2189、“他们对亚伯拉罕说，你妻子撒拉在哪里”表示理性真理，那时它因在理性良善中而未显现。这从此处“撒拉”的代表清楚可知，“撒拉”是指理性真理，如前所述（2173节）。至于此处，以及下文，就是论述撒拉所代表的主的理性状态的地方，情况如何，这是无法理性解释清楚的，除非知道就良善和真理而言，理性状态一般是何性质；还需知道，就神性和那时主所在的人身或人性而言，祂的理性状态一般是何性质。
人的理性的首要元素是真理，如前所述（2072节）；因此，正是对真理的情感使人能得以改造，从而重生；这种改造是通过认知或知识和事实，或说宗教和世俗知识，也就是真理的各个方面实现的。它们正不断被植入良善，也就是仁爱，以便他能以这种方式接受仁爱的生命。这就是为何对真理的情感在人的理性中占主导地位。因为仁爱的生命，也就是天堂的生命本身，其情况是这样：在那些正在被改造和重生的人里面，这生命不断出生、发展和增长。它通过真理成长，所以被植入的真理越多，仁爱的生命就越得以完善。因此，与人同在的真理的质和量如何，与他同在的仁爱就如何。
由此可在某种程度上说明人的理性是何情形。然而，生命并不在真理里面，只在良善里面。真理只是生命，即良善的接受者。真理就像良善所披的衣服或衣裳。所以在圣言中，真理被称为衣服和衣裳。但当良善构成理性时，真理就消失不见了，似乎变成了良善，因为这时良善透过真理闪耀，这就是发生在天使身上的情形。当天使身穿衣服显现时，他们出现在看似一件衣服的光辉中，先知们所看见的天使也是如此。
这就是说那时理性真理因在理性良善中而未显现这句话的意思，这句话由“他们对亚伯拉罕说，你妻子撒拉在哪里”来表示。但由于那时主的理性是神性，是永远无法与任何天使同在的那种神性，所以它只能通过对比来描述，因而通过与某种类似但不一样的事物类比来说明。
Potts(1905-1910) 2189
2189. They said unto him, Where is Sarah thy wife? That this signifies rational truth, which did not then appear because it was in rational good, is evident from the representation here of Sarah, as being rational truth (spoken of above, n. 2173). How the case is with these things, as also with those which follow, where the state of the rational with the Lord is treated of, which is represented by Sarah, cannot be so well explained to the understanding unless it is known what in general is the state of the rational as to good and as to truth; and with the Lord, as to the Divine and as to the Human in which He then was. [2] The primary thing of the rational with man is truth (as before said, n. 2072), consequently it is the affection of truth, to the end that man may be reformed, and so regenerated. This is effected by means of knowledges [cognitiones et scientifica] that are of truth, which are continually being implanted in good, that is, in charity, that so the man may receive the life of charity. It is on this account that the affection of truth in man is predominant in his rational. For it is the case with the life of charity (which is the heavenly life itself) that with those who are being reformed and regenerated it is continually being born and growing up and receiving increments, and this by means of truths; therefore the more of truth there is insinuated, the more is the life of charity perfected; wherefore according to the quality and quantity of truth, so is the charity with a man. [3] From all this it may in some measure be evident how the case is with man's rational. In truth, however, there is no life, but in good. Truth is only a recipient of life, that is, of good. Truth is as the clothing or garment of good; therefore also truths are called in the Word "clothing," and also "garments." But when good constitutes the rational, truth disappears and becomes as if it were good. Good then shines through the truth, in the same way as takes place with the angels, for when they appear clothed, it is a brightness inducing the appearance of raiment, as was the case also when angels appeared before the prophets. [4] This then is what is meant by rational truth not then appearing because it was in rational good, and which is signified by their saying to him, "Where is Sarah thy wife?" But as the Lord's rational good was then Divine, such as it can be with no angel, it cannot be described otherwise than by comparison, and thus by illustration from something similar, and which is not the same.
Elliott(1983-1999) 2189
2189. They said to him, Where is Sarah your wife? means rational truth, which did not at that time show itself because it existed within rational good. This is clear from the representation of 'Sarah' here as rational truth, dealt with above in 2173. The implications of these things - as also of those that follow where the state of the Lord's Rational is the subject, which state is represented by 'Sarah' - cannot so easily be explained intelligibly unless the general nature of the state of the rational as regards good and as regards truth is known; and also in the Lord's case as regards the Divine and as regards the Human in which He was at that time.
[2] The first and foremost element of the rational with man is truth, as stated already in 2072, and therefore it is the affection for truth, which exists with man to enable him to be reformed and so regenerated, such reformation being effected by means of cognitions and facts, which are matters of truth. These are being constantly implanted in good, that is, in charity, so that in this manner he may receive the life of charity. It is therefore the affection for truth with man that predominates in his rational. For the situation with the life of charity, which is the life of heaven itself, is that in people who are being reformed and regenerated it is constantly being born and developing and increasing, such growth being achieved by means of truths. Therefore the more truth that is implanted, the more is the life of charity perfected. Thus as is the nature and the amount of truth present with man, so is the charity present with him.
[3] These few observations may to some extent show what the position is with man's rational. Within truth however no life is present, only within good. Truth is merely the recipient of life, that is, of good. Truth is like the clothing or a garment worn by good. In the Word too therefore truths are called clothes, and also garments. But when good composes the rational, truth passes out of sight and becomes as though it was good; for good is now shining through the truth, in the same way as when angels are seen clothed they appear in brightness that looks like a garment, as also was the case when angels appeared before the prophets.
[4] These then are the implications of the explanation given, that rational truth did not at that time show itself because it existed within rational good, meant by 'they said to him, Where is Sarah your wife?' But because the Lord's Rational Good at that time was Divine, as it can never be with any angel, it cannot be described other than by the use of a comparison, thus by the use of an illustration presenting something similar but not the same.
Latin(1748-1756) 2189
2189. `Dixerunt ad illum, Ubi Sarah uxor tua?': quod significet rationale verum, quod tunc non apparuit quia in bono rationali fuit, constat a repraesentatione `Sarae' hic quod sit rationale verum, de qua supra n. 2173. Quomodo haec se habent, tum quoque sequentia ubi de statu Rationalis apud Dominum, qui [status] repraesentatur per `Sarah,' non ita ad intellectum explicari potest nisi sciatur qualis in genere sit status rationalis quoad bonum et quoad verum; tum apud Dominum quoad Divinum et quoad Humanum in quo tunc fuit: [2] primarium rationalis apud hominem est verum, ut prius n. 2072 dictum, proinde est affectio veri, ob causam ut reformari possit homo: et sic regenerari, quod fit per cognitiones et scientifica quae sunt veri; quae continue {1} implantantur in bono, hoc est, in charitate, ut sic accipiat vitam charitatis; ideo est quod affectio veri apud hominem praedominetur in ejus rationali; se enim ita habet cum vita charitatis quae est ipsa vita caelestis, quod apud illos qui reformantur (c)et regenerantur, illa continue nascatur et adolescat, et incrementa capiat, et hoc per vera, ideo quo plus veri `insinuatur, eo plus perficitur vita charitatis, quare secundum veri qualitatem et quantitatem, se habet charitas apud hominem. [3] Ex his constare aliquatenus potest quomodo se habet cum rationali hominis: at in vero non est vita, sed in bono; verum est modo recipiens vitae, hoc est, boni; verum est sicut indumentum aut vestimentum boni; ideo etiam vera in Verbo vocantur `indumenta,' ut et `vestes'; cum autem bonum constituit rationale, tunc disparatur verum, et fit sicut sit bonum, {2} bonum tunc translucet per verum, quemadmodum fit apud angelos qui cum induti apparent, est splendor inducens speciem vestis, quales etiam apparuerunt angeli coram prophetis. [4] Haec nunc sunt quae intelliguntur per quod rationale verum tunc non apparuerit quia in bono rationali fuit, quae significata per quod `dixerunt ad illum, Ubi Sarah uxor tua?' sed quia Bonum Rationale Domini tunc fuit Divinum, quale apud nullum angelum potest esse, non describi potest aliter ac per comparationem, ita per illustrationem a quodam simili quod non est idem. @1 i a Domino.$ @2 i nam.$