1001. There is a great deal of evidence for the symbolism of blood as neighborly love. ¹ As a result, blood symbolizes a new will that the spiritual person who has been reborn receives from the Lord. This new will is the same thing as neighborly love, because the new will is formed of that love. Charity — love — is the vital essence itself of the will, or the life of the will. The only possible reason for saying we will something is that we favor or love it. We might say we think something, but that is not the same as willing it, unless the will lies behind the thought.

This new will, which is neighborly love, is the blood. The new will is not ours but is the Lord's in us. And since it is the Lord's, it must never be mixed together with the promptings of our own will, which again are quite foul. That is why the representative church had this proscription against eating flesh in its soul, that is, in its blood, meaning that people were not to mix the two together.

[2] Because blood symbolized charity, it symbolized what was holy; and because flesh symbolized human will, it symbolized what was profane. Since the two, being opposites, are separate, people were forbidden to eat blood. The reason was that the eating of flesh together with blood in those days presented to heaven a picture of profanation, or the intermingling of something sacred and something profane. Such a picture could not help striking the angels of the time with horror. In those days, everything that was happening among members of the church was being turned into a corresponding spiritual representation among the angels, in accord with its inner-sense symbolism.

Since meanings always depend on the individual they apply to, so does the symbolism of blood. In relation to a regenerate spiritual person, blood symbolizes charity, or love for one's neighbor. In relation to a regenerate person of heavenly character, it symbolizes love for the Lord. In relation to the Lord, however, it symbolizes his core human essence and therefore Love itself, that is, his mercy toward the human race. Since blood, then, symbolizes love and anything connected with love, in general it symbolizes heavenly traits, which are the Lord's alone. So in relation to humans, it symbolizes heavenly qualities that we receive from the Lord. The heavenly qualities that a regenerate spiritual person receives from the Lord are heavenly-spiritual ones (discussed elsewhere, by the Lord's divine mercy). ²

[3] This fact — that blood symbolizes heavenly qualities and that in the highest sense it symbolized the Lord's core human essence and so love itself, or his mercy toward the human race — can be seen from the holiness that the representative Jewish religion was commanded to accord blood. On that account it was called the blood of the covenant and was spattered on the people. Along with the anointing oil, it was also spattered on Aaron and his sons. ³ And the blood of every burnt offering and sacrifice was spattered on and around the altar. On these subjects, see Exodus 12:7, 13, 22-23; 24:6, 8; Leviticus 1:5, 11, 15; 4:6-7, 17-18, 25, 30, 34; 5:9; 16:14-15, 18-19; Numbers 18:17; Deuteronomy 12:27. ⁴

[4] The reason the eating of blood was so strictly forbidden was that blood was considered this holy and human will is this profane, and the practice represented the profanation of something holy. Moses says, for instance:

It is an eternal statute throughout your generations, everywhere you live: you shall not eat any fat or any blood. (Leviticus 3:17)

Fat stands for heavenly life, and blood (in this verse) for heavenly-spiritual life.

(A heavenly-spiritual entity is something spiritual that develops out of something heavenly. For example, love for the Lord was the heavenly trait belonging to people in the earliest church, because it was planted in their will. Their heavenly-spiritual possession was the faith that grew out of it, as described in §§30-38, 337, 393, 398. With spiritual people, on the other hand, a heavenly attribute is not possible, since love for others is planted in their intellectual side; they can have only a heavenly-spiritual dimension.)

In the same author:

Any from the house of Israel or from among the immigrants residing in your midst who may have eaten any blood — I will set my face ⁵ against the souls eating blood, and I will cut them off from the midst of their people, because the soul of the flesh is in the blood. And I have given it to you [for use] on the altar, to make atonement over your souls, because the blood itself must atone for the soul. The soul of all flesh is its blood; everyone eating it will be cut off. (Leviticus 17:10-11, 14)

This says explicitly that the soul of flesh is in the blood and that the soul of flesh is the blood — the heavenly aspect, the sacred element, the Lord's possession.

[5] In the same author:

Set yourself firmly against eating blood, because the blood itself is the soul, and you shall not eat the soul with the flesh. (Deuteronomy 12:23, 24, 25)

These verses again show that blood is being called the soul, that is, heavenly life, or a heavenly quality, as represented by the burnt offerings and sacrifices of that religion. The prohibition in Exodus 23:18 and 34:25 against offering the blood of a sacrifice on top of yeast bread ⁶ also represented a ban on mingling any heavenly aspect, which belongs to the Lord — and only what belongs to him is heavenly and sacred — with any distinctly human aspect, which is profane. Anything containing yeast symbolized what was corrupt and tainted.

[6] The reason blood is called soul and symbolizes the holiness of charity, and the reason it represented the holiness of love in the Jewish religion, is that it constitutes the life of the body. Since blood constitutes the life of the body, it is the body's outermost soul, so that we can call it the physical soul, or the vehicle of our physical life. ⁷ And since external objects represented inner attributes in the representative churches, blood represented the soul, or heavenly life.

Footnotes:

4031. 'And before [the eyes of those of] the flock which came together later he did not put [the rods] in' means things that are compulsory. This is clear from the meaning of 'coming together later'. 'Coming together first' means, as shown above in 4029, that which is spontaneous or free; and from this, as well as from the sequence of thought in the internal sense, it is evident that 'coming together later' means that which is compulsory or non-free. It is also evident from the consideration that the expression 'coming on heat' is not used here as it is of those which came together first. For 'coming on heat' means affection, in this case an intense desire. Anything that does not begin from affection is not spontaneous or free, for everything spontaneous or free is in keeping with one's affection or love, 2870. This consideration is also evident from the derivation of the expression in the original language as a lack, for if the intense desire is lacking, all sense of freedom is at an end, in which case that which a pervert does is referred to as non-freedom and at length that which is compulsory.

[2] It may be seen from the paragraphs quoted above in 4029 that every joining together of truth and good, and therefore all reformation and regeneration, is effected in freedom, that is, is the outcome of what is spontaneous. Consequently no joining together of truth and good, thus no regeneration, is possible in the absence of freedom, that is, through compulsion. What freedom is, and the origin of it, see 2870-2893, where Human Freedom is the subject. Anyone who is unaware of the fact that no joining of truth and good, that is, no making of these one's own, and so no regeneration, is possible except in a person's freedom, ends up - if he reasons about the Lord's Providence, about human salvation, and about the eternal damnation of many - with utterly dim misconceptions and then with serious errors. For he imagines that if the Lord is willing, He is able to save anyone, and to do so by all manner of means beyond number - by miracles, by the dead coming back again, by direct revelations, by angels withholding people from evils, and driving them to good by the plain use of force, and by many states into which a person is introduced and becomes repentant, and by many other means.

[3] But he does not know that all of these means involve compulsion and that nobody can be reformed through them. For anything that compels a person does not impart any affection to him; or if it is of such a nature that it does impart an affection, it binds itself to an affection for evil. Indeed it seems to instill, and does in fact instill, some holiness, but even so, when the state is altered he goes back to his previous affections, which are evils and falsities. In that case that holiness links itself to the evils and falsities and is turned into profanity, such as leads him into the worst hell of all. For that person first of all acknowledges and believes, and also has an affection for what is holy; but after that he denies it, indeed he loathes it. For profaners are those who at one point acknowledge with the heart and after that deny, not those who have not acknowledged with the heart, see 301-303, 571, 582, 593, 1001, 1008, 1010, 1059, 1327, 1328, 2051, 2426, 3398, 3399, 3402, 3898. For this reason evident miracles do not take place at the present day, only miracles which are not evident or plain to see and which are of such a nature that they do not enforce any holiness or take away a person's freedom from him. This is why the dead do not come back again and why no one is withheld from evil by direct revelations, or by angels, and led to good by the plain use of force.

[4] It is man's freedom into which the Lord operates, and by means of which He turns him in a different direction. For all freedom involves that which is present in his love or affection, and so in his will, 3158. If he does not receive good and truth in freedom it cannot be made or become his own, since that which is for him compulsory is not his own but belongs to whoever compels it. For he is not acting of himself even though the action is done by him. It does sometimes seem as though a person is drawn under compulsion towards good, as in temptations and spiritual conflicts. But within these experiences he is in greater freedom than when he is outside them, see 1937, 1947, 2881. It also seems as though a person is acting under compulsion when he compels himself to do good; but self-compulsion is one thing, being compelled is another. Self-compulsion with anyone is a product of the freedom within him, but being compelled is a product of non-freedom. This shows what dim misconceptions and then what errors people end up with who reason about the Lord's Providence, about human salvation, and about the eternal damnation of many, yet who are unaware of the fact that it is freedom through which the Lord operates and by no means through compulsion. For compulsion in things of a holy nature if not freely accepted is dangerous.