It was a regulation among the Ancients that women given to slaves belonged to the master with whom they served, and so did the children born from them, as may be seen in Moses,

If you buy a Hebrew slave he shall serve for six years; and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If his master has given him a wife and she has borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out by himself.^a Exod 21:2, 4.

It was because this was also a regulation in the Ancient Church and was therefore well known to Laban that he laid claim to Jacob's wives and children, as is evident in the next chapter,

Laban said to Jacob, The daughters are my daughters, and the sons are my sons, and the flock is my flock, and all that you see belongs to me. Gen 31:43.

And because Jacob knows this he says to Laban, 'Give me my womenfolk and my children'. But this regulation as stated in Moses in the verses quoted above represented the right of the internal or rational man to the goods and truths of the external or natural man which the latter has obtained for itself. For a slave represented the truth of the natural man as that truth exists at first before genuine truths are instilled. The truth which is present at first is not truth but the outward appearance of it. Nevertheless it serves as the means by which genuine truths and goods are introduced, as has been shown already. For this reason once goods and truths have been instilled through that truth present at first, that is, through the service it renders, it is dispensed with, but the genuine truths obtained in that way are retained. It was for the sake of this representation that this law about slaves was laid down.

[2] But as for Jacob, he was not a slave who had been purchased, but a man from a more distinguished family than Laban. He himself - that is to say, Jacob - purchased Laban's daughters, and so also the children by them, through the service he rendered; for they were his instead of wages. Consequently Laban's assumptions concerning them were not correct. Furthermore 'a Hebrew slave' means the truth which serves to introduce genuine goods and truths, and his wife the affection for natural good. But Jacob's position was different from that of a slave. He represented the good of natural truth, and his wives the affections for truth. Nor does Laban have the same representation as the master in the law that has been quoted relating to a Hebrew slave. That is to say, he does not represent the rational, but a parallel good, 3612, 3665, 3778, which is such that it is not genuine good but the outward appearance of the genuine, serving to introduce truths, 3665, 3690, which were accordingly 'Jacob's'.

[3] These details which have been presented are indeed such as fall within the mental grasp of none but a very few, for most people do not know what the truth and good of the natural are, and that these are different from the truth and good of the rational. Still less do they know that goods and truths which are not genuine but only so to external appearance serve to introduce genuine truths and goods, especially at the outset of regeneration. All the same, as these details are contained in the internal sense of these words, and also in the internal sense of those that follow concerning Laban's flock from which Jacob obtained a flock for himself, they ought not to be passed over in silence. There will perhaps be some who grasp them. Any who have a strong desire to know such things, that is, who are stirred by an affection for spiritual good and truth, receive enlightenment in such matters.

Notes