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).

491. The same things are signified by “sons” and “daughters” in this chapter (verses 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 26, 30), but such as is the church, such are the “sons and daughters” that is, such are the goods and truths; the truths and goods here spoken of are such as were distinctly perceived, because they are predicated of the Most Ancient Church, the principal and parent of all the other and succeeding churches.

2039. 'Every male [among you] is to be circumcised' means purity. This is clear from the representation and consequently the meaning of 'circumcising' in the internal sense. Circumcision or cutting off the foreskin meant nothing else than the removal and rejection of those elements which stand in the way of and defile heavenly love, namely evil desires, especially those of self-love, and falsities resulting from those desires. The reason why this is the meaning is that the genital organs of both sexes represent heavenly love. There are three kinds of love which constitute the heavenly things of the Lord's kingdom - conjugial love, the love of infants, and social or mutual love. Conjugial love is the chief love of all because it has within it the end of serving the greatest use, namely the propagating of the human race, and therefore of the Lord's kingdom for which it is the seminary. Next to conjugial love, and deriving from it, comes the love of infants, and after that social or mutual love. Whatever covers over, obstructs, and defiles those loves is meant by the foreskin, the cutting away of which, or circumcision, therefore became representative. Indeed to the extent evil desires and resulting falsities are removed, a person is purified and heavenly love can show itself. How contrary self-love is to heavenly love, and how filthy, has been stated and shown in 760, 1307, 1308, 1321, 1594, 2045, 2057. From these considerations it is plain that circumcision in the internal sense means purity.

[2] That circumcision is no more than the sign of a covenant or of conjunction becomes quite clear from the fact that circumcising the foreskin counts for absolutely nothing if unaccompanied by circumcision of the heart; and that purification from those filthy loves is what circumcision of the heart means is quite evident from the following places in the Word: In Moses,

Jehovah God will circumcise your heart, and the heart of your seed, so that you will love Jehovah your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. Deuteronomy 30:6.

From these words it is clear that 'circumcising the heart' means being purified from filthy loves in order that Jehovah God or the Lord may be loved with all the heart and all the soul.

[3] In Jeremiah,

Break up your fallow ground, and do not sow among thorns. Circumcise yourselves to Jehovah, and remove the foreskin of your heart, O men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem. Jeremiah 4:3-4.

'Circumcising oneself to Jehovah and removing the foreskin of the heart' is nothing other than removing such things as stand in the way of heavenly love. From this it is also clear that circumcision of the heart is something more interior that is meant by circumcision of the foreskin. In Moses,

You shall circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and you shall be stiff-necked no longer. [Jehovah] executes judgement for the orphan and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him bread and clothing. Deuteronomy 10:16, 18.

Here also it is plain that 'circumcising the foreskin of the heart' means being purified from the evils that accompany filthy loves and from resulting falsities. The heavenly things of love are described as charitable works, namely 'executing judgement for the orphan and widow', and 'loving the sojourner to give him bread and clothing'.

[4] In Jeremiah,

Behold, the days are coming in which I will visit every one circumcised in the foreskin - Egypt, and Judah, and Edom, and the children of Ammon, and Moab, and all that have the corners [of their hair] cut and who dwell in the wilderness, for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart. Jeremiah 9:25-26.

This too shows that circumcision was a sign meaning purification. Although they are called 'circumcised in the foreskin', these nations - the Jews included along with the rest - are considered to be 'uncircumcised nations', and Israel to be 'uncircumcised in heart'. In Moses,

If at that time their uncircumcised heart is humbled. Leviticus 26:41.

Here the meaning is similar.

[5] That the foreskin and being uncircumcised means that which is unclean is clear in Isaiah,

Awake, awake, put on your strength, O Zion, put on your beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city, for there will no more come into you the uncircumcised and the unclean. Isaiah 52:1.

'Zion' is used to mean the celestial Church and 'Jerusalem' the spiritual Church into which the uncircumcised, which means the unclean, will not enter.

[6] That circumcision is 'a sign of the covenant' or token of conjunction is quite clear from the fact that the same was represented by the requirement to circumcise the fruits of trees also, spoken of in Moses as follows,

When you come into the land and plant any kind of tree for food you shall circumcise its foreskin, its fruit. For three years it shall be to you uncircumcised; it shall not be eaten. And in the fourth all its fruit shall be holy. to the praises of Jehovah. Leviticus 19:23-24.

'Fruit' similarly represents and means charity, as becomes clear from many places in the Word. Their 'foreskin' accordingly means the uncleanness that obstructs and pollutes charity.

[7] Here is a marvel: When angels in heaven conceive the idea of purification from natural things that are filthy, something akin to circumcision is represented very speedily in the world of spirits, for in the world of spirits angelic ideas come over as representatives. In the Jewish Church there were some representative religious ceremonies which had those same origins and there were others which did not. The spirits with whom that swift circumcision was represented in the world of spirits were people who wished to be allowed into heaven, but before they were allowed in this representation took place. This explains why Joshua was commanded to circumcise the people after they had crossed the Jordan and were about to enter the land of Canaan. The people's entry into the land of Canaan represented nothing else than the admission into heaven of those who have had faith.

[8] This is why circumcision was commanded a second time, described in Joshua as follows,

Jehovah said to Joshua, Make swords of flint for yourself; circumcise the children of Israel a second time. And Joshua made swords of flint for himself, and circumcised the children of Israel on the hill of foreskins. And Jehovah said to Joshua, This day I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you. And he called the name of that place Gilgal (rolling away). Joshua 5:2-3, 9.

'Swords of flint' means the truths which they were to be provided with to enable them to correct and cut back filthy loves, for without cognitions of truth no purification is possible. That 'stone' or 'flirt' means truths has been shown already, in 643, 1298, and that 'a sword' has reference to truths by which evils may be corrected is clear from the Word.