly communities exist in accordance with those kinships, 685, 917, 2739, 3612.

[2] The reason why Jacob calls himself Laban's brother when he was in fact his sister's son is that by virtue of good all are brothers. This also is why Laban in turn calls Jacob 'brother' in verse 15. For it is good that constitutes blood-relationship and which effects any joining together, since good is an attribute of love, and love is a spiritual joining together. This also was the reason why in the ancient Churches all who were governed by good were called brothers. The same happened in the Jewish Church, but because that Church despised everybody else and imagined that they alone were the elect it spoke only of those who had been born Jews as brothers. The rest it called companions or foreigners. The primitive Christian Church also referred to as brothers all who were governed by good, but later on it confined the term to those inside its own group. But the name brother disappeared from among Christians when good did so. And when truth took the place of good, or faith the place of charity, none was able any longer to call another brother by virtue of good, only neighbour. This is also a feature of the doctrine of faith when devoid of the life of charity, in that it seems to be beneath them to exist as a brotherhood when this includes any of lower rank than themselves. For being brothers in their case does not have its origin in the Lord, and therefore in good, but in themselves, and therefore in position and gain.

[3803a] 'And that he was Rebekah's son' means the link between these kindred varieties of good. This becomes clear without explanation, for Rebekah, who was Jacob's mother and Laban's sister, was the one in whom the link existed.