Из произведений Сведенборга

 

Arcana Coelestia # 9372

Изучить этот эпизод

  
/ 10837  
  

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).

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Foundation for the permission to use this translation.

Из произведений Сведенборга

 

Arcana Coelestia # 3129

Изучить этот эпизод

  
/ 10837  
  

3129. And Rebekah had a brother. That this signifies the affection of good in the natural man, is evident from the signification of a “brother” and a “sister” in the Word, namely, that a “brother” is the affection of good, and a “sister” is the affection of truth (see n. 367, 2360, 2508, 2524); for in the natural man, as in the rational, there are relationships by both blood and marriage of all the things therein (see n. 2556, 2739). And it also is from this that the mind, both the rational and the natural, is called a “house” (or family), where parents, brothers, sisters, kinsmen, and other relatives exist in order.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Foundation for the permission to use this translation.

Из произведений Сведенборга

 

Arcana Coelestia # 2360

Изучить этот эпизод

  
/ 10837  
  

2360. That Lot calls them “brethren” because it is from good that he exhorts them, is evident from the signification of a “brother.” In the Word “brother” signifies the same as “neighbor,” for the reason that everyone ought to love his neighbor as himself; thus brethren were so called from love; or what is the same, from good. This manner of naming and addressing the neighbor comes from the fact that in heaven the Lord is the Father of all and loves all as His children; and thus that love is spiritual conjunction. From this the universal heaven resembles as it were one family derived from love and charity (n. 685, 917).

[2] Therefore as all the sons of Israel represented the Lord’s heavenly kingdom, that is, the kingdom of love and charity; among each other they were called “brethren,” and also “companions;” but the latter, that is, “companions,” not from the good of love, but from the truth of faith; as in Isaiah:

They help every man his companion, and he saith to his brother, Be of good courage (Isaiah 41:6).

In Jeremiah:

Thus shall ye say every man to his companion, and every man to his brother, What hath Jehovah answered? and what hath Jehovah spoken? (Jeremiah 23:35).

In David:

For my brethren and companions’ sakes I will say, Peace be within thee (Psalms 122:8).

In Moses:

He shall not press upon his companion or his brother, because the release of Jehovah hath been proclaimed (Deuteronomy 15:2-3).

In Isaiah:

I will confound Egypt with Egypt, and they shall fight every man against his brother, and every man against his companion (Isaiah 19:2).

In Jeremiah:

Beware every man of his companion, and trust ye not in any brother; for every brother will utterly supplant, and every companion will slander (Jeremiah 9:4).

[3] That all who were of that church were called by the one name “brethren,” see in Isaiah:

They shall bring all your brethren out of all the nations for an offering unto Jehovah, upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon dromedaries, to the mountain of My holiness, Jerusalem (Isaiah 66:20).

They who know nothing beyond the sense of the letter, as was the case with the Jews, believe that no others are signified than the posterity of Jacob; thus that they will be brought back to Jerusalem upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, by those whom they call the Gentiles. But by the “brethren” are meant all who are in good; and by the “horses,” “chariots,” and “litters,” the things which are of truth and good; and by “Jerusalem” the Lord’s kingdom.

[4] In Moses:

When there shall be among thee a needy one of one of thy brethren, in one of thy gates, thou shalt not harden thy heart, and shalt not shut thy hand from thy needy brother (Deuteronomy 15:7, 11).

Again:

From among thy brethren thou shalt set a King over thee; thou mayest not put over thee a foreigner, who is not thy brother, and his heart shall not be lifted up above his brethren (Deuteronomy 17:15, 20).

Again:

A prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me, Jehovah thy God will raise up unto thee; him shall ye obey (Deuteronomy 18:15, 18).

[5] From all this it is evident that the Jews and Israelites all called one another brethren; but those united by covenant they called companions. Yet as they understood nothing beyond the historical and worldly things of the Word, they believed that they called one another brethren because they were all sons of one father, or of Abraham; yet they were not called “brethren” in the Word from this circumstance, but from the good which they represented. “Abraham” also, in the internal sense, denotes nothing else than love itself, that is, the the Lord, (n. 1893, 1965, 1989, 2011), whose sons, consequently those who are “brethren,” are those who are in good, in fact all those who are called the neighbor; as the Lord teaches in Matthew:

One is your Master, Christ; all ye are brethren (Matthew 23:8).

[6] Again:

Whosoever is angry with his brother without cause shall be in danger of the judgment; whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council. If thou offer a gift upon the altar, and there remember that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother (Matthew 5:22-24).

Again:

Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye? How wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye (Matthew 7:2-4)?

Again:

If thy brother sin against thee, go and show him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother (Matthew 18:15).

Again:

Peter coming to Him said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? (Matthew 18:21).

Again:

So also will My heavenly Father do unto you, if ye from the heart forgive not everyone his brother their trespasses (Matthew 18:35).

[7] It is clear from these teachings that all in the universe who are the neighbor are called “brethren,” and this because everyone ought to love his neighbor as himself, thus they are so called from love or good. And as the Lord is good itself, and regards all from good, and is Himself the Neighbor in the highest sense, He also calls them “brethren,” as in John:

Jesus said to Mary, Go to My brethren (John 20:17).

And in Matthew:

The King answering shall say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me (Matthew 25:40).

Thus it is evident that “brother” is a term of love.

  
/ 10837  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Foundation for the permission to use this translation.