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).

5323. 'And they cried out before him, Abrek!' means acknowledgement coming through faith, and homage. This is clear from the meaning of 'crying out' as acknowledgement coming through faith, dealt with below, and from the meaning of 'Abrek!' as homage, because Abrek in the original language means 'bend your knees', and the bending of knees is homage. For every inward impulse of a person's will, thus of his love and affection, and consequently of his life, has corresponding outward actions and gestures. Those actions and gestures flow from the actual correspondence of exterior things with interior ones. Holy fear that leads to humility, and from this to homage, has corresponding actions or gestures, which are bending the knees, falling forward on the knees, and also prostration of the body flat on the ground. If in that state homage is a product of genuine humility, and if humility is the product of genuine holy fear, there is an absence of spirits, which leads to a falling downwards of the joints at the border or intermediate area where the spiritual is joined to the natural, and so where the knees are. For the parts below the knee correspond to natural things, while the parts above the knee correspond to spiritual ones. These are the reasons why bending the knees is a sign representative of homage. Among celestial people this action comes quite spontaneously, but in the case of spiritual people it is a deliberate act of their will.

[2] In former times people bent their knees before kings when they rode by in a chariot. They bent them because kings represented the Lord's Divine Truth, while 'a chariot' meant His Word. This customary act of homage came into being when people knew what was represented by it, at which time kings did not think that such homage was paid to themselves but to their kingly authority, which was distinct from yet invested in their own persons. That authority invested in them was the law, and because this law had its origin in Divine Truth, it was the law invested in the person of the king, inasmuch as he was the guardian of the law, to which homage had to be paid. Thus a king did not attribute any royal authority to himself other than guardianship of the law. Insofar as he relinquished that guardianship he relinquished his royal authority; for he knew that homage arising from any other source than the law, that is, any other homage than that paid to the law itself, was idolatry. By royal authority is meant Divine Truth - see 1672, 1728, 2015, 2069, 3009, 3670, 4581, 4966, 5044, 5068 - and therefore that authority is the law, which essentially is truth reigning in that kingdom, in accordance with which its inhabitants conduct their lives. From all this it may be seen that 'Abrek!' or 'bend your knees' means homage.

[3] Since 'a cry' is in a similar way an action which corresponds to a living confession or an acknowledgement that is a product of faith, crying out was also the custom followed by the ancients when an outward sign of such confession or acknowledgement needed to be made. The expression 'crying out' is therefore used in various places in the Word when confession and acknowledgement that are the product of faith are referred to, as in the description involving John the Baptist in John,

He bore witness to Jesus and he cried out, saying, This was He of whom I spoke, He who, though coming after me, was before me, for He was before me. I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord. John 1:15, 23.

In the same gospel,

They took branches of palm trees, and went to meet Jesus, and cried, Hosanna! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord, the King of Israel! John 12:13.

In Luke,

Jesus said to the Pharisees that if [the disciples] kept silent, the stones would cry out. Luke 19:40.

Because 'crying out' meant an acknowledgement that was the product of faith and consequently acceptance rising out of the acknowledgement, one therefore reads several times of the Lord's crying out, as in John 7:28, 37; 12:44-45. Also in Isaiah,

Jehovah will go forth as a Mighty Man, as a Man of Wars He will arouse zeal; He will shout aloud, and also will cry out. Isaiah 42:13.

In the contrary sense 'crying out' means lack of acknowledgement and so aversion, see 5016, 5018, 5027. This usage has reference to falsity, 2240.

4622. CONTINUATION CONCERNING CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE GRAND MAN, HERE CONCERNING THE CORRESPONDENCE OF ODOR AND OF THE NOSTRILS THEREWITH.

The dwellings of the blessed in the other life are of many kinds, and are constructed with such art as to be as it were embodiments of the very art of architecture, or to come straight from the art itself. (On this subject see what has already been related from experience, n. 1116, 1626-1630.) These dwellings appear not only to the sight, but also to the touch, for all things there are adapted to the sensations of spirits and angels, and hence are such as do not come to bodily sense like that of man, but to that possessed by those who are there. I know that this is incredible to many, but this is because nothing is believed which cannot be seen by the bodily eyes and felt with the hands of flesh. For this reason the man of this day, whose interiors are closed, knows nothing of the things which exist in the spiritual world or in heaven. He does indeed say from the Word and from doctrine that there is a heaven, and that the angels who are there are in joy and in glory, but he knows no more about the matter. How the case is there he would indeed like to know, but when told he still believes nothing, because at heart he denies the existence of such things, and his desire to know about them is prompted solely by his curiosity from doctrine, and not by any delight grounded in faith. They who are not in faith also deny at heart; but they who believe get ideas from various sources about heaven and its joy and glory, each person from such things as are of his own knowledge and intelligence, and the simple from the things of bodily sensation.

[2] Nevertheless most people do not apprehend that spirits and angels enjoy sensations much more exquisite than those of men in this world, namely, sight, hearing, smell, something analogous to taste, and touch; and especially the delights of the affections. If men would only believe that their interior essence is the spirit, and that the body and its sensations and members are adapted to uses in this world merely, and that the spirit and its sensations and organs are adapted to uses in the other life, then from themselves and almost of their own accord they would come into ideas about the state of their spirit after death; for they would reflect that the spirit must be the man himself who thinks, and who desires, longs for things, and is affected with them; and further that all the power of sensation which appears in the body belongs properly to the spirit, and to the body merely by influx; and they would afterwards confirm themselves in this idea by many considerations, and in this way would at last take more delight in the things of their spirit than in those of their body.

[3] It is also a real fact that it is not man’s body which sees, hears, smells, and feels, but his spirit; and therefore when the spirit is divested of the body, it is in its own sensations, the same as when it was in the body, only now far more exquisite; for the things of the body, being comparatively gross, had rendered the sensations obtuse, and this the more because the man had immersed them in earthly and worldly things. This I can aver-that a spirit has much more exquisite sight than a man in the body, and also much more exquisite hearing, and, astonishing to say, the sense of smell, and especially the sense of touch; for spirits see one another, hear one another, and touch one another. Moreover, anyone who believes in the life after death might infer that this is the case from the fact that no life is possible without sensation, and that the quality of the life is according to the quality of the sensation, nay, that the intellectual faculty is nothing but an exquisite sense of interior things, and the higher intellectual of spiritual things; and it is from this that the things of the intellectual and its perceptions are called internal senses.

[4] As regards man’s power of sensation immediately after death the case is this: As soon as a man dies and all things of his body grow cold, he is raised up into life, and at the same time into a state of all sensations; insomuch that at first he scarcely knows but that he is still in the body, for the sensations he then enjoys lead him so to believe. But when he observes that he has more exquisite sensations, and especially when he begins to speak with other spirits, it dawns upon him that he is in the other life, and that the death of his body has been the continuation of the life of his spirit. I have spoken with two of my acquaintances on the day of their burial, and with one who through my eyes saw his coffin and his bier; and as this man enjoyed all the sensation he had in this world, he spoke to me about the burial rites while I was following in his funeral procession, and also about his body, saying that they should throw that away because he himself was alive.

[5] Be it known, however, that they who are in the other life can see nothing whatever in this world through the eyes of any man; but that their being able to do so through mine was because I am in the spirit with them and at the same time in the body with those who are in the world (see also n. 1880). And be it further known that I did not see with my bodily eyes those with whom I have spoken in the other life, but with the eyes of my spirit; and yet I saw them as clearly, and sometimes more clearly, than with the eyes of the body; for of the Lord’s Divine mercy the senses of my spirit have been opened.

[6] But I am aware that what I have so far said will not be believed by those who are immersed in bodily, earthly, and worldly things (that is, by those of them who have such things as their end), for such people apprehend no other things than those which are dissipated by death. I am also well aware that those will not believe who have thought much and investigated much about the soul, and who have not at the same time comprehended that the soul of man is his spirit, and that his spirit is the man himself who is living in the body; for such persons could have no other notion about the soul than as of a thinking principle, whether of flame or of ether, that acts solely into the organic forms of the body, and not into those purer forms which are of the spirit in the body; thus that the soul is such a thing as must be dissipated together with the body. And this is especially the case with those who have confirmed themselves in such things by views that are inflated with a persuasion of their own preeminent wisdom.