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).

1672. And the kings that were with him. That this signifies the apparent truth which is of that good, is evident from the signification of “kings” in the Word. “Kings,” “kingdoms,” and “peoples,” in the historical and the prophetical parts of the Word, signify truths and the things which are of truths, as may be abundantly confirmed. In the Word an accurate distinction is made between a “people” and a “nation;” by a “people” are signified truths, and by a “nation” goods, as before shown (n. 1259, 1260). “Kings” are predicated of peoples, but not so much of nations. Before the sons of Israel sought for kings, they were a nation, and represented good, or the celestial; but after they desired a king, and received one, they became a people, and did not represent good or the celestial, but truth or the spiritual; which was the reason why this was imputed to them as a fault (see 1 Samuel 8:7-22, concerning which subject, of the Lord’s Divine mercy elsewhere). As Chedorlaomer is named here, and it is added, “the kings that were with him,” both good and truth are signified; by “Chedorlaomer,” good, and by “the kings,” truth. But what was the quality of the good and truth at the beginning of the Lord’s temptations has already been stated.

10225. 'From a son of twenty years and over' means the state in which the understanding of truth and good exists. This is clear from the meaning of the word 'twenty', when it refers to a person's age, as the state in which the understanding of truth and good exists. The reason why 'twenty' means the state in which the understanding of truth and good exists is that when a person attains twenty years he starts to think for himself. For from earliest childhood to extreme old age a person passes inwardly through a number of states, which are those of understanding (or intelligence) and wisdom. The first state lasts from birth to the person's fifth year. It is a state of ignorance and of innocence within ignorance; and it is called early childhood. The second state lasts from the fifth to the twentieth year. This is a state in which instruction is received and knowledge is acquired; and it is called later childhood. The third state lasts from the twentieth to the sixtieth year, which is a state in which understanding exists; and it is called adulthood, maturity, or full manhood. The fourth or last state lasts from the sixtieth year onwards, which is a state of wisdom and of innocence within wisdom.

[2] These consecutive states of a person's life are meant in Moses by the numbers five, twenty, and sixty, used in Moses to describe the following age-groups,

When anyone makes a particular vow, the valuation for a male from a son of twenty years to a son of sixty years shall be fifty shekels of silver; if it is a female the valuation shall be thirty shekels. But from a son of five years to a son of twenty years the valuation shall be, if a male, twenty shekels; if a female, ten shekels. But from the son of a month to a son of five years the valuation of a male shall be five shekels, of a female three shekels. But from a son of sixty years onwards the valuation [of a male] shall be fifteen shekels, of a female ten shekels. Leviticus 27:2-7.

[3] The fact that the first state is a state of ignorance and also of innocence within ignorance is self-evident. While this state exists the inner levels of the mind are being put into shape for the use they will serve, and consequently are not yet opened up. Only the most external levels, those of the senses, are open; and when these alone are open ignorance exists. For a person's understanding and perception of anything at all springs from those inner levels. From this it also becomes clear that the innocence which exists at this time and is called the innocence of young childhood is of a most external nature.

[4] The fact that the second state is one in which instruction is received and knowledge is acquired is also self-evident. This is not yet a state in which understanding exists because the young person does not arrive at any conclusion by himself; neither by himself does he draw any distinction between one truth and another, nor even between truth and falsity, only with the help of others. His thought and speech consist purely of matters contained in his memory, thus solely of acquired knowledge; nor does he see or perceive whether something is true unless he takes it on trust from his teacher, consequently because another says it is.

[5] The third state however is called a state in which understanding exists because the person now thinks for himself, drawing distinctions and arriving at conclusions; and the conclusions are his, not another's. At this time belief begins; for belief is not a person's own until he has confirmed what he believes with ideas that are the product of his own thinking. Till then the belief is not his but another's within him; for till then he trusts in the person, not in the matter of belief. From this it becomes clear that the state in which understanding exists begins with a person when not his teacher's but his own ideas constitute what he thinks, which does not happen until inner levels of the mind are opened towards heaven. It should be remembered that the outer levels of the human mind exist in the world and the inner ones in heaven, and that the amount of light flowing from heaven into ideas derived from the world determines how much understanding and wisdom a person has. This comes about according to how far and in what kind of way the inner levels have been opened; and how far they are open depends on how far the person leads a life looking to heaven and not to the world.

[6] The last state however is one of wisdom and of innocence within wisdom, which exists when a person is no longer concerned just to gain an understanding of truths and forms of good, but is concerned to make them part of his will and life; for then the person has wisdom. And how far that person is able to make them part of his will and life depends on how much innocence he has, that is, on how far he believes that left to himself he has no wisdom at all, but that whatever wisdom he has is derived from the Lord, and also on how far he loves this to be so. So it is that this state is also one of innocence within wisdom.

[7] From the way in which these states follow one another the person possessing wisdom can also see the marvels of Divine Providence, namely these: An earlier state serves as the basis for those following on continuously; and, The opening up or unclosing of inner levels advances in consecutive stages from the outermost right through to the inmost ones, till at length they have been so opened up that what existed initially on outermost levels - that is to say, ignorance and innocence - also exists finally on inmost levels. For anyone who knows that by himself he is ignorant of everything and that whatever he knows is derived from the Lord has the ignorance of wisdom and also the innocence of wisdom within him. All this now makes clear what the state of understanding is, meant by 'twenty' when this number is used in reference to a person's age.

[8] This number is used with a similar meaning elsewhere in the Word, for example in Moses,

Take the sum of all the congregation, from a son of twenty years and over - every [male] going into the army in Israel. Numbers 1:2-3, 18ff.

This refers to the encampment and journeying of the children of Israel according to their tribes, which too means the arrangement in order by the Lord of the truths and forms of the good of faith and love, this arrangement in order being meant by the encampment of them, 4236, 8103 (end), 8130, 8131, 8155, and the forms of good and the truths of faith in their entirety by their tribes, 3858, 3926, 3939, 4060, 6335, 6337, 6397. Consequently 'a son of twenty years and over' is used to mean those who are in the state when understanding exists, because in their case truths and forms of the good of faith and love are able to be arranged and set in order by the Lord. For the Lord flows into their understanding and will, where He arranges and sets those things in order, and also removes and casts aside falsities and evils. This explains why it says 'from a son of twenty years and over, every [male] going into the army; for 'the army' means truths drawn up in order, in such a way that they may have no fear of falsities and evils, but may drive them back if they attack. The fact that such truths are meant in the internal sense by 'the army', see 3448, 7236, 7988, 8019.

[9] But in the case of those who are in the state of early childhood or that of later childhood, thus those who are under twenty years old, truths and forms of good are not so well arranged that they can go into the army and perform military service. They cannot do so because, as has been stated above, they do not as yet draw distinctions or arrive at conclusions by themselves, and cannot therefore as yet use reason to banish any falsity or evil at all; and those who cannot do this are not sent into battle, either. This is why a person is not allowed to undergo temptations, which are spiritual conflicts against falsities and evils, until he has entered the state in which understanding exists, that is, when he can judge things for himself, 3928, 4248, 4249, 8963.

[10] Twenty years of age and over is used with the same meaning elsewhere in Moses,

Jehovah said to Moses and Eleazar, Take the sum of the whole assembly of the children of Israel from a son of twenty years and over - everyone going into military service in Israel. Numbers 26:1, 2.

In the spiritual sense 'going into military service' means going into battles against falsities and evils which come from hell.

[11] Anyone who does not know that 'a son of twenty years and over' means the state in which understanding exists, or those who are in that state, cannot know either why it was declared, when the people grumbled against Jehovah, that all who came up from Egypt, from a son of twenty years and over, would die in the wilderness, Numbers 14:29; 32:10-11. For those who are in the state of understanding, in which they are able to draw distinctions, arrive at conclusions, and make judgements for themselves, are guilty of the wrong they do, but not so those who are not as yet in that state. From this also it is evident that 'twenty years', used in reference to an age, means the state in which understanding or judgement exists. But the number 'twenty' has a different meaning when used in reference to any other subject, see above in 10222.