3425、“基拉耳的牧人与以撒的牧人争竞”表示（教义的）教导者看不见它里面的任何内义，因为内义与字义似乎对立。这从“争竞”、“牧人”和“基拉耳”的含义清楚可知：当论述的主题是圣言的内义时，“争竞”是指否认这种事物的存在，声称他们无法看见它；“牧人”是指（教义的）教导者（343节）；“基拉耳”是指信（1209， 2504， 3365， 3384节）。因此，“基拉耳山谷的牧人”表示那些只承认圣言字义的人。他们之所以看不见任何东西，也就是任何内层意义，是因为这两者，即内义和字义，看似对立。然而，它们看似对立并不能证明它们就真地对立，因为它们彼此完全对应。它们之所以看似对立，是因为那些只看见圣言字义的人本身就处于一种对立的状态。
这种情形类似一个处于对立状态的人，也就是一个其外在人或属世人与内在人或属灵人完全不一致的人。这种人发现属于内在人或属灵人的事物好像与他自己作对；而事实上，是他自己在其外在人或属世人方面处于一种对立状态。如果他没有处于这种状态，相反他的外在人或属世人顺服内在人或属灵人，那么这两者就会完全对应。例如：一个处于对立状态的人以为，为了获得永生，他必须放弃财富、一切肉体的感官享受和世俗的满足，从而放弃生活的快乐；因为他以为这一切事物都与属灵的生活对立。而事实上，它们本身与属灵的生活并不对立，而是与它相对应，因为它们是达到目的的手段，也就是说，它们存在，是为了使内在人或属灵人可以喜欢用它们来实行仁之良善，还可以满足地生活在一个健康的身体中。唯独目的使内在人和外在人要么彼此对立，要么彼此对应。当此处所说的财富、享受和快乐成为目的时，它们就对立，因为在这种情况下，属于内在人的属灵和属天事物被人鄙视和嘲笑，甚至弃绝。但当这类事物没有成为目的，而是成为达到更高目的，也就是那些属于死后生活，因而属于天国和主自己的事物的手段时，它们就对应。在这种情况下，在此人看来，与刚才所提到的那些事物相比，肉体和世俗事物几乎什么都不是；并且当他思想它们时，只把它们视为达到目的的手段。
由此明显可知，看似对立的事物本身并不对立；它们之所以看似对立，是因为人们处于一种对立的状态。那些没有处于对立状态的人，和那些处于对立状态的人一样行事、说话、寻求财富、追求快乐，以至于从外表上看，他们几乎没什么区别。原因在于，唯独他们的目的，或也可说，他们的爱将他们区分开来，因为爱就是目的。尽管从外表，也就是他们的身体来看，他们很相像；然而，从内在，也就是他们的灵来看，他们完全不同。一个处于对应，也就是外在人与内在人相对应之人的灵又亮又美，就像以可见的形式呈现出来的天堂之爱。而一个处于对立状态，也就是外在人与内在人相对立之人的灵又黑又丑（无论他外表看上去与其他人多么相似），就像以可见的形式呈现出来的对自我和世界的爱，也就是对他人的蔑视和仇恨。
圣言中的大量事物都是这种情况，也就是说，字义中的事物与内义中的事物看似对立。然而，它们决不对立，而是彼此完全对应。例如：圣言经常说，耶和华或主生气、发怒、毁灭或荒废，并将人投入地狱；而事实上，祂从不生气，更不将任何人投入地狱。前者属于字义，而后者属于内义。它们看似对立，仅仅因为人类处于对立状态。同样，在天上的天使看来，主就像一轮太阳，因而就像春天的温暖和黎明的曙光；但在地狱里的人看来，祂就像一片漆黑，因而就像冬天的寒冷和午夜的黑暗。所以天使以爱和仁来看待祂，而地狱里的人以仇恨和敌意来看待祂。因此，对后者来说，祂正如字义所说的，生气、发怒、毁灭或荒废，并将人投入地狱；而对前者来说，祂正如内义所说的，从不生气、发怒，更不毁灭或荒废，并将人投入地狱。
因此，当圣言论述的主题是与神性相反的事物时，它们照着表象被呈现出来是不可避免的。此外，恶人将神性转变为以这种方式作工的魔鬼的东西，或说恶人将神的工作转变为魔鬼的工作，以至于神性在他们身上产生的效果如同魔鬼一般。因此，他们越接近神性，就越将自己投入地狱的折磨。在主祷文中，主说“不叫我们遇见试探”，这句话也是这种情况。从字面上看，这句话的意思是，祂把我们引入试探；但内义是，祂从不将任何人引入试探，这是众所周知的（参看1875节）。这同样适用于属于圣言字义的其余事物。
Potts(1905-1910) 3425
3425. And the shepherds of Gerar strove with Isaac's shepherds. That this signifies that they who taught did not see any such thing therein because the senses appeared opposed, is evident from the signification of "disputing," when the internal sense of the Word is concerned, as being to deny it to be such by saying that they do not see it; and from the signification of "shepherds," as being those who teach (n. 343); and from the signification of "Gerar," as being faith (n. 1209, 2504, 3365, 3384); thus "the shepherds of the valley of Gerar" denote those who acknowledge only the literal sense of the Word. The reason why they see no such thing, that is, no interior sense, is that the two appear opposite, namely, what is in the internal sense, and what is in the literal sense. But their appearing to be opposite does not prove that they are so, for they wholly correspond; and the reason they appear opposite is that they who see the Word so are in what is opposite. [2] It is the same in the case of a man who is in opposition within himself, that is, whose external or natural man is in entire disagreement with his internal or spiritual man. Such a man sees that which is of the internal or spiritual man as opposed to himself, when yet in respect to the external or natural man, he himself is in that which is opposed; and if he were not in this, so that his external or natural man yielded obedience to the internal or spiritual man, the two would wholly correspond. For example: the man who is in what is opposed believes that in order for him to receive eternal life riches are to be renounced, as well as all the pleasures of the body and of the world, thus the delights of life; such things being supposed to be opposed to spiritual life, whereas in themselves they are not so, but correspond, because they are means to an end, namely, that the internal or spiritual man may enjoy them so as to be able to perform the goods of charity, and also may live content in a healthful body. The ends alone are what cause the internal man and the external either to be opposed or to correspond; they are opposed when the riches, pleasures, and delights here spoken of become the ends, for in this case the spiritual and celestial things which are of the internal man are despised and derided, nay, are rejected; but they correspond when such things are not made ends, but means to higher ends, namely, to those things which belong to the life after death, thus to the heavenly kingdom and the Lord Himself. In this case bodily and worldly things appear to the man as scarcely anything in comparison; and when he thinks about them, he values them only as means to ends. [3] From this it is evident that the things which appear opposed are not opposed in themselves; but they appear so because men are in what is opposed. They who are not in what is opposed, act, speak, and acquire riches, and also enjoy pleasures, similarly as do those who are in what is opposed, insomuch that in the outward appearance they can scarcely be distinguished from each other. The reason is that their ends alone are what distinguish them; or what is the same, their loves; for loves are ends. But although in the outward form, or as to the body, they appear alike, yet in the inward form, or as to the spirit, they are utterly unlike. The spirit of one who is in correspondence-that is, with whom the external man corresponds to the internal-is fair and beautiful, such as is heavenly love in form; but the spirit of one who is in what is opposed-that is, with whom the external man is opposed to the internal-however great may be the outward resemblance to the other, is black and ugly, such as is the love of self and of the world, that is, such as is contempt of others and hatred in form. [4] The case is the same with a host of things in the Word; that is to say, the things in the literal sense appear opposed to those in the internal sense; when yet they are by no means opposed, but wholly correspond. For example: it is frequently said in the Word that Jehovah or the Lord is angry, is wroth, destroys, and casts into hell; when yet He is never angry, and still less does He cast anyone into hell. The former is of the sense of the letter, but the latter is of the internal sense; and these appear opposed, but this is because the man is in what is opposed. In the same way the Lord appears as a sun to the angels who are in heaven, and thence as vernal warmth, and as light at dawn; but to the infernals He appears as something quite opaque, and thence as wintry cold, and as midnight darkness. Consequently to the angels He appears in love and charity, but to the infernals in hatred and enmity; thus to the latter according to the sense of the letter-that He is angry, is wroth, destroys, and casts into hell; but to the former according to the internal sense-that He is never angry and wroth, and still less destroys and casts into hell; so that when things are being treated of in the Word that are contrary to the Divine, it is inevitable that they should be presented in accordance with the appearance. Moreover it is the Divine which the wicked change into what is diabolical that works in this way; and therefore insofar as they approach the Divine, so far they cast themselves into infernal torments. [5] The case is the same with the Lord's words in the prayer: "Lead us not into temptation." The sense according to the letter is that He leads into temptation; but the internal sense is that He leads no one into temptation, as is well known (see n. 1875). The same is true of all other things that belong to the literal sense of the Word.
Elliott(1983-1999) 3425
3425. 'The herdsmen of Gerar disputed with Isaac's herdsmen' means that those who taught did not see anything of the sort there, because things in the internal sense appear contrary to those in the literal. This is clear from the meaning, when the internal sense of the Word is the subject, of 'disputing' as refusing to recognize any such thing - by saying that they do not see it; from the meaning of 'herdsman' as people who teach, dealt with in 343;a and from the meaning of 'Gerar' as faith, dealt with in 1209, 2504, 3365, 3384. Thus 'the herdsmen of the Valley of Gerar' means those who do not acknowledge any sense in the Word other than its literal sense. The reason they do not see anything else - namely any interior sense - is that things appear to be contraries; that is to say, things in the internal sense appear to be contrary to those in the literal sense. Yet though they appear to be contrary they are not in fact so but exist in perfect correspondence with one another. The reason why they appear to be contrary however is that people who see only the literal sense of the Word are themselves dwelling in a state of contrariety. Anyone whose state is this - that is, in whom the external or natural man is totally at variance with the internal or spiritual man - sees the things that belong to the internal or spiritual man as though they stood contrary to himself, when in fact he himself as to his external or natural man is in a state of contrariety. And if he were not in that state, but his external or natural man were subservient to the internal or spiritual man, they would exist in perfect correspondence with one another.
[2] For example, a person in a state of contrariety believes that to obtain eternal life he must renounce riches, and all physical and worldly pleasures, and so the delights of life; for he believes that all these things are contrary to spiritual life. But in themselves they are not contrary to that life but correspond to it; for they are means to an end, that is to say, they exist so that the internal or spiritual man may be enabled to find joy in performing the good deeds of charity, and in addition to live contentedly in a healthy body It is ends in view which alone cause the internal man and the external man either to be contrary or to correspond to each other. They are contrary when the riches, pleasures, and delights spoken of become ends in view, for in that case spiritual and celestial things that belong to the internal man are despised and ridiculed, or even simply rejected, by a person. But they correspond when they do not become ends but means to higher ends, that is to say, to things that belong to life after death, and so to the heavenly kingdom and to the Lord Himself. In this case bodily and worldly things appear to him to be hardly anything compared with those just mentioned and when he does think about them he considers them to be merely means to ends in view.
[3] From these considerations it is evident that things that appear to be contraries are not in themselves so, but that the reason why they appear to be such is that contrariety exists within the persons themselves. Those in whom it does not exist act in similar ways, utter similar things, seek wealth in similar ways, and pursue similar pleasures to those in whom contrariety does exist, so much so that to outward appearance scarcely any distinction can be made between them. The reason for this is that solely their ends in view distinguish the former from the latter, or what amounts to the same, that which they really love distinguishes one person from another, for what people love they have as their end in view. But although to outward appearance, that is, as to their bodies, people are similar, they are nevertheless completely different inwardly, that is, as to their spirits. The spirit of one in whom correspondence exists, that is, with whom the external man corresponds to the internal man, is shining and beautiful, like heavenly love when presented in visible form. But the spirit of one in whom contrariety exists, that is, with whom the external man is contrary to the internal man - even though he looks like the other in external appearance - is dark and ugly, like self-love and love of the world, that is, like contempt for others and like hatred, when presented in a visible form.
[4] It is similar with very many things in the Word, that is to say, those in the literal sense appear as contraries to those in the internal sense. Yet they are in no way contraries but have a perfect correspondence with one another. For example, in the Word reference is made many times to Jehovah or the Lord being angry, being wroth, destroying, and casting into hell, when in fact He is never angry, let alone casts anyone into hell. The former ideas belong to the sense of the letter, but the latter to the internal sense. The latter appear to be contraries, but this is because man dwells in a state of contrariety. It is like the Lord's appearing as the Sun to angels in heaven, and therefore as spring-like warmth and as light like that of the dawn, but to those in hell like something altogether darkened and therefore as cold like that of winter and as thick darkness like that of night - as a consequence of which angels are governed by love and charity, but those in hell by hatred and enmity. Thus to those in hell He is, as the sense of the letter refers to Him, one who is angry and wrathful, who destroys and casts into hell, but to the angels He is, as the internal sense portrays Him, one who is never angry and wroth, still less one who destroys and casts into hell.
[5] When the subject in the Word therefore is things that are contrary to the Divine such appearances inevitably present themselves. Even so, it is the Divine - which the wicked turn into that which is of the devil - that is then at work Furthermore to the extent they draw near the Divine those in hell subject themselves to torments. Something similar is true of the words of the Lord's Prayer, Do not lead us into temptation. According to the letter the meaning is that He leads into temptation, but the internal sense is that He does not lead anyone into it, as is well known, see 1875. Similarly with everything else which occurs in the literal sense of the Word.
Latin(1748-1756) 3425
3425. Quod `rixati sunt pastores Geraris cum pastoribus Jishaki' significet quod docentes non viderent ibi tale, quia apparent opposita, constat a significatione `rixari,' cum agitur de Verbi sensu interno, quod sit negare quod sit tale, ita dicendo se non videre illud; ex significatione `pastorum' quod sint docentes, de qua n. 343; et ex significatione `Geraris' quod sit fides, de qua n. 1209, 2504, 3365, 3384; ita `pastores vallis Geraris' sunt illi qui non nisi quam sensum litteralem Verbi agnoscunt: causa quod non videant tale, nempe aliquem sensum interiorem, est quia apparent opposita, {1}scilicet illa quae in sensu interno et quae in sensu litterali; sed quod opposita appareant, {2}ideo non opposita sunt, verum prorsus correspondent; at quod opposita appareant, est quia illi qui ita Verbum vident, in opposito sunt; se habet hoc sicut homo qui in opposito est in se, hoc est, cujus externus seu naturalis homo prorsus dissidet ab ejus interno seu spirituali, {3}is videt illa quae interni seu spiritualis hominis sunt, sibi quasi opposita, cum tamen ipse quoad externum seu naturalem hominem in opposito est, et si non is in opposito esset, sed externus seu naturalis ejus homo obsequia praestaret interno seu spirituali, prorsus corresponderent: ut pro exemplo, qui in opposito est, credit quod abdicandae sint divitiae, ac omnes voluptates corporis et mundi, ita jucunda vitae, [2] ut vitam aeternam accipiat, {4}illa enim opposita creduntur vitae spirituali; at in se non opposita sunt, sed correspondent; sunt enim media finis, ut nempe internus seu spiritualis homo illis frui queat ad bona charitatis exercenda, (c)et praeterea ut contentus in salubri corpore vivat; sunt fines qui unice faciunt quod internus homo et externus vel oppositi sint, vel correspondeant; oppositi sunt quando divitiae, voluptates et jucunda, de quibus dictum, fiunt fines, tunc enim spiritualia et caelestia, quae sunt interni hominis, contemnit {5}et subsannat, immo rejicit; at correspondent quando illa non fiunt fines sed media ad fines superiores, nempe ad illa quae sunt vitae post mortem, ita regni caelestis ac Ipsius Domini, tunc {6}corporea et mundana apparent illi vix aliquid respective, et cum de illis cogitat, modo ut media ad fines aestimat; inde patet quod illa quae apparent opposita, non in se opposita sint; [3] sed quod ita appareant, sit {7}quia illi in opposito sunt: qui non in opposito sunt, similiter agunt, similiter loquuntur, similiter ambiunt divitias, et quoque {8}similiter voluptates captant, sicut illi qui in opposito sunt, usque adeo ut externa facie vix dignosci queant; causa est quia soli fines sunt qui distinguunt, seu quod idem, amores, nam amores sunt fines; at tametsi similes apparent forma externa seu quoad corpus, usque tamen prorsus dissimiles sunt forma interna seu quoad spiritum; qui in correspondentia {9}est, hoc est, apud {10}quem interno homini correspondet externus, ejus spiritus est candidus {11}et pulcher, qualis est amor caelestis in forma; at qui in opposito {9}est, hoc est, apud {10}quem externus homo oppositus est interno, utcumque similitudo est cum altero quoad externum, ejus spiritus est niger (c)et deformis, {12}qualis est amor sui et mundi, hoc est, qualis contemptus aliorum et quale odium, in forma. [4] Similiter se habet cum perplurimis in Verbo, quod nempe quae in sensu litterali sunt, appareant opposita illis quae in sensu interno sunt, cum tamen nusquam opposita sint, sed prorsus correspondeant; ut pro exemplo, in Verbo pluries dicitur quod Jehovah seu Dominus irascatur, excandescat, vastet, conjiciat in infernum, cum tamen nusquam irascatur, minus conjiciat aliquem in infernum; illud est sensus litterae, hoc autem est sensus interni; haec apparent opposita, sed ex causa quia homo in opposito est; se habet hoc, sicut quod Dominus appareat ut Sol angelis qui in caelo, et inde ut calor quasi vernus, et ut lux quasi aurorae; at infernalibus sicut prorsus opacum quid, et inde ut frigus quasi hiemis, ac ut caligo quasi noctis; proinde angelis in amore et charitate, sed infernalibus in odio et hostilitate; ita his secundum sensum litterae, quod irascatur, excandescat, vastet, conjiciat in infernum, illis autem secundum sensum internum quod nusquam irascatur et excandescat, minus quod vastet et conjiciat in infernum; [5] cum itaque agitur in Verbo de illis quae contraria Divino sunt, illa non (t)possunt aliter quam secundum apparentiam ita sisti; etiam Divinum est quod quia mali vertunt in diabolicum, hoc sic operatur; quare etiam quantum ad Divinum {13}approximant, tantum in cruciatus infernales se conjiciunt. Similiter se habet cum verbis Domini in Oratione, `Ne inducas nos in tentationem;' sensus secundum litteram est quod inducat in tentationem: sensus autem internus est quod neminem inducat, ut notum est, videatur n. 1875; similiter se habet cum reliquis quae {14}sensus litteralis Verbi sunt. @1 nempe$ @2 non usque$ @3 ille quia in opposito est, videt illa quae interni seu spiritualis hominis sunt, sibi quasi opposita, cum tamen usque dum interno seu spirituali homini obsequia praestat externus seu naturalis, prorsus correspondent;$ @4 opposita enim$ @5 subsannat et$ @6 corporeum et mundanum apparet$ @7 quod...sint$ @8 ab illis similiter voluptates capiunt, ac$ @9 sunt$ @10 quos$ @11 ac formosus et$ @12 i et$ @13 appropinquant$ @14 in sensu literali$