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).

3316. And Jacob boiled pottage. That this signifies a chaotic mass of doctrinal things, is evident from the representation of Jacob, as being the doctrine of natural truth (n. 3305), thus the doctrinal things which are in the natural man; and from the signification of “pottage,” as being a chaotic mass of such things. “Boiling it,” signifies amassing, for in the original tongue the expression is proper to pottage, as if it had been said that he “pottaged pottage,” that is, he amassed it. The first state of the conjunction of good and truth is that which is described in this and the following verses, down to the end of the chapter.

[2] The first state of the man who is being regenerated, or in whom truth is being conjoined with good, is that first of all in his natural man, or in its storehouse called the memory, there are amassed the doctrinal things of truth without any certain order. The doctrinal things at that time therein may be compared to some undigested and uncompounded mass, and to a kind of chaos. But this is to the end that they may be reduced to order, for whatever is to be reduced to order is at first in this state of confusion; and this is what is signified by the pottage which Jacob boiled, that is, amassed. These doctrinal things are not reduced to order by themselves, but by the good which flows into them, and the good reduces them into order in exact proportion to the amount and the quality of its action upon them. When good first longs for and desires these doctrinal things, to the end that it may conjoin them with itself, it manifests itself under the appearance of the affection of truth. This is what is signified by Esau’s saying to Jacob, “Cause me to sup I pray of the red, this red.”

[3] These things do indeed appear remote from the sense of the letter; nevertheless, when these words are read by man, and are apprehended by him according to the sense of the letter, the angels who are then with him have no idea at all of pottage, or of Jacob, or of Esau, or of what is red, or of supping of what is red, but instead thereof they have a spiritual idea which is altogether different and remote from such natural ideas, and into this spiritual idea these natural things are instantly turned. It is the same with other things in the Word; as for example when man reads of bread, the angels have no perception of bread, but instantly instead of bread they perceive celestial love and all that belongs thereto, that is, to love to the Lord; and when wine is read of in the Word, they do not perceive wine, but instead of wine spiritual love and all that belongs thereto, that is, to love toward the neighbor. So when pottage or pulse is read of, they do not perceive pottage or pulse, but doctrinal things not yet conjoined with good, thus an inordinated mass of them. This shows the nature and quality of the angelic thought and perception, and how remote it is from the thought and perception of man. If man thought in like manner when he is in a holy state, as when he attends the Holy Supper, and instead of bread perceived love to the Lord, and instead of wine love toward the neighbor, he would be in thought and perception like that of the angels, who would then approach nearer to him, till at last they could consociate their thoughts, but only so far as the man was at the same time in good.

[4] That “pottage” or “pulse” signifies a chaotic mass, is evident also from what is said in the book of Kings concerning the sons of the prophets and Elisha:

Elisha came back to Gilgal, and there was a famine in the land; and the sons of the prophets were sitting before him; and he said to his lad, Set on the great pot and boil pottage for the sons of the prophets; and one went out into the field to gather herbs, and he found a vine of the field and gathered from it gourds of the field his garment full, and came and shred them into the pot of pottage, because they knew not; and they poured out to the men to eat; and it came to pass, in their eating of the pottage, that they cried out and said, O man of God there is death in the pot! And they could not eat; and he said, Take ye meal; and he put it into the pot, and said, Pour out for the people; and they did eat, and there was no evil word in the pot (2 Kings 4:38-41).

In the internal sense these words signify things altogether different from that which they signify in the sense of the letter. A “famine in the land” signifies a scarcity of the knowledges of good and truth (n. 1460); the “sons of the prophets” signify those who teach (n. 2534); “pottage” signifies an ill-assorted mass of memory-knowledges; and “meal,” the truth which is from good, or the spiritual which is from the celestial (n. 2177); thus that Elisha put meal in the pot, and there was then no evil in it, signifies that that chaotic mass was amended by means of spiritual truth from the Lord’s Word; for Elisha represented the Lord as to the Word (n. 2762). Apart from this spiritual sense, this story concerning the pottage and the change in it by the meal, would not have been worthy of relation in the most holy Word. It was for the sake of the representation of such things that this miracle was wrought, as also is the case with the rest of the miracles in the Word, all of which have Divine things concealed within them.

3928. And she called his name Naphtali. That this signifies its quality, namely, the quality of the temptation in which there is victory, and also the quality of the resistance by the natural man, is evident from the signification of “name,” and of “calling a name,” as being quality (see n. 144, 145, 1754, 1896, 2009, 2724, 3421). The quality itself is that which is signified by “Naphtali,” for he was named “Naphtali” from “wrestling.” Hence also by Naphtali is represented this second general truth of the church, for temptation is the means of the conjunction of the internal man with the external, because they are at variance with each other, but are reduced to agreement and correspondence by means of temptations. The external man is indeed such that of itself it lusts for nothing else than corporeal and worldly things, these being the delights of its life. But the internal man, when it is opened toward heaven and desires the things of heaven, such as it is with those who can be regenerated, then finds heavenly delight in these things, and while the man is in temptations there is a combat between these two kinds of delight. This the man does not then know, because he does not know what heavenly delight is, and what infernal delight is; and still less that they are so entirely opposed to each other. But the celestial angels cannot possibly be with man in his corporeal and worldly delight until this delight has been reduced to subservience, so that the corporeal and worldly delight is no longer sought as the end; but for the sake of the use of serving the heavenly delight (as s hown above, n. 3913). When this has been effected, the angels can be with the man in both; but in this case his delight becomes bliss, and finally happiness in the other life.

[2] He who believes that before regeneration the delight of his natural man is not infernal, and that it is not possessed by diabolical spirits, is much mistaken, and does not know how the case is with man, namely, that before regeneration he is possessed as to his natural man by genii and infernal spirits, however much he may appear to himself to be like any other man; and even though he may be with others in what is holy, and may reason about the truths and goods of faith, and may indeed believe himself to be confirmed in them; yet if he does not perceive in himself anything of the affection of what is just and equitable in his employment, and of truth and good in company and in life, let him know that his delight is that of the infernals, for there is no other love in it than that of self and the world; and when this love makes his delight, there is in it no charity and no faith. After this delight has become dominant, it is deadened and dissipated by no other means than the affirmation and acknowledgment of the holy of faith and of the good of life, which is the first means, signified by “Dan,” as shown above; and then by means of temptation, which is the second means, and is signified by Naphtali; for this means follows the other, for they who do not affirm and acknowledge the good and truth of faith and charity cannot come into any combat of temptation, because there is nothing within which offers resistance to the evil and falsity to which natural delight persuades.

[3] In other places in the Word where “Naphtali” is mentioned, there is signified man’s state after temptations; as in the prophecy of Jacob, then Israel:

Naphtali is a hind let loose, giving sayings of elegance (Genesis 49:21); where a “hind let loose” denotes the affection of natural truth in the free state which exists after temptations; which state is also the quality that is in the temptations signified by “Naphtali;” for in temptations the struggle is concerning freedom. In like manner in the prophecy of Moses:

To Naphtali he said, Naphtali is satisfied with favor, and full with the blessing of Jehovah, he shall possess the west and the south (Deuteronomy 33:23);

for the representations of the sons of Jacob and of the tribes are in accordance with the order in which they are named (n. 3862). And in the prophecy of Deborah and Barak:

Zebulun a people that hath devoted his soul to die, and Naphtali upon the high places of the field (Judg. 5:18); where also in the internal sense the combats of temptations are treated of; and the man is among those who fear nothing of evil because they are in truths and goods; which is to be “upon the high places of the field.”