3438. 'Jehovah appeared to him that night, and said' means the Lord's perception regarding that obscurity. This is clear from the meaning of 'Jehovah's appearing and saying' - when it has reference to the Lord - as perceiving from the Divine ('Jehovah's appearing to him' is perception from the Divine, see 3367, and 'laying' is perceiving, 2862, 3395. For Jehovah was within Him, and so long as the Human was not yet glorified, Jehovah's 'appearing' was a Divine perception - or perception from the Divine. Therefore 'Jehovah's appearing to him and saying' has this meaning of perceiving from the Divine); and from the meaning of 'night' as a state of shade or obscurity, dealt with in 1712. By that obscurity is meant the literal sense of the Word, for the relationship of that sense to the internal sense is that of shade to light.

[2] To enable people to have a clearer knowledge of what the situation is with the literal sense of the Word, let this be discussed briefly: The relationship of the internal sense to the literal is like the relationship between the interiors and the exteriors of the human being, that is, between all that is celestial or spiritual in him and all that is natural or bodily. His interiors dwell in the light of heaven, but his exteriors in the light of the world. For the nature of the difference between the light of heaven and the light of the world, consequently for the difference between things belonging to the light of heaven and those belonging to the light of the world, see 1521-1533, 1619-1632, 1783, 1880, 2776, 3138, 3167, 3190, 3195, 3222, 3223, 3225, 3337, 3339, 3341, 3413. That is to say, the difference is like that existing between the light of day and the shade of night. Since man dwells in that shade and does not wish to know that truth from the Lord has light within it he inevitably believes that his shade is light, and indeed the reverse also - that his light is shade. For he is like the owl which, when flying in the shade of night, imagines it is in the light, but when flying in the light of day imagines it is in the shade. Indeed the internal eye - that is, the understanding - by means of which a person sees interiorly, assumes no other shape with someone like that, such being exactly how he has shaped it. For he opens it when he looks downwards, that is, to worldly and bodily things, and shuts it when he looks upwards, that is, to spiritual and celestial. With these people it is similar with the Word. That which appears in its literal sense they imagine to belong to the light but that which appears in the internal sense they imagine to belong to the shade. For how the Word appears to anyone depends on his own essential nature. In reality the internal sense of the Word in relation to its literal sense is like the light of heaven to the light of the world, 3086, 3108, that is, it is like the light of day to the light of night.

[3] Within the internal sense there are individual details, millions of which together constitute one particular feature that occurs in the literal sense. Or what amounts to the same, within the internal sense there exist particular features, millions of which together constitute just one general whole that occurs in the literal sense. This general whole is what is seen by man, but not the particular features which are present within it and which constitute it. Nevertheless man can see within the general whole the order that holds the particular features together, though he sees it according to his own essential nature. That order is the holiness which stirs his affections.

1712. That 'he divided himself against them by night' means the shade which the apparent goods and truths were in is clear from the meaning of 'night' as a state of shade. It is called a state of shade when a person does not know whether good and truth are apparent or genuine. While a person is limited to apparent good and truth he imagines that these are genuine good and truth. It is the evil and falsity present in apparent good and truth that produce the shade and cause them to be seen as genuine. What else can people who are in ignorance know than that the good they do is their own, and that the truth they think is their own? The same applies to people who ascribe the good deeds they do to themselves and place merit in them, unaware of the fact that in this case those deeds are not good though they appear to be so, and that the proprium and the self-merit they place in them are evils and falsities that cause obscurity and darkness. And the same applies in many other instances.

[2] What evil and falsity are like, and how much evil and falsity lie concealed in such deeds, cannot possibly be seen so clearly in the life of the body as in the next life, where these are presented to view altogether as in broad daylight. But it is different if a person acts out of ignorance that has not been confirmed, for in that case those evils and falsities are easily dispersed. But if people confirm themselves in the notion that they are able to do good and to withstand evil by their own powers, and that thus they merit salvation, such a notion remains attached, and causes the good to be evil, and the truth to be falsity. Yet for all this, order requires that a person should do good as though from himself, and ought not therefore to stay his hand and think to himself, 'If I am unable to do anything good at all from myself I must wait for immediate influx' and so remain inactive. This is also contrary to order. Man ought to do good as though from himself; but when he stops to reflect on the good he is doing or has done, let him think, acknowledge, and believe that the Lord present with him has accomplished it.

[3] If by thinking as described he gives up acting as of himself he is not a subject into whom the Lord can operate. The Lord cannot flow into anyone who deprives himself of everything into which power has to be introduced. He is like someone who is not willing to learn anything except through a revelation made to him; or like someone who is not willing to teach anything unless the words are put into his mouth; or like someone who is unwilling to attempt anything unless he is directed as one without a will. But if this were done he would be more indignant still at being like an inanimate object. In fact however that which is animated by the Lord in a person is the very thing which makes it seem as though it were from himself. That man does not live from himself is an eternal truth; yet if he did not appear to do so he could not possibly live at all.