3819. 'The name of the elder was Leah' means the nature of the affection for external truth; 'and the name of the younger Rachel' means the nature of the affection for internal truth. This is clear from the representation of 'Leah' as the affection for external truth, and of 'Rachel' as the affection for internal truth, both dealt with in 3793; and from the meaning of 'the name' as the nature of, dealt with in 144, 145, 1754, 1896, 2009, 2724, 3006. Leah is called 'the elder' because external truth is learned first, and Rachel 'the younger' because internal truth is learned from then on after that; or what amounts to the same, a person first of all feels an affection for external truths, and from then on after that an affection for internal truths. external truths provide the basic outline for internal truths, for they are the general outlines into which particular details are added. Unless a person has a general outline of the idea of a thing he does not make sense of any particular aspect of it. This explains why the literal sense of the Word contains general truths but the internal sense particular truths. General truths are called external, but particular truths internal. And because truths devoid of affection are not truths because there is no life to them, the affections for them are therefore meant when external and internal truths are referred to.

3463. 'That Isaac's servants came' means rational concepts. This is clear from the meaning of 'servants' as rational concepts, and also as facts, dealt with in 2567, and from the representation of 'Isaac' as the Lord's Divine Rational, dealt with in 1893, 2066, 2072, 2083, 2630, 3012, 3194, 3210. From what has gone before it is clear what aspect of the Lord is represented here by Isaac, namely the Word as regards its internal sense. For by 'Abimelech, Ahuzzath, and Phicol' are meant matters of doctrine concerning faith which are drawn from the literal sense of the Word, like those matters of doctrine possessed by people who are called 'Philistines' in the good sense. That is, they are people who have no other matters of doctrine than those concerning faith, and yet so far as life is concerned they do what is good, though it is the good of truth. And these matters of doctrine do have a certain link with the internal sense, and so with the Lord.

[2] For people who have no other matters of doctrine than those concerning faith and yet who live according to them are linked in some way to Him, though in a remote way. It is remote for the reason that they do not know from any affection what charity towards the neighbour is, let alone love to the Lord, but only from some concept that belongs to faith. Thus they do not possess any perception of good, only a type of persuasion that that is true and accordingly good which their matters of doctrine tell them to be so. And when they are confirmed in those matters of doctrine they are just as likely to be subject to falsity as to truth, for nothing else than good can confirm a person as to what the truth is.

[3] Truth does indeed teach what good is, but it does so without perception, whereas good teaches what truth is from perception. Anyone may recognize this difference, and also the nature of it, simply from the following general command concerning charity,

All things whatever you would wish people to do to you, do so to them. Matthew 7:12.

The person who acts from this commandment does indeed do what is good to others; but he does it because it is so commanded rather than from any affection in the heart. And as often as he does that good deed he begins from a selfish motive, and also in doing such good his thoughts are of merit. But when he does not act from the commandment but from charity, that is, from affection, his actions begin in the heart, and so in freedom. And as often as he performs that act he begins from the desire itself for what is good, and so that which is a delight to him; and because in this delight he finds reward he has no thought of merit.

[4] From this one may now see what the difference is between doing good from faith and doing it from charity, and that people who do it from faith are more remote from good itself, which is the Lord, than those who do it from charity. The former cannot be easily brought to the good that flows from charity so that they may perceive it because truths are not present in them to any great extent. For no one can be brought to that good unless untruths have been rooted out first, which cannot be effected as long as untruths are so deeply rooted that a person is persuaded that they are truths.