10035. And the flesh of the bullock. That this signifies the evil of the former loves there, is evident from the signification of “flesh,” as being the good of love, and in the opposite sense the evil of love (of which below); and from the signification of “the bullock,” as being the external or natural (of which above). For by a “bullock” and a “calf” in a good sense is signified the external or natural of man in respect to the good of innocence and of charity; but in the opposite sense, the external or natural of man in respect to the evil which is contrary to the good of innocence and of charity; for in the Word most things have also an opposite sense. That “the flesh of the bullock” here signifies the evil of the former loves in the external or natural man, is because by “flesh” is signified man’s will, thus his own, for that which is of the will is his own; and as by “flesh” is signified the will or own, therefore by it is also signified the good of love, or the evil of love. For in man there are two faculties called understanding and will. To the understanding pertain truths or falsities; but to the will, goods or evils. Thus to the understanding pertain the things of faith, and to the will the things of love, because the things of love are perceived as goods, and the things of faith are perceived as truths. Moreover, with those who are in falsities and evils, falsities are of faith, and evils are of love.

[2] From this it can be seen what is meant by the own of the will, which is signified by “flesh” in both senses. Be it known further that all the own of the will of man is evil, because from himself man loves nothing but himself and the world, and if he loves his neighbor it is for the sake of himself. Therefore he must be regenerated, and through regeneration receive a new will; but the will which he receives through regeneration is not of the man, but of the Lord with the man. When this will or will part is meant by “flesh,” then “flesh” signifies the good of love. (But see what has already been shown concerning “flesh,” and concerning own, namely, that “flesh” signifies the Lord’s own which is Divine good, and from this it signifies all the good of love with the regenerate man, n. 3813, 7850, 9127; and that in the opposite sense it signifies the own of the will of man, which is the evil of love, n. 999, 3813, 8409.) (That the Lord’s own denotes the Divine good, and from this the good of love to Him and toward the neighbor, because the Lord’s own is that which gives the life of heaven to man when he is being regenerated, see n. 1023, 1044, 1937, 1947, 3812, 5660, 5786, 8480; and that man’s own is nothing but evil, n. 210, 215, 694, 874-876, 987, 1047, 3812, 4328, 5660, 5786, 8480, 8497.) That by “the flesh of this bullock” is signified the evil of love, is evident from what follows in this verse, namely, that the flesh, the skin, and the dung were to be burned without the camp, because they were sin. But what was represented by the command that the flesh of the sacrifice was to be eaten by the priest and by the people in the holy place, will be seen below (n. 10040).

10040. As the flesh of the bullock with its skin and dung was to be burnt with fire without the camp, it can be seen that by its “flesh” was not signified the good of love, but the evil of love, according to what was said of its flesh above (n. 10035), and of the camp just above (n. 10038). But that the eating of the flesh of the sacrifice was allowed, as can be seen from the passages which follow, was because that nation, while in worship, was in the external without the internal (see the places cited in n. 9320, 9380); and the external without the internal is not at all holy, because then there is only gesture of the body and speech of the mouth, and the heart and soul are absent. Nevertheless the external without the internal was called holy, because it represented holy internal things. Holy internal things are all things that belong to love and faith from the Lord to the Lord. As that nation was of this character, they were not allowed to eat blood and fat, because by “blood” was signified the Divine truth which is of faith, and by “fat” the Divine good which is of love, both from the Lord (see above, n. 10033); but they were allowed to eat the flesh of the sacrifice, because it signified what is man’s own (n. 10035), and the own of that nation was to worship external things as holy, and to make no account whatever of internal things; which worship, except as a representative that was holy, was idolatrous (n. 4281, 4311). Moreover, representatively “flesh” is nothing else, seeing that its blood represented Divine truth and its fat Divine good (n. 10033), for in this case the flesh represented something without life and soul, which is called dead, as is the external without the internal, according to these words in Moses:

Thou shalt not eat the blood, for the blood is the soul; thou shalt not eat the soul with the flesh (Deuteronomy 12:23).

[2] Worship is nearly similar with the Gentile people of the Catholic religion, as it is called, namely, external without internal; for it is not granted to the common people to know the internal things of the Word, seeing that they are not allowed to read the Word. For this reason also it has of the Lord’s Divine Providence come to pass that in the Holy Supper the bread is given, which is “the flesh;” and not the wine, which is “the blood;” and yet the blood is what gives life to the flesh, as the wine does to the bread. For as bread without wine does not give nourishment to the body, so neither does the good of love, which is signified by “bread” and by “flesh,” without the truth of faith, which is signified by “wine” and by “blood,” give nourishment to the soul. By the Divine Providence of the Lord it has also come to pass that the priest should drink up the wine, because by this is signified the nourishment of the soul by Divine truth without the good of love, which is a holy external without a holy internal. That this has come to pass by the Divine Providence of the Lord they do not know, because they idolatrously adore external things, and thus do not apprehend internal ones; and therefore if they had acted differently they would have profaned holy things just like the Jews. By drinking wine alone, is also signified alone to know Divine truth, and not the common people, except insofar and in such a way as the priests wish, as also is the case there. (That in the Holy Supper the flesh and the bread denote the Divine good of the Lord’s Divine love toward the human race, and the reciprocal love of man to the Lord; and that the blood and the wine denote the Divine truth that proceeds from the Lord’s Divine good, thus the truth of faith from the Lord to the Lord, see n. 3464, 3813, 4211, 4217, 4735, 4976, 6135, 6377, 6789, 7850, 9127) As regards the flesh of the sacrifices, when it was to be brought forth out of the camp, and burned with fire, see Leviticus 4:11-12, 21; and when and by whom it was to be eaten, Leviticus 6:19 end; 7:6, 15-19 19:5-6; Deuteronomy 12:7, 17-18, 27; 26:6-7.