10437. 'Why should the Egyptians speak, saying' means those interested solely in outward things, what they say about those raised to inward things. This is clear from the representation of 'the Egyptians' as those interested solely in outward things; and from the meaning of 'to speak, saying' as what they say about those who are raised to inward things, the latter being the ones whom the words that directly follow refer to in the internal sense. The reason why those interested solely in outward things are represented by 'the Egyptians' is that in ancient times the Egyptians were some of those among whom the representative Church existed. For this Church had spread throughout very many regions of Asia, and at that time the Egyptians excelled all others in the knowledge of correspondences and representations, which were the characteristic of that Church. For they knew the inward things which outward ones represented and consequently were meaningful signs of. But in course of time the like happened to them as happens to others among whom the Church exists, when from being interested in inward things they become interested in outward ones, till at length they do not care about inward things, and make the whole of worship consist in outward things.

[2] When this also happened with the Egyptians the knowledge of correspondences and representations, in which they excelled all others in Asia, was turned into magic. This is what comes about when the inner things of worship, which are those of love and faith, are wiped out, while the outward representative worship still remains, together with knowledge of the inner things that are represented by it. Because the Egyptians came to be like this, in the Word they mean knowledge of inner things, and also that which is outward or natural. And since that which is outward devoid of what is inward is either magic or idolatry, both of which are hellish, 'Egypt' also means hell. From this it is evident why it is that 'why should the Egyptians say' means those interested solely in outward things.

[3] In Egypt as well the representative Church existed, see 7097, 7296, 9391.

'Egypt' means the knowledge of such things in both senses, 1164, 1165, 1186, 1462, 2588, 4749, 4964, 4966, 5700, 5702, 6004, 6015, 6125, 6651, 6673, 6679, 6683, 6750, 7926.

'Egypt' means that which is natural or external, 4967, 5079, 5080, 5095, 5160, 5276, 5278, 5280, 5288, 5301, 5799, 6004, 6015, 6147, 6252, 7353, 7355, 7648.

'Egypt' means hell, 7039, 7097, 7107, 7110, 7126, 7142, 7220, 7228, 7240, 7278, 7307, 7317, 8049, 8132, 8135, 8138, 8146, 8148, 8866, 9197.

3519. 'And take for me from there two good kids of the she-goats' means truths born from that good. This is clear from the meaning of 'kids of the she-goats' as truths born from good, dealt with below. The reason for having 'two' was that as in the rational so in the natural there are things of the will and those of the understanding. Things in the natural that belong to the will are delights, while those that belong to the understanding are facts. These two have to be joined together if they are to be anything at all.

[2] As regards 'kids of the she-goats' meaning truths born from good, this becomes clear from those places in the Word where kids and she-goats are mentioned. It should be recognized that all gentle and useful beasts mentioned in the Word mean in the genuine sense celestial things, which are forms of good, and spiritual things, which are forms of truth, see 45, 46, 142, 143, 246, 714, 715, 776, 2179, 2180, 2781, 3218. And since there are various genera of celestial things or forms of good, and consequently there are various genera of spiritual things or forms of truth, one beast has a different meaning from another; that is to say, a lamb has one meaning, a kid another, and a sheep, she-goat, ram, he-goat, young bull, or ox another, while a horse or a camel has yet another meaning. Birds have a different meaning again, as also do beasts of the sea, such as sea monsters, and fish. The genera of celestial and spiritual things, and consequently of forms of good and truth, are more than anyone can number, even though when that which is celestial or good is mentioned, and also when that which is spiritual or truth, this is not envisaged as being anything complex, consisting of many parts, but as a single entity. Yet how complex both of these are, that is, how countless the genera are of which they consist, may be seen from what has been stated about heaven in 3241, to the effect that it is distinguished into countless separate communities, according to the genera of celestial and spiritual things, that is, of goods of love and of derivative truths of faith. Furthermore each genus of good and each genus of truth has countless species into which the communities of each genus are separated. And each species in a similar way has separate sub-species.

[3] The commonest genera of good and truth are what the living creatures offered as burnt offerings and sacrifices represented. And because the genera are quite distinct and separate, people were explicitly commanded to use those living creatures and no others, that is to say, in some sacrifices lambs and ewe-lambs, and also kids and female kids of she-goats were to be used, in other sacrifices rams and sheep, and also he-goats, were to be used, while in other sacrifices again, calves, young bulls, and oxen, or else pigeons and doves, were to be used, see 992, 1823, 2180, 2805, 2807, 2830, 3218. What kids and she-goats meant however becomes clear both from the sacrifices in which they used to be offered and from other places in the Word. These show that lambs and ewe-lambs meant innocence belonging to the internal or rational man, and kids and she-goats innocence belonging to the external or natural man, and so the truth and the good of the latter.

[4] The fact that truth and good present in the innocence that belongs to the external or natural man is meant by a kid and a she-goat is clear from the following places in the Word: In Isaiah,

The wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the kid, the calf also and the young lion and the sheep together; and a little child will lead them. Isaiah 11:6.

This refers to the Lord's kingdom and to the state there in which people have no fear of evil, that is, no dread of hell, because they are with the Lord. 'The lamb' and 'the kid' stand for people who have innocence within them, and who, being the most secure of all, are mentioned first.

[5] When all the firstborn of Egypt were smitten the people were commanded to kill from among the lambs or among the kids a male without blemish, and to put some of the blood on the doorposts and on the lintel of their houses; and so the destroyer would not strike them with the plague, Exodus 12:5, 7, 13. 'The firstborn of Egypt' means the good of love and charity that was wiped out, 3325. 'The lambs' and 'the kids' are states of innocence, in which those with whom these exist are secure from evil. Indeed all in heaven are kept secure by the Lord through states of innocence. That security was represented by the killing of the lamb or kid, and putting the blood on the doorposts and on the lintel of the houses. .

[6] To avert his own death when a person saw Jehovah manifested as an angel he would sacrifice 'a kid of the she-goats', as Gideon did when he saw Him, Judges 6:19, and also Manoah, Judges 13:15-16, 19. The reason they offered a kid was that Jehovah or the Lord cannot appear to anybody, not even to an angel, unless the one to whom He appears is in a state of innocence. Therefore as soon as the Lord is present people are brought into a state of innocence, for the Lord enters in by way of innocence, even with angels in heaven. Consequently no one is able to enter heaven unless he has a measure of innocence, according to the Lord's words recorded in Matthew 18:3; Mark 10:15; Luke 18:17. Regarding people's belief that they would die when Jehovah appeared to them if they did not offer such a burnt offering, see Judges 13:22-23.

[7] Since genuine conjugial love is innocence itself, 2736, it was customary in the representative Church for a man to go to his wife with the gift of a kid of the she-goats, as one reads of Samson in Judges 15:1, and also of Judah when he visited Tamar, Genesis 38:17, 20, 23. The fact that 'a kid' and 'a she-goat' meant innocence is also evident from the sacrifices made as guilt offerings that a person would offer if he had sinned through error, Leviticus 1:10; 4:28; 5:6. Sinning through error is sinning through ignorance that has innocence within it. The same is evident from the following Divine command in Moses,

You shall bring the first of the firstfruits of your land to the house of Jehovah your God. You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk. Exodus 23:19; 34:26.

Here the requirement 'to bring the firstfruits of the land to the house of Jehovah' means the state of innocence which exists in early childhood; and 'not boiling a kid in its mother's milk' means that they were not to destroy the innocence of early childhood. This being their meaning, the one command, in both places referred to, follows directly after the other. In the literal sense there seems to be no connection at all between them as there is in the internal sense.

[8] Because kids and she-goats, as has been stated, meant innocence it was also required that the curtains over the tabernacle should be made from she-goat hair, Exodus 25:4; 26:7; 35:5-6, 23, 26; 36:14, as a sign that all the holy things represented in it depended for their very being on innocence. 'She-goat hair' means the last or outermost degree of innocence present in ignorance, such as exists with gentiles who in the internal sense are meant by the curtains of the tabernacle. These considerations now show what truths born of good are, and what the nature of these is, meant by the two good kids of the she-goats which Rebekah his mother spoke about to Jacob. That is to say, they are truths belonging to innocence or early childhood, meant also by the things which Esau was to bring to Isaac his father, dealt with in 3501, 3508. They were not in fact such truths, but initially they appeared to be. Thus it was that Jacob pretended by means of them to be Esau.