This is commonly taken as literal heaven, but why should it be, seeing that the same heaven is referred to in v. 1 and that is clearly figurative?
Tavaliselt võetakse siin taevast kui reaalset, kuid miks peaks see nii olema, kui seesama taevas, millest oli varem juttu (värss 1), võetakse vastu, kogu tõenäosuses, kujundlikuna.