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 in the original text, 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, Swedenborg says that 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.
Those spiritual marriages produce “children,” just as natural marriages do. When an individual person can “marry” the desire to be good and the understanding of how to be good, he or she can do good things and share good ideas to benefit the world — with those good things and good ideas being the “children” of that internal marriage. And when we — individually or collectively — become a “church” by making the Lord our guide and motivation, we can do good things and share good ideas to an even greater degree, turning the Lord’s love and wisdom into forms that can benefit people in their natural and spiritual lives. Again, those forms are the “children” of that marriage.
So when a marriage is mentioned in the Bible, describing the union of our hearts and minds, it makes sense that the wife represents the aspect of that union which can produce “children” — the aspect that can take the love and wisdom of that union and give it form as actions and ideas.
What that aspect is, precisely, depends on the nature of the person being described, because different people with different internal motivations have different paths that let them share the best of themselves with the world.
If the passage is describing people in spiritual states – people who are ultimately led by their principles and the thoughts and ideas that come from them – the wife represents the desire for good, the affections that can turn those ideas into action. If the marriage is describing people who are celestial in nature – “celestial” being the highest degree of human life, in which people are led from love, with the intellect and ideas following – the wife represents those ideas flowing out of that love, which give the love form and make action possible. If the marriage is describing the union between the Lord and the church, the wife represents the church, which can take in the love and wisdom of the Lord and turn it into activity in the world.
In a way, these are symbolic meanings that actually have little to do with gender, though as they are often expressed they can sound sexist (the basic complaint being that “the husband always represents the inmost of the marriage, and the wife only has what he gives her”). 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. “Wife” in those cases is really describing part of the spiritual wiring that exists in all of us.
And when these ideas are applied to actual natural marriages and how husbands and wives work together, Swedenborg says that the love of the marriage itself — the inmost source of all the desire for good and knowledge of truth the couple can share — flows in from the Lord through the wife. The husband receives it from her and returns it to her in forms that she can use to create life. So his role is crucially important, but no more important or elevated (in fact, arguably LESS important and elevated) than hers is.
Passages from Swedenborg
Arcana Coelestia 915.
‘He went out’ means that this did in fact happen. ‘Noah and his sons means the member of the Ancient Church; and ‘his wife and his sons’ wives’ means the Church itself. This is clear from the train of thought, which implies that in this way the Ancient Church came into being, for these words form an end or conclusion to what goes before them. When the Church is being described in the Word it is described either as ‘husband (vir) and wife’ or as ‘man (homo) and wife’. When it is husband and wife ‘husband’ means the understanding part, which is truth, and ‘wife’ the will part, which is good. And when man and wife is used ‘man’ means love, or good that stems from love, and ‘wife’ faith, or the truth of faith. ‘Man’ accordingly means the essential element of the Church, ‘wife’ the Church itself. This applies throughout the Word. Here, since the subject up to now has been the forming of a new Church while the Most Ancient Church was dying out, ‘Noah and his sons’ means the member of the Ancient Church, and ‘his wife and his sons’ wives with him’ the Church itself. This is why they are here referred to in a different order from what they were in verse 16 previously. In that verse, where it is said, ‘Go out, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you’, ‘you’ and ‘wife’ are coupled together, as are ‘sons’ and ‘your sons’ wives’. Consequently ‘you’ and ‘sons’ mean truth, and ‘wife’ and ‘sons’ wives’ good. In this verse 18 however they do not come in the same order, the reason being, as has been stated, that ‘you and sons’ means the member of the Church, and ‘his wife and his sons’ wives’ the Church itself. It in fact forms the conclusion to what goes before it. It was not Noah but his sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth who constituted the Ancient Church, as stated already. For three Churches in a sense formed this Ancient Church, which will in the Lord’s Divine mercy be dealt with later on. These Churches emerged as offspring of the one Church called Noah, and this is why the expressions ‘you and your sons’, and then ‘your wife and sons’ wives’ are used here.
Arcana Coelestia 4823
[2] In the Word the expression ‘man and wife’ (vir et uxor) is used many times, as also is ‘husband and wife’ (maritus et uxor). When ‘man and wife’ is used, ‘man’ means truth and ‘wife’ good; or in the contrary sense ‘men’ means falsity and ‘wife’ evil. But when ‘husband and wife’ is used, ‘husband’ means good and ‘wife’ truth; or in the contrary sense ‘husband’ means evil and ‘wife’ falsity. The reason underlying this arcanum is this In the celestial Church good resided with the husband and the truth of that good with the wife; but in the spiritual Church truth resided with the man and the good of that truth with the wife: Such is and was the actual relationship between the two, for in human beings interior things have undergone this reversal. This is the reason why in the Word, when celestial good and celestial truth from this are the subject, they are called ‘husband and wife’, but when spiritual good and spiritual truth from this are dealt with, these are called ‘man and wife’, or rather ‘man and woman’ (vir et mulier). From this, as well as from the actual expressions used, one can come to know which kind of good and which kind of truth are being dealt with in the internal sense of the Word.
Arcana Coelestia 1468.
‘That he said to Sarai his wife’ means that He thought in the following way about truths to which celestial things were allied. This is clear from the meaning of ‘Sarai’ when she is called ‘a wife’. In the internal sense of the Word ‘a wife’ means nothing other than truth joined to good, for truth joined to good is altogether like a marriage. When the noun ‘husband’ (maritus) is used in the Word it means good and ‘wife’ means truth. But when instead of this another noun for ‘husband’ (vir) is used, it in that case means truth, and ‘wife’ means good; and this is a consistent usage in the Word, as also stated already in 915. Since ‘Abram’ has been mentioned by name in this passage, ‘Sarai his wife’ means truth. Thus the meaning of ‘he said to Sarai his wife’ is in the internal sense that He thought in the following way about truths to which celestial things were allied. It is true historically that when he travelled into Egypt Abram spoke to his wife in this way; but, as has been stated, all the historical events recorded in the Word are representative and every word carries a spiritual meaning. No other historical details have been brought in, and those that have are not presented in any other sequence, nor expressed in any other words than such as in the internal sense may express these arcana.
Arcana Coelestia 3398.
‘One of the people might easily have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt on us’ means that it could have been adulterated and so profaned. This is clear from the meaning of ‘lying wish’ as being perverted or adulterated; from the meaning of ‘one of the people’ as one who belongs to the Church, that is to say, to the spiritual Church, dealt with in 2928; from the meaning of ‘wife’ – who is Rebekah here – as Divine Truth, dealt with above; and from the meaning of ‘guilt’ as blame for the profanation of truth. From this it is evident that ‘one of the people might easily have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt on us’ means that Divine Truth could easily have been adulterated by someone within the Church and so he would have made himself culpable of the profanation of truth. It has been stated above in 3386 that the reason why Abraham on two occasions spoke of Sarah his wife as his sister – first of all in Egypt, and then, when dwelling with Abimelech, in Gerar – and why Isaac in a similar way spoke of Rebekah his wife as his sister, when he too was dwelling with Abimelech, and why those three occasions are mentioned in the Word, is a very deep arcanum. The actual arcanum contained in these words is evident in the internal sense, and it is this: ‘A sister’ means rational truth, and ‘a wife’ Divine Truth; and rational truth is called this – that is, ‘a sister’ – to prevent Divine Truth, which is ‘a wife’ (Rebekah in this case) from being adulterated and so perverted.
Arcana Coelestia 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.
Arcana Coelestia3246
[3] In former times – to enable both those who are celestial and those who are spiritual to be represented in marriages – a man was allowed to have a concubine in addition to a wife. That concubine was given to the husband by his wife (uxor), in which case the concubine was called his wife (mulier), or was said to have been given to him as a wife (mulier), as when Hagar the Egyptian was given to Abraham by Sarah, Gen. 16:3, when the servant-girl Bilhah was given to Jacob by Rachel, Gen. 30:4, and when the servant-girl Zilpah was given to Jacob by Leah, Gen. 30:9. In those cases they are called ‘wives’ (mulier), but elsewhere concubines, as is Hagar the Egyptian in the present verse, Bilhah in Gen. 35:22, and even Keturah herself in 1 Chron. 1:32.
[4] The reason why those men of old had concubines in addition to a wife, as not only Abraham and Jacob did, but also their descendants, such as Gideon, Judg. 8:31; Saul, 2 Sam. 3:7; David, 2 Sam. 5:13; 15:16; Solomon, 1 Kings 11:3, was that they were permitted to do so for the sake of the representation. That is to say, the celestial Church was represented by the wife, and the spiritual Church by the concubine. They were permitted to do so because they were the kind of men with whom conjugial love did not exist; so that to them marriage was not marriage but merely copulation for the sake of begetting off-spring. With such persons those permissions were possible without any harm being done to love or consequently to the conjugial covenant. But such permissions are never possible among people with whom good and truth are present and who are internal people, or potentially so. For as soon as good and truth, and internal things, exist with the human being, such permissions come to an end. This is why Christians are not allowed, as the Jews were, to take a concubine in addition to a wife, and why such is adultery. Regarding the adoption of those who are spiritual by the Lord’s Divine Human, see what has been stated and shown already on the same subject in 2661, 2716, 2833, 2834.
* or from the evil one
Arcana Coelestia 8647.
‘And Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, took Zipporah, the wife of Moses’ means the good from God which had been joined to God’s truth. This is clear from the representation of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses’ as Divine Good, the source of the good joined to truth, in this instance God’s truth, which ‘Moses’ represents, dealt with above in 8643, 8644; from the representation of ‘Zipporah, the wife of Moses’ as the good from God. Marriages represent goodness and truth joined together. In the celestial Church the husband represents good and the wife the truth coming from it; but in the spiritual Church the man represents truth and the wife good. Here ‘the wife of Moses’ represents good because the spiritual kingdom is dealt with, see 2517, 4510, 4823, 7022.