6148. 'Only the ground of the priests he did not buy' means that the internal obtained for itself from the natural every capacity to receive good, because every such capacity came from itself. This is clear from the representation of 'Joseph', about whom these things are said, as the internal, dealt with already; from the meaning of 'the ground' as the receptacle of truth, dealt with above in 6135-6137, at this point the capacity to receive good, for the capacity of something is its inherent ability to receive, which causes a receptacle to be a receptacle (that capacity comes from good, that is, from the Lord through good, for if the good of love did not flow in from the Lord no one would ever have the capacity to receive truth or good. That inflow of the good of love from the Lord causes everything present inwardly in a person to be of a receptive nature. The truth that the capacity to receive good comes from the natural is meant by the fact that the ground lay in Egypt, since 'Egypt' means the natural in respect of factual knowledge, 6142); from the meaning of 'the priests' as good, dealt with below; and from the meaning of 'not buying' as not taking those capacities to itself - not in the way that it made truths and forms of the good of truth, together with their receptacles, its own, which came about through periods of desolation and sustainment - for the reason that those capacities came from itself, from the internal. All these meanings serve to show that 'only the ground of the priests he did not buy' means that the internal obtained for itself from the natural every capacity to receive good, because every such capacity came from itself.

[2] The implications of all this are that a person's capacities to receive truth and good come directly from the Lord; he obtains them without any help at all from himself. A person's capacity to receive goodness and truth is maintained in him unceasingly; and from that capacity he possesses understanding and will. But a person does not receive them if he turns to evil. The capacity to receive does, it is true, remain, but its access to thought and sensitivity is blocked, on account of which his capacity to see what is true and have a sensitive awareness of what is good perishes. And it perishes to the extent that he turns to evil and in faith and life becomes firmly settled in it. The fact that a person contributes nothing whatever to his capacity to receive truth and good is well known from the Church's teaching that nothing at all of the truth of faith and nothing at all of the good of charity comes from man but from the Lord. Yet a person can destroy that capacity residing with him. From all this one may now see how one should understand the idea that the internal obtained for itself from the natural every capacity to receive good, because every such capacity came from itself. The expression 'from the natural' is used because the inflow of good from the Lord is effected by the Lord through the internal into the natural; and once the capacity to receive has been obtained from there, the inflow takes place, for now there is reception, see 5828.

[3] So far as the meaning of 'the priests' as forms of good is concerned, it should be recognized that there are two realities which go forth from the Lord - goodness and truth. Divine Good was represented by priests, and Divine Truth by kings; and this is why 'the priests' means forms of good and 'the kings' truths. Regarding the attribution of Priesthood and Kingship to the Lord, see 1728, 2015 (end), 3670. In the representative Ancient Church those two offices of priest and king existed jointly in one personage, the reason for this being that goodness and truth which go forth from the Lord are united; and they are also joined together in heaven among the angels.

[4] A personage in the Ancient Church in whom the two offices existed joined together was called Melchizedek, a name meaning king of righteousness. This may be seen from the following statement about Melchizedek who came to Abraham, ¹

Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; and he was a priest to God Most High. And he blessed Abraham. Genesis 14:18-19.

His representation of the Lord in both offices is evident from the fact that he was a king and at the same time a priest, and from the fact that he was allowed to bless Abraham and offer him bread and wine, which even at that time were the symbols of the good of love and the truth of faith. His representation of the Lord in both offices is further evident in David,

Jehovah has sworn and will not repent, You are a priest for ever after the manner of Melchizedek. Psalms 110:4.

These words were spoken in reference to the Lord. 'After the manner of Melchizedek' means that He is both King and Priest, that is, in the highest sense that Divine Good and Divine Truth go forth together from Him.

[5] Because a representative Church was going to be established also among the descendants of Jacob, they too were to have a single personage to represent jointly Divine Good and Divine Truth, which go forth from the Lord united. But on account of the wars and the idolatry of that people the two were in fact divided right from the start; those who ruled over the attended to sacred duties were referred to as the priests, who belonged to the seed of Aaron and were the Levites. At a later time the two functions were joined together in a single person, as they were in Eli and Samuel. Yet because the nature of the people was such that the representative Church could not be established among them, only a representative of the Church, on account of the practice of idolatry prevalent among them, the two functions were allowed to be separated. The Lord was then represented in respect of Divine Truth by kings and in respect of Divine Good by priests. The separation took place because the people desired it, not because the Lord took any pleasure in it, as is clear from the Word of Jehovah to Samuel,

Obey the voice of the people in all that they have said to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them; and show them the right of the king. 1 Samuel 8:7-end; 12:19-20.

[6] The reason why the two functions were not meant to be separated was that Divine Truth separated from Divine Good condemns all people, whereas Divine Truth united to Divine Good saves them. Judged by Divine Truth a person is condemned to hell, but Divine Good brings him out of there and raises him into heaven. Salvation comes of mercy and so sprigs from Divine Good; but damnation exists when a person rejects mercy and so casts Divine Good away from himself, as a consequence of which he is left to be judged by Truth. As regards 'kings' representing Divine Truth, see 1672, 1728, 2015, 2069, 3009, 3670, 4575, 4581, 4966, 5044, 5068.

[7] 'The priests' represented the Lord in respect of Divine Good, and for that reason good is meant by them. This becomes clear from the internal sense of all that was prescribed regarding the priesthood when Aaron was chosen, and after him the Levites, such as these prescriptions:

The High Priest alone should enter the Holy of holies and minister there. [Leviticus 16.]

Things holy to Jehovah were to be for the priest. Leviticus 23:20; 27:21.

They were not to have any portion or inheritance in the land, but Jehovah would be their portion and inheritance. Numbers 18:20; Deuteronomy 10:9; 18:1.

The Levites were given to Jehovah instead of the firstborn, and they were given by Jehovah to Aaron. Numbers 3:9, 12-13, Numbers 3:40-end; 8:16-19.

The high priest and the Levites were to be in the middle of the camp when they pitched it and when they were journeying. Numbers 1:50-54; 2:17; 3:23-38; 4:1-end.

No one from the seed of Aaron who had a blemish in himself was to approach to offer burnt offerings or sacrifices. Leviticus 21:17-20.

And there are many other prescriptions besides these, such as those in Leviticus 21:9-13, and elsewhere.

[8] In the highest sense all these prescriptions relating to the priests represented the Lord's Divine Good and therefore in the relative sense the good of love and charity. Aaron's vestments however, called 'vestments of holiness', represented Divine Truth from Divine Good. These matters will in the Lord's Divine mercy be dealt with in the explanations of what appears in Exodus.

[9] Since truth is meant by 'kings' and good by 'priests', 'kings and priests' are mentioned together many times in the Word, as in John, Jesus Christ has made us kings and priests to His God and Father. Revelation 1:6; 5:10.

By virtue of the truth of faith we are said to have been made 'kings', and by virtue of the good of charity to have been made 'priests', so that the truth and good residing with those who abide in the Lord have been joined together, in the way they are in heaven, as stated above. This is what is meant by 'being made kings and priests'.

[10] In Jeremiah,

It will happen on that day, that the heart of the king and of the princes will perish, and the priests will be dumbfounded and the prophets left wondering. Jeremiah 4:9.

In the same prophet,

The house of Israel is ashamed, they, their kings, their princes, and their priests, and their prophets. Jeremiah 2:26.

In the same prophet,

The kings of Judah, the princes, the priests, and the prophets, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Jeremiah 8:1.

In these places 'kings stands for truths, 'princes' for first and foremost truths, 1482, 1089, 5044, 'priests' for forms of good, and 'prophets' for those who teach, 2534.

[11] Quite apart from this it should be recognized that Joseph did not buy the ground of the priests. The fact that this was representative of the consideration that the whole of a person's capacity to receive truth and good comes from the Lord is evident from a similar law in Moses regarding the fields belonging to the Levites,

The field of the country surrounding the cities of the Levites shall not be sold, for it is their eternal possession. Leviticus 25:34.

The meaning here in the internal sense is that no one ought to lay any claim to the good of the Church, which is the good of love and charity, because that good is from the Lord alone.

Footnotes:

4581. 'And he poured out a drink-offering onto it' means the Divine Good of Truth. This is clear from the meaning of 'a drink-offering' as the Divine Good of Truth, dealt with below. But first one must say what the good of truth is. The good of truth is that which elsewhere has been called the good of faith, which is love towards the neighbour, or charity. There are two universal kinds of good, the first being that which is called the good of faith, the second that which is referred to as the good of love. The good of faith is the kind of good meant by 'a drink-offering', and the good of love the kind meant by 'oil'. The good of love exists with those whom the Lord brings to what is good by an internal way, while the good of faith exists with those He brings to it by an external way. The good of love exists with members of the celestial Church, and likewise with angels of the inmost or third heaven, but the good of faith with members of the spiritual Church, and likewise with angels of the middle or second heaven. Consequently the first kind of good is called celestial good, whereas the second kind is called spiritual good. The difference between the two is, on the one hand, willing what is good out of a will for good and, on the other, willing what is good out of an understanding of it. The second kind of good therefore - spiritual good or the good of faith, which is the good of truth - is meant by 'a drink-offering'; but the first - celestial good or the good of love - is meant in the internal sense by 'oil'.

[2] Nobody, it is true, can see that such things as these were meant by 'oil' and 'a drink-offering' unless he does so from the internal sense. Yet anyone may see that things of a holy nature were represented by them, for unless those holy things were represented by them what else would pouring out a drink-offering or pouring oil onto a stone pillar be but some ridiculous and idolatrous action? It is like the coronation of a king. What else would the ceremonies performed on that occasion be if they did not mean and imply things of a holy nature - placing the crown on his head; anointing him with oil from a horn, on his forehead and on his wrists; placing a sceptre in his hand, as well as a sword and keys; investing him with a purple robe, and then seating him on a silver throne; and after that, his riding in his regalia on a horse, and later still his being served at table by men of distinction, besides many other ceremonies? Unless these represented things of a holy nature and were themselves holy by virtue of their correspondence with the things of heaven and consequently of the Church, they would be no more than the kind of games that young children play, though on a grander scale, or else like plays that are performed on the stage.

[3] But all those ceremonies trace their origin back to most ancient times when ceremonies were holy by virtue of their representation of things that were holy and of their correspondence with holy things in heaven and consequently in the Church. Even today they are considered holy, though not because people know their spiritual representation and correspondence but through the interpretation so to speak they put on symbols in common use. If however people did know what the crown, oil, horn, sceptre, sword, keys, purple robe, silver throne, riding on a white horse, and eating while men of distinction act as the servers, all represented and to what holy thing each corresponded, they would conceive of those things in an even holier way. But they do not know, and surprisingly do not wish to know; indeed that lack of knowledge is so great that the representatives and the meaningful signs included within such ceremonies and within every part of the Word have been obliterated from people's minds at the present day.

[4] The fact that 'a drink-offering' means the good of truth, or spiritual good, may be seen from the sacrifices in which drink-offerings were used. When sacrifices were offered they were made either from the herd or from the flock, and they were representative of internal worship of the Lord, 922, 923, 1823, 2180, 2805, 2807, 2830, 3519. To these the minchah and the drink-offering were added. The minchah, which consisted of fine flour mixed with oil, meant celestial good, or what amounted to the same, the good of love - 'the oil' meaning love to the Lord and 'the fine flour' charity towards the neighbour. But the drink-offering, which consisted of wine, meant spiritual good, or what amounted to the same, the good of faith. Both these therefore, the minchah and the drink-offering, have the same meaning as the bread and wine in the Holy Supper.

[5] The addition of a minchah and a drink-offering to a burnt offering or to a sacrifice is clear in Moses,

You shall offer two lambs in their first year, each day continually. One lamb you shall offer in the morning, and the second you shall offer between the evenings; and a tenth of fine flour mixed with beaten oil, a quarter of a hin, and a drink-offering of a quarter of a hin of wine, for the first lamb; and so also for the second lamb. Exodus 29:38-41.

In the same author,

You shall offer on the day when you wave the sheaf of the firstfruits of the harvest a lamb without blemish in its first year as a burnt offering to Jehovah, its minchah being two tenths of fine flour mixed with oil, and its drink-offering wine, a quarter of a hin. Leviticus 23:12-13, 18.

In the same author,

On the day when the days of Naziriteship are completed he is to offer his gift to Jehovah, sacrifices and also a basket of unleavened [loaves] of fine flour, cakes mingled with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil, together with their minchah and their drink-offerings. Numbers 6:13-17.

In the same author,

Upon the burnt offering they shall offer a minchah of a tenth [of an ephah] of fine flour mixed with a quarter of a hin of oil, and wine as the drink-offering, a quarter of a hin - in one way upon the burnt offering of a ram, and in another upon that of a bull. Numbers 15:3-11.

In the same author,

With the continual burnt offering you shall offer a drink-offering, a quarter of a hin for a lamb; in the holy place pour out a drink-offering of wine to Jehovah. Numbers 28:6-7.

Further references to minchahs and drink-offerings in the different kinds of sacrifices are continued in Numbers 28:7-end; 29:1-end.

[6] The meaning that 'minchah and drink-offering' had may be seen in addition from the considerations that love and faith constitute the whole of worship, and that in the Holy Supper 'the bread' - described in the quotations above as fine flour mixed with oil - and 'the wine' mean love and faith, and so the whole of worship, dealt with in 1798, 2165, 2177, 2187, 2343, 2359, 3464, 3735, 3813, 4211, 4217.

[7] But when people fell away from the genuine representative kind of worship of the Lord and turned to other gods and poured out drink-offerings to these, 'drink-offerings' came to mean things that were the reverse of charity and faith, namely the evils and falsities that go with the love of the world; as in Isaiah,

You inflamed yourselves among the gods under every green tree. You have also poured out a drink-offering to them, you have brought a minchah. Isaiah 57:5-6.

'Inflaming oneself among the gods' stands for cravings for falsity - 'gods' meaning falsities, 4402 (end), 4544. 'Under every green tree' stands for the trust in all falsities which leads to those cravings, 2722, 4552. 'Pouring out a drink-offering to them' and 'bringing a minchah' stand for the worship of those falsities. In the same prophet,

You who forsake Jehovah, who forget My holy mountain, who set a table for Gad, and fill a drink-offering for Meni. Isaiah 65:11.

In Jeremiah,

The sons gather pieces of wood, and the fathers kindle fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings to other gods. Jeremiah 7:18.

[8] In the same prophet,

We will surely do every word that has gone out of our mouth, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings to her, as we did, we and our fathers, and our princes in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem. Jeremiah 44:17-19.

'The queen of heaven' stands for all falsities, for 'the hosts of heaven' in the genuine sense means truths, and in the contrary sense falsities, and so in the same way do 'king' and 'queen'. 'Queen' accordingly stands for all [falsities] and 'pouring out drink-offerings to her' means worshipping them.

[9] In the same prophet,

The Chaldeans will burn the city, and the houses upon whose roofs they have burned incense to Baal and poured out drink-offerings to other gods. Jeremiah 32:29.

'The Chaldeans' stands for people whose worship involves falsity. 'Burning the city' stands for destroying and laying waste those whose doctrines teach falsity. Upon the roofs of the houses burning incense to Baal' stands for the worship of what is evil, 'pouring out drink-offerings to other gods' for the worship of what is false.

[10] In Hosea,

They will not dwell in Jehovah's land, but Ephraim will return to Egypt, and in Assyria they will eat what is unclean. They will not pour libations of wine to Jehovah. Hosea 9:3-4.

'Not dwelling in Jehovah's land' stands for not abiding in the good of love. 'Ephraim will return to Egypt' stands for the Church when its understanding will come to be no more than factual and sensory knowledge. 'In Assyria they will eat what is unclean' stands for impure and profane desires that are the product of reasoning. 'They will not pour libations of wine to Jehovah' stands for no worship based on truth.

[11] In Moses,

It will be said, Where are their gods, the rock in which they trusted, who ate the fat of the sacrifices, [who] drank the wine of their drink-offering? Let them rise up and help them! Deuteronomy 32:37-38.

'Gods' stands for falsities, as above. 'Who ate the fat of the sacrifices' stands for their destruction of the good belonging to worship, '[who] drank the wine of their drink-offering' for their destruction of the truth belonging to it. A reference to 'drink-offerings of blood' also occurs in David,

They will multiply their pains; they have hastened to another, lest I pour out their drink-offerings of blood, and take up their names upon My lips. Psalms 16:4.

By these 'drink-offerings' are meant profanations of truth, for in this case 'blood' means violence done to charity, 374, 1005, and profanation, 1003.