9372. And He said unto Moses. That this signifies that which concerns the Word in general, is evident from the representation of Moses, as being the Word (of which below); and from the signification of “He said,” as involving those things which follow in this chapter, thus those which concern the Word (see n. 9370). (That Moses represents the Word, can be seen from what has been often shown before about Moses, as from the preface to Genesis 18; and n. 4859, 5922, 6723, 6752, 6771, 6827, 7010, 7014, 7089, 7382, 8601, 8760, 8787, 8805.) Here Moses represents the Word in general, because it is said of him in what follows, that he alone should come near unto Jehovah (verse 2); and also that, being called unto out of the midst of the cloud, he entered into it, and went up the mount (verses 16-18).

[2] In the Word there are many who represent the Lord in respect to truth Divine, or in respect to the Word; but chief among them are Moses, Elijah, Elisha, and John the Baptist. That Moses does so, can be seen in the explications just cited above; that so do Elijah and Elisha, can be seen in the preface to Genesis 18; and n. 2762, 5247; and that John the Baptist does so is evident from the fact that he was “Elias who was to come.” He who does not know that John the Baptist represented the Lord as to the Word, cannot know what all those things infold and signify which are said about him in the New Testament; and therefore in order that this secret may stand open, and that at the same time it may appear that Elias, and also Moses, who were seen when the Lord was transfigured, signified the Word, some things may here be quoted which are spoken about John the Baptist; as in Matthew:

After the messengers of John had departed, Jesus began to speak concerning John, saying, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? a reed shaken by the wind? But what went ye out to see? a man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they that wear soft things are in kings’ houses. But what went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, even more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, Behold I send Mine angel before Thy face, who shall prepare Thy way before Thee. Verily I say unto you, Among those who are born of women there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist; nevertheless he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he. All the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye are willing to believe, he is Elias who was to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear (Matthew 11:7-15; and also Luke 7:24-28).

No one can know how these things are to be understood, unless he knows that this John represented the Lord as to the Word, and unless he also knows from the internal sense what is signified by “the wilderness” in which he was, also what by “a reed shaken by the wind,” and likewise by “soft raiment in kings’ houses;” and further what is signified by his being “more than a prophet,” and by “none among those who are born of women being greater than he, and nevertheless he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he,” and lastly by his being “Elias.” For without a deeper sense, all these words are uttered merely from some comparison, and not from anything of weight.

[3] But it is very different when by John is understood the Lord as to the Word, or the Word representatively. Then by “the wilderness of Judea in which John was” is signified the state in which the Word was at the time when the Lord came into the world, namely, that it was “in the wilderness,” that is, it was in obscurity so great that the Lord was not at all acknowledged, neither was anything known about His heavenly kingdom; when yet all the prophets prophesied about Him, and about His kingdom, that it was to endure forever. (That “a wilderness” denotes such obscurity, see n. 2708, 4736, 7313.) For this reason the Word is compared to “a reed shaken by the wind” when it is explained at pleasure; for in the internal sense “a reed” denotes truth in the ultimate, such as is the Word in the letter.

[4] That the Word in the ultimate, or in the letter, is crude and obscure in the sight of men; but that in the internal sense it is soft and shining, is signified by their “not seeing a man clothed in soft raiment, for behold those who wear soft things are in kings’ houses.” That such things are signified by these words, is plain from the signification of “raiment,” or “garments,” as being truths (n. 2132, 2576, 4545, 4763, 5248, 6914, 6918, 9093); and for this reason the angels appear clothed in garments soft and shining according to the truths from good with them (n. 5248, 5319, 5954, 9212, 9216). The same is evident from the signification of “kings’ houses,” as being the abodes of the angels, and in the universal sense, the heavens; for “houses” are so called from good (n. 2233, 2234, 3128, 3652, 3720, 4622, 4982, 7836, 7891, 7996, 7997); and “kings,” from truth (n. 1672, 2015, 2069, 3009, 4575, 4581, 4966, 5044, 6148). Therefore by virtue of their reception of truth from the Lord, the angels are called “sons of the kingdom,” “sons of the king,” and also “kings.”

[5] That the Word is more than any doctrine in the world, and more than any truth in the world, is signified by “what went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet;” and by, “there hath not arisen among those who are born of women a greater than John the Baptist;” for in the internal sense “a prophet” denotes doctrine (n. 2534, 7269); and “those who are born,” or are the sons, “of women” denote truths (n. 489, 491, 533, 1147, 2623, 2803, 2813, 3704, 4257).

[6] That in the internal sense, or such as it is in heaven, the Word is in a degree above the Word in the external sense, or such as it is in the world, and such as John the Baptist taught, is signified by, “he that is less in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he;” for as perceived in heaven the Word is of wisdom so great that it transcends all human apprehension. That the prophecies about the Lord and His coming, and that the representatives of the Lord and of His kingdom, ceased when the Lord came into the world, is signified by, “all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.” That the Word was represented by John, as by Elijah, is signified by his being “Elias who is to come.”

[7] The same is signified by these words in Matthew:

The disciples asked Jesus, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? He answered and said, Elias must needs first come, and restore all things. But I say unto you, that Elias hath come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they wished. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them. And they understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist (Matthew 17:10-13).

That “Elias hath come, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they wished” signifies that the Word has indeed taught them that the Lord is to come, but that still they did not wish to comprehend, interpreting it in favor of the rule of self, and thus extinguishing what is Divine in it. That they would do the same with the truth Divine itself, is signified by “even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them.” (That “the Son of man” denotes the Lord as to truth Divine, see n. 2803, 2813, 3704)

[8] From all this it is now evident what is meant by the prophecy about John in Malachi:

Behold I send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Jehovah cometh (Malachi 4:5).

Moreover, the Word in the ultimate, or such as it is in the external form in which it appears before man in the world, is described by the “clothing” and “food” of John the Baptist, in Matthew:

John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, had His clothing of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his food was locusts and wild honey (Matthew 3:1, 4).

In like manner it is described by Elijah in the second book of Kings:

He was a hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins (2 Kings 1:8).

By “clothing,” or a “garment,” when said of the Word, is signified truth Divine there in the ultimate form; by “camel’s hair” are signified memory-truths such as appear there before a man in the world; by the “leathern girdle” is signified the external bond connecting and keeping in order all the interior things; by “food” is signified spiritual nourishment from the knowledges of truth and of good out of the Word; by “locusts” are signified ultimate or most general truths; and by “wild honey” their pleasantness.

[9] That such things are signified by “clothing” and “food” has its origin in the representatives of the other life, where all appear clothed according to truths from good, and where food also is represented according to the desires of acquiring knowledge and growing wise. From this it is that “clothing,” or a “garment,” denotes truth (as may be seen from the citations above; and that “food” or “meat” denotes spiritual nourishment, n. 3114, 4459, 4792, 5147, 5293, 5340, 5342, 5576, 5579, 5915, 8562, 9003; that “a girdle” denotes a bond which gathers up and holds together interior things, n. 9341; that “leather” denotes what is external, n. 3540; and thus “a leathern girdle” denotes an external bond; that “hairs” denote ultimate or most general truths, n. 3301, 5569-5573; that “a camel” denotes memory-knowledge in general, n. 3048, 3071, 3143, 3145, 4156; that “a locust” denotes nourishing truth in the extremes, n. 7643; and that “honey” denotes the pleasantness thereof, n. 5620, 6857, 8056). It is called “wild honey,” or “honey of the field,” because by “a field” is signified the church (n. 2971, 3317, 3766, 7502, 7571, 9139, 9295). He who does not know that such things are signified, cannot possibly know why Elijah and John were so clothed. And yet that these things signified something peculiar to these prophets, can be thought by everyone who thinks well about the Word.

[10] Because John the Baptist represented the Lord as to the Word, therefore also when he spoke of the Lord, who was the Word itself, he said of himself that he was “not Elias, nor the prophet,” and that he was “not worthy to loose the latchet of the Lord’s shoe,” as in John:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory. The Jews from Jerusalem, priests and Levites, asked John who he was. And he confessed, and denied not, I am not the Christ. Therefore they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? But he said, I am not. Art thou the prophet? He answered, No. They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said Isaiah the prophet. They said therefore, Why then baptizest thou, if thou art not the Christ, nor Elias, nor the prophet? He answered, I baptize with water; in the midst of you standeth one whom ye know not; He it is who is to come after me, who was before me, the latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose. When he saw Jesus, he said, Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world! This is He of whom I said, After me cometh a man who was before me; for he was before me (John 1:1, 14, 19-30).

From these words it is plain that when John spoke about the Lord Himself, who was Truth Divine itself, or the Word, he said that he himself was not anything, because the shadow disappears when the light itself appears, that is, the representative disappears when the original itself makes its appearance. (That the representatives had in view holy things, and the Lord Himself, and not at all the person that represented, see n. 665, 1097, 1361, 3147, 3881, 4208, 4281, 4288, 4292, 4307, 4444, 4500, 6304, 7048, 7439, 8588, 8788, 8806.) One who does not know that representatives vanish like shadows at the presence of light, cannot know why John denied that he was Elias and the prophet.

[11] From all this it can now be seen what is signified by Moses and Elias, who were seen in glory, and who spoke with the Lord when transfigured, of His departure which He should accomplish at Jerusalem (Luke 9:29-31); namely, that they signified the Word (“Moses” the historic Word, and “Elias” the prophetic Word), which in the internal sense throughout treats of the Lord, of His coming into the world, and of His departure out of the world; and therefore it is said that “Moses and Elias were seen in glory,” for “glory” denotes the internal sense of the Word, and the “cloud” its external sense (see the preface to Genesis 18, and n. 5922, 8427).

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.

Footnotes: