7022. 'And Moses took his wife' means the good linked to [the law from God]. This is clear from the representation of 'Moses' as the Lord in respect of the law or truth from God, dealt with already; and from the meaning of 'wife' as the good linked to it, dealt with in 4510, 4823. In the internal sense, and also in the highest sense in which the Lord is the subject, 'the wife' who was married to Moses represents the good that had been joined to truth, the reason for this being that every single thing in the spiritual world and in the natural world has the likeness of a marriage within it. The likeness of a marriage exists wherever there is that which is active and that which is passive; and both must be present with each other wherever anything comes into being. Unless they are joined together nothing can possibly be produced. One reason why the likeness of a marriage is present in all things is that all things have a connection with goodness and truth and so with the heavenly marriage, which is a marriage of goodness and truth; and the heavenly marriage has a connection with the Divine marriage, which is a marriage of Divine Good and Divine Truth. And another reason is, as has been stated, that nothing can be produced or brought into being unless there is that which is active and that which is passive, and so unless the likeness of a marriage exists. From all this it is plainly evident that the truth of faith devoid of the good of charity cannot produce anything, and neither can the good of charity devoid of the truth of faith. The two must be joined together to bear fruit and to establish the life of heaven in a person. Regarding the likeness of a marriage present in every single thing, see 1432, 2177, 2516, 5194. And since each detail of the Word has the marriage of goodness and truth within it, 683, 793, 801, 2516, 2712, 4138 (end), 5138, 6343, each detail of the Word has heaven within it, for heaven constitutes that actual marriage. And since each detail of the Word has heaven within it, each detail has the Lord within it, because the Lord is the All in all of heaven. All this shows how it comes about that 'the wife of Moses' represents the good that had been joined to truth, even in the highest sense in which the Lord is the subject, in the same way as Sarah the wife of Abraham represents such good, dealt with in 2063, 2065, 2172, 2173, 2198, and also Rebekah the wife of Isaac, in 3012, 3013, 3077.

2209. 'And I have grown old' means after it ceased to be such - that is, ceased to be [merely] human and not Divine - when that which was human was cast off. This is clear from the meaning of 'growing old' as casting off the human, dealt with above in 2198, 2203. As regards the rational in general, when it thinks about Divine things, especially from the truth it possesses, it cannot possibly believe that such things exist. It is unable to do so because for one thing it has no grasp of them, and for another appearances born from the illusions of the senses cling to it, by means of which and from which it thinks, as becomes clear from the examples which have been introduced above in 2196. To these, for the sake of illustration, let the following be added.

[2] Is the rational, if consulted, able to believe in the existence of the internal sense of the Word which, as has been shown, is so remote from the literal sense? And is it thus able to believe that the Word is that which joins heaven and earth together, that is, the Lord's kingdom in heaven to the Lord's kingdom on earth? Is the rational able to believe that souls after death converse with one another most distinctly, doing so not by means of speech consisting of spoken words, yet nevertheless so completely that they express more in a minute than man does in an hour by the use of his speech; or that the angels likewise converse with one another, but in a language which is more perfect still though imperceptible to spirits; and also that all souls on entering the next life know how to use this kind of speech even though they are never taught how to do so? Is the rational able to believe that present within one affection which a person has, indeed within a single sigh expressing his affection, there are things perceived by angels which are so countless that they cannot possibly be described; or that every affection which a person has, indeed every idea comprising his thought, is an image of him and is such that it includes within it in a wondrous fashion every detail of his life, besides thousands upon thousands of other such things?

[3] When the rational which derives its wisdom from the evidence of the senses, and is wrapped in the illusions of the senses, thinks about such things it does not believe that they can be so, for it is not able to form any idea for itself except from such things as it perceives by some sensory power whether external or internal. How must it be when it thinks about Divine celestial and Divine spiritual things which are higher still? For there must always exist, born from the evidence of the senses, some appearances for thought to rest upon, and when these appearances are withdrawn the idea ceases to exist. This has also become clear to me from spirits who are newcomers and who take very great delight in the appearances they have brought with them from the world. They have said that they did not know whether they would be able to think if those appearances were taken away from them. Such is the nature of the rational regarded in itself.