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).

4434. 'And his soul clung to Dinah, [the daughter of Jacob]' means the inclination to be joined to it. This is clear from the meaning of 'the soul clinging' as an inclination. It is evident that an inclination to be joined is meant because things connected with conjugial love imply in the internal sense the joining together of truth and good, and of good and truth. The reason why things connected with conjugial love imply in the internal sense that spiritual joining together is that conjugial love has its origin in the marriage of truth and good and of good and truth, see 2618, 2727-2729, 2737, 2803, 3132. Consequently the adulteration of good is meant by an act of adultery, and the falsification of truth by an act of whoredom described in the Word, 2466, 2729, 2750, 3399. From these considerations it may be seen that all the details mentioned in this chapter concerning Shechem and Dinah mean nothing else in the internal sense than the joining of truth, represented by 'Shechem', to the affection for truth, represented by 'Dinah', so that the words 'his soul clung to Dinah' mean the inclination to be joined to this affection.

[2] Since the subject in the whole of this chapter is Shechem's love towards Dinah and how he sought to make her his wife, and since things connected with conjugial love mean spiritual joining together, let it now be established from the Word that marriages and things that have a connection with marriages do not imply anything else: In John,

Let us be glad and exult, and let us give glory to Him, for the time of the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His Wife has made herself ready. Blessed are those who have been called to the marriage supper of the Lamb. Revelation 19:7, 9.

In the same book,

I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. One of the seven angels spoke to me, saying, Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb. He carried me away in the spirit onto a great and high mountain and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. Revelation 21:2, 9-10.

It is quite evident that betrothal and marriage in these places mean nothing other than the joining of the Lord to the Church, which is effected by means of truth and good. For 'the holy city' and 'the new Jerusalem' mean nothing other than the Church - 'city' meaning the truth of the Church, see 402, 2268, 2449, 2451, 2712, 2943, 3216, and 'Jerusalem' the spiritual Church, 402, 2117, 3654.

[3] In Malachi,

Judah has acted faithlessly, and abomination has been committed in Israel and in Jerusalem, for Judah has profaned the holiness of Jehovah, for he loved and married the daughter of a foreign god. Jehovah was a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have acted faithlessly. Malachi 2:11, 14-15.

'Loving and marrying the daughter of a foreign god' means joining oneself to falsity instead of truth, which is 'the wife of one's youth'.

[4] In Ezekiel,

You took your sons and your daughters whom you had borne to Me, and sacrificed them so as to be devoured. Was the matter of your acts of whoredom a small one? You are your mother's daughter who loathes her husband and her sons, and you are the sister of your sisters who loathed their husbands and their sons. Ezekiel 16:20, 45.

This refers to the abominations of Jerusalem which, because they were the product of evils and falsities, are described in this chapter by means of the kind of things that are the direct opposite of marriages, that is to say, acts of adultery and of whoredom. 'The husbands' whom they loathed are goods, 'the sons' truths, and 'the daughters' the affections for these.

[5] In Isaiah,

Sing, O barren one that did not bear; resound with singing and cry out for joy, O one that has not been in travail, for the sons of her that is desolate will be more than the sons of her that is married. You will not remember any more the reproach of your widowhood, for your Maker is your Husband, ¹ Jehovah Zebaoth is His name, and your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, the God of the whole earth He is called. For Jehovah has called you like a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth when she is put away, said your God. All your sons are taught by Jehovah, and much is the peace of your sons. Isaiah 54:1, 4-6, 13.

Since 'a marriage' means the joining together of truth and good and of good and truth, one may see what is meant by husband and wife, sons and daughters, widows, women who have been put away, and by bearing, giving birth, being desolate, and being barren; for all these expressions have some connection with marriage. The meaning in the spiritual sense of each of these expressions has been shown many times in the explanatory sections.

[6] In the same prophet,

For Zion's sake I will not keep silent, and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest. You will no more be called Deserted, but your land will be named Married, for Jehovah will take His pleasure in you, and your land will be married. Forasmuch as a young man will marry a virgin, your sons will marry you; and there will be the joy of a bridegroom over a bride, your God will rejoice over you. Isaiah 62:1, 4-5.

Anyone unacquainted with the internal sense of the Word may suppose that such imagery in the Word is simply an employment of comparisons like many of those used in everyday speech, and that this is the reason why the Church is compared to a daughter, a virgin, and a wife, and so why matters of faith and charity are compared to things which have some connection with marriage. But in the Word everything is representative of that which is spiritual or celestial, and it is a real correspondence; for the Word has come down from heaven, and because it has come down from there it is in origin something Divinely celestial and spiritual, to which everything in the sense of the letter corresponds. Consequently things connected with the heavenly marriage, which is good and truth joined together, pass into those that correspond to them, and so into those which have some connection with marriages on earth.

[7] This also explains why the Lord likened the kingdom of heaven - that is, His kingdom in heaven and His kingdom on earth, which is the Church - to a certain king, who arranged a wedding for his son and invited many to it, Matthew 22:2 and following verses, and also to ten virgins who took lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom, Matthew 25:1 and following verses. The Lord also referred to those who belong to the Church as 'the sons of the wedding',

Jesus said, Can the sons of the wedding mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast. Matthew 9:15.

[8] For the same reasons the affection for good and the affection for truth are called 'the joy and gladness of a bridegroom and bride', for heavenly joy is the product of those affections and resides within them, as in Isaiah,

Your sons will marry you; and there will be the joy of a bridegroom over a bride, Jehovah your God will rejoice over you. Isaiah 62:5.

In Jeremiah,

The voice of joy and the voice of gladness, and the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the voice of those that say, Give thanks ² to Jehovah, for Jehovah is good. Jeremiah 33:11.

In the same prophet,

I will make to cease from the cities of Judah and from the streets of Jerusalem the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, for the land will turn into a waste. Jeremiah 7:34; 16:9; 25:10.

And in John,

The light of a lamp will not shine in Babylon any more, and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride will not be heard in it any more. Revelation 18:23.

[9] Since marriages on earth correspond through truly conjugial love to the heavenly marriage which is that of good and truth, the laws laid down in the Word concerning betrothals and marriages correspond completely to the spiritual laws of the heavenly marriage, such as the law that men were to marry one wife only, Mark 10:2-8; Luke 16:18; for in the case of the heavenly marriage the situation is that no good can be joined to any but its own truth, or truth to any but its own good. If joined to any truth other than its own, good could not possibly be held together but would be torn apart and so would perish. In the spiritual Church 'wife' (uxor) represents good and 'man' (vir) represents truth, but in the celestial Church 'husband' (maritus) represents good and 'wife' (uxor) truth. Furthermore - and this is an arcanum - they not only represent those things but also in actual fact correspond to them.

[10] The laws also concerning marriages which have been laid down in the Old Testament have in a similar way a correspondence with the laws of the heavenly marriage, such as those in Exodus 21:7-11; 22:15-16, 17; 34:16; Numbers 36:6; Deuteronomy 7:3-4; 22:28-29; and also the laws about the forbidden degrees of affinity, Leviticus 18:6-20. In the Lord's Divine mercy these will be dealt with individually in some other place. The fact that the degrees and laws of marriages have their origin in the laws of truth and good which belong to the heavenly marriage and with which they correlate is evident in Ezekiel,

The priests the Levites shall not take as wives for themselves a widow or a woman that has been put away, but virgins from the seed of the house of Israel; only a widow who is the widow of a priest may they take. Ezekiel 44:22.

This refers to the holy city, the new Jerusalem, and to the heavenly Canaan which clearly mean the Lord's kingdom and His Church. Consequently 'the Levites' do not mean Levites, nor do 'a widow and a woman who has been put away' mean a widow and one put away, but the kind of things they correspond to.

Footnotes: