4241. 'The field of Edom' means truth derived from this, that is to say, from good. This is clear from the meaning of 'the field of Edom' as the Lord's Divine Natural as regards good to which truths, or matters of doctrine regarding truth, were joined, dealt with in 3302, 3322. Truths derived from this, that is, from good, are quite different from truths which are the source of good. Truths which are the source of good are those which a person takes to himself before regeneration, whereas truths which are derived from good are those which he takes to himself after regeneration. For after regeneration truths are the product of good since good is now the source of his perception and knowledge that they are truths. Such truth - truth which is the product of good - is that which is meant by 'the field of Edom', as also in the place quoted above from the Book of Judges,

O Jehovah, when You went forth from Seir, when You set out from the field of Edom. Judges 5:4.

2018. That 'I will establish My covenant between Me and you' means union is clear from the meaning of 'a covenant' as union, dealt with already in 665, 666, 1023, 1038. This union has been dealt with above in this chapter and in other places before that, where it has been shown that Jehovah who is the speaker here was within Him, because He was one with Him from the very start of conception and birth. For He was indeed conceived from Jehovah, and therefore His Internal was Jehovah. And in 1999 this has been illustrated by the similarity that exists with man; that is to say, his soul is one with his body, or his internal one with his external, even though they are quite distinct and separate from each other. Sometimes they are so distinct that one is in conflict with the other, as normally happens in times of temptation when the internal reproaches the external and wishes to cast out the evil that is within the external; nevertheless they are joined together or are one since soul and body both belong to the same person. Take for example a person whose thought is something other than what is expressed in his looks, speech, and actions. In his case that which is more interior is at variance with that which is external; yet the two make one, for the thought is just as much part of that person as the external is to which looks, speech, and actions belong. Union exists however when the latter - looks, speech, and action - are in agreement with the thought. So much for these remarks added by way of illustration.