5365. And the people cried unto Pharaoh for bread. That this signifies the need of good for truth, is evident from the signification of “crying,” as being the act of a person in grief and mourning, thus being that of a person in need; from the signification of “people,” as being truth (see n. 1259, 1260, 3295, 3581); from the representation of Pharaoh, as being the natural (n. 5079, 5080, 5095, 5160); and from the signification of “bread,” as being the celestial of love, thus good (n. 276, 680, 2165, 2177, 3464, 3478, 3735, 3813, 4211, 4217, 4735, 4976). From this it follows that by “the people cried unto Pharaoh for bread” is signified the need in the natural of good for truth. This meaning indeed appears remote from the historic sense of the letter; but still when they who are in the internal sense understand by “crying,” by “people,” by “Pharaoh,” and by “bread,” nothing else than what has been said, it follows that this meaning results therefrom.

[2] How the case is in regard to the need of good for truth, must be told. Truth has need of good, and good has need of truth; and when truth has need of good, truth is conjoined with good, and when good has need of truth, good is conjoined with truth; for the reciprocal conjunction of good and truth, namely of truth with good and of good with truth, is the heavenly marriage. In the early stages of man’s regeneration, truth is multiplied, but not good; and as truth has then no good with which to be conjoined, it is drawn in and stored up in the interiors of the natural mind, that it may be called forth thence according to the increasings of good. In this state truth is in need of good, and moreover conjunction of truth with good takes place according to the inflow of good into the natural; but still no fruitfulness is effected by this conjunction. But when man has been regenerated, then good increases; and as it increases it is in need of truth, and also procures truth for itself with which it may be conjoined, and thereupon there is a conjunction of good with truth. When this takes place, truth is made fruitful from good, and good from truth.

[3] That this is the case is entirely unknown in the world, but is very well known in heaven; and yet were it known in the world (not only by knowledge but also by perception) what celestial love or love to the Lord is, and what spiritual love or charity toward the neighbor is, it would also be known what good is, for all good is of these loves; and moreover it would be known that good desires truth, and truth good, and that they are conjoined according to the desire and its quality. This might be plain from the fact that when truth is thought of, the good adjoined to it is presented at the same time; and when good is stirred, the truth adjoined to it is presented at the present time-in both cases with affection, desire, delight, or holy aspiration; and from this the quality of the conjunction might be known. But as it is not known from any inward sensation or perception what good is, such things cannot come to knowledge; for that about which nothing is known is not understood, even when it comes to view.

[4] And as it is not known what spiritual good is, and that it is charity toward the neighbor, therefore it is a matter of dispute in the world, especially among the learned, what is the highest good; and scarcely anyone has maintained that it is that delight, satisfaction, blessedness, and happiness which is perceived from mutual love devoid of any selfish or worldly end, and which makes heaven itself. From this also it is plain that in the world at this day it is not at all known what spiritual good is, and still less that good and truth form a marriage together, and that heaven is in this marriage, and that those who are in it are in wisdom and intelligence and have satisfactions and happinesses with unlimited and inexpressible variety, not one of which is known by the world, nor is its existence even recognized and believed; when in fact it is heaven itself, or that very heavenly joy of which so much is said in the church.

5095. Of the king of Egypt. That this signifies which were subordinate to the interior natural, is evident from the representation of Pharaoh or the king of Egypt in this chapter, as being a new state of the natural (n. 5079, 5080), consequently the interior natural, for this was made new. What the interior natural is, and what the exterior, may be seen just above (n. 5094). What is the nature of the internal sense in the historic and prophetic portions of the Word, must be briefly told. Where several persons are mentioned in the historic sense-as here Joseph, Pharaoh, the prince of the guards, the butler and the baker-in the internal sense they indeed signify various things; but only in one person. The reason is that names signify things, as for instance Joseph here represents the Lord as to the celestial spiritual from the rational and also in the natural, Pharaoh represents Him as to the new state of the natural or as to the interior natural, the butler and the baker represent Him as to those things which are of the exterior natural. Such is the internal sense; and it is the same in other places, as where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are mentioned. In the sense of the letter these are three persons, but in the supreme sense all three represent the Lord-Abraham the Divine Itself, Isaac the Divine intellectual, and Jacob His Divine natural. It is the same in the prophets, where sometimes the narration consists of mere names, such as those of persons, kingdoms, or cities, and yet in the internal sense these names together present and describe one thing. One who is not aware of this may easily be led away by the sense of the letter into thinking of a variety of things, and thus the idea of one thing is dissipated.