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).

'Soft raiment,' as in Matthew 11:9, represents the internal sense of the Word.

(References: Arcana Coelestia 9372; Matthew 9, 11)

2715. Two arcana exist here, the first being that, compared with the good of the celestial man, that of the spiritual man is obscure, the second that this obscurity is brightened by light from the Lord's Divine Human. As regards the first of these - that the good residing with the spiritual man is obscure compared with the celestial man's - this may be seen from what has been stated above in 2708 about the state of the spiritual man in comparison with that of the celestial man. From a comparison of the two states the fact of that obscurity is quite evident. With those who are celestial good itself exists implanted in the will part of their mind, and from there light enters the understanding part. But with those who are spiritual the whole of the will part is corrupted, so that they have no good at all from there, and therefore the Lord implants good in the understanding part of their mind, see 863, 875, 895, 927, 928, 1023, 1043, 1044, 2124, 2256. The will part is, in the main, the part of man's mind that possesses life, whereas the understanding part receives life from the will. Since therefore the will part in the case of the spiritual man is so corrupted as to be nothing but evil, and yet evil is flowing in from there unceasingly and constantly into the understanding part, that is, into his thought, it is clear that the good there is obscure compared with the celestial man's good.

[2] As a consequence those who are spiritual do not have love to the Lord, as those who are celestial do; nor therefore does that humility exist with them which is essential in all worship and by means of which good can flow in from the Lord; for a heart that is haughty is not at all receptive, only one that is humble. Nor do those who are spiritual have love towards the neighbour, as those who are celestial do, because self-love and love of the world are constantly flowing in from the will part of their mind, bringing obscurity into the good that goes with that love towards the neighbour. This may also become clear to one who reflects from the fact that when he helps another he does so for worldly reasons; thus though he may not consciously have it in mind he is nevertheless thinking about what he will get in return either from those he helps or in the next life from the Lord, which being so his good is still defiled with merit-seeking. It may also become clear to him from the fact that when he has done anything good and is able to speak about it to others and so set himself up above others, he is in his element. But those who are celestial love the neighbour more than they love themselves, and do not ever think about repayment or in any way set themselves up above others.

[3] The good residing with those who are spiritual is in addition made obscure by persuasive beliefs that are the product of various assumptions, which likewise have their origin in self-love and love of the world. For the nature of their persuasive beliefs even in matters of faith, see 2682, 2689 (end). This too is a product of the influx of evil from the will part of their mind.

[4] It may in addition become clear that the good residing with the spiritual man is obscure compared with the celestial man's, from the fact that he does not know what truth is, as those who are celestial do, from any perception. Instead he knows what truth is from what he has learned from parents and teachers, and also from the doctrine into which he was born. And when he adds to this anything from himself and from his own thinking, it is for the most part the senses and the illusions of the senses, also the rational and the appearances present within the rational, that predominate, and these make it barely possible for him to acknowledge any pure truth like that acknowledged by those who are celestial. But in spite of this, within things that are seemingly true the Lord implants good, even though these truths are mere illusions or else appearances of truth. But this good is made obscure by such truths, for it derives its specific nature from the truths to which it is joined. It is like the light of the sun falling upon objects. The nature of the objects receiving the light causes the light to be seen within those objects in the form of colours, which are beautiful if the nature of the recipient form and the manner of its receiving are fitting and correspondent, hideous if the nature of the recipient form and the manner of its receiving are not fitting and so not correspondent. In the same way good itself acquires a specific nature from the truth [to which it is joined].

[5] The same arcanum is also evident from the fact that the spiritual man does not know what evil is. He scarcely believes that any other evils exist than actions contrary to the Ten Commandments. Of evils present in affection and thought, which are countless, he has no knowledge nor does he reflect on them or call them evils. All delights whatever that go with evil desires and pleasures he does not regard as other than good; and the actual delights that are part of self-love he both pursues, approves of, and excuses, without knowing that such things have an effect on his spirit and that he becomes altogether such in the next life.

[6] From this it is in a similar way clear that although the whole of the Word deals with scarcely any other matter than the good which goes with love to the Lord and love towards the neighbour, the spiritual man does not know that that good is the sum and substance of faith, nor even what the essential nature of love and charity is. It is also clear that though something which is a matter of faith may be known to him - faith being considered by him to be essential in itself - he nevertheless discusses whether it is true, unless he has been confirmed by much experience of life. Those who are celestial do not discuss the same because they know and have a perception that it is true hence the Lord's statement in Matthew,

Let your words be, Yes, yes; No, no; anything beyond this is from evil. ¹ Matthew 5:37.

For those who are celestial are immersed in the truth itself about which those who are spiritual dispute. Consequently because those who are celestial are immersed in the truth itself, they are able to see from it numberless facets of that truth, and so from light to see so to speak heaven in its entirety. But those who are spiritual, because they dispute whether it is true, cannot - so long as they do so - arrive at the remotest boundary of the light existing with those who are celestial, let alone behold anything from their light.

Footnotes: