10134. The one lamb thou shalt offer in the morning. That this signifies the removal of evils through the good of innocence from the Lord in a state of love and of the consequent light in the internal man, is evident from the signification of “offering a lamb,” or sacrificing it, as being the removal of evils through the good of innocence from the Lord (of which below); and from the signification of “morning,” as being a state of love and of the consequent light in the internal man (of which also below). By “offering,” or “sacrificing, a lamb” is signified the removal of evils through the good of innocence from the Lord, because by burnt-offerings and sacrifices was signified purification from evils and the derivative falsities, or what is the same, their removal, and the implantation of good and truth, and their conjunction by the the Lord, (n. 9990, 9991, 10022, 10042, 10053). (That purification from evils is their removal, see the places cited in n. 10057; and that a “lamb” denotes the good of innocence, n. 10132)

[2] That the removal of evils, and the implantation of good and truth, and their conjunction, are effected through the good of innocence by the Lord, is because in all good there must be innocence in order that it be good, and because without innocence good is not good. For innocence is not only the plane in which truths are sown, but is also the very essence of good; so far therefore as a man is in innocence, so far good becomes good, and truth lives from good; consequently so far the man becomes alive, and so far the evils with him are removed; and insofar as they are removed, goods and truths are implanted and conjoined by the Lord. This is the reason why the continual burnt-offering was made by means of lambs. (That all the good of heaven and the church has innocence in it, and that without innocence good is not good, see n. 2736, 2780, 6013, 7840, 7887, 9262; also what innocence is, n. 3994, 4001, 4797, 5236, 6107, 6765, 7902, 9262, 9936)

[3] That “morning” denotes a state of love and of the consequent light in the internal man, is because in the heavens the states with the angels vary as to love and the faith thence derived, as in the world with men times vary as to heat and its attendant light. These times, as is well known, are morning, noon, evening, and night; hence in the Word by “morning” is signified a state of love; by “noon,” a state of light in clearness; by “evening,” a state of light in obscurity; and by “night,” or “twilight,” a state of love in obscurity. (That there are such variations of states in the heavens, see n. 5672, 5962, 6110, 7218, 8426; and that morning there is a state of peace and innocence, thus a state of love to the Lord, n. 2405, 2780, 8426, 8812, 10114; that noon is a state of light in clearness, n. 3708, 5672, 9642; evening a state of light in obscurity, n. 3056, 3833, 6110; and that there is no night in heaven, but twilight, n. 6110, by which is signified a state of love in obscurity.)

[4] That by “morning” is signified a state of love and of the consequent light in the internal man, is because when an angel is in a state of love and light, he is then in his internal man; but when he is in a state of light and love in obscurity, he is then in the external man. For the angels have an internal and an external, and when they are in the internal, the external is almost quiescent; but when they are in the external, they are in a more gross and obscure state. Consequently when they are in a state of love and light, they are in their internal, thus in their morning; and when they are in a state of light and love in obscurity, they are in the external, thus in their evening; from which it is plain that variations of states are made by elevations toward more interior things, thus into a higher sphere of heavenly light and heat, consequently nearer to the Lord; and by lowerings toward more exterior things, into a lower sphere of heavenly light and heat, and thus more remote from the Lord.

[5] Be it known that interior things are higher, thus nearer to the Lord; and that exterior things are lower, thus more remote from the Lord; and that light in the heavens is the Divine truth which is of faith, and heat in the heavens is the Divine good which is of love, both proceeding from the Lord. For the Lord in heaven is a Sun, from which the angels have everything of life, and from it man has everything of spiritual and heavenly life (see the p laces cited in n. 9548, 9684; also that interior things are higher, thus nearer to the Lord, n. 2148, 3084, 4599, 5146, 8325).

[6] The man who is being regenerated, and likewise the man who has been regenerated, also undergo variations of state as to love and as to faith, by means of elevations toward more interior things, and by lowerings toward more exterior things; but there are few who are able to reflect upon this, because they do not know what it is to think and to will in the internal man, and in the external; nor indeed what the internal man is, and what the external. To think and to will in the internal man is to think and to will in heaven, for the internal man is there; but to think and to will in the external man is to think and to will in the world, for the external man is there; and therefore when a man is in love to God and in the consequent faith, he is in the internal man, because in heaven; but when he is in obscurity as to love and the consequent faith, he is in the external man, because in the world. These states also are meant by “morning,” “noon,” “evening,” and “night” or “twilight” in the Word.

[7] It is similar with the states of the church, the first state of which is also called “morning” in the Word, the second “noon,” the third “evening,” and the fourth or last, “night.” But when the church is in its night, in which it is when no longer in love to God and in faith, then from the twilight morning begins with another nation, where a new church is set up.

[8] For it is with the church in general as with man in particular; his first state is a state of innocence, thus also of love toward his parents, nurse, and infant companions; his second is a state of light, for when the infant becomes a child, he learns things that belong to light, that is, the truths of faith, and believes them; the third state is when he begins to love the world and to love himself, which takes place when he becomes a youth and when he thinks from himself, and in proportion as these loves increase, faith decreases, and with faith charity toward the neighbor and love to God; the fourth and last state is when he does not care for these things, and still more when he denies them.

[9] Such also are the states of every church from its beginning to its end. Its first state is likewise a state of infancy, thus also of innocence, consequently of love to the Lord, which state is called “morning;” the second state is a state of light; the third is a state of light in obscurity, which is its “evening;” and the fourth is a state of no love and hence of no light, which is its “night.” This is so because evils increase day by day, and insofar as they increase, one person infects another like a contagion; especially parents their children, besides that hereditary evils are successively condensed, and so transmitted.

[10] That “morning” signifies the first state of the church, and also a state of love, is evident from Daniel:

A holy one said, How long shall be the vision, the continual sacrifice, and the wasting transgressions? And he said to me, Until evening and morning two thousand three hundred; then shall the holy thing be justified (Daniel 8:13-14).

The subject here treated of is the coming of the Lord; “evening” denotes the state of the church before his coming, while “morning” denotes the first state of the church after His coming, and in the supreme sense it denotes the Lord Himself. That in the supreme sense the Lord is the “morning” is because He is the Sun of heaven, and the Sun of heaven never sets, but is always rising; hence also the Lord is called the “east,” consequently also the “morning” (n. 2405, 2780, 9668).

[11] And in Isaiah:

One crieth unto me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night? what of the night? The watchman said, The morning cometh, and also the night (Isaiah 21:11-12);

by the “watchman” in the internal sense is meant one who observes the states of the church and its changes, thus every prophet; by “night” is meant the last state of the church; by “morning” its first state; by “Seir,” from which the watchman crieth, is signified the enlightening of the nations which are in darkness (that “Seir” has this meaning, see n. 4240; and that “night” denotes the last state of the church, n. 6000); “the morning cometh, and also the night,” signifies that though there is enlightening to those who are of the new church, yet there is night to those who are in the old. The like is signified by “morning” in David:

In the evening weeping may pass the night, but in the morning shall be singing (Psalms 30:5).

About the time of evening behold terror; before the morning he is not (Isaiah 17:14).

[12] As in the supreme sense “morning” signifies the Lord, and from this, love from Him to Him, therefore the manna, which was heavenly bread, “rained down every morning” (Exodus 16:8, 12-13, 21). (That the Lord is the bread which comes down from heaven, thus the manna, see John 6:33, 35, 48, 50; and that “bread” denotes celestial love, which is love from the Lord to the Lord, n. 2165, 2177, 3464, 4217, 4735, 5405, 5915, 9545.) And as the Lord is “the east,” and “the morning,” and as all celestial love is from Him, therefore also He rose “in the morning on the day of the Sabbath” (Mark 16:9); and therefore also the day before the feast of the passover was called “the evening;” for by the feast of the passover was signified the presence of the Lord and the liberation of the faithful by Him from damnation (n. 7867, 9286-9292).

[13] He who is acquainted with the internal sense of the Word, is able to know what is involved in Peter’s thrice denying the Lord before the cock crew twice (Matthew 26:34, 74-75; Mark 14:30, 68, 72; Luke 22:34, 60-61; John 18:27); for by Peter was represented the faith of the church, or what is the same, the church as to faith; by the time when the cock crew was signified the last state of the church, which time was also called “cockcrowing;” by the denial three times was signified full and complete denial of the Lord in the end of the church. That Peter represented the faith of the church, thus the church as to faith, see the preface to Genesis 18 and Genesis 22, and also n. 3750, 4738; and that these words to Peter signified the denial of the Lord in the church at the time of its end (n. 6000, 6073, 10087); for the Lord is denied when there is no longer any faith, and there is no faith when there is no longer any charity. That “three” signifies what is full and complete, see n. 2788, 4495, 7715, 8347, 9198, 9488, 9489; and from this it was said that he would deny three times. That this was done in twilight, when morning was about to come, is evident in John 18:28; and that cock crowing and twilight are the same, is evident in Mark:

Watch ye, for ye know not when the lord of the house will come; at even, or at midnight, or at cock crowing, or in the morning (Mark 13:35).

From all this it can now be seen what is signified by “morning.”

6148. Only the ground of the priests bought he not. That this signifies that the internal procured for itself from the natural, capacities to receive good, because these are from itself, is evident from the representation of Joseph, of whom these things are said, as being the internal (of which above); from the signification of the “ground,” as being the receptacle of truth (of which also above, n. 6135-6137), here the capacity to receive good, for capacity is receptibility, and this must be within it, in order that a receptacle may be a receptacle. This capacity comes from good, that is, through good from the Lord; for unless the good of love flowed in from the Lord, no man would have the capacity to receive either truth or good. It is the influx of good of love from the Lord which causes all things within man to be disposed for reception. That the capacity to receive good is from the natural, is signified by the ground being in Egypt, for by “Egypt” is signified the natural in respect to memory-knowledges (n. 6142). The internal sense as given above is further evident from the signification of “priests,” as being good (of which in what follows); and from the signification of “not buying,” as being not to appropriate to himself these capacities as he had appropriated to himself truths and the goods of truth with their receptacles (which was done by means of desolations and sustainings), for the reason that these capacities were from himself, that is, from the internal. Thus it is that by these words, “Only the ground of the priests bought he not” is signified that the internal procured for itself from the natural, capacities to receive good, because these are from itself.

[2] The case herein is this. The capacities in man to receive truth and good are immediately from the Lord, nor does man render any aid in the procuring of them. For man is always kept in the capacity to receive good and truth, and from this capacity he has understanding and will; but a man’s not receiving them is the result of his turning to evil: the capacity does indeed then remain, but the approach to the thought and feeling of them is closed against him; and therefore the capacity to see truth and feel good perishes in proportion as a man turns himself to evil and confirms himself therein in life and faith. That man contributes nothing whatever to the capacity to receive truth and good, is known from the doctrine of the church, that nothing of the truth of faith and nothing of the good of charity comes from man, but that all comes from the Lord. Nevertheless a man can destroy this capacity in himself. From this it may now be seen how it is to be understood that the internal procured for itself from the natural, capacities to receive good, because these are from itself. It is said “from the natural,” because the influx of good from the Lord is effected by the Lord through the internal into the natural. When a capacity to receive has been acquired in the natural, then there is influx, for then there is reception (as may be seen above, n. 5828).

[3] In regard to goods being signified by “priests,” be it known that there are two things which proceed from the Lord, namely, good and truth. The Divine good was represented by priests, and the Divine truth by kings. Hence it is that by “priests” are signified goods, and by “kings” truths. (Concerning the priesthood and royalty which are predicated of the Lord, see n. 1728, 2015, 3670.) In the Ancient Representative Church the priesthood and the royalty were joined together in one person, because the good and truth which proceed from the Lord are united, and in heaven with the angels are also joined together.

[4] The person in whom these two things in the Ancient Church were joined together was called “Melchizedek,” or “King of Righteousness,” as may be seen from the Melchizedek who came to Abraham, of whom it is thus written:

Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine; and he was priest to God Most High; and he blessed Abraham (Genesis 14:18-19).

That he represented the Lord as to both is manifest from the fact that he was king and at the same time priest, and that he was allowed to bless Abraham and to offer him bread and wine, which at that time also were symbols of the good of love and the truth of faith. That Melchizedek represented the Lord as to both is further manifest from David:

Jehovah hath sworn and He will not repent, Thou art a priest eternally after the manner of Melchizedek (Psalms 110:4);

which was said of the Lord; “after the manner of Melchizedek” means that he was both king and priest, that is, in the supreme sense, that from Him proceed the Divine good and the Divine truth together.

[5] Moreover as a representative church was instituted with the posterity of Jacob, therefore in one person conjointly was represented the Divine good and the Divine truth which proceed united from the Lord. But on account of the wars and of the idolatry of that people, these two offices were at first divided, and they who ruled over the people were called “leaders,” and afterward “judges;” while they who officiated in holy things were called “priests,” and were of the seed of Aaron, and Levites. Yet afterward these two offices were joined together in one person, as in Eli and in Samuel. But because the people were of such a character that a representative church could not be instituted among them, but only the representative of a church, by reason of the idolatrous disposition which prevailed among them, therefore it was permitted that the two offices should be separated, and that the Lord as to Divine truth should be represented by kings, and as to Divine good by priests. That this was done at the will of the people, and not of the Lord’s good pleasure, is manifest from the word of Jehovah unto Samuel:

Obey the voice of the people in all that they shall say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them; and thou shalt show them the king’s right (1 Samuel 8:7 to the end, and 12:19-20).

[6] The reason why these two offices were not to be separated, was that the Divine truth separated from the Divine good condemns everyone; whereas the Divine truth united to the Divine good saves. For from the Divine truth man is condemned to hell, but by the Divine good he is taken out therefrom, and is elevated into heaven. Salvation is of mercy, thus from the Divine good; but damnation is when man refuses mercy, and thus rejects from himself the Divine good; wherefore he is left to judgment from truth. (That kings represented the Divine truth may be seen, n. 1672, 1728, 2015, 2069, 3009, 3670, 4575, 4581, 4966, 5044, 5068.)

[7] That priests represented the Lord as to Divine good, and that from this they signify good, may be seen from all those things in the internal sense which were instituted with respect to the priesthood when Aaron was chosen, and afterward the Levites; as that the high priest alone should enter into the Holy of holies and there minister; that the holy things of Jehovah should be for the priest (Leviticus 23:20; 27:21); that they should not have a portion and inheritance in the land, but that Jehovah should be their portion and inheritance (Numbers 18:20; Deuteronomy 10:9; 18:1); that the Levites were given to Jehovah instead of the firstborn, and that by Jehovah they were given to Aaron (Numbers 3:9, 12-13, 40 to the end; 8:16-19); that the high priest with the Levites should be in the midst of the camp when they pitched and when they set forward (Numbers 1:50-54; 2:17; 3:23-38; 4:1 to the end); that no one of the seed of Aaron in whom was any blemish should come near to offer burnt-offerings and sacrifices (Leviticus 21:17-21); besides many other things (see Leviticus 21:9-13, and elsewhere).

[8] All these things represented in the supreme sense the Divine good of the Lord, and thus in the relative sense the good which is of love and of charity. But the garments of Aaron, which were called the “garments of holiness,” represented the Divine truth from the Divine good; concerning which garments of the Lord’s Divine mercy more shall be said in the explications of what is written in Exodus.

[9] As truth is signified by “kings,” and good by “priests,” therefore in the Word “kings and priests” are frequently mentioned together; as in Revelation:

Jesus Christ hath made us kings and priests to God and His Father (Revelation 1:5-6; 5:10);

“kings” are said to be “made” from the truth which is of faith, and “priests” from the good which is of charity. Thus with those who are in the Lord truth and good are joined together, as they are in heaven (as was said above), and this is meant by “being made kings and priests.”

[10] In Jeremiah:

It shall come to pass in that day that the heart of the king and of the princes shall perish; and the priests shall be amazed; and the prophets shall wonder (Jeremiah 4:9).

Again:

The house of Israel are ashamed; they, their kings, their princes, and their priests, and their prophets (Jeremiah 2:26).

Again:

The kings of Judah, the princes, the priests, and the prophets, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 8:1).

In these passages “kings” denote truths; “princes,” primary truths (n. 1482, 2089, 5044); “priests,” goods; and “prophets,” those who teach (n. 2534).

[11] Be it known further that the fact of Joseph’s not buying the ground of the priests was a representative that all capacity to receive truth and good is from the Lord, is evident from a similar law concerning the fields of the Levites in Moses:

The field of the suburbs of the cities of the Levites may not be sold; for it is their eternal possession (Leviticus 25:34);

by this is meant in the internal sense that no man ought to claim for himself anything of the good of the church, which is the good of love and of charity, because this is from the Lord alone.