8910. 'You shall not covet your neighbour's house; you shall not covet your neighbour's wife, nor his male slave nor his female slave, nor his ox nor his ass, nor anything that is your neighbour's' means that one must be on one's guard against self-love and love of the world, and so one must take care to prevent the evils contained in the preceding commandments from becoming present in the will and consequently going out of it. This is clear from the meaning of 'coveting' as a wanting that springs from an evil love. The reason why 'coveting' has this meaning is that all covetousness or craving exists as the result of some kind of love. For nothing is coveted unless there is a love of it, and therefore covetousness extends as a continuation from some kind of love, in this instance from self-love and love of the world. It is so to speak the life of what those loves breathe, for what an evil kind of love breathes is called covetousness or craving, whereas what a good kind breathes is called desire. The love itself belongs to one of two parts of the mind, which is called the will; for what a person loves, that he wills and intends. but covetousness belongs to both parts, to both the will and the understanding, that is, it is an attribute of the will within the understanding, to be precise. All this shows why it is that the words 'you shall not covet the things that are your neighbour's' mean that one must take care to prevent them from becoming present in the will, since what takes possession of the will becomes the person's own; for, to be sure, the will is the real person.

[2] The world believes that thought is the person. But there are two powers that constitute a person's life - understanding and will - and thought belongs to the understanding, the affection inherent in love being what belongs to the will. Thought without the affection inherent in love does not in any way at all constitute a person's life; but thought springing from such affection, that is, the understanding springing from the will, does constitute it. Those two powers are distinct from each other, which is evident to anyone who stops to reflect on the matter from the consideration that with his understanding a person can perceive that that thing is bad which his will desires, and that that thing is good which his will either does or does not desire. From all this it is plain that the will is the real person, not his thought, except so far as anything passes into it from the will. So it is that things which enter a person's thought but do not pass on through it into his will do not render him unclean; only those which pass through thought on into the will do so. The reason why the latter render a person unclean is that he takes them to himself then and makes them his; for the will, as has been stated, is the real person. The things which become part of his will are said to go into his heart and to go out from there, whereas those which are merely part of his thought are said to go into the mouth and to go out by way of the bowels into the sewer, according to the Lord's words in Matthew,

Not what enters the mouth renders a person unclean, but what comes out of the mouth, this renders the person unclean. Everything that goes into the mouth departs into the bowels and is cast out into the sewer. But the things which come out of the mouth come out of the heart, and these render a person unclean. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, ravishments, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. Matthew 15:11, 17-19.

[3] From these words as from all the others the nature of the Lord's manner of speaking becomes clear. That is, its nature was such that internal or spiritual matters were meant, but they were expressed by means of external or natural things and in accordance with correspondences. For the mouth corresponds to thought, and so do all parts of the mouth, such as the lips, tongue, and throat, while the heart corresponds to the affection inherent in love, and so to the will. For the correspondence of the heart to these, see 2930, 3313, 3883-3896, 7542. Consequently 'entering the mouth' is entering thought, and 'going out of the heart' is going out of the will. 'Departing into the bowels and being cast out into the sewer (or latrine)' is going away into hell; for the bowels correspond to the way to hell, while the sewer or latrine corresponds to hell itself. Hell also in the Word is called 'the latrine'. All this shows what is meant by 'everything that goes into the mouth departs into the bowels and is cast out into the sewer', namely that evil and falsity are introduced into a person's thought by hell and are discharged back there again. Such evil and falsity cannot render a person unclean because they are discharged from him. For a person cannot help thinking what is evil, but he can refrain from doing it. As soon however as he receives evil from his thought into his will it does not go out but enters into him; and this is said 'to enter the heart'. The things that go out from here are what render him unclean; for what a person desires in his will goes out into speech and action, so far as external restraints do not inhibit him, those restraints being fear of the law, and fear of the loss of reputation, position, gain, or life. From all this it is now evident that 'you shall not covet' means that one must take care to prevent evils from becoming present in the will and consequently going out of it.

[4] The fact that 'covetousness' is a craving or lusting on the part of the will, and so of the heart, is also clear from the Lord's words in Matthew,

You have heard that it was said to those of old, You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that if anyone looks at a woman ¹ so that he lusts after her he has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Matthew 5:27-28.

'Lusting for' is used here to mean desiring in the will, and - but for the fears acting as external restraints - also doing. This is why it says that one who looks at a woman so that he lusts after her has committed adultery with her in his heart.

[5] Lusting after what is evil is also meant by 'the right eye causing one to stumble', and lusting after what is false by 'the right hand causing one to stumble' in the Lord's words, again in Matthew,

If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it away from you; for it will be better for you that one of your members perish, than that your whole body be cast into gehenna. And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away from you; for it will be better for you that one of your members perish, than that your whole body be cast into gehenna. Matthew 5:29-30.

From these words the Lord's way of saying things is again clear. That is to say, He was speaking from the Divine, as in every other place in the Word, in such a way that He expressed inward and heavenly matters through outward or natural ones in accordance with correspondences. In this instance He expressed an affection for evil or lusting after it by 'the right eye causing one to stumble', and an affection for falsity or lusting after it by 'the right hand causing one to stumble'. For the eye corresponds to faith, the left eye to the truth of faith, and the right eye to the good of faith, or in the contrary sense to the evil of faith, so that 'the right eye causing one to stumble' corresponds to lusting after what is evil, 4403-4421, 4523-4534. But the hand corresponds to the power that truth possesses, the right hand to the power of truth coming from good, or in the contrary sense the power of falsity coming from evil, so that 'the right hand causing one to stumble' corresponds to a lusting after it, 3091, 4931-4937, 8281. 'Gehenna' is the hell of lusts, cravings, or covetousness. Anyone may see that here 'the right eye' was not used to mean the right eye or that it was to be plucked out; also that 'the right hand' was not used to mean the right hand or that it was to be cut off, but that something other was meant. What this is cannot be known unless one knows what is really meant by 'the eye', in particular by 'the right eye', also what is meant by 'the hand', and in particular by 'the right hand', as well as what 'causing to stumble' really means. Nor can the meaning of these expressions be known except from the internal sense.

[6] Lusts, cravings, or covetous desires are what spring from an evil will, thus from a heart that is such; and according to the Lord's words in Matthew 15:19, murders, adulteries, ravishments, thefts, false witness, blasphemies come out of the heart or will, that is, the kinds of evils contained in the preceding commandments of the Decalogue. In all this lies the reason for saying that this - 'you must not covet the things which are your neighbour's' - means that one must take care to prevent the evils contained in the ''receding commandments from becoming present in the will and consequently going out of it. The reason why 'you shall not covet the things which are your neighbour's' also means that one must be on one's guard against self-love and love of the world is that all the evils composing covetousness well up from those loves as their source, see 2045, 7178, 7255, 7366 7377, 7488, 8318, 8678.

Footnotes:

The Hebrew of the Old Testament has six different common words which are generally translated as "wife," which largely overlap but have different nuances. Swedenborg uses two different Latin words, which largely overlap but have different nuances. Meanwhile, "wife" is often paired with "man" or "husband," which are also catch-all translations for a basket of Hebrew and Latin terms. So it's hard to pin down one universal meaning for "wife"; context and subject matter have a large effect.

In general, though, marriage in the Bible represents the union we all seek between our hearts and our minds. If we know what is right and pursue it faithfully, the Lord will ultimately help us love doing what is good, and the two aspects of ourselves will be unified. On a higher level, marriage represents the union we can have with the Lord, both individually and collectively as a church. As an intrinsic part of the marriage, the wife plays a key role in that meaning. But that meaning is different depending on what is being described.

If the marriage is describing a person who is spiritual in nature – "spiritual" being the second degree of heavenly life, in which people are led by intellect and knowledge with the desire for good following – the wife represents the desire for good, the affections that drive the person. If the marriage is describing someone who is celestial in nature – "celestial" being the highest degree of heavenly life, in which people are led from love, with the intellect and ideas following – the wife represents the true ideas held by the person or church. If the marriage is describing the union between the Lord and the church, the wife represents the church.

In a way, these are symbolic meanings that actually have little to do with gender. When "wife" describes a church, obviously that church can include both male and female people. When "wife" describes an aspect of a person, that person can obviously be either male or female.

(References: Arcana Coelestia 915, 1468, 1904 [1-2], 3246 [3-4], 3398, 4823 [2])

1904. That 'Sarai, Abram's wife, took' means the affection for truth, which in the genuine sense is 'Sarai the wife', is clear from the meaning of 'Sarai' as truth allied to good, and from the meaning of 'wife' as affection, dealt with already in 915, 1468. There are two affections, distinct and separate - the affection for good and the affection for truth. While a person is being regenerated the affection for truth takes the lead, for it is an affection for truth for the sake of good that moves him; but once he has been regenerated the affection for good takes the lead, and it is now an affection for truth originating in good that moves him. The affection for good belongs to the will, the affection for truth to the understanding. The most ancient people established a marriage so to speak between these two affections. They used to refer to good (or the love of good) and truth (or the love of truth) as Man, calling the former 'the husband' and the latter 'the wife'. The comparison of good and truth to a marriage has its origins in the heavenly marriage.

[2] Regarded in themselves good and truth do not possess any life, but they derive their life from love or affection. They are merely the instruments that serve life. Consequently as is the love producing the affection for good and truth, so is the life; for the whole of life constitutes the whole of love or affection. This is why 'Sarai his wife' in the genuine sense means the affection for truth. And because the Intellectual desired the Rational as its offspring, and because what she says is an expression of that desire or affection, this verse contains the explicit wording, 'Sarai, Abram's wife, gave to Abram her husband' which would be an unnecessary repetition - for in themselves these words would be quite superfluous - if such matters were not embodied within the internal sense.

[3] Intellectual truth is distinct and separate from rational truth, and rational truth from factual truth, just as what is internal, what is intermediate, and what is external are. Intellectual truth is internal, rational truth is intermediate, while factual truth is external. These are quite distinct and separate because one is interior to another. With everyone intellectual truth, which is internal, or that present within the inmost part of him, is not his own but is the Lord's with him. From this the Lord flows into the rational, where truth first appears as if it were the person's own, and through the rational into his faculty of knowing. From these considerations it is clear that nobody can possibly think as of himself from intellectual truth, but from rational truth and factual truth because these do appear as if they were his.

[4] Only the Lord, when He lived in the world, thought from intellectual truth, for that truth was His own Divine truth joined to good, or the Divine spiritual joined to the Divine celestial. In this respect the Lord was different from all others. Man in no way possesses the ability to think from the Divine existing within himself as his essential self, nor can that ability possibly exist within man, only within Him who was conceived from Jehovah. Because He thought from intellectual truth, that is, from the love or affection for intellectual truth, from that truth also He desired the Rational. This is why it is stated here that 'Sarai, Abram's wife', by whom is meant the affection for intellectual truth, 'took Hagar the Egyptian and gave her to Abram her husband as his wife (mulier)'.

[5] No other arcana concealed here can be brought out and explained intelligibly because the human being dwells in very great obscurity regarding his own internals. Indeed he has no conception of these, for he identifies the rational and the intellectual degrees of the mind with the factual degree, not knowing that these degrees are distinct and separate, so distinct in fact that the intellectual is able to exist without the rational, as also can the rational, while subordinate to the intellectual, exist without the factual. This must inevitably seem absurd to those wholly immersed in factual knowledge, but it is nevertheless the truth. It is not possible however for anyone to have truth present in the factual degree of his mind, that is to say, to have an affection for it and a belief in it, if truth is not present in the rational, into which and through which the Lord flows in from the intellectual degree. These arcana do not lie open to man's view except in the next life.