737. 'Noah was a son of six hundred years' means his initial state of temptation. This is clear from the fact from here down to Eber in Chapter 11 nothing else is meant by numbers, years of age, or names than real things, as was the case also with the ages and names of all those mentioned in Chapter 5. Here 'six hundred years' means the initial state of temptation. This becomes clear from its prime factors which are ten and six multiplied again by ten. When the same factors are involved it makes no difference whether the number arrived at is large or small. As for ten, this has been shown already at 6:3 to mean remnants, while the meaning of six here as labour and conflict is clear from places throughout the Word. For the situation is this: What has gone before dealt with man's preparation for temptation, that is to say, he was supplied by the Lord with truths of the understanding and with goods of the will. These truths and goods are remnants, but they are not brought forth so as to be acknowledged until man is being regenerated. In the case of those who are being regenerated by means of temptations the remnants existing with any man are for the angels present with him. From these remnants they draw out those things with which they protect him against the evil spirits who activate falsities with him and in this way attack him. It is because remnants are meant by 'ten' and conflict by 'six' that six hundred years are spoken of, a number in which ten and six are the prime factors and which means a state of temptation.

[2] As regards conflict being the particular meaning of 'six', this is clear from Genesis 1, which describes the six days of man's regeneration prior to his becoming celestial. During those six days there was constant conflict, but on the seventh day came rest. Consequently there are six days of labour, and the seventh is the sabbath, a word which means rest. This also is why a Hebrew slave was to serve for six years and in the seventh was to go free, Exodus 21:2; Deuteronomy 15:12; Jeremiah 34:14, and why for six years they were to sow the land and gather in the produce, but in the seventh they were to leave it alone, Exodus 23:10-12. The same applied to a vineyard. It is also the reason why in the seventh year the land was to have a sabbath of rest, a sabbath to Jehovah, Leviticus 25:3-4. Because 'six' means labour and conflict it also means the dispersion of falsity, as in Ezekiel,

Behold, six men coming from the direction of the upper gate, which looks towards the north, every man with a weapon of dispersion in his hand. Ezekiel 9:2.

And in the same prophet, against Gog,

I will cause you to turn about, and I will split you into six, and cause you to come up from the uttermost parts of the north. Ezekiel 39:2.

Here 'six' and 'splitting into six' stand for dispersion, 'the north' for falsities, and 'Gog' for people who seize on doctrinal matters based on things of an external nature with which they destroy internal worship. From Job,

He will deliver you in six troubles, and in a seventh no evil will touch you. Job 5:19.

This stands for the conflict that constitutes temptations.

[3] 'Six' occurs in other parts of the Word where it does not mean labour, conflict, or the dispersion of falsity, but the holiness of faith. In these instances it is related to twelve, which means faith and all things of faith in their entirety, and to three which means that which is holy. Consequently there is also a genuine derivative meaning to the number six, as in Ezekiel 40:5, where the man's measuring rod with which he measured the holy city of Israel was six cubits long; and in other places. The reason for this derivative is that in the conflict of temptation the holiness of faith is present, and also that six days of labour and conflict look forward to the holy seventh day.

4741. 'That they stripped Joseph of his tunic' means that they removed and annihilated the appearances of truth. This is clear from the meaning of 'stripping', when used in reference to Divine Truth represented here by 'Joseph', as removing and also annihilating; and from the meaning of 'tunic', because this consisted of various colours, as appearances of truth, dealt with in 4677. The removal and annihilation of the appearances of truth takes place once truth itself has been cast aside, for truth itself cannot but shine in people's minds, and no matter how much it is blotted out it remains visible, especially to those who are governed by good. Those who have annihilated truth see it too, and therefore they try to remove and annihilate even those appearances of it.

[2] Take an example to illustrate this. Who does not see that willing what is good and doing it is the whole essence of the Christian life? And if anyone is told that this is charity he is bound to agree. Indeed all who agree will go on to say that they know what willing and doing good is because this is a matter of life. But as for thinking, by the confidence imparted through faith, that this or that is true, as the adherents to faith separated from charity wish to do, they will say that they do not know what this is, for they can have no other conception of it than of smoke which vanishes. Now since faith alone and the confidence it imparts is seen to be like this by all who think seriously about it, especially by the good, those adherents to faith separated from charity strive to remove and annihilate even those appearances by cutting away every idea that is close to Divine Truth or in the neighbourhood of it. This is what is meant by stripping Joseph of the tunic that was on him.

[3] The same people also believe that those persons are wiser than all others who, once they have accepted some dogma, can substantiate it in various ways, and use various reasonings to present it as the truth. This however is anything but the mark of one who is wise. Anyone who is clever enough can do it, the wicked being more expert at it than the upright. Nor indeed is it the mark of a rational man; for a rational man can see from so to speak a higher viewpoint whether it is truth that is being substantiated or whether it is falsity. And this being what he sees he is quite unmoved by arguments substantiating falsity but regards them as senseless and absurd, no matter how much another person believes they are the result of wrestling to obtain pure wisdom. In short, it is anything but the mark of one who is wise, indeed anything but rationality, to be able to substantiate falsities; for it is the mark of a wise one, and it is rationality, when something is first seen to be the truth and is substantiated only after that. That is to say, seeing the truth implies seeing it by the light of heaven which comes from the Lord, but seeing falsity as truth implies seeing it by the inferior light which comes from hell.