9213. Even at the going in of the sun thou shalt restore it to him. That this signifies that it must be restored before there is a state of shade from the delights of external loves, is evident from the signification of the “going in,” or setting, “of the sun,” as being a state of shade from the delights of external loves. The case herein is this. In heaven there are alternations of heat in respect to those things which are of the good of love; and there are alternations of light in respect to those things which are of the truth of faith; thus there are alternations of love and of faith. In hell also there are alternations, but such as are opposite to those in heaven, because there they are alternations of the love of evil and of the faith of falsity. These alternations correspond to the changes of the seasons on the earth, which are spring, summer, autumn, and winter, and again spring; and so on. But in the spiritual world instead of times there are states; for there are no changes of heat and light there, but of love and faith. But be it known that these alternations are not the same with one as with another, but differ with each person according to the state of life acquired by him in the world. Sunset in heaven corresponds to a state of shade as to the truths of faith, and to a state of cold as to the good of love to the Lord and toward the neighbor; for those who are there then come into the delights of external loves, which are attended with shade as to faith. For when an angel or spirit is in external things, he is also in shade; but when he is in internal things, he is in the delights and blessednesses of heavenly loves, and at the same time is in the pleasant things of faith, that is, in the light of truth. These are the states to which correspond the spring and summer seasons on the earth. From all this then it can now be seen why the “going in,” or setting, “of the sun,” signifies a state of shade from the delights of external loves. (Concerning these alternations see (5097) what has been shown above, n. 5097, 5672, 5962, 6110, 7083, 8426, 8615, 8644, 8812.)

[2] From what has been said above it can be seen what is meant by saying that the memory-truths which have been separated through fallacies derived from the things of sense must be restored before there is a state of shade from the delights of external loves, which is signified by the words, “if thou take thy companion’s garment in pledge, even at the going in of the sun thou shalt restore it to him.” For hereby is meant that truths taken away through fallacies must be restored while the man is still in the light of truth; for he is then able to recover them, and also to dispel the falsities induced by fallacies; but this he cannot do when he is in a state of shade arising from the delights of external loves, because these delights reject those truths; and the shade does not receive them; and thus the fallacies cling to the man, and are appropriated by him. The reason why external delights, that is, those of the external man, are of such a nature, is that they are closely connected with the world, and are also excited and as it were vivified by its heat. It is otherwise with internal delights and blessednesses, or those of the internal man. These are closely connected with heaven, and are also excited and vivified by its heat, which is love from the Lord.

[3] This judgment, or law, is thus delivered in another passage in Moses:

Thou shalt not take in pledge the mill or millstone; for he taketh the soul in pledge (Deuteronomy 24:6);

by “a mill” are signified such things as serve for procuring faith, and afterward charity (n. 7780); and by “the soul” is signified the life of faith from charity (n. 9050). From this it is evident what is meant by “not taking in pledge a mill, for he taketh the soul in pledge.” Again:

Thou shalt not turn back the right of the sojourner and the orphan; nor shalt thou take a widow’s garment in pledge (Deuteronomy 24:17);

“to take a widow’s garment in pledge” denotes to take away in any manner the truths that long for good; for a “garment” denotes truth (see n. 9212); and “a widow,” one who is in good and longs for truths, or in the abstract sense, good longing for truths (n. 9198); for if truth is taken away, good perishes together with its longing.

[4] And again:

If thou lend thy companion anything, thou shalt not enter into his house to take a pledge. Thou shalt stand outside, and the man to whom thou hast lent shall bring forth the pledge outside. And if he be a needy man, thou shalt not lie down in his pledge; restoring thou shalt restore to him the pledge at the setting of the sun, that he may lie in his garment, and may bless thee; and it shall be righteousness before thy God (Deuteronomy 24:10-13).

That the creditor should “stand outside, and the pledge be brought forth to him,” signifies how the communicated truths are to be responded to; for by “lending” is signified the communication of truth, and by “taking a pledge,” the response. No one can know that these things are signified except from what happens in the other life; thus unless he knows what is meant by “entering into the house,” and what by “standing outside,” thus what is meant by “bringing forth outside.”

[5] In the other life those who enter the house of another, and converse together in one room, so communicate their thoughts with all who are there, that the latter absolutely know no otherwise than that they themselves are thinking these thoughts from themselves. But if they stand outside, the thoughts are indeed perceived, but as coming from another, and not from themselves. This happens every day in the other life; and therefore those who are of one opinion, or of one sentiment, appear together in one house; and this is still more the case if they appear in one room of the house; and when these same persons disagree, those who do so disappear. In the other life such appearances are everywhere, and are continually happening. The reason is that parity of thoughts conjoins and causes presence, for thought is internal sight, and distances of places there, are not as in the world.

[6] From this it is plain what is meant by “not entering into the house, but standing outside and taking a pledge,” namely, that one should not bind or incite another to confirm one’s own truths, but should hear him and take his answers as they are in himself. For he who binds and incites another to confirm his own truths, causes the other not to think and speak from himself, but from him. And when anyone thinks and speaks from another, the truths he has are thrown into disorder, and yet he is not amended, except in the case of one who is as yet ignorant of these truths. From all this it is again clear that in every detail of the Word there are things which correspond to such as are in the spiritual world.

1999. Abram fell upon his faces. ¹ That this signifies adoration, is evident without explication. To fall upon the face was a rite of adoration in the Most Ancient Church, and thence in that of the Ancients, for the reason that the face signified the interiors, and the state of their humiliation was represented by falling upon the face; hence in the Jewish representative church it became a customary ceremonial. True adoration, or humiliation of heart, carries with it prostration to the earth upon the face before the Lord, as a gesture naturally flowing from it. For in humiliation of heart there is the acknowledgment of self as being nothing but filthiness, and at the same time the acknowledgment of the Lord’s infinite mercy toward that which is such; and when the mind is kept in these two acknowledgments, the very mind droops in lowliness toward hell, and prostrates the body; nor does it uplift itself until it is uplifted by the Lord. This takes place in all true humiliation, with a perception of being uplifted by the Lord’s mercy. Such was the humiliation of the men of the Most Ancient Church; but very different is the case with that adoration which comes not from humiliation of the heart. (See n. 1153.)

[2] That the Lord adored and prayed to Jehovah His Father, is known from the Word of the Gospels; and also that He did so as if to one different from Himself, although Jehovah was in Him. But the state in which the Lord was at these times was His state of humiliation, the nature of which has been stated in Part First, namely, that He was then in the infirm human that was from the mother; but insofar as He put this off, and put on the Divine, He was in another state, which is called His state of glorification. In the former state He adored Jehovah as one different from Himself, although in Himself; for, as has been said, His internal was Jehovah; but in the latter, that is, in His state of glorification, He spoke with Jehovah as with Himself, for He was Jehovah Himself.

[3] But how the case is with these matters cannot be apprehended unless it is known what the internal is, and how the internal acts into the external; and further, in what manner the internal and the external are distinct from each other, and yet are conjoined. This, however, may be illustrated by something that is similar, namely, by the internal in man, and by its influx and operation into the external. That man has an internal, an interior or rational, and an external, may be seen above (n. 1889, 1940). Man’s internal is that from which he is man, and by which he is distinguished from brute animals. By means of this internal he lives after death, and to eternity a man, and by means of it he can be uplifted by the Lord among the angels. This internal is the very first form from which a man becomes and is man, and by means of it the Lord is united to man. The very heaven that is nearest the Lord is composed of these human internals; but this is above even the inmost angelic heaven, and therefore these internals belong to the Lord Himself. By this means the whole human race is most present under the Lord’s eyes, for there is no distance in heaven, such as appears in the sublunary world, and still less is there any distance above heaven. (See what is said from experience, n. 1275, 1277.)

[4] These internals of men have no life in themselves, but are forms recipient of the Lord’s life. Insofar therefore as a man is in evil, whether actual or hereditary, so far has he been as it were separated from this internal which is the Lord’s and with the Lord, and thereby so far has he been separated from the Lord; for although this internal has been adjoined to man, and is inseparable from him, nevertheless insofar as he recedes from the Lord, so far he as it were separates himself from it. (See n. 1594.) But the separation is not an absolute sundering from it, for then the man could no longer live after death; but it is a dissent and disagreement on the part of those faculties of his which are below, that is, of his rational and of his external man. Insofar as there is dissent and disagreement, there is disjunction from the Lord; but insofar as there is not dissent and disagreement, the man is conjoined with the Lord through the internal, which takes place insofar as the man is in love and charity, for love and charity conjoin. Such is the case with man.

[5] But the Lord’s internal was Jehovah Himself, because He was conceived from Jehovah, who cannot be divided and become another’s, as is the case with a son who is conceived from a human father; for the Divine is not divisible, like the human, but is and remains one and the same. To this internal the Lord united the Human Essence; and because the Lord’s internal was Jehovah, it was not a form recipient of life, like the internal of man, but was life itself. His Human Essence also in like manner was made life by the unition, on which account the Lord so often said that He is Life, as in John:

As the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself (John 5:26); besides other passages in the same gospel (John 1:4; 5:21; 6:33, 35, 48; 11:25).

Insofar therefore as the Lord was in the human which He received by inheritance from the mother, so far did He appear distinct from Jehovah and adore Jehovah as one different from Himself. But insofar as the Lord put off this human, He was not distinct from Jehovah, but was one with Him. The former state, as before said, was the Lord’s state of humiliation; but the latter was His state of glorification.

Poznámky pod čarou: