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).

4307. That in the internal historical sense by “Jacob asked and said, Tell I pray thy name,” are signified evil spirits, may be seen from many things in this sense, in which these words and those which follow are predicated of the posterity of Jacob; for the internal sense is determined by its application to the subject treated of. That not good spirits, but evil ones are signified by him who wrestled with Jacob, may be seen from the fact that by “wrestling” is signified temptation (n. 3927, 3928, 4274); and temptation is never caused by good spirits, but by evil, for temptation is the excitation of the evil and falsity that are in the man (n. 741, 751, 761, 1820, 4249, 4299). Good spirits and angels never excite evils and falsities, but defend man against them, and bend them to good; for good spirits are led by the Lord, and from the Lord nothing ever proceeds but holy good and holy truth. That the Lord tempts no one, is known from the doctrine received in the church, and may also be seen above (n. 1875, 2768). From this, and also from the fact that the posterity of Jacob gave way in every temptation, both in the wilderness and afterwards, it is evident that not good spirits, but evil, are signified by him who wrestled with Jacob. Moreover that nation, which is here signified by “Jacob,” was not in any spiritual and heavenly love, but in bodily and worldly love (n. 4281, 4288-4290, 4293); and the presence of spirits with men is determined in accordance with their loves. Good spirits and angels are present with those who are in spiritual and heavenly love, and evil spirits with those who are solely in bodily and worldly love; and this so much that everyone may know the quality of the spirits with him by merely observing the quality of his loves, or what is the same, the quality of his ends; for everyone has for an end that which he loves.

[2] The reason why the spirit called himself God was that Jacob believed this; like his posterity, who constantly believed that Jehovah was in their holy external, when yet Jehovah was present only representatively, as will be evident from what follows. They also believed that Jehovah led into temptations, that all evil was from Him, and that He was in anger and fury when they were punished. For this reason it was so expressed in the Word, in accordance with their belief, when yet Jehovah never leads into temptations, nor is there ever anything evil from Him, nor is He ever in anger, and still less in fury (see n. 223, 245, 592, 696, 1093, 1683, 1874, 1875, 2395, 3605, 3607, 3614). This is also the reason why he who wrestled with Jacob was not willing to reveal his name. That in the internal spiritual sense by him who wrestled with Jacob is meant the angelic heaven (n. 4295), is because the Lord, who in the supreme sense is there represented by Jacob, allowed angels also to tempt Him; and because the angels were at that time left to what is their own, as was shown in the number cited.

2718. 'A wife from the land of Egypt' means the affection for knowledge, which the member of the spiritual Church possesses. This is clear from the meaning of 'a wife' as affection or good, dealt with in 915, 2517, and from the meaning of 'Egypt' as knowledge, dealt with in 1164, 1165, 1186, 1462. In this verse the member of the spiritual Church is described so far as the nature of his good, that is, the essence of his life, is concerned - that the good residing with him is obscure, but that it is brightened with light from the Lord's Divine Human. From that brightening of it the affection for truth arises in the rational part of his mind, and the affection for knowledge in the natural part. The reason the affection for good such as resides within the celestial man cannot arise in the spiritual man, but instead the affection for truth, is that the good residing with him is implanted in the understanding part of his mind, and is obscure compared with the celestial man's good, as shown in 2715. From this good no other type of affection can be generated and derived within his rational than the affection for truth, and through this affection for truth the affection for knowledge within the natural. No other truth is meant in this case than that which the person believes to be the truth, even though it may not in itself be the truth. Nor is knowledge used to mean such knowledge as the learned possess but all factual knowledge with which a person can be taught from what he experiences or hears in everyday life, from doctrine, and from the Word. It is the affection for such truth and knowledge that exists within the member of the spiritual Church.

[2] So that it may be known what is meant by the affection for truth existing with someone and what by the affection for good, let a brief statement be made regarding them. Those with the affection for truth think about, question, and discuss whether a thing is true, whether it is so. And when they are convinced it is true, or is so, they think about, question, and discuss what it is. Thus they remain rooted on the doorstep and cannot be admitted into wisdom until they no longer have any doubts. Those however with whom the affection for good exists know and perceive that the thing is so from the good itself governing them. Thus they do not remain on the doorstep but are in a room inside, having been admitted into wisdom.

[3] Take as an example the consideration that it is a celestial gift to think and to act from an affection for good, or from good. Those with whom the affection for truth exists discuss whether this is so, whether such a gift can exist, and what it may be. And so long as they are turning over doubts about it they are unable to be admitted. But those with the affection for good do not discuss or turn doubts over but assert that the thing is true and are for that reason admitted. For those with whom the affection for good exists, that is, those who are celestial, start off where those with the affection for truth, that is, those who are spiritual, come to a halt, so that the furthest point reached by the latter is the starting point for the former. That being so, those who are celestial are given to know, recognize, and perceive that affections for good are countless - as numerous as the communities in heaven - and that they are all joined together by the Lord into a heavenly form so as to constitute one human being so to speak. They are also given to define by perception the genus and species to which each affection belongs.

[4] Or take this example: All delight, blessedness, and happiness belong wholly to love, but the nature of the love determines that of the delight, blessedness, and happiness. The spiritual man fixes his mind on the question whether this is true and whether delight, blessedness, and happiness may not spring from some other source, such as from mixing with others, talking to others, meditation, or learning, and also whether they reside in possessions, position, reputation, and the glory resulting from these. As long as he is asking such questions he does not confirm himself in the truth that none of these accomplishes anything, only the affection born of love which is present within them and making them what they are. The celestial man however does not remain rooted in such preliminary questionings but immediately asserts that the thing is true. Consequently he is interested in the end in view and the realization of this, that is, he is governed by the very affections born of love which are countless, and in each one of which there are things beyond description, involving variations of delight, blessedness, and happiness that have no end.

[5] Take as a further example the consideration that the neighbour is to be loved for the good that resides with him. Those with whom the affection for truth exists think, question, and discuss whether this is true, that is, whether it is so. They ask what the neighbour is, what good is; but they go no further than this, and therefore they shut the door to wisdom against themselves. Those however with the affection for good assert that the thing is so and do not consequently shut the door against themselves but enter in and so come to know, recognize, and perceive from good who is pre-eminently the neighbour, also in what degree he is the neighbour, and that everyone in differing ways is the neighbour. Thus they perceive things beyond description, over and above what is known to those with the affection solely for truth.

[6] Take as yet another example the truth that a person who loves the neighbour for the good within him loves the Lord. Those with the affection for truth question whether this is so. And if they are told that anyone who loves the neighbour for the good within him loves the good, and that - since all good comes from the Lord and the Lord is present in good - when anyone loves good he also loves the Lord from whom that good comes and in which He is present, they then question whether that too is so. They also ask what loving good is, as well as what good is, and whether the Lord is present more so in good than in truth. As long as they remain rooted in such questionings they cannot get even a distant view of wisdom. But those with the affection for good know from perception that the thing is so and immediately behold the whole field of wisdom leading right on to the Lord.

[7] From these examples it may become clear why in comparison with those who have the affection for good, that is, with those who are celestial, obscurity exists with those who have the affection for truth, that is, with those who are spiritual Nevertheless the latter are able to pass from obscurity into light, provided that they are willing to adopt the affirmative attitude that all good belongs to love to the Lord and charity towards the neighbour; also that love and charity constitute spiritual conjunction, and that these are the source of all blessedness and happiness, thus that heavenly life consists in the good belonging to love received from the Lord, but not in the truth of faith separated from it.