3835. And Laban gave her Zilpah his handmaid, unto his daughter Leah for a handmaid. That this signifies the external affections, or external bonds, which are subservient means, is evident from the signification of a “handmaid,” as being the external affections (see n. 1895, 2567). That “Laban gave her” signifies that they are from the collateral good of a common stock, for this is the origin of such affections. They are called external bonds, because all affections are bonds (n. 1077, 1080, 1835, 1944), for nothing holds man in bonds except his affection. The affection of each man does not indeed appear to him as a bond, yet still it is so called because it rules him, and keeps him bound to it. Internal affections, however, are called internal bonds, the affections of truth and of good being called the bonds of conscience. To these correspond external bonds or external affections, for every internal has a corresponding external. As the man who is being regenerated is introduced to internal things by means of external ones, and as this state of introduction is here treated of, therefore it is here said that Laban’s handmaid was given to his daughter Leah for a handmaid, by which is signified that such affections were given as serve as the means of introduction. That these affections were the most external ones, such as are those called the affections of the body, is evident from the fact that Leah represents the affections of external truth. But on this subject also, of the Lord’s Divine mercy more elsewhere.

1895. And she had a handmaid, an Egyptian. That this signifies the affection of memory-knowledges [scientiae], is evident from the signification of a “handmaid,” and from the signification of “Egypt.” Sarai, who was the mistress or lady, represents and signifies truth adjoined to good, as already said. Truth adjoined to good is intellectual truth in the genuine sense, but rational truth is beneath this and therefore is lower; and this rational truth is born from knowledges [scientiae et cognitiones] vivified by the affection that corresponds to them, and this affection, being of the exterior man, ought to serve the intellectual truth that appertains to the inmost man, as a handmaid serves her lady, or a household servant her mistress; and therefore this affection is what is represented and signified by the “handmaid Hagar.”

[2] How these things stand cannot well be stated to the apprehension, for it must first be known what intellectual truth in the genuine sense is, and also how the rational is born, namely, from the internal man as a father, and from the exterior or natural man as a mother, for without the conjunction of these two nothing rational can possibly come forth. The rational is not born (as is supposed) of knowledges [scientiae et cognitiones], but of the affection of these knowledges, as may be seen from the mere fact that no one can ever become rational unless some delight or affection of these knowledges aspires thereto. The affection is the maternal life itself; and the celestial and spiritual itself, in the affection, is the paternal life; therefore in proportion to the affection, and in accordance with the quality of the affection, in the same proportion, and in the same quality, does the man become rational. In themselves these knowledges are nothing but dead things, or instrumental causes, which are vivified by the life of affection; and such is the conception of the rational man in everyone. The reason why the handmaid was an Egyptian, and the reason why this fact is stated, is that “Egypt” signifies memory-knowledges [scientiae], as before shown (n. 1164, 1165, 1186, 1462).