10283. 'It shall not be poured onto the flesh of a person' means no imparting [of what is the Lord's] to a person's proprium or self. This is clear from the meaning of 'the flesh of a person' as his proprium, dealt with below; and from the meaning of 'pouring onto' as imparting to. For 'pouring' has a similar meaning to 'touching'; but 'pouring' is used in connection with liquids, namely oil, wine, and water, and 'pouring out' in connection with Divine, heavenly, and spiritual realities, whereas 'touching' is used in connection with dry substances and with bodily things. For the meaning of 'touching' as imparting, see 10130. From this it follows that 'the anointing oil shall not be poured onto the flesh of a person' means that there is no imparting of the Divine Good of the Lord's Divine Love to a person's proprium or self, because a person's proprium is nothing but evil and the Lord's Divine Good cannot be imparted to what is evil.

A person's proprium or self is nothing but evil, see 210, 215, 694, 731, 874-876, 987, 1023, 1024, 1047, 5660, 5786, 8480.

[2] One part of the human proprium belongs to the will and the other part to the understanding; the will part consists of evil, and the understanding part of falsity arising from this. The former - the will part of the proprium - is meant by human flesh, and the understanding part by the blood of that flesh. The truth of this is clear from the following places: In Matthew,

Jesus said, Blessed are you, Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. Matthew 16:17.

It is plainly evident that 'flesh' here, and also 'blood', means the human proprium or self.

[3] In John,

As many as received Him, to them He gave power to be sons of God, who were born, not of blood ¹ , nor of the will of the flesh, but of God. John 1:12-13.

'Blood' here means falsities that come out of the understanding part of the human proprium, and 'the will of the flesh' evils that spring from the will part of it. For the meaning of 'blood' as falsity arising from evil, thus what is in the understanding part of the proprium as a result of what is in the will part, see 4735, 9127.

[4] In Isaiah,

I will feed your oppressors with their flesh and they will be drunk with their blood as with new wine. Isaiah 49:26.

'Feeding them with their flesh' and 'making them drunk with their blood' stands for filling them up with evil and the falsity of evil, thus with what is of the proprium or what is one's own; for both the evil and the falsity come out of the proprium.

[5] In Jeremiah,

Cursed is the man (homo) who trusts in man (homo) and makes flesh his arm. Jeremiah 17:5.

'Trusting in man and making flesh his arm' means trusting in oneself and one's proprium.

[6] In Isaiah,

The people have become as fuel for the fire. If any of them cuts down on the right he will be hungry, and if any eats on the left they will not be satisfied. Each will eat the flesh of his own arm ² ; Manasseh [will eat] Ephraim, and Ephraim Manasseh. Isaiah 9:19-21.

'Fuel for the fire' means making the evils or desires of self-love and love of the world one's own, 'being hungry' and 'not being satisfied' mean not accepting the good or the truth of faith, and 'the flesh of his arm' means both parts of the human proprium, 'Manasseh' meaning evil in the will, 'Ephraim' falsity in the understanding, and 'eating' making one's own.

'Fire' means the evils or desires of self-love and love of the world, see 5071, 5215, 6314, 6832, 7324, 7575, 9141.

The reason why 'being hungry' and 'not being satisfied' mean not accepting the good or the truth of faith is that 'hunger' or famine and 'thirst' mean desolation with regard to goodness and truth, 5360, 5376, 6110, 7102, 8568(end).

'The right' means good from which truth emanates, and 'the left' truth through which good comes, 10061; consequently 'being hungry if any of them cuts down on the right, and not being satisfied if any eats on the left' means that no matter how much instruction they may receive about goodness and truth they will not accept them.

[7] 'Manasseh' means good in the will, 5351, 5353, 5354(end), 6222, 6234, 6238, 6267, and 'Ephraim' truth in the understanding, 3969, 5354, 6222, 6234, 6238, 6267, so that in the contrary sense 'Manasseh' means evil in the will and 'Ephraim' falsity in the understanding, since almost everything in the Word also has a contrary meaning.

'Eating' means making one's own, 3168, 3513(end), 3596, 4745, from which it is evident what 'eating the flesh of his own arm' means, namely making evil and falsity originating in the proprium one's own.

The expression 'flesh of the arm' is used because 'the arm', like 'the hand', means the powers present in a person, in which he puts his trust, see in the places referred to in 10019.

[8] In Zechariah,

I said, I will not feed you. Let the one that is dying die; [the sheep] that are left will eat, every one the flesh of another. Zechariah 11:9.

'Not feeding' stands for not teaching and reforming, 'dying' for loss of spiritual life, and 'eating the flesh of another' for making evils originating in the proprium of another one's own.

[9] In Ezekiel,

Jerusalem committed whoredom with the sons of Egypt, her neighbours, the great in flesh. Ezekiel 16:26.

'Jerusalem' stands for the perverted Church, 'committing whoredom with the sons of Egypt, the great in flesh' for falsifying the Church's truths by means of factual knowledge which begins in the natural man alone, thus by means of factual knowledge based on sensory evidence.

'Jerusalem' means the Church, see 402, 2117, 3654, in this instance the Church when it has been perverted.

'Committing whoredom' means falsifying truths, 2466, 2729, 8904.

'Sons' means truths, or else falsities, 1147, 3373, 4257, 9807.

'Egypt' means factual knowledge, in either [a good or a bad] sense, see in the places referred to in 9340, and also the natural, in the places referred to in 9391.

Consequently the words 'the great in flesh' describe people who, relying on sensory evidence, reason and draw conclusions about the Church's truths. Those who do this lay hold of falsities as truths, for to rely on sensory evidence to reason and draw conclusions about anything is to rely on the illusions of the bodily senses. People therefore who are ruled by their senses are meant by 'the great in flesh'; for their own bodily perceptions govern their thinking.

[10] In Isaiah,

Egypt is man (homo) and not God, and his horses are flesh, but not spirit. Isaiah 31:3.

Here also 'Egypt' stands for factual knowledge, 'his horses' for a power of understanding consisting of this. That power is called 'flesh, not spirit' when people use what is their own and not God's to draw conclusions.

By 'horses' is meant the power of understanding, see 2761, 2762, 3217, 5321, 6534, and by 'the horses of Egypt' factual knowledge supplied from a perverted understanding, 6125, 8146, 8148.

[11] The fact that 'flesh' means a person's proprium or selfhood, or what amounts to the same thing, his own evil will, is clear in Moses, where the subject is the Israelite people's desire for flesh to eat, described as follows,

The rabble who were in the midst of the people had a strong craving and said, Who will feed us with flesh? Jehovah said, Tomorrow you will eat flesh. Not for one day will you eat it, nor for two days, nor for five days, nor for ten days, nor for twenty days, [but] for a whole month. And a wind set out from Jehovah, and it cut off the quails from the sea and sent them down ³ over the camp, about two cubits above the surface of the land. The people rose up that whole day, and the whole night, and the whole of the next day, and gathered them and spread them out all around the camp. The flesh was still between their teeth, before it could be swallowed, and Jehovah's anger flared up against the people, and He struck the people with an extremely great plague. So he called the name of the place The Graves of Craving. Numbers 11:4, 18-20, 31-34.

[12] The fact that 'flesh' meant that nation's proprium becomes clear from every detail in these verses; for unless this had been meant what evil could there have been in their desire for flesh, especially as flesh had been promised them on a previous occasion, Exodus 16:12? But since it meant the proprium, thus an evil will, which that nation possessed in greater measure than other nations, it says - when they desired flesh - that they 'had a strong craving', on account of which they were struck with a great plague, and on account of which the place where they were buried was called The Graves of Craving. Whether you speak of an evil will or of craving, it amounts to the same thing, for an evil will consists in craving. The human proprium has no desire for anything apart from what belongs to itself; it has no desire for anything that concerns the neighbour or anything that concerns God, unless this is beneficial to itself. Since that nation was like this it says that they would eat flesh not for one day, not for two, not for five, nor for ten, nor for twenty, but for a whole month, meaning that this nation would be like that forever (for 'a whole month' means forever); and for the same reason it says that while the flesh was still between their teeth, before it could be swallowed, they were struck with a great plague. For by 'teeth' the bodily level of the proprium, the lowest of a person's mind, is meant, 4424(end), 5565-5568, 9062. The fact that this nation was like this may be seen in the places referred to in 9380, and in the Song of Moses, at Deuteronomy 32:20, 22-26, 28, 32-34.

[13] In the Word spirit is set in contrast to flesh, for 'spirit' means life from the Lord and 'flesh' life from man, as in John,

It is the Spirit which bestows life, the flesh does not profit anything. The words that I speak to you, they are spirit and they are life. John 6:63.

From this it is clear that 'spirit' means life from the Lord, which is the life of love to Him and faith in Him, received from Him, and that 'flesh' means life from man, thus his selfhood. This is why it says 'the flesh does not profit anything'. Something similar is meant elsewhere in John,

That which has been born from the flesh is flesh, but that which has been born from the spirit is spirit. John 3:6.

In David,

God remembered that they were flesh; a spirit which would pass away would not come back. Psalms 78:39.

[14] Since 'flesh' in reference to man means his proprium, which consists of the evil of self-love and love of the world, it is evident what 'flesh' means when used in reference to the Lord, namely His Proprium, which consists of the Divine Good of Divine Love. This is what 'the Lord's flesh' means in John,

The bread which I will give you is My flesh. Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you will have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life; for My flesh is truly food and My blood is truly drink. John 6:51, 53-55.

'The flesh' of the Lord means the Divine Good of His Divine Love, and 'the blood' the Divine Truth emanating from that Divine Good, so that they are similar in meaning to the bread and wine in the Holy Supper; and those Divine Realities are His own, present within His Divine Human, see 1001, 3813, 4735, 6978, 7317, 7326, 7850, 9127, 9393, 10026, 10033, 10152. Also, the sacrifices represented forms of good that originate in the Lord, and therefore the flesh of those sacrifices meant forms of good, 10040, 10079. Furthermore, various places in the Word use the expression 'all flesh', by which every human being should be understood, as in Genesis 6:12-13, 17, 19; Isaiah 40:5-6; 49:26; 66:16, 23-24; Jeremiah 25:31; 32:27; 45:5; Ezekiel 20:48; 21:4-5; and elsewhere.

Poznámky pod čarou:

5351. 'And Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh' means a new area of will within the natural, and the essential nature of it. This is clear from the representation of 'Manasseh' in the Word as spiritual good within the natural, and so a new area of will there, dealt with below. This name also implies the essential nature of that good or new area of will. The fact that the name implies the essential nature of this may be recognized from the names given to other people. An explanation of the essential nature accompanies each name, like that given for Manasseh in the following words, For God has made me forget all my labour and all my father's house. These words describe the essential nature of what is meant by 'Manasseh'. What is more, when the phrase 'he called the name' is used, the meaning is that the actual name too contains that essential nature, since 'name' and 'calling the name' mean the essential nature, 144, 145, 1754, 1896, 2009, 2724, 3006, 3421.

[2] The reason why the firstborn who was given the name Manasseh means spiritual good within the natural, or a new area of will there, is that good is in actual fact the firstborn in the Church. That is, with someone who is in the process of becoming a Church, truth is not the firstborn, though it appears to be so, see 352, 367, 2435, 3325, 3494, 4925, 4926, 4928, 4930. The same may also be recognized from the consideration that a person's will takes precedence over his understanding; for the desires in a person's will are the primary constituents of his life, while the ideas in his understanding are secondary to them; and he acts in accordance with the desires of his will. What goes forth from the will is called good in the case of those who through regeneration have received from the Lord a new will; but it is called evil in the case of those who have had no wish to receive such. What goes forth from the understanding however is called truth in the case of the regenerate but falsity in the case of the unregenerate. But because no knowledge of a person's will is possible except through his understanding - for the understanding is the outward form that the will possesses or the outward form taken by the will which enables it to be known - people therefore imagine that truth which goes forth from the understanding is the firstborn. But this is nothing else than the appearance, for the reason that has been stated.

[3] This explains the controversy that existed in former times over whether the truth which is the essence of faith was the firstborn of the Church or whether good which is the essence of charity was such. Those who based their conclusions on the appearance said that truth was the firstborn, whereas those who did not base theirs on the appearance acknowledged that good was. This also explains why at the present day people make faith the primary and absolutely essential constituent of the Church, but charity the secondary and non-essential element. But by supposing that faith alone is what saves a person they have sunk into far deeper error than the ancients. (In the Church faith is used to mean all the truth of doctrine, while charity is used to mean all the good of life.) They do, it is true, call charity and the works of charity the fruits of faith. Yet does anyone believe that those fruits make any contribution to salvation when the belief exists that someone can be saved by faith in the final hour of his life, no matter what kind of life he led before then? More than this, does anyone believe that those fruits contribute in any way to salvation when people use doctrine to set faith apart from works that are the product of charity, saying that faith alone saves without good works, or that works which are matters of life contribute nothing to salvation? Dear, dear! What kind of faith is that, and what kind of Church is it when people cherish faith that is dead and reject faith that is living? For faith without charity is like a body without a soul. But a body without a soul is removed from sight and put away because it stinks, as everyone knows; and in the next life faith without charity is just like this. All who possessed faith so-called which was devoid of charity are in hell; but all who had charity are in heaven. For everyone's life remains with him, whereas doctrine does so only insofar as it draws on that life.

[4] It is less easy to show from other places in the Word that 'Manasseh' means a new area of will within the natural - or what amounts to the same, spiritual good there - than it is to show that 'Ephraim' means a new area of understanding within the natural, or spiritual truth there. Even so, inferences can be drawn regarding the meaning of 'Manasseh' from what is said about 'Ephraim', because in the Word when two are mentioned together in the way these are, one means good, the other truth. Therefore Manasseh's meaning - spiritual good within the natural, which is the essence of the new will there - will be seen in what follows shortly where Ephraim is the subject.