10283. 'It shall not be poured onto the flesh of a person' means no imparting [of what is the Lord's] to a person's proprium or self. This is clear from the meaning of 'the flesh of a person' as his proprium, dealt with below; and from the meaning of 'pouring onto' as imparting to. For 'pouring' has a similar meaning to 'touching'; but 'pouring' is used in connection with liquids, namely oil, wine, and water, and 'pouring out' in connection with Divine, heavenly, and spiritual realities, whereas 'touching' is used in connection with dry substances and with bodily things. For the meaning of 'touching' as imparting, see 10130. From this it follows that 'the anointing oil shall not be poured onto the flesh of a person' means that there is no imparting of the Divine Good of the Lord's Divine Love to a person's proprium or self, because a person's proprium is nothing but evil and the Lord's Divine Good cannot be imparted to what is evil.

A person's proprium or self is nothing but evil, see 210, 215, 694, 731, 874-876, 987, 1023, 1024, 1047, 5660, 5786, 8480.

[2] One part of the human proprium belongs to the will and the other part to the understanding; the will part consists of evil, and the understanding part of falsity arising from this. The former - the will part of the proprium - is meant by human flesh, and the understanding part by the blood of that flesh. The truth of this is clear from the following places: In Matthew,

Jesus said, Blessed are you, Simon, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. Matthew 16:17.

It is plainly evident that 'flesh' here, and also 'blood', means the human proprium or self.

[3] In John,

As many as received Him, to them He gave power to be sons of God, who were born, not of blood ¹ , nor of the will of the flesh, but of God. John 1:12-13.

'Blood' here means falsities that come out of the understanding part of the human proprium, and 'the will of the flesh' evils that spring from the will part of it. For the meaning of 'blood' as falsity arising from evil, thus what is in the understanding part of the proprium as a result of what is in the will part, see 4735, 9127.

[4] In Isaiah,

I will feed your oppressors with their flesh and they will be drunk with their blood as with new wine. Isaiah 49:26.

'Feeding them with their flesh' and 'making them drunk with their blood' stands for filling them up with evil and the falsity of evil, thus with what is of the proprium or what is one's own; for both the evil and the falsity come out of the proprium.

[5] In Jeremiah,

Cursed is the man (homo) who trusts in man (homo) and makes flesh his arm. Jeremiah 17:5.

'Trusting in man and making flesh his arm' means trusting in oneself and one's proprium.

[6] In Isaiah,

The people have become as fuel for the fire. If any of them cuts down on the right he will be hungry, and if any eats on the left they will not be satisfied. Each will eat the flesh of his own arm ² ; Manasseh [will eat] Ephraim, and Ephraim Manasseh. Isaiah 9:19-21.

'Fuel for the fire' means making the evils or desires of self-love and love of the world one's own, 'being hungry' and 'not being satisfied' mean not accepting the good or the truth of faith, and 'the flesh of his arm' means both parts of the human proprium, 'Manasseh' meaning evil in the will, 'Ephraim' falsity in the understanding, and 'eating' making one's own.

'Fire' means the evils or desires of self-love and love of the world, see 5071, 5215, 6314, 6832, 7324, 7575, 9141.

The reason why 'being hungry' and 'not being satisfied' mean not accepting the good or the truth of faith is that 'hunger' or famine and 'thirst' mean desolation with regard to goodness and truth, 5360, 5376, 6110, 7102, 8568(end).

'The right' means good from which truth emanates, and 'the left' truth through which good comes, 10061; consequently 'being hungry if any of them cuts down on the right, and not being satisfied if any eats on the left' means that no matter how much instruction they may receive about goodness and truth they will not accept them.

[7] 'Manasseh' means good in the will, 5351, 5353, 5354(end), 6222, 6234, 6238, 6267, and 'Ephraim' truth in the understanding, 3969, 5354, 6222, 6234, 6238, 6267, so that in the contrary sense 'Manasseh' means evil in the will and 'Ephraim' falsity in the understanding, since almost everything in the Word also has a contrary meaning.

'Eating' means making one's own, 3168, 3513(end), 3596, 4745, from which it is evident what 'eating the flesh of his own arm' means, namely making evil and falsity originating in the proprium one's own.

The expression 'flesh of the arm' is used because 'the arm', like 'the hand', means the powers present in a person, in which he puts his trust, see in the places referred to in 10019.

[8] In Zechariah,

I said, I will not feed you. Let the one that is dying die; [the sheep] that are left will eat, every one the flesh of another. Zechariah 11:9.

'Not feeding' stands for not teaching and reforming, 'dying' for loss of spiritual life, and 'eating the flesh of another' for making evils originating in the proprium of another one's own.

[9] In Ezekiel,

Jerusalem committed whoredom with the sons of Egypt, her neighbours, the great in flesh. Ezekiel 16:26.

'Jerusalem' stands for the perverted Church, 'committing whoredom with the sons of Egypt, the great in flesh' for falsifying the Church's truths by means of factual knowledge which begins in the natural man alone, thus by means of factual knowledge based on sensory evidence.

'Jerusalem' means the Church, see 402, 2117, 3654, in this instance the Church when it has been perverted.

'Committing whoredom' means falsifying truths, 2466, 2729, 8904.

'Sons' means truths, or else falsities, 1147, 3373, 4257, 9807.

'Egypt' means factual knowledge, in either [a good or a bad] sense, see in the places referred to in 9340, and also the natural, in the places referred to in 9391.

Consequently the words 'the great in flesh' describe people who, relying on sensory evidence, reason and draw conclusions about the Church's truths. Those who do this lay hold of falsities as truths, for to rely on sensory evidence to reason and draw conclusions about anything is to rely on the illusions of the bodily senses. People therefore who are ruled by their senses are meant by 'the great in flesh'; for their own bodily perceptions govern their thinking.

[10] In Isaiah,

Egypt is man (homo) and not God, and his horses are flesh, but not spirit. Isaiah 31:3.

Here also 'Egypt' stands for factual knowledge, 'his horses' for a power of understanding consisting of this. That power is called 'flesh, not spirit' when people use what is their own and not God's to draw conclusions.

By 'horses' is meant the power of understanding, see 2761, 2762, 3217, 5321, 6534, and by 'the horses of Egypt' factual knowledge supplied from a perverted understanding, 6125, 8146, 8148.

[11] The fact that 'flesh' means a person's proprium or selfhood, or what amounts to the same thing, his own evil will, is clear in Moses, where the subject is the Israelite people's desire for flesh to eat, described as follows,

The rabble who were in the midst of the people had a strong craving and said, Who will feed us with flesh? Jehovah said, Tomorrow you will eat flesh. Not for one day will you eat it, nor for two days, nor for five days, nor for ten days, nor for twenty days, [but] for a whole month. And a wind set out from Jehovah, and it cut off the quails from the sea and sent them down ³ over the camp, about two cubits above the surface of the land. The people rose up that whole day, and the whole night, and the whole of the next day, and gathered them and spread them out all around the camp. The flesh was still between their teeth, before it could be swallowed, and Jehovah's anger flared up against the people, and He struck the people with an extremely great plague. So he called the name of the place The Graves of Craving. Numbers 11:4, 18-20, 31-34.

[12] The fact that 'flesh' meant that nation's proprium becomes clear from every detail in these verses; for unless this had been meant what evil could there have been in their desire for flesh, especially as flesh had been promised them on a previous occasion, Exodus 16:12? But since it meant the proprium, thus an evil will, which that nation possessed in greater measure than other nations, it says - when they desired flesh - that they 'had a strong craving', on account of which they were struck with a great plague, and on account of which the place where they were buried was called The Graves of Craving. Whether you speak of an evil will or of craving, it amounts to the same thing, for an evil will consists in craving. The human proprium has no desire for anything apart from what belongs to itself; it has no desire for anything that concerns the neighbour or anything that concerns God, unless this is beneficial to itself. Since that nation was like this it says that they would eat flesh not for one day, not for two, not for five, nor for ten, nor for twenty, but for a whole month, meaning that this nation would be like that forever (for 'a whole month' means forever); and for the same reason it says that while the flesh was still between their teeth, before it could be swallowed, they were struck with a great plague. For by 'teeth' the bodily level of the proprium, the lowest of a person's mind, is meant, 4424(end), 5565-5568, 9062. The fact that this nation was like this may be seen in the places referred to in 9380, and in the Song of Moses, at Deuteronomy 32:20, 22-26, 28, 32-34.

[13] In the Word spirit is set in contrast to flesh, for 'spirit' means life from the Lord and 'flesh' life from man, as in John,

It is the Spirit which bestows life, the flesh does not profit anything. The words that I speak to you, they are spirit and they are life. John 6:63.

From this it is clear that 'spirit' means life from the Lord, which is the life of love to Him and faith in Him, received from Him, and that 'flesh' means life from man, thus his selfhood. This is why it says 'the flesh does not profit anything'. Something similar is meant elsewhere in John,

That which has been born from the flesh is flesh, but that which has been born from the spirit is spirit. John 3:6.

In David,

God remembered that they were flesh; a spirit which would pass away would not come back. Psalms 78:39.

[14] Since 'flesh' in reference to man means his proprium, which consists of the evil of self-love and love of the world, it is evident what 'flesh' means when used in reference to the Lord, namely His Proprium, which consists of the Divine Good of Divine Love. This is what 'the Lord's flesh' means in John,

The bread which I will give you is My flesh. Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you will have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life; for My flesh is truly food and My blood is truly drink. John 6:51, 53-55.

'The flesh' of the Lord means the Divine Good of His Divine Love, and 'the blood' the Divine Truth emanating from that Divine Good, so that they are similar in meaning to the bread and wine in the Holy Supper; and those Divine Realities are His own, present within His Divine Human, see 1001, 3813, 4735, 6978, 7317, 7326, 7850, 9127, 9393, 10026, 10033, 10152. Also, the sacrifices represented forms of good that originate in the Lord, and therefore the flesh of those sacrifices meant forms of good, 10040, 10079. Furthermore, various places in the Word use the expression 'all flesh', by which every human being should be understood, as in Genesis 6:12-13, 17, 19; Isaiah 40:5-6; 49:26; 66:16, 23-24; Jeremiah 25:31; 32:27; 45:5; Ezekiel 20:48; 21:4-5; and elsewhere.

脚注:

4763. 'And he rent his clothes' means mourning. This is clear from the meaning of 'rending clothes' as mourning, that is to say, mourning on account of the loss of truth, or the fact that no faith exists. In the Word, especially the historical part, one often reads about people rending their clothes, but the origin of that practice is not known at the present day. Nor is it known that it was representative of grief on account of the loss of truth. This practice became representative from the fact that 'clothes' meant truths, as has been shown and may be seen in 4545. Further on in this chapter it is also said that when Jacob recognized his son's tunic he rent his clothes, verse 34, by which mourning for lost truth is meant. Similar instances of this practice occur elsewhere in the Word, where it is stated that when the Rabshakeh was sent by Sennacherib king of Asshur and uttered insults against Jerusalem, Eliakim who was over the king's house, and Shebna the secretary, and Joash the recorder ¹ rent their clothes and reported these things to king Hezekiah; and when he heard them the king too rent his clothes and covered himself with sackcloth, Isaiah 36:22; 37:1; 2 Kings 18:37; 19:1. The insults he uttered were directed against God, the king, and Jerusalem, and so against Divine Truth, as is even more evident from the internal sense of this narrative. It was to express mourning therefore that their clothes were rent.

[2] When Jehudi had read before the king the scroll which Jeremiah wrote, it is said that he threw it into the fire, but the king and his servants who were listening to all those words did not tear their clothes apart, Jeremiah 36:23-24. 'They did not tear their clothes apart' meant that they did not mourn on account of the non-acceptance of Divine Truth. Something similar is implied by Joshua the son of Nun and Caleb the son of Jephunneh rending their clothes, when the spies spoke in opposition to them, by speaking unfavourably about the land of Canaan, Numbers 14:6; for 'the land of Canaan' means the Lord's kingdom, and 'to speak in opposition to this' describes falsity in opposition to Divine Truth. Mourning over the loss of Divine Truth and Divine Good is meant where it is said, in 1 Samuel 4:11-12, that when the ark of God was captured by the Philistines and both of Eli's sons died, a man ran from the line of battle to Shiloh, with rent clothes and dust on his head. Because 'the ark' represented the Lord's kingdom, and in the highest sense the Lord Himself, and consequently represented everything holy in the Church, 'rent clothes' meant grief over the loss of Divine Truth, while 'dust on his head' meant grief over the loss of Divine Good.

[3] In the narrative about Samuel and Saul one reads,

When Samuel turned to go away Saul took hold of the skirt of his tunic, and it was torn away. Therefore Samuel said to him, Jehovah has torn the kingdom of Israel from upon you this day and has given it to your companion. I will not return with you, for you have rejected the word of Jehovah, and Jehovah has rejected you from being king over Israel. 1 Samuel 15:26-28.

The tearing away by Saul of the skirt of Samuel's tunic represented that which Samuel then stated - that the kingdom would be torn from him and that he would not be the king of Israel any longer. For 'the kingdom' in the internal sense means Divine Truth, 1672, 2547, 4691, as also does 'king' and 'kingship', 1672, 1728, 2015, 2069, 3009, 3670, 4575, 4581, especially the king and the kingdom of Israel, since 'Israel' represented the Lord's kingship. The meaning is similar in what is recorded concerning Jeroboam and Ahijah the prophet,

When Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, and Ahijah the prophet found him on the road, when he was covered with a new garment and both were alone in the field, Ahijah took hold of the new garment that was on him and rent it into twelve pieces; and he said to Jeroboam, Take for yourself ten pieces; for thus said Jehovah, the God of Israel, behold, I am rending [the kingdom] from the hand of Solomon and I will give you ten tribes. 1 Kings 11:29-31.

[4] The second Book of Samuel likewise records that when Saul was killed in battle they tore their clothes apart,

When Saul was killed in battle, on the third day a man came from the camp, whose clothes had been rent. And when David heard about the death of Saul, David took hold of his garments and tore them apart; and so did all his servants who were with him. 2 Samuel 1:2, 10-12.

This too represented mourning because of Divine Truth, lost and cast away by those who adhered to faith separated from charity. For as stated above, 'kingship' meant Divine Truth, while 'the Philistines' by whom Saul was slain represented adherents to faith separated from charity, 1197, 1198, 3412, 3413. The same is also evident from David's lament over him, in verses 18-27 of the same chapter.

[5] When Absalom had slain Amnon his brother and the news reached David that Absalom had slain all the king's sons, David tore his clothes apart and lay on the ground; and all his servants standing by tore their clothes apart, 2 Samuel 13:28, 30-31. This too was done for the sake of the representation that truths from the Divine were lost, those truths being meant in the internal sense by 'the king's sons'. A similar meaning exists in the reference to Hushai the Archite who with his tunic torn apart came to meet David when he fled from Absalom, 2 Samuel 15:32; for in the Word 'a king', and in particular David, represents Divine Truth. The meaning is also very similar in the reference to Ahab, who tore his clothes apart and put sackcloth over his flesh when Elijah told Ahab the king of Israel the words of Jehovah, to the effect that he would be completely wiped out for the evil he had done, 1 Kings 21:27-29.

[6] The fact that tearing apart or rending clothes represented mourning the loss of Truth is additionally clear from the following: Hilkiah the priest found the Book of the law in the house of Jehovah. When Shaphan read it before king Josiah and the king heard the words of the Book of the law, he tore his clothes apart, 2 Kings 22:11. Plainly the king did so because the Word, that is, Divine truth, had been lost for so long and in their hearts and life had been blotted out.

[7] The tearing apart of his own clothes by the high priest, when the Lord confessed He was the Christ the Son of God, and his declaration that He had spoken utter blasphemy, Matthew 26:63-65; Mark 14:63-64, meant that the high priest was absolutely convinced that the Lord had spoken against the Word and so against Divine truth. When Elijah went up in the whirlwind, and Elisha saw it, it is said,

He took hold of his own clothes and tore them into two pieces. And he took up Elijah's tunic that had fallen from upon him, and he struck the waters and they were divided this way and that, and Elisha went over. 2 Kings 2:11-14.

Elisha tore his own clothes apart at that time to express mourning the loss of the Word, that is, of Divine Truth; for 'Elijah' represents the Lord as regards the Word, that is, Divine Truth, 2762. When the tunic fell from Elijah and was picked up by Elisha, the continuation of Elijah's representation by Elisha was represented, 'the tunic' meaning Divine Truth, see 4677. This also explains why the garment torn apart when such mourning took place was the tunic, as is evident from some of the places that have been quoted. Because 'a garment' meant the truth possessed by the Church, and in the highest sense Divine Truth, it was therefore shameful, except when one was mourning, to go about with clothes that were torn. This is evident from what was done to David's servants by Hanun king of the children of Ammon, when he cut off half the beard of each one, and their garments at the middle even to their buttocks, for which reason they were not allowed to come to David, 2 Samuel 10:4-5.

脚注: