7424. And there was louse on man and on beast. That this signifies that interior and exterior evils of cupidities were thence derived, is evident from the signification of “lice,” as being evils (see n. 7419); and from the signification of “man,” as being good (n. 4287, 5302), thus in the opposite sense evil; and from the signification of “beast,” as being the affection of good, and in the opposite sense the affection of evil, or cupidity (n. 45, 46, 142, 143, 246, 714, 715, 719, 776, 2179, 2180, 3218, 3519, 5198); but when “man and beast” are mentioned together, then by “man” is signified interior good, and in the opposite sense interior evil; and by “beast” exterior good, and in the opposite sense exterior evil. The reason why by “man” is signified interior good, or evil, is that he is man from his internal man and its quality, but not from the external man; for the external man is not man without the internal; and in order that the external may also be man, it must be wholly subordinated to the internal, insomuch that it does not act from itself, but from the internal man. The reason why by “beast” is signified exterior good, and in the opposite sense exterior evil, is that beasts have no internal such as man has; the internal which they have has been immersed in the external, insomuch that it is one with it, and together with it looks downward or toward the earth, without any elevation toward what is interior. It is said “evils of cupidities” because all evils belong to cupidities, because cupidities belong to loves. Interior evils are distinguished from exterior by the fact that interior evils are those which are of the thought and will; and exterior evils are those which are of act. That there may be evils which are interior and not exterior, is evident from the fact that a man may be evil, and yet in the outward form may appear as an upright man, and even as a man of faith and conscience. Some also know how to counterfeit angels, when yet inwardly they are devils. So far can the inward form which is of the spirit differ from the outward form which is of the body.

3519. And take me from thence two good kids of the she-goats. That this signifies the truths of this good, is evident from the signification of “kids of the she-goats,” as being the truths of good, concerning which in what follows. The reason there were two, is that as in the rational, so in the natural, there are things which are of the will and things which are of the understanding. The things in the natural that have relation to the will are delights, and those which have relation to the understanding are memory-knowledges, and in order to be something these two must be conjoined together.

[2] That “kids of the she-goats” signify the truths of good, may be seen from those passages of the Word where “kids” and “she-goats” are mentioned. Be it known that in the genuine sense all the tame and useful beasts mentioned in the Word signify the celestial things of good and the spiritual things of truth (see n. 45, 46, 142, 143, 246, 714, 715, 2180, 2781, 3218); and because there are various kinds of celestial things or goods, and consequently various kinds of spiritual things or truths, one kind is signified by one beast, and another by another; thus one kind is signified by a “lamb,” another by a “kid,” another by a “sheep,” by a “she-goat,” a “ram,” a “he-goat,” a “bullock,” an “ox;” another also by a “horse” and by a “camel;” another likewise by birds; and also another by the beasts of the sea, as by “whales” and “fishes.” There are more genera of celestial and spiritual things than can be enumerated, consequently of goods and truths, although when the celestial or good is mentioned, and also the spiritual or truth, it appears as if it were not manifold, but only one. But how manifold they both are, or how innumerable their genera are, may be seen from what has been said concerning heaven (n. 3241), namely, that it is distinguished into innumerable societies, and this according to the genera of celestial and spiritual things, or of the goods of love and thence of the truths of faith; and moreover every single genus of good, and every single genus of truth, has innumerable species into which the societies of each genus are distinguished, and every species in like manner.

[3] The most universal genera of good and truth are what were represented by the animals that were offered in the burnt-offerings and sacrifices; and because the genera are most distinct from one another it was expressly enjoined that such and no other should be offered-in some cases, for instance, male and female lambs, also male and female kids; in some cases rams and sheep, and also he-goats; but in others, calves, bullocks, and oxen; also pigeons and turtle-doves (n. 922, 1823, 2180, 2805, 2807, 2830, 3218). What was signified by “kids” and “she-goats” may be seen both from the sacrifices in which they were offered, and also from other passages in the Word; whence it is evident that male and female “lambs” signified the innocence of the internal or rational man, and that “kids” and “she-goats” signified the innocence of the external or natural man, thus the truth and good thereof.

[4] That the truth and good of the innocence of the external or natural man is signified by “kids” and “she-goats” is evident from the following passages in the Word.

In Isaiah:

The wolf shall abide with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf, and the young lion, and the sheep ¹ together; and a little child shall lead them (Isaiah 11:6); where the Lord’s kingdom is treated of, and a state of no fear from evil, or of no dread on account of hell, because one of presence with the Lord. The “lamb” and the “kid” denote those who are in innocence, and because these are the safest of all, they are mentioned first.

[5] When all the firstborn of Egypt were smitten, it was commanded that they should slay perfect and male young of the flock, of lambs or of kids, and should put some of the blood on the door-posts and on the lintel of the houses, and thus there should not be a plague on them from the destroyer (Exodus 12:5, 7, 13). The “firstborn of Egypt” denotes the good of love and charity extinct (n. 3325); “lambs” and “kids” are states of innocence; and those who are in these states are safe from evil, for all in heaven are protected by the Lord through states of innocence; and this protection was represented by the slaying of a lamb or kid, and by the blood upon the door-posts and lintel of the houses.

[6] When Jehovah appeared to anyone through an angel, a kid of the goats was sacrificed, lest the man should die-as when he appeared to Gideon (Judges 6:19), and to Manoah (13:15-16, 19). The reason was that Jehovah or the Lord cannot appear to anyone, not even to an angel, unless he to whom He appears is in a state of innocence; and therefore as soon as the Lord is present with anyone he is let into a state of innocence; for the Lord enters through innocence, even with the angels in heaven. On this account no one can come into heaven unless he has somewhat of innocence, according to the words of the Lord in Matthew 18:3; Mark 10:15; Luke 18:17. That men believed they should die when Jehovah appeared, unless they offered such a burnt-offering may be seen in Judges 13:22-23.

[7] Inasmuch as genuine conjugial love is innocence (see n. 2736), it was customary in the representative church to enter in unto a wife by a present of a kid of the she-goats; as we read of Samson (Judges 15:1); likewise of Judah when he went in unto Tamar (Genesis 38:17, 20, 23). That a “kid” and a “she-goat” signified innocence, is also evident from the sacrifices of guilt, which they were to offer when anyone had sinned through error (Leviticus 1:10; 4:28; 5:6); sin through error is a sin of ignorance in which is innocence. The same is evident from the following Divine command in Moses:

The first of the first-fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring into the house of Jehovah thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk (Exodus 23:19; 34:26); where by the “first-fruits of the ground, which they were to bring into the house of Jehovah,” is signified the state of innocence which is in infancy; and by “not seething a kid in its mother’s milk,” that they should not destroy the innocence of infancy. Because these things are signified, in both passages the one command follows the other without a break; and yet in the literal sense they appear to be altogether different; but in the internal sense they cohere together.

[8] Because as before said “kids” and “she-goats” signified innocence, it was also commanded that the curtain of the tent over the tabernacle should be made of the wool of she-goats (Exodus 25:4; 26:7; 35:5-6, 23, 26; 36:14), for a sign that all the holy things therein represented derived their essence from innocence. By the “wool of she-goats” is signified the ultimate or outermost of the innocence that is in ignorance, such as exists with the Gentiles; and who in the internal sense are the “curtains” of the tabernacle. From all this it is evident what and of what quality are the truths of good that are signified by the “two good kids of the she-goats” concerning which Rebekah his mother spoke unto Jacob her son, namely, that they are those of innocence or of infancy, being in fact those which Esau was to bring to his father Isaac; concerning which above (n. 3501, 3508); and which indeed were not these truths of good, but at first appeared as if they were; and it is for this reason that by means of these Jacob simulated Esau.

脚注: