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).

7997. That the paschal supper represented the consociations of angels in the heavens in respect to goods and truths, see above (n. 7836, 7996); and because it represented these, it was ordained that not only every house by itself should then be together and eat, but also that no others should be consociated except those who represent the conjunction of love such as is that of the heavenly societies, and thus that the rest were to be separated. They who are to be separated were the aliens, for by them were signified those who are not in the good and truth of the church; also the lodgers and hirelings, because by these were represented those who from mere natural disposition, and those who for the sake of gain, did good and truth, and made a boast of them. Neither the latter nor the former can be consociated with the angels in the heavens; but when they are allowed to wander about, as is the case when they first come into the other life, before they undergo vastations of good and truth, then when they come toward any angelic society and feel the sphere of sanctity from the truth of the good of innocence which is signified by the blood of the paschal lamb (n. 7846, 7877), they cannot approach, but forthwith flee away because of fear and aversion.

9824. 'And an ephod' means Divine Truth there in an outward form, in which inner things terminate. This is clear from the meaning of 'an ephod' as Divine Truth in an outward form. The reason why 'an ephod' has this meaning is that Aaron's holy garments represented forms of Divine Truth in the spiritual kingdom, in their proper order, see above in 9822, and the ephod was the outermost of the three garments, Aaron's holy garments being the ephod, the robe, and the checkered tunic. Not only does what is outermost contain inner things; but inner things also terminate in it. This applies to the human body, and therefore also applies to the heavens, to which aspects of the human body correspond. It applies similarly to truths and forms of good, for both these constitute the heavens.

[2] Since the ephod represented the most external part of the Lord's spiritual kingdom it was holier than all the other garments; and on it there was the breastplate containing the Urim and Thummim, by means of which answers from the Divine were given. The reason why the most external part is holier than the things within is that what is outermost contains all inner things in their proper order. It contains them in an outward form and in a connection which are so perfect that if what is outermost were taken away the things within would disintegrate; for the things within not only terminate there, but also exist together there. The truth of this may be recognized by people who know about the nature of things that succeed one another and those that exist together with one another, namely that those which succeed one another, that is, proceed and follow one another in their proper order, also stand together with one another at the last and lowest levels. Let end, cause, and effect exemplify this. The end is the first in order, the cause is the second, and the effect is the last and lowest, so that these too progress one after another. Yet within the effect, which is last, the cause at the same time manifests itself, as does the end within the cause. Consequently the effect is the completion of the inner or prior things, which have also been brought together in it and lodge there.

[3] The situation is similar with human will, thought, and action; will comes first, thought second, and action last. Action is also the effect that has the two prior or inner things existing together within it. For to the extent that action contains what the person thinks and what the person wills, inner things are contained in a form and in connection. This explains why the Word says that a person will be judged according to his deeds or works, which means that he will be judged according to his thought and will, for these are present within deeds as the soul is within its body. Now since inner things present themselves together in what is last and lowest, then if the order is perfect that which is last and lowest, as has been stated, is held to be holier than the inner things, because it is there that the holiness of the inner things exists in its fullness.

[4] Since inner things exist together in the last and lowest in the same way, as has been stated, as a person's thought and will - or, on a spiritual level, his faith and love - exist together in his deeds or works, John more than all the other disciples was loved by the Lord and leaned on His breast, John 13:23; 21:20, 22. This was because that disciple represented the works of charity, see Prefaces to Genesis 18, 22, and also 3934. This too shows why what is outermost or last within perfect order is holier than the things within if considered separately from it. For when the Lord is present in what is last and lowest He is at the same time present on all levels; and when He is present in it inner things are contained in their proper order, connection, and form, and are under His control and guidance, subject to His good will. This is the arcanum that was meant in 9360, as you may see.

[5] This then is the reason why the ephod, being representative of the last and lowest part of the Lord's spiritual kingdom, was held to be holier than the rest of the garments belonging to the priestly office. Therefore the ephod was the chief of the priestly vestments, being made from threads of gold in among the violet, purple, twice-dyed scarlet, and fine twined linen, Exodus 39:3, though the rest of the priests had ephods made of linen, 1 Samuel 2:18; 22:18. This goes to explain why the word 'ephod' stood for a priest's whole attire and why he was said 'to wear the ephod', meaning that he was a priest, 1 Samuel 2:28; 14:3. It also goes to explain why the breastplate was tied to the ephod and why answers were given through the Urim and Thummim there. That is to say, this vestment was a representative sign of the lowest part of the Lord's spiritual kingdom, and answers from God present themselves in things last and lowest; for they pass through all the inner levels one after another, declaring themselves on the last and lowest because they terminate there. The fact that answers were given when they wore the ephod is clear from 1 Samuel 23:6-13; 30:7-8, and also in Hosea,

The children of Israel sat many days with no king, and no prince, and no sacrifice, and no pillar, and no ephod, and no teraphim ¹ . Hosea 3:4.

'Teraphim' means answers from God, for in former times answers were given through them, Zechariah 10:2. Furthermore the word 'ephod' in the original language is derived from the root 'to enclose all inner things', as is evident from the meaning of that word in Exodus 29:5; Leviticus 8:7.

Footnotes: