{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_40285/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_40285","id":"gutenberg_40285","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40285","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Religion/Spirituality","Jesus Christ -- Biography","Palestine -- Social life and customs","Syria -- Social life and customs"],"text":"[Illustration: Cover]\n\n\n\n\nTHE SYRIAN CHRIST\n\n\nBY\n\nABRAHAM MITRIE RIHBANY\n\n\n\n\nBOSTON AND NEW YORK\n\nHOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY\n\nThe Riverside Press Cambridge\n\n1916\n\n\n\n\nCOPYRIGHT, 1916, BY THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY COMPANY\n\nCOPYRIGHT, 1916, BY ABRAHAM MITRIE RIHBANY\n\n\nALL RIGHTS RESERVED\n\n\n_Published October 1916_\n\n\n\n\n{v}\n\nPREFACE\n\nThis little volume is sent forth in the confident hope that it may\nthrow fresh light on the life and teachings of Christ, and facilitate\nfor the general public the understanding of the Bible. As may be\nreadily seen, from its perusal, the present work is not intended to be\na commentary on the Bible, nor even an exhaustive study of the subject\nwith which it deals. That it leaves many things to be desired is very\nevident to the author, who fears that his book will be remembered by\nits readers more by the things it lacks than by the things it contains.\n\nYet, from the cordial reception with which the opening chapters of this\npublication (which made their first appearance in the _Atlantic\nMonthly_) met from readers, of various religious affiliations, the\nauthor has been encouraged to believe that his aim has not only been\nclearly {vi} discerned, but thoroughly approved. The books which\nundertake the systematic \"expounding of the Scriptures\" are a host\nwhich no man can number, nor is there any lack of \"spiritual lessons\ndrawn from the Bible.\" Therefore, as one of the Master's fellow\ncountrymen, and one who has enjoyed about twenty years of service in\nthe American pulpit, I have for several years entertained the growing\nconviction that such a book as this was really needed. Not, however,\nas one more commentary, but as an Oriental guide to afford Occidental\nreaders of the Bible a more intimate view of the original intellectual\nand social environment of this sacred literature. So what I have to\noffer here is a series of suggestions, and not of technically wrought\nBible lessons.\n\nThe need of the Western readers of the Bible is, in my judgment, to\nenter sympathetically and intelligently into the atmosphere in which\nthe books of the Scriptures first took form: to have real intellectual,\nas well as spiritual, fellowship with those Orientals who sought {vii}\nearnestly in their own way to give tangible form to those great\nspiritual truths which have been, and ever shall be, humanity's most\nprecious heritage.\n\nMy task has not been a light one. It is comparatively easy to take\nisolated Bible texts and explain them, treating each passage as a\ndetached unit. But when one undertakes to group a large number of\npassages which never were intended to be gathered together and treated\nas the kindred thoughts of an essay, the task becomes rather difficult.\nHow far I have succeeded in my effort to relate the passages I have\ntreated in this book to one another according to their intellectual and\nsocial affinities, the reader is in a better position to judge than I\nam.\n\nIt may not be absolutely necessary for me to say that infallibility\ncannot justly be ascribed to any author, nor claimed by him, even when\nwriting of his own experiences, and the social environment in which he\nwas born and brought up.\n\nHowever, in Yankee, not in Oriental, {viii} fashion, I will say that\n_to the best of my knowledge_ the statements contained in this book are\ncorrect.\n\nFinally, I deem it necessary before I bring this preface to a close to\nsound a note of warning. So I will say that the Orientals' extensive\nuse of figurative speech should by no means be allowed to carry the\nidea that _all_ Oriental speech is figurative. This manner of speech,\nwhich is common to all races of men, is only _more extensively_ used by\nOrientals than by Occidentals. I could wish, however, that the learned\ntheologians had suspected more strongly the literal accuracy of\nOriental utterances, and had thus been saved at times from founding a\nhuge doctrinal structure on a figure of speech.\n\nNotwithstanding all this, the Gospel and the Christian faith still live\nand bless and cheer the hearts and minds of men. As an Oriental by\nbirth, and as an American from choice, I feel profoundly grateful that\nI have been enabled to render this modest service to the Churches of\n{ix} America, and to present this book as an offering of love and\nhomage to my Master, the Syrian Christ.\n\nABRAHAM MITRIE RIHBANY\n\nBOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS.\n\n\n\n\n{xi}\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nPART I. THE SYRIAN CHRIST.\n\n I. Son of the East\n II. Birth of a Man Child\n III. The Star\n IV. Mystic Tones\n V. Filial Obedience\n VI. Feast and Sacrament\n VII. The Last Scene\n\n\nPART II. The Oriental Manner Of Speech.\n\n I. Daily Language\n II. Imprecations\n III. Love of Enemies\n IV. \"The Unveracious Oriental\"\n V. Impressions _vs._ Literal Accuracy\n VI. Speaking in Parables\n VII. Swearing\n VIII. Four Characteristics\n\n\n{xii}\n\nPART III. BREAD AND SALT\n\n I. The Sacred 'Aish\n II. \"Our Daily Bread\"\n III. \"Compel Them to come in\"\n IV. Delaying the Departing Guest\n V. Family Feasts\n\n\nPART IV. OUT IN THE OPEN\n\n I. Shelter and Home\n II. Resigned Travelers\n III. The Market Place\n IV. The Housetop\n V. The Vineyards and the Fields\n VI. The Shepherd\n\n\nPART V. SISTERS OF MARY AND MARTHA\n\n I. Woman East and West\n II. Paul and Woman\n III. Jesus and his Mother\n IV. \"A Gracious Woman\"\n\n\nPART VI.\n\n Here and There in the Bible\n Index\n\n\n\n\n{3}\n\nPART I\n\nTHE SYRIAN CHRIST\n\n\n\n\nTHE SYRIAN CHRIST\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nSON OF THE EAST\n\nJesus Christ, the incarnation of the spirit of God, seer, teacher of\nthe verities of the spiritual life, and preacher of the fatherhood of\nGod and the brotherhood of man, is, in a higher sense, \"a man without a\ncountry.\" As a prophet and a seer Jesus belongs to all races and all\nages. Wherever the minds of men respond to simple truth, wherever the\nhearts of men thrill with pure love, wherever a temple of religion is\ndedicated to the worship of God and the service of man, there is Jesus'\ncountry and there are his friends. Therefore, in speaking of Jesus as\nthe son of a certain country, I do not mean in the least to localize\nhis Gospel, or to set bounds and limits to the flow of his spirit and\nthe workings of his love.\n\nNor is it my aim in these chapters to imitate {4} the astute\ntheologians by wrestling with the problem of Jesus' personality. To me\nthe secret of personality, human and divine, is an impenetrable\nmystery. My more modest purpose in this writing is to remind the\nreader that, whatever else Jesus was, as regards his modes of thought\nand life and his method of teaching, he was a Syrian of the Syrians.\nAccording to authentic history Jesus never saw any other country than\nPalestine. There he was born; there he grew up to manhood, taught his\nGospel, and died for it.\n\nIt is most natural, then, that Gospel truths should have come down to\nthe succeeding generations--and to the nations of the West--cast in\nOriental moulds of thought, and intimately intermingled with the simple\ndomestic and social habits of Syria. The gold of the Gospel carries\nwith it the sand and dust of its original home.\n\nFrom the foregoing, therefore, it may be seen that my reason for\nundertaking to throw fresh light on the life and teachings of Christ,\nand {5} other portions of the Bible whose correct understanding depends\non accurate knowledge of their original environment, is not any claim\non my part to great learning or a profound insight into the spiritual\nmysteries of the Gospel. The real reason is rather an accident of\nbirth. From the fact that I was born not far from where the Master was\nborn, and brought up under almost the identical conditions under which\nhe lived, I have an \"inside view\" of the Bible which, by the nature of\nthings, a Westerner cannot have. And I know that the conditions of\nlife in Syria of to-day are essentially as they were in the time of\nChrist, not from the study of the mutilated tablets of the arch\u00e6ologist\nand the antiquarian, precious as such discoveries are, but from the\nsimple fact that, as a sojourner in this Western world, whenever I open\nmy Bible it reads like a letter from home.\n\nIts unrestrained effusiveness of expression; its vivid, almost flashy\nand fantastic imagery; its na\u00efve narrations; the rugged unstudied\nsimplicity of its parables; its unconventional (and {6} to the more\nmodest West rather unseemly) portrayal of certain human relations; as\nwell as its all-permeating spiritual mysticism,--so far as these\nqualities are concerned, the Bible might all have been written in my\nprimitive village home, on the western slopes of Mount Lebanon some\nthirty years ago.\n\nNor do I mean to assert or even to imply that the Western world has\nnever succeeded in knowing the mind of Christ. Such an assertion would\ndo violent injustice, not only to the Occidental mind, but to the\nGospel itself as well, by making it an enigma, utterly foreign to the\nnative spirituality of the majority of mankind. But what I have\nlearned from intimate associations with the Western mind, during almost\na score of years in the American pulpit, is that, with the exception of\nthe few specialists, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for\na people to understand fully a literature which has not sprung from\nthat people's own racial life. As a repository of divine revelation\nthe Bible knows no geographical limits. Its spiritual truths are {7}\nfrom God to man. But as a literature the Bible is an imported article\nin the Western world, especially in the home of the Anglo-Saxon race.\nThe language of the Scriptures, the mentality and the habits of life\nwhich form the setting of their spiritual precepts, and the mystic\natmosphere of those precepts themselves, have come forth from the soul\nof a people far removed from the races of the West in almost all the\nmodes of its earthly life.\n\nYou cannot study the life of a people successfully from the outside.\nYou may by so doing succeed in discerning the few fundamental traits of\ncharacter in their local colors, and in satisfying your curiosity with\nsurface observations of the general modes of behavior; but the little\nthings, the common things, those subtle connectives in the social\nvocabulary of a people, those agencies which are born and not made, and\nwhich give a race its rich distinctiveness, are bound to elude your\ngrasp. There is so much in the life of a people which a stranger to\nthat people must receive {8} by way of unconscious absorption. Like a\nlittle child, he must learn so many things by involuntary imitation.\nAn outside observer, though wise, is only a photographer. He deals\nwith externals. He can be converted into an artist and portray the\nlife of a race by working from the soul outward, only through long,\nactual, and sympathetic associations with that race.\n\nFrom the foregoing it may be seen that I deem it rather hazardous for a\nsix-weeks tourist in that country to publish a book on the _life_ of\nSyria. A first-class camera and \"an eye to business\" are hardly\nsufficient qualifications for the undertaking of such a task. It is\nvery easy, indeed, to take a photograph, but not so easy to relate such\na picture to the inner life of a race, and to know what moral and\nsocial forces lie behind such externals. The hasty traveler may easily\nstate what certain modes of thought and life in a strange land mean to\n_him_, but does that necessarily mean that _his_ understanding of such\nthings is also the understanding of the _people_ of that land\nthemselves?\n\n{9}\n\nWith the passing of the years, this thought gains in significance with\nme, as a Syrian immigrant. At about the end of my second year of\nresidence in this country, I felt confident that I could write a book\non America and the Americans whose accuracy no one could challenge. It\nwas so easy for me to grasp the significance of certain general aspects\nof American life that I felt I was fully competent to state how the\nAmerican people lived, what their racial, political, and religious\ntendencies were, what their idioms of speech meant, and to interpret\ntheir amorous, martial, dolorous, and joyous moods with perfect\naccuracy and ease. But now, after a residence of about twenty-four\nyears in America--years which I have spent in most intimate association\nwith Americans, largely of the \"original stock\"--I do not feel half so\nconfident that I am qualified to write such a book. The more intimate\nI become with American thought, the deeper I penetrate the American\nspirit, the more enlightened my associations become with American\nfathers, mothers, {10} and children in the joys and sorrows of life,\nthe more fully do I realize how extremely difficult, if not impossible,\nit is for one to interpret successfully the life of an alien people\nbefore one has actually _lived it_ himself.\n\nMany Westerners have written very meritorious books on the thought and\nlife of the East. But these are not of the \"tourist\" type. Such\nwriters have been those who, first, had the initial wisdom to realize\nthat the beggars for _bakhsheesh_ in the thoroughfares of Syrian\ncities, and those who hitch a woman with an ox to the plough in some\ndark recesses of Palestine, did not possibly represent the deep soul of\nthat ancient East, which gave birth to the Bible and to the glorious\ncompany of prophets, apostles, and saints. Second, such writers knew,\nalso, that the fine roots of a people's life do not lie on the surface.\nSuch feeders of life are both deep and fine; not only long residence\namong a people, but intimate association and genuine sympathy with them\nare necessary to reveal to a stranger the hidden {11} meaning of their\nlife. Social life, like biological life, energizes from within, and\nfrom within it must be studied.\n\nAnd it is those common things of Syrian life, so indissolubly\ninterwoven with the spiritual truths of the Bible, which cause the\nWestern readers of holy writ to stumble, and which rob those truths for\nthem of much of their richness. By sheer force of genius, the\naggressive, systematic Anglo-Saxon mind seeks to press into logical\nunity and creedal uniformity those undesigned, artless, and most\nnatural manifestations of Oriental life, in order to \"understand the\nScriptures.\"\n\n\"Yet show I unto you a more excellent way,\" by personally conducting\nyou into the inner chambers of Syrian life, and showing you, if I can,\nhow simple it is for a humble fellow countryman of Christ to understand\nthose social phases of the Scriptural passages which so greatly puzzle\nthe august minds of the West.\n\n\n\n\n{12}\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nBIRTH OF A MAN CHILD\n\nIn the Gospel story of Jesus' life there is not a single incident that\nis not in perfect harmony with the prevailing modes of thought and the\ncurrent speech of the land of its origin. I do not know how many times\nI heard it stated in my native land and at our own fireside that\nheavenly messengers in the forms of patron saints or angels came to\npious, childless wives, in dreams and visions, and cheered them with\nthe promise of maternity. It was nothing uncommon for such women to\nspend a whole night in a shrine \"wrestling in prayer,\" either with the\nblessed Virgin or some other saint, for such a divine assurance; and I\nremember a few of my own kindred to have done so.\n\nPerhaps the most romantic religious practice in this connection is the\n_zeara_. Interpreted literally, the word _zeara_ means simply a visit.\nIn its social use it is the equivalent of {13} a call of long or short\nduration. But religiously the _zeara_ means a pilgrimage to a shrine.\nHowever, strictly speaking, the word \"pilgrimage\" means to the Syrians\na journey of great religious significance whose supreme purpose is the\nsecuring of a blessing for the pilgrim, with no reference to a special\nneed. The _zeara_ is a pilgrimage with a specific purpose. The\n_zayir_ (visitor to a shrine) comes seeking either to be healed of a\ncertain ailment, to atone for a sin, or to be divinely helped in some\nother way. Unlike a pilgrimage also, a _zeara_ may be made by one\nperson in behalf of another. When, for example, a person is too ill to\ntravel, or is indifferent to a spiritual need which such a visit is\nsupposed to fill, his parents or other close friends may make a _zeara_\nin his behalf. But much more often a _zeara_ is undertaken by women\nfor the purpose of securing the blessing of fecundity, or consecrating\nan approaching issue of wedlock (if it should prove to be a male) to\nGod, and to the patron saint of the visited sanctuary.\n\n{14}\n\nAgain the word \"pilgrimage\" is used only to describe a visit by a\nChristian to Jerusalem, or by a Mohammedan to Mecca, while the _zeara_\ndescribes a visit to any one of the lesser shrines.\n\nThe happy journey is often made on foot, the parties most concerned\nwalking all the way \"on the flesh of their feet\"; that is, with neither\nshoes nor sandals on. This great sacrifice is made as a mark of\nsincere humility which is deemed to be pleasing to God and his holy\nsaints. However, the wearing of shoes and even the use of mounts is\nnot considered a sinful practice on such occasions, and is indulged in\nby many of the well-to-do families. The state of the heart is, of\ncourse, the chief thing to be considered.\n\nIn the fourth chapter of the Second Book of Kings we are told that \"the\nShunammite woman\" used an ass when she sought Elisha to restore her\ndead son to her. In the twenty-second verse (the Revised Version), we\nare told, \"And she called unto her husband, and said, {15} Send me, I\npray thee, one of the servants, and one of the asses, that I may run to\nthe man of God, and come again.... Then she saddled an ass, and said\nto her servant, Drive, and go forward; slacken me not the riding,\nexcept I bid thee. So she went, and came unto the man of God to mount\nCarmel.\"\n\nFasting and prayer on the way are often pronounced phases of a _zeara_.\nHowever, wine-drinking by the men in the company and noisy gayety are\nnot deemed altogether incompatible with the solemnity of the occasion.\nThe pious visitors carry with them presents to the abbot and to the\nmonks who serve the shrine. A silver or even gold candlestick, or a\ncrown of either metal for the saint, is also carried to the altar. The\nyoung mother in whose behalf the _zeara_ is undertaken is tenderly\ncared for by every member of the party. She is \"the chosen vessel of\nthe Lord.\"\n\nThe _z\u00fbwar_ (visitors) remain at the holy shrine for one or two nights,\nor until the \"presence\" is revealed; that is, until the saint {16}\nmanifests himself. The prayerfully longed-for manifestation comes\nalmost invariably in a dream, either to the mother or some other worthy\nin the party. How like the story of Joseph all this is! In the first\nchapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, the twentieth verse, it is said of\nJoseph, \"But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the\nLord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David,\nfear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived\nin her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou\nshalt call his name Jesus; for he shall save his people from their\nsins.\"\n\nIn this manner the promise is made to the waiting mother, who \"keeps\nthese things, and ponders them in her heart.\"\n\nThe promise thus secured, the mother and the father vow that the child\nshall be a _nedher_; that is, consecrated to the saint who made the\npromise to the mother. The vow may mean one of several things. Either\nthat a sum of {17} money be \"given to the saint\" upon the advent of the\nchild, or that the child be carried to the same sanctuary on another\n_zeara_ with gifts, and so forth, or that his hair will not be cut\nuntil he is seven years old, and then cut for the first time before the\nimage of his patron saint at the shrine, or some other act of pious\nfulfillment.\n\nThe last form of a vow, the consecration of the hair of the head for a\ncertain period, is practiced by men of all ages. The vow is made as a\npetition for healing from a serious illness, rescue from danger, or\npurely as an act of consecration. In the eighteenth chapter of the\nBook of Acts, the eighteenth verse, we have the statement: \"And Paul\nafter this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of\nthe brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and\nAquila; _having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow_.\" It was\nalso in connection with this practice that Paul was induced by the\n\"brethren\" at Jerusalem to make a compromise which cost him dearly.\n{18} In the twenty-first chapter of Acts, the twenty-third verse, we\nare told that those brethren said to Paul, \"We have four men who have a\nvow on them; them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges\nfor them, that they may _shave their heads_.\"\n\nThe last service of this kind which I attended in Syria was for a\ncousin of mine, a boy of twelve, who was a _nedher_, or as the word is\nrendered in the English Bible, a Nazarite. We assembled in the church\nof St. George of S\u00fbk. The occasion was very solemn. A mass was\ncelebrated after the order of the Greek Orthodox Church. Near the\nclose of the service the tender lad was brought by his parents in front\nof the Royal Door at the altar. While repeating a prayer, the priest\ncut the hair on the crown of the boy's head with the scissors, in the\nshape of a cross. The simple act released the child and his parents of\ntheir solemn vow.\n\n\"Twentieth-century culture\" is prone to call all such practices\nsuperstitions. So they are to a large extent. But I deem it the\nhigher {19} duty of this culture to _interpret_ sympathetically rather\nthan to condemn superstition in a sweeping fashion. I am a lover of a\nrational theology and a reasonable faith, but I feel that in our\nenthusiasm for such a theology and such a faith we often fail to\nappreciate the deep spiritual longing which is expressed in\nsuperstitious forms of worship. What is there in such religious\npractices as those I have mentioned but the expression of the\nheart-burning of those parents for the spiritual welfare and security\nof their children? What do we find here but evidences of a deep and\nsincere yearning for divine blessings to come upon the family and the\nhome? Thoughts of God at the marriage altar; thoughts of God when the\npromise of parenthood becomes evident; thoughts of God when a child\ncomes into the world; thoughts of God and of his holy prophets and\nsaints as friends and companions in all the changes and chances of the\nworld. Here the challenge to modern rationalism is not to content\nitself with rebuking superstitions, but to give {20} the world deeper\nspiritual visions than those which superstitions reveal, and to compass\nchildhood and youth by the gracious presence of the living God.\n\nIn a most literal sense we always understood the saying of the\npsalmist, \"Children are a heritage from the Lord.\" Above and beyond\nall natural agencies, it was He who turned barrenness to fecundity and\nworked the miracle of birth. To us every birth was miraculous, and\nchildlessness an evidence of divine disfavor. From this it may be\ninferred how tenderly and reverently agreeable to the Syrian ear is the\nangel's salutation to Mary, \"Hail, thou that art highly favored, the\nLord is with thee; blessed art thou among women!--Behold thou shalt\nconceive in thy womb and bring forth a son.\"[1]\n\nA miracle? Yes. But a miracle means one thing to your Western\nscience, which seeks to know what nature is and does by dealing with\nsecondary causes, and quite another thing to {21} an Oriental, to whom\nGod's will is the law and gospel of nature. In times of intellectual\ntrouble this man takes refuge in his all-embracing faith,--the faith\nthat to God all things are possible.\n\nThe Oriental does not try to meet an assault upon his belief in\nmiracles by seeking to establish the historicity of concrete reports of\nmiracles. His poetical, mystical temperament seeks its ends in another\nway. Relying upon his fundamental faith in the omnipotence of God, he\nthrows the burden of proof upon his assailant by challenging him to\nsubstantiate his _denial_ of the miracles. So did Paul (in the\ntwenty-sixth chapter of the Book of Acts) put his opponents at a great\ndisadvantage by asking, \"Why should it be thought a thing incredible\nwith you, that God should raise the dead?\"\n\nBut the story of Jesus' birth and kindred Bible records disclose not\nonly the predisposition of the Syrian mind to accept miracles as divine\nacts, without critical examination, but {22} also its attitude toward\nconception and birth,--an attitude which differs fundamentally from\nthat of the Anglo-Saxon mind. With the feeling of one who has been\nreminded of having ignorantly committed an improper act, I remember the\ntime when kind American friends admonished me not to read from the\npulpit such scriptural passages as detailed the accounts of conception\nand birth, but only to allude to them in a general way. I learned in a\nvery short time to obey the kindly advice, but it was a long time\nbefore I could swing my psychology around and understand why in America\nsuch narratives were so greatly modified in transmission.\n\nThe very fact that such stories are found in the Bible shows that in my\nnative land no such sifting of these narratives is ever undertaken when\nthey are read to the people. From childhood I had been accustomed to\nhear them read at our church, related at the fireside, and discussed\nreverently by men and women at all times and places. There is nothing\nin the {23} phraseology of such statements which is not in perfect\nharmony with the common, everyday speech of my people.\n\nTo the Syrians, as I say, \"children are a heritage from the Lord.\"\nFrom the days of Israel to the present time, barrenness has been looked\nupon as a sign of divine disfavor, an intolerable calamity. Rachel's\ncry, \"Give me children, or else I die,\"[2] does not exaggerate the\nagony of a childless Syrian wife. When Rebecca was about to depart\nfrom her father's house to become Isaac's wife, her mother's ardent and\neffusively expressed wish for her was, \"Be thou the mother of thousands\nof millions.\"[3] This mother's last message to her daughter was not\nspoken in a corner. I can see her following the bride to the door,\nlifting her open palms and turning her face toward heaven, and making\nher affectionate petition in the hearing of a multitude of guests, who\nmust have echoed her words in chorus.\n\nIn the congratulations of guests at a {24} marriage feast the central\nwish for the bridegroom and bride is invariably thus expressed: \"May\nyou be happy, live long, and have many children!\" And what contrasts\nvery sharply with the American reticence in such matters is the fact\nthat shortly after the wedding, the friends of the young couple, both\nmen and women, begin to ask them about their \"prospects\" for an heir.\nNo more does a prospective mother undertake in any way to disguise the\nsigns of the approaching event, than an American lady to conceal her\nengagement ring. Much mirth is enjoyed in such cases, also, when\nfriends and neighbors, by consulting the stars, or computing the number\nof letters in the names of the parents and the month in which the\nmiracle of conception is supposed to have occurred, undertake to\nforetell whether the promised offspring will be a son or a daughter.\nIn that part of the country where I was brought up, such wise\nprognosticators believed, and made us all believe, that if the\ncalculations resulted in an odd number the birth would be a son, but\n{25} if in an even number, a daughter, which, as a rule, is not\nconsidered so desirable.\n\nBack of all these social traits, and beyond the free realism of the\nSyrian in speaking of conception and birth, lies a deeper fact. To\nEastern peoples, especially the Semites, reproduction in all the world\nof life is profoundly sacred. It is God's life reproducing itself in\nthe life of man and in the living world below man; therefore the\nevidences of this reproduction should be looked upon and spoken of with\nrejoicing.\n\nNotwithstanding the many and fundamental intellectual changes which I\nhave undergone in this country of my adoption, I count as among the\nmost precious memories of my childhood my going with my father to the\nvineyard, just as the vines began to \"come out,\" and hearing him say as\nhe touched the swelling buds, \"Blessed be the Creator. He is the\nSupreme Giver. May He protect the blessed increase.\" Of this I almost\nalways think when I read the words of the psalmist, \"The earth is the\nLord's and the fullness thereof!\"\n\n{26}\n\nNow I do not feel at all inclined to say whether the undisguised\nrealism of the Orientals in speaking of reproduction is better than the\ndelicate reserve of the Anglo-Saxons. In fact, I have been so\nreconstructed under Anglo-Saxon auspices as to feel that the excessive\nreserve of this race with regard to such things is not a serious fault,\nbut rather the defect of a great virtue. My purpose is to show that\nthe unreconstructed Oriental, to whom reproduction is the most sublime\nmanifestation of God's life, cannot see why one should be ashamed to\nspeak anywhere in the world of the fruits of wedlock, of a \"woman with\nchild.\" One might as well be ashamed to speak of the creative power as\nit reveals itself in the gardens of roses and the fruiting trees.\n\nHere we have the background of the stories of Sarah, when the\nangel-guest prophesied fecundity for her in her old age; of Rebecca,\nand the wish of her mother for her, that she might become \"the mother\nof thousands\"; of Elizabeth, when the \"babe leaped in her womb,\" {27}\nas she saw her cousin Mary; and of the declaration of the angel to\nJoseph's spouse; \"Thou shalt conceive in thy womb and bring forth a\nson.\"\n\nHere it is explained, also, why upon the birth of a \"man-child,\"\nwell-wishers troop into the house,--even on the very day of\nbirth,--bring their presents, and congratulate the parents on the\ndivine gift to them. It was because of this custom that those\nstrangers, the three \"Wise Men\" and Magi of the Far East, were\npermitted to come in and see the little Galilean family, while the\nmother was yet in childbed. So runs the Gospel narrative: \"And when\nthey were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his\nmother, and fell down and worshipped him: and when they had opened\ntheir treasures, they presented unto him gifts,--gold, frankincense,\nand myrrh.\"[4]\n\nSo also were the humble shepherds privileged to see the wondrous child\nshortly after birth. \"And it came to pass, as the angels were gone\naway from them into heaven, the {28} shepherds said one to another, Let\nus now go to Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which\nthe Lord hath made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found\nMary and Joseph and the babe lying in a manger.\"[5]\n\nIn the twelfth verse of the second chapter of the Gospel of St. Luke,\nthe English version says, \"And this shall be a sign unto you; ye shall\nfind a babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.\" Here the\nword \"clothes\" is somewhat misleading. The Arabic version gives a\nperfect rendering of the fact by saying, \"Ye shall find a _swaddled_\nbabe, _laid_ in a manger.\"\n\nAccording to general Syrian custom, in earliest infancy a child is not\nreally clothed, it is only swaddled. Upon birth the infant is washed\nin tepid water by the midwife, then salted, or rubbed gently with salt\npulverized in a stone mortar especially for the occasion. (The salt\ncommonly used in Syrian homes is coarse-chipped.) Next the babe is\nsprinkled with {29} _rehan_,--a powder made of dried myrtle\nleaves,--and then swaddled.\n\nThe swaddle is a piece of stout cloth about a yard square, to one\ncorner of which is attached a long narrow band. The infant, with its\narms pressed close to its sides, and its feet stretched full length and\nlaid close together, is wrapped in the swaddle, and the narrow band\nwound around the little body, from the shoulders to the ankles, giving\nthe little one the exact appearance of an Egyptian mummy. Only a few\nof the good things of this mortal life were more pleasant to me when I\nwas a boy than to carry in my arms a swaddled babe. The \"salted\" and\n\"peppered\" little creature felt so soft and so light, and was so\nappealingly helpless, that to cuddle it was to me an unspeakable\nbenediction.\n\nSuch was the \"babe of Bethlehem\" that was sought by the Wise Men and\nthe shepherds in the wondrous story of the Nativity.\n\nAnd in describing such Oriental customs it may be significant to point\nout that, in certain {30} localities in Syria, to say to a person that\nhe was not \"salted\" upon birth is to invite trouble. Only a _bend\u00fbq_,\nor the child of an unrecognized father, is so neglected. And here may\nbe realized the full meaning of that terrible arraignment of Jerusalem\nin the sixteenth chapter of the Book of Ezekiel. The Holy City had\ndone iniquity, and therefore ceased to be the legitimate daughter of\nJehovah. So the prophet cries, \"The Lord came unto me, saying, Son of\nman, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations, and say, Thus saith the\nLord God unto Jerusalem; Thy birth and thy nativity are of the land of\nCanaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother a Hittite. And as\nfor thy nativity, in the day thou wast born--neither wast thou washed\nin water to supple[6] thee; _thou wast not salted at all, nor swaddled\nat all_. No eye pitied thee, to do any of these things for thee, to\nhave compassion upon thee; but thou wast cast out in the open field, to\nthe loathing of thy person, in the day thou wast born.\"\n\n\n\n[1] Luke i: 28, 31.\n\n[2] Gen. xxx; 1.\n\n[3] Gen. xxiv: 60.\n\n[4] Matt. ii: 11.\n\n[5] Luke ii: 15-16.\n\n[6] \"Cleanse\" in the Revised Version.\n\n\n\n\n{31}\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nTHE STAR\n\nHow natural to the thought of the East the story of the \"star of\nBethlehem\" is! To the Orientals \"the heavens declare the glory of\nGod,\" and the stars reveal many wondrous things to men. They are the\nmessengers of good and evil, and objects of the loftiest idealization,\nas well as of the crudest superstitions. Those who have gazed upon the\nstars in the deep, clear Syrian heavens can find no difficulty in\nentering into the spirit of the majestic strains of the writer of the\neighth Psalm. \"When I consider thy heavens,\" says this ancient singer,\n\"the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast\nordained; what is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of\nman, that thou visitest him?\" Deeps beyond deeps are revealed through\nthat dry, soft, and clear atmosphere of the \"land of promise,\" yet the\nconstellations seem as near {32} to the beholder as parlor lamps. \"My\nsoul longeth\" for the vision of the heavens from the heights of my\nnative Lebanon, and the hills of Palestine. It is no wonder to me that\nmy people have always considered the stars as guides and companions,\nand as awe-inspiring manifestations of the Creator's power, wisdom, and\nglory. \"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament\nsheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech and night unto\nnight sheweth knowledge.\"[1]\n\nSo great is the host of the stars seen by the naked eye in that land\nthat the people of Syria have always likened a great multitude to the\nstars of heaven or the sand of the sea. Of a great assemblage of\npeople we always said, \"They are _methel-ennijoom_--like the stars\" (in\nnumber). So it is written in the twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy,\nthe sixty-second verse, \"And ye shall be left few in number, whereas ye\nwere _as the stars of heaven for multitude_; because thou wouldst not\nobey the {33} voice of the Lord thy God.\" According to that great\nnarrative in Genesis, God promised Abraham that his progeny would be as\nthe stars in number. In the fifteenth chapter, the fifth verse, it is\nsaid, \"And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward\nheaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said\nunto him, So shall thy seed be.\" In speaking of the omniscience of God\nthe writer of the one hundred and forty-seventh Psalm says, \"He telleth\nthe number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names. Great is\nour Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.\"\n\nBut the numberless lights of the firmament were brought even closer to\nus through the belief that they had vital connection with the lives of\nmen on the earth. I was brought up to believe that every human being\nhad a star in heaven which held the secret of his destiny and which\nwatched over him wherever he went. In speaking of an amiable person it\nis said, \"His star is attractive\" (_nejmo jeddeeb_). Persons {34} love\none another when \"their stars are in harmony.\" A person is in\nunfavorable circumstances when his star is in the sphere of\n\"misfortune\" (_nehiss_), and so forth. The stars indicated the time to\nus when we were traveling by night, marked the seasons, and thus\nfulfilled their Creator's purpose by serving \"for signs, and for\nseasons, and for days and years.\"\n\nIn every community we had \"star-gazers\" who could tell each person's\nstar. We placed much confidence in such mysterious men, who could\n\"arrest\" an absent person's star in its course and learn from it\nwhether it was well or ill with the absent one.\n\nLike a remote dream, it comes to me that as a child of about ten I went\nout one night with my mother to seek a \"star-gazer\" to locate my\nfather's star and question the shining orb about him. My father had\nbeen away from home for some time, and owing to the meagerness of the\nmeans of communication in that country, especially in those days, we\nhad no news of him at all. During that afternoon {35} my mother said\nthat she felt \"heavy-hearted\" for no reason that she knew; therefore\nshe feared that some ill must have befallen the head of our household,\nand sought to \"know\" whether her fear was well grounded. The\n\"star-arrester,\" leaning against an aged mulberry tree, turned his eyes\ntoward the stellar world, while his lips moved rapidly and silently as\nif he were repeating words of awful import. Presently he said, \"I see\nhim. He is sitting on a cushion, leaning against the wall and smoking\nhis _narghile_. There are others with him, and he is in his usual\nhealth.\" The man took pains to point out the \"star\" to my mother, who,\nafter much sympathetic effort, felt constrained to say that she did see\nwhat the star-gazer claimed he saw. But at any rate, mother declared\nthat she was no longer \"heavy-hearted.\"\n\nIn my most keen eagerness to see my father and his _narghile_ in the\nstar, at least for mere intellectual delight, I clung to the arm of the\nreader of the heavens like a frightened kitten, {36} and insisted upon\n\"seeing.\" The harder he tried to shake me off, the deeper did my\norgans of apprehension sink into his sleeve. At last the combined\nefforts of my mother and the heir of the ancient astrologers forced me\nto believe that I was \"too young to behold such sights.\"\n\nIt was the excessive leaning of his people upon such practices that led\nIsaiah to cry, \"Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let\nnow the astrologers, the star-gazers, the monthly prognosticators,\nstand up and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee.\nBehold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall\nnot deliver themselves from the power of the flames.\"\n\nBeyond all such crudities, however, lies the sublime and sustaining\nbelief that the stars are alive with God. The lofty strains of such\nscriptural passages as the nineteenth Psalm and the beautiful story of\nthe star of Bethlehem, indicate that to the Oriental mind the \"hosts of\nheaven\" are no mere masses of dust, {37} but the agencies of the\nCreator's might and love. So the narrative of the Nativity in our\nGospel sublimates the beliefs of the Orientals about God's purpose in\nthose lights of the firmament, by making the guide of the Wise Men to\nthe birthplace of the Prince of Peace a great star, whose pure and\nserene light symbolized the peace and holiness which, in the \"fullness\nof time,\" his kingdom shall bring upon the earth.\n\nThe presentation of a child at the temple, or the \"admittance of an\ninfant into the Church,\" is one of the most tender, most beautiful, and\nmost impressive services of my Mother Church--the Greek Orthodox.[2]\nIt is held for every child born within that fold, in commemoration of\nthe presentation of Jesus at the temple in Jerusalem. As Luke tells us\n(11:22), \"And when the days of her purification according to the law of\nMoses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him\nto the Lord.\"\n\n{38}\n\nThe purification period \"according to the law of Moses\" is forty\ndays.[3] Until this is \"accomplished,\" the mother is not permitted to\nenter into the house of worship. As a general rule the baptismal\nservice, which takes place any time between the eighth day and the\nfortieth day after birth, is held at the home. On the first Sabbath\nday after the \"forty days,\" the mother carries the infant to the door\nof the church during mass, where the robed priest, who has been\npreviously applied to for the sacred rite, meets the mother and\nreceives the child in his arms. After making the sign of the cross\nwith the child at the door, the priest says, \"Now enters the servant of\nGod [naming the child] into the Holy Church, in the name of the Father,\nand the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Amen.\" Then the priest walks into\nthe church with the child, saying, in its behalf, \"I will come into thy\nhouse in the multitude of thy mercy: and in thy fear will I worship\ntoward thy holy temple.\"[4] As he {39} approaches the center of the\nchurch, he says again, \"Now enters the servant of God,\" etc. Then\nstanding in the center of the church, and surrounded by the reverently\nsilent congregation, the priest says again, in behalf of the child, \"In\nthe midst of the congregation will I praise thee, O Lord.\"[5] Again,\nin front of the Royal Gate (the central door in the _anastasis_, or\npartition which screens the altar from the congregation) the priest\nsays for the third time, \"Now enters the servant of God,\" etc. After\nthis the priest carries the infant through the north door, which is to\nthe left of the Royal Gate, into the _mizbeh_, which corresponds to the\n\"holy place\" in the ancient temple. Here he walks around the _maideh_\n(altar of sacrifice), makes the sign of the cross with the child, and\nwalks out into the midst of the congregation, through the south door.\nIn this position the priest utters as his final petition the words of\nthe aged Simeon (Luke 11:29), \"Lord, now lettest thou thy servant\ndepart in peace, {40} according to thy word: for mine eyes have seen\nthy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;\na light to lighten the gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.\"\nThen he delivers the child back to its mother. Female children are\npresented in front of the Royal Gate, but are not admitted into the\n_mizbeh_.\n\n\n\n[1] Ps. xix: 1-2.\n\n[2] See the author's autobiography, _A Far Journey_, p. 4.\n\n[3] Lev. xii: 2-4.\n\n[4] Ps. v: 7.\n\n[5] Ps. xx: 22.\n\n\n\n\n{41}\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nMYSTIC TONES\n\nI love to listen to the mystic tones of the Christmas carol. The story\nof the \"star of Bethlehem\" is the medium of transmission of those\ndeeper strains which have come into the world through the soul of that\nancient East. I love to mingle with the social joys of the Christmas\nseason and its spirit of good-will, the mystic accents of the ancient\nseers who expressed in the rich narratives of the New Testament the\ndeepest and dearest hopes of the soul.\n\nI leave most respectfully to the \"Biblical critic\" the task of\nassigning to the narrative of the Nativity its rightful place in the\nhistory of the New Testament. My deep interest in this story centers\nin those spiritual ideals it reveals, which have through the ages\nexercised such beneficent influences over the minds of men. And I\nbelieve that both as a Christian {42} and as an Oriental, I have a\nperfect right to be a mystic, after the wholesome New Testament fashion.\n\nIn the second chapter of St. Luke's Gospel the story of the Nativity is\npresented in a most exquisite poetical form. The vision of humble\nshepherds, wise men, and angels, mingling together in the joy of a new\ndivine revelation, could have been caught only by a deep-visioned\nspiritual artist. Had this fragment of religious literature been\ndiscovered in this year of 1916, its appearance would have marked a\nsignificant epoch in the history of religion. It is the expression of\na sublime and passionate desire of the soul for divine companionship\nand for infinite peace.\n\n\"And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field,\nkeeping watch over their flocks by night.\n\n\"And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the\nLord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.\n\n\"And the angel said unto them, Fear not; {43} for, behold, I bring you\ngood tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.\n\n\"For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is\nChrist the Lord.\n\n\"And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in\nswaddling clothes, lying in a manger.\n\n\"And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host\npraising God, and saying,\n\n\"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.\"\n\nWhen the angel delivered his message to the effect that God had visited\nhis people in the person of the new-born Christ, then the humble,\nunlettered shepherds heard the heavenly song, which gave God the glory,\nand prophesied peace and good-will for all mankind. Could there be\nanything more profoundly and accurately interpretative of the deepest\nhopes of the human soul than this picture? Even the uncouth shepherds,\nbeing living souls, could realize that when the divine and the {44}\nhuman met heaven and earth became one, and peace and good-will\nprevailed among men. What encouragement, what hope this vision holds\nout even to the humblest among men! What assurance that heaven with\nall its treasures of peace and love is so near to our dust!\n\n\"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you glad\ntidings.\" The shepherds looked up to heaven through the eyes of all\nmankind. It was the upward look of a world-old hope. No soul ever\nlooked up to heaven with different results. The divine response always\nis, \"Fear not, for I bring you good tidings!\" No soul ever needs to\ndwell in doubt and fear. No soul ever needs to be lonely and forlorn.\nHeaven has nothing for us but \"good tidings of great joy.\" The higher\npowers are near at hand, and the soul of man may have invisible\ncompanions.\n\nAgain we learn from this New Testament passage that in the visit of the\nshepherds and the Wise Men to the holy child both were equally blest.\nBoth those who were steeped {45} in the wisdom of that ancient East and\nthe simple-minded sons of the desert stood at the shrine of a holy\npersonality as naked souls, divested of all artificial human\ndistinctions. There were no \"assigned\" pews in that little shrine.\nAll those who came into it by way of the heart received a blessing, and\nwent away praising God. Here we have a foregleam of that longed-for\nkingdom of God--the home of all aspiring and seeking souls, regardless\nof rank and station.\n\n \"There is no great and no small\n To the soul that maketh all:\n And where it cometh, all things are;\n And it cometh everywhere.\"\n\n\nThe Christmas carol is dear to the human heart because it is a song of\nspiritual optimism. To pessimism the heavens are closed and silent;\nthe world has no windows opening toward the Infinite. Pessimism cannot\nsing because it has no hope, and cannot pray because it has no faith.\n\nAnd I deem it essential at this point to ask, {46} Whither is the\nspirit of the present age leading us? Are we drifting away from the\nmount of vision? There seems to be but little room in this vast and\ncomplex life of ours for spiritual dreams and visions. The combination\nof our commercial activities and the never-ceasing whir of the wheels\nof our industries close up our senses to the intimate whisperings of\nthe divine spirit. We see, but with the outward eye. We hear, but\nwith the outward ear. Our inward senses are in grave danger of dying\naltogether from lack of exercise. The things of this life are too much\nwith us, and they render us oblivious to the gracious beckonings of the\nhigher world. Let not the lesser interests of this life close our\nhearing to the angel-song which never dies upon the air. The star of\nhope never sets, and God's revelations are from everlasting to\neverlasting.\n\n\n\n\n{47}\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nFILIAL OBEDIENCE\n\nOf Jesus' life between the period spoken of in the narrative of the\nNativity and the time when he appeared on the banks of the Jordan,\nseeking to be baptized by John, the New Testament says nothing. One\nsingle incident only is mentioned. When twelve years old, the boy\nJesus went with his parents on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Annual\npilgrimages to the great shrines are still very common in Syria. The\nMohammedans go to Mecca, the Christians and the Jews to Jerusalem. But\nthere are many other and more accessible sanctuaries which are\nfrequented by the faithful in all those communions. However, a visit\nto any other sanctuary than Jerusalem and Mecca is called _zeara_,\nrather than a pilgrimage.[1] The simple record of Jesus' pilgrimage to\nJerusalem with his parents is that of a typical {48} experience. In\nwriting about it I seem to myself to be giving a personal reminiscence.\n\nIn the second chapter of the Gospel of Luke, the forty-first verse, it\nis said: \"Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of\nthe passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to\nJerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled\nthe days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in\nJerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it. But they,\nsupposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and\nthey sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. And when they\nfound him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him.\"\n\nIn Syria male children are taken on a pilgrimage or _zeara_, and thus\npermitted to receive the blessing, which this pious act is supposed to\nbring upon them, as soon as they are able to make the journey. Full\nmaturity is no essential condition. I went with my parents on two\n_zearas_ before I was fifteen. At the {49} present time there is no\ndefinite rule, at least among Christians, as to how many days should be\nspent at a sanctuary. Pilgrims usually \"vow\" to stay a certain number\nof days. In ancient Judaism, \"the feast of the passover\" occupied\neight days, and it was that number of days which Mary and Joseph\n\"fulfilled.\"\n\nAccording to Luke, on their return journey to Nazareth Jesus' parents\nwent a day's journey before they discovered that he was not with them.\nThis phase of the story seems to have greatly puzzled the good old\ncommentator, Adam Clarke. \"Knowing what a treasure they possessed,\" he\nobserves, \"how could they be so long without looking on it? Where were\nthe bowels and tender solicitude of the mother? Let them answer this\nquestion who can.\"\n\nClarke did not need to be so perplexed or so mystified. For one who\nknows the customs of the Syrians while on religious pilgrimages knows\nalso that the experience of the \"holy family\" was not at all a strange\none. The whole mystery is cleared up in the saying, {50} \"And they\nsought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance.\" Kinsfolk and\nacquaintances travel in large groups, and the young pilgrims, such as\nthe twelve-year-old Jesus, are considered safe so long as they keep in\nclose touch with the company. On such journeys, parents may not see\ntheir sons for hours at a time. The homogeneous character of the\ngroup, and the sense of security which faith gives, especially at such\ntimes, present no occasion for anxiety concerning the dear ones.\n\nThe saying of Luke that Joseph and Mary \"went a day's journey\" before\nthey discovered that Jesus was not in the company must, it seems to me,\ninclude also the time consumed in their return journey to Jerusalem to\nseek their son. Perhaps they discovered his absence about noontime\nwhen the company halted by a spring of water to partake of the _zad_\n(food for the way). At such a time families gather together to break\nbread. And what I feel certain of also is that the boy Jesus must have\nbeen with his parents when they first {51} set out on their homeward\njourney early in the morning from Jerusalem, and that he detached\nhimself from his kinsfolk and returned to the holy city shortly after\nthe company had left that place. No Syrian family ever would start out\non a journey before every one of its members had been accounted for.\nThe evangelist's omission of these details is easily understood. His\npurpose was not to give a photographic account of all that happened on\nthe way. It was rather to reveal the lofty spiritual ideals which led\nthe boy Jesus to return to the temple, where he was found by his\nanxious parents \"sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing\nthem, and asking them questions.\"\n\nIn this brief but significant record of all the filial graces which\nJesus must have possessed one only is mentioned in the second chapter\nof the Gospel of Luke, where it is stated that he went down to Nazareth\nwith his parents \"and was subject unto them.\"\n\nThis seemingly casual remark is full of {52} significance. With us in\nSyria, _ta'at-el-walideen_ (obedience to parents) has always been\nyouth's crowning virtue. Individual initiative must not overstep the\nboundary line of this grace. Only in this way the patriarchal\norganization of the family can be kept intact. In my boyhood days in\nthat romantic country, whenever my father took me with him on a \"visit\nof homage\" to one of the lords of the land, the most fitting thing such\na dignitary could do to me was to place his hand upon my head and say\nwith characteristic condescension, \"Bright boy, and no doubt obedient\nto your parents.\"\n\nAs regards the grace of filial obedience, I am not aware of a definite\nbreak between the East and the West. But there is a vital difference.\nTo an Oriental who has just come to this country, the American youth\nseem to be indifferent to filial obedience. The strong passion for\nfreedom, the individualistic sense which is a pronounced characteristic\nof the aggressive Anglo-Saxon, and the economic stress {53} which ever\ntends to scatter the family group, and which the East has never\nexperienced so painfully as the West has, all convey the impression\nthat parental love and filial obedience are fast disappearing from\nAmerican society. But to those of us sons of the East who have\nintimate knowledge of the American family, its cohesion does not seem\nto be so alarmingly weak. The mad rush for \"business success\" is\nindeed a menace to the American home, but love and obedience are still\nvital forces in that home. The terms \"father,\" \"mother,\" \"brother,\"\nand \"sister,\" have by no means lost their spiritual charms in American\nsociety. The deep affection in which the members of the better\nAmerican family hold one another and the exquisite regard they have for\none another command profound respect.\n\nBut the vital difference between the East and the West is that to\nEasterners filial obedience is more than a social grace and an evidence\nof natural affection. It is a _religious_ duty of far-reaching\nsignificance. God commands {54} it. \"Thou shalt honor thy father and\nthy mother\" is a divine command. The \"displeasure\" of a parent is as\nmuch to be feared as the wrath of God. This sense permeates Syrian\nsociety from the highest to the lowest of its ranks.\n\nThe explanation of the origin of sin in the third chapter of Genesis\ntouches the very heart of this matter. The writer ascribes the \"fall\nof man,\" not to any act which was in itself really harmful, but to\ndisobedience. Adam was commanded by his divine parent not to eat of\nthe \"tree of knowledge of good and evil\"; but he did eat, and\nconsequently became a stranger to the blessings of his original home.\n\nThis idea of filial obedience has been at once the strength and\nweakness of Orientals. In the absence of the restraining interests of\na larger social life this patriarchal rule has preserved the cohesion\nof the domestic and clannish group, and thus safeguarded for the people\ntheir primitive virtues. On the other hand, it has served to\nextinguish the spirit of {55} progress, and has thus made Oriental life\na monotonous repetition of antiquated modes of thought.\n\nAnd it was indeed a great blessing to the world when Jesus broke away\nfrom mere formal obedience to parents, in the Oriental sense of the\nword, and declared, \"Whosoever shall do the will of my Father in\nheaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.\"\n\n\n\n[1] See above, p. 14.\n\n\n\n\n{56}\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nFEAST AND SACRAMENT\n\nOf Jesus' public ministry and his characteristics as an Oriental\nteacher, I shall speak in later chapters. Here I will give space only\nto a portrayal of the closing scenes in his personal career. The\nevents of the \"upper room\" on Mount Zion, and of Gethsemane, are\nfaithful photographs of striking characteristics of Syrian life.\n\nThe Last Supper was no isolated event in Syrian history. Its fraternal\natmosphere, intimate associations, and sentimental intercourse are such\nas characterize every such gathering of Syrian friends, especially in\nthe shadow of an approaching danger. From the simple \"table manners\"\nup to that touch of sadness and idealism which the Master gave that\nmeal,--bestowing upon it the sacrificial character that has been its\npropelling force through the ages,--I find nothing which is {57} not in\nperfect harmony with what takes place on such occasions in my native\nland. The sacredness of the Last Supper is one of the emphatic\nexamples of how Jesus' life and words sanctified the commonest things\nof life. He was no inventor of new things, but a discoverer of the\nspiritual significance of things known to men to be ordinary.\n\nThe informal formalities of Oriental life are brimful of sentiment.\nThe Oriental's chief concern in matters of conduct is not the\ncorrectness of the technique, but the cordiality of the deed. To the\nAnglo-Saxon the Oriental appears to be perhaps too cordial, decidedly\nsentimental, and over-responsive to the social stimulus. To the\nOriental, on the other hand, the Anglo-Saxon seems in danger of\nbecoming an unemotional intellectualist.\n\nBe that as it may, the Oriental is never afraid to \"let himself go\" and\nto give free course to his feelings. The Bible in general and such\nportions of it as the story of the Last Supper in particular illustrate\nthis phase of Oriental life.\n\n{58}\n\nIn Syria, as a general rule, the men eat their fraternal feasts alone,\nas in the case of the Master and his disciples at the Last Supper,\nwhen, so far as the record goes, none of the women followers of Christ\nwere present. They sit on the floor in something like a circle, and\neat out of one or a few large, deep dishes. The food is lifted into\nthe mouth, not with a fork or spoon,--except in the case of liquid\nfood,--but with small \"shreds\" of thin bread. Even liquid food is\nsometimes \"dipped up\" with pieces of bread formed like the bowl of a\nspoon. Here may be readily understood Jesus' saying, \"He that dippeth\nhis hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.\"[1]\n\nIn his famous painting, The Last Supper, Leonardo da Vinci presents an\nOriental event in an Occidental form. The high table, the chairs, the\nindividual plates and drinking-glasses are European rather than Syrian\nappointments. From a historical standpoint, the picture is misleading.\nBut Da Vinci's great {59} production was not intended to be a\nhistorical, but a character, study. Such a task could not have been\naccomplished if the artist had presented the Master and his disciples\nas they really sat in the \"upper room\"--in a circle. He seats them on\none side of the table, divides them into four groups of three each--two\ngroups on each side of the Master. As we view the great painting, we\nfeel the thrill of horror which agitated the loyal disciples when Jesus\ndeclared, \"Verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.\"[2]\nThe gestures, the sudden change of position, and the facial expression\nreveal the innermost soul of each disciple. This is the central\npurpose of the picture. The artist gave the event a European rather\nthan an Oriental setting, in order to make it more intelligible to the\npeople for whom it was intended.\n\nBut the appointments of the Great Supper were genuinely Oriental. The\nMaster and his disciples sat on the floor and ate out of one or {60} a\nfew large, deep dishes. In Mark's account of that event[3] we read:\n\"And when it was evening he cometh with the twelve. And as they sat\nand were eating, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you shall\nbetray me, even he that _eateth_ with me.\" The fact that they were\n_all_ eating with him is shown in the statement, \"They began to be\nsorrowful, and to say unto him, Is it I? And he said unto them, It is\none of the twelve, he that dippeth with me in the dish.\"\n\nThe last sentence, \"He that dippeth with me in the dish,\" has been\nconstrued to mean that it was Judas only (who was sitting near to\nJesus) who was dipping in the dish out of which the Master was eating.\nThis is altogether possible, but by no means certain. The fact is that\naccording to Syrian customs on such occasions each of the few large\ndishes contains a different kind of food. Each one of the guests is\nprivileged to reach to any one of the dishes and dip his bread in it.\nFrom this it may be {61} safely inferred that several or all of the\ndisciples dipped _in turn_ in the dish which was nearest to Jesus. The\nfact that the other disciples did not know whom their Master meant by\nhis saying that one of them should betray him, even after he had said,\n\"He that dippeth with me in the dish,\" shows plainly that Judas was\neating in the same fashion as all the other disciples were.\n\nTherefore the saying, \"He that dippeth with me,\" etc., was that of\ndisappointed love. It may be thus paraphrased: \"I have loved you all\nalike. I have chosen you as my dearest friends. We have often broken\nbread and sorrowed and rejoiced together, yet one of you, my dear\ndisciples, one who is now eating with me _as the rest are_, intends to\nbetray me!\"\n\nAnd that forlorn but glorious company who met in the upper room on\nMount Zion on that historic night had certainly one cup out of which\nthey drank. At our feasts we always drank the wine out of one and the\nsame cup. We did not stay up nights thinking about {62} microbes. To\nus the one cup meant fellowship and fraternal communion. The one who\ngives drink (_sacky_) fills the cup and passes it to the most honored\nmember of the company first. He drinks the contents and returns the\ncup to the _sacky_, who fills it again and hands it to another member\nof the group, and so on, until all have been served once. Then the\nguests drink again by way of _nezel_. It is not easy to translate this\nword into English. The English word \"treating\" falls very short of\nexpressing the affectionate regard which the _nezel_ signifies. The\none guest upon receiving the cup wishes for the whole company \"health,\nhappiness, and length of days.\" Then he singles out one of the group\nand begs him to accept the next cup that is poured as a pledge of his\naffectionate regard. The pourer complies with the request by handing\nthe next cup to the person thus designated, who drinks it with the most\neffusive and affectionate reciprocation of his friend's sentiments. It\nis also customary for a gracious host to request as a {63} happy ending\nto the feast that the contents of one cup be drunk by the whole company\nas a seal of their friendship with one another. Each guest takes a sip\nand passes the cup to the one next to him until all have partaken of\nthe \"fruit of the vine.\"\n\nI have no doubt that it was after this custom that the disciples drank\nwhen Jesus \"took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to\nthem: and they _all_ drank of it.\"[4]\n\nNo account of fraternal feasting in Syria can be complete without\nmention of the _z[i-breve]kreh_ (remembrance). To be remembered by his\nfriends after his departure from them is one of the Syrian's deepest\nand dearest desires. The _z[i-breve]kreh_ plays a very important part\nin the literature of the East, and expresses the tenderest spirit of\nits poetry. The expressions \"I remember,\" \"remember me,\" \"your\nremembrance,\" \"the remembrance of those days\" and like phrases are\nlegion among the Syrians. \"O friends,\" cries the Arabian poet, {64}\n\"let your remembrance of us be as constant as our remembrance of you;\nfor such a remembrance brings near those that are far away.\"\n\nRarely do friends who have been feasting together part without this\nrequest being made by those of them who do not expect to meet with\ntheir friends again for a time. \"Remember me when you meet again,\" is\nsaid by the departing friend with unspeakable tenderness. He is\naffectionately grateful also when he knows that he is held in\nremembrance by his friends. So St. Paul pours out his soul in grateful\njoy for his friends' remembrance of him. \"But now when Timotheus came\nfrom you unto us, and brought us good tidings of your faith and\ncharity, and that _ye have good remembrance of us always, desiring\ngreatly to see us, as we also to see you_.\"[5]\n\nThis affectionate request, \"remember me,\" signifies, \"I love you,\ntherefore I am always with you.\" If we love one another, we cannot\n{65} be separated from one another. The _z[)i]ikreh_ is the bond of\nfraternity between us.\n\nWas not this the very thing which the Master meant when he said, \"This\ndo in remembrance of me\"?[6] The disciples were asked never to allow\nthemselves to forget their Master's love for them and for the world:\nnever to forget that if his love lived in their hearts he was always\nwith them, present at their feasts, and in their struggles in the world\nto lead the world from darkness into light. \"This do in remembrance of\nme,\" is therefore the equivalent of \"Lo, I am with you alway, even unto\nthe end of the world.\"[7]\n\n\"Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus\nloved.\"[8] The posture of the \"beloved disciple,\" John,--so\nobjectionable to Occidental taste,--is in perfect harmony with Syrian\ncustoms. How often have I seen men friends in such an attitude. There\nis not in it the slightest infringement of the rules of propriety; the\nact was as natural {66} to us all as shaking hands. The practice is\nespecially indulged in when intimate friends are about to part from one\nanother, as on the eve of a journey, or when about to face a dangerous\nundertaking. They then sit with their heads leaning against each\nother, or the one's head resting upon the other's shoulder or breast.\n\nThey talk to one another in terms of unbounded intimacy and\nunrestrained affection. The expressions, \"My brother,\" \"My eyes,\" \"My\nsoul,\" \"My heart,\" and the like, form the life-centers of the\nconversation. \"My life, my blood are for you; take the very sight of\nmy eyes, if you will!\" And lookers-on say admiringly, \"Behold, how\nthey love one another! By the name of the Most High, they are closer\nthan brothers.\"\n\nWas it, therefore, strange that the Master, who knew the deepest secret\nof the divine life, and whose whole life was a living sacrifice, should\nsay to his intimate friends, as he handed them the bread and the cup on\nthat {67} momentous night, \"Take, eat; this is my body\"; and \"Drink ye\nall of it; for this is my blood\"? Here again the Nazarene charged the\nordinary words of friendly intercourse with rare spiritual richness and\nmade the common speech of his people express eternal realities.\n\nBut let me here call attention to Da Vinci's master-stroke which\nchanges for a moment John's posture and relieves the Last Supper of a\nfeature which is so objectionable to Occidental taste. The artist\nseizes the moment when Peter pulled John from Jesus' breast by\nbeckoning to the beloved disciple \"that he should ask who it should be\nof whom he spoke\" (the one who should betray him). John remains in the\nattitude of loving repose; he simply lifts his body for an instant, and\ninclines his head to hear Peter.\n\nThe treachery of Judas is no more an Oriental than it is a human\nweakness. Traitors can claim neither racial nor national refuge. They\nare fugitives in the earth. But in the Judas episode is involved one\nof the most tender, {68} most touching acts of Jesus' whole life. To\none familiar with the customs of the East, Jesus' handing the \"sop\" to\nhis betrayer was an act of surpassing beauty and significance. In all\nmy life in America I have not heard a preacher interpret this simple\ndeed, probably because of lack of knowledge of its meaning in Syrian\nsocial intercourse.\n\n\"And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son\nof Simon.\"[9] At Syrian feasts, especially in the region where Jesus\nlived, such sops are handed to those who stand and serve the guests\nwith wine and water. But in a more significant manner those morsels\nare exchanged by friends. Choice bits of food are handed to friends by\none another, as signs of close intimacy. It is never expected that any\nperson would hand such a sop to one for whom he cherishes no friendship.\n\nI can never contemplate this act in the Master's story without thinking\nof \"the love of Christ which passeth knowledge.\" To the one {69} who\ncarried in his mind and heart a murderous plot against the loving\nMaster, Jesus handed the sop of friendship, the morsel which is never\noffered to an enemy. The rendering of the act in words is this:\n\"Judas, my disciple, I have infinite pity for you. You have proved\nfalse, you have forsaken me in your heart; but I will not treat you as\nan enemy, for I have come, not to destroy, but to fulfill. Here is my\nsop of friendship, and 'that thou doest, do quickly.'\"\n\nApparently Jesus' demeanor was so cordial and sympathetic that, as the\nevangelist tells us, \"Now no man at the table knew for what intent he\nspake this unto him. For some of them thought, because Judas had the\nbag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need\nof against the feast, or that he should give something to the poor.\"[10]\n\nThus in this simple act of the Master, so rarely noticed by preachers,\nwe have perhaps the finest practical example of \"Love your enemies\" in\nthe entire Gospel.\n\n{70}\n\nIs it therefore to be wondered at that in speaking of Judas, the writer\nof St. John's Gospel says, \"And after the sop Satan entered into him\"?\nFor, how can one who is a traitor at heart reach for the gift of true\nfriendship without being transformed into the very spirit of treason?\n\nAgain, Judas's treasonable kiss in Gethsemane was a perversion of an\nancient, deeply cherished, and universally prevalent Syrian custom. In\nsaluting one another, especially after having been separated for a\ntime, men friends of the same social rank kiss one another on both\ncheeks, sometimes with very noisy profusion. When they are not of the\nsame social rank, the inferior kisses the hand of the superior, while\nthe latter at least pretends to kiss his dutiful friend upon the cheek.\nSo David and Jonathan \"kissed one another, until David exceeded.\"\nPaul's command, \"Salute one another with a holy kiss,\" so scrupulously\ndisobeyed by Occidental Christians, is characteristically Oriental. As\na child I always felt {71} a profound reverential admiration for that\nunreserved outpouring of primitive affections, when strong men \"fell\nupon one another's neck\" and kissed, while the women's eyes swam in\ntears of joy. The passionate, quick, and rhythmic exchange of\naffectionate words of salutation and kisses sounded, with perhaps a\nlittle less harmony, like an intermingling of vocal and instrumental\nmusic.\n\nSo Judas, when \"forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail, Master, and\nkissed him,\"[11] invented no new sign by which to point Jesus out to\nthe Roman soldiers, but employed an old custom for the consummation of\nan evil design. Just as Jesus glorified the common customs of his\npeople by using them as instruments of love, so Judas degraded those\nvery customs by wielding them as weapons of hate.\n\n\n\n[1] Matt. xxvi: 23.\n\n[2] Matt. xxvi: 21.\n\n[3] Revised Version, xiv: 17-20.\n\n[4] Mark xiv: 23.\n\n[5] 1 Thess. iii: 6.\n\n[6] Luke xxii: 19.\n\n[7] Matt. xxviii: 10.\n\n[8] John xiii: 23.\n\n[9] John xiii: 26.\n\n[10] John xiii: 28, 29.\n\n[11] Matt. xxvi: 49.\n\n\n\n\n{72}\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nTHE LAST SCENE\n\nPerhaps nowhere else in the New Testament do the fundamental traits of\nthe Oriental nature find so clear an expression as in this closing\nscene of the Master's life. The Oriental's _dependence_, to which the\nworld owes the loftiest and tenderest Scriptural passages, finds here\nits most glorious manifestations.\n\nAs I have already intimated, the Oriental is never afraid to \"let\nhimself go,\" whether in joy or sorrow, and to give vent to his\nemotions. It is of the nature of the Anglo-Saxon to suffer in silence,\nand to kill when he must, with hardly a word of complaint upon his lips\nor a ripple of excitement on his face. He disdains asking for\nsympathy. His severely individualistic tendencies and spirit of\nendurance convince him that he is \"able to take care of himself.\"\nDuring my early years in this country the reserve of Americans in times\nof sorrow {73} and danger, as well as in times of joy, was to me not\nonly amazing, but appalling. Not being as yet aware of their inward\nfire and intensity of feeling, held in check by a strong bulwark of\ncalm calculation, as an unreconstructed Syrian I felt prone to doubt\nwhether they had any emotions to speak of.\n\nIt is not my purpose here to undertake a comparative critical study of\nthese opposing traits, but to state that, for good or evil, the\nOriental is pre\u00ebminently a man who craves sympathy, yearns openly and\nnoisily for companionship, and seeks help and support outside himself.\nWhatever disadvantages this trait may involve, it has been the one\nsupreme qualification that has made the Oriental the religious teacher\nof the whole world. It was his childlike dependence on God that gave\nbirth to the twenty-third and fifty-first Psalms, and made the Lord's\nPrayer the universal petition of Christendom. It was also this\ndependence on companionship, human and divine, which inspired the great\ncommandments, {74} \"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy\nheart, and thy neighbor as thyself.\"\n\nNow it is in the light of this fundamental Oriental trait that we must\nview Christ's utterances at the Last Supper and in Gethsemane. The\nrecord tells us that while at the Supper he said to his disciples,\n\"With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I\nsuffer,\"[1]--or, as the marginal note has it, \"I have heartily\ndesired,\" and so forth, which brings it nearer the original text.\nAgain, \"He was troubled in spirit, and testified and said, Verily,\nverily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.\" \"This is my\nbody ... This is my blood ... Do this in remembrance of me.\" We must\nseek the proper setting for these utterances, not merely in the upper\nroom in Zion, but in the deepest tendencies of the Oriental mind.\n\nAnd the climax is reached in the dark hour of Gethsemane, in the hour\nof intense suffering, imploring need, and ultimate triumph in {75}\nJesus' surrender to the Father's will. How true to that demonstrative\nOriental nature is the Scriptural record, \"And being in an agony he\nprayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of\nblood falling down to the ground.\"[2]\n\nThe faithful and touching realism of the record here is an example of\nthe childlike responsiveness of the Syrian nature to feelings of\nsorrow, no less striking than the experience itself. It seems to me\nthat if an Anglo-Saxon teacher in similar circumstances had ever\nallowed himself to agonize and to sweat \"as it were great drops of\nblood,\" his chronicler in describing the scene would have safeguarded\nthe dignity of his race by simply saying that the distressed teacher\nwas \"visibly affected\"!\n\nThe darkness deepened and the Master \"took with him Peter and the two\nsons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith\nhe unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death; tarry\n{76} ye here, and watch with me.\"[3] Three times did the Great Teacher\nutter that matchless prayer, whose spirit of fear as well as of trust\nvindicates the doctrine of the humanity of God and the divinity of man\nas exemplified in the person of Christ: \"O my Father, if it be\npossible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as\nthou wilt!\"[4]\n\nThe sharp contrast between the Semitic and the Anglo-Saxon temperament\nhas led some unfriendly critics of Christ to state very complacently\nand confidently that he \"simply broke down when the critical hour\ncame.\" In this assertion I find a very pronounced misapprehension of\nthe facts. If my knowledge of the traits of my own race is to be\nrelied on, then in trying to meet this assertion I feel that I am\nentitled to the consideration of one who speaks with something\nresembling authority.\n\nThe simple fact is that while in Gethsemane, as indeed everywhere else\nthroughout his ministry, Jesus was not in the position of one {77}\ntrying to \"play the hero.\" His companions were his intimate earthly\nfriends and his gracious heavenly Father, and to them he spoke as an\nOriental would speak to those dear to him,--_just as he felt_, with not\na shadow of show or sham. His words were not those of weakness and\ndespair, but of confidence and affection. The love of his friends and\nthe love of his Father in heaven were his to draw upon in his hour of\ntrial, with not the slightest artificial reserve. How much better and\nhappier this world would be if we all dealt with one another and with\nGod in the warm, simple, and pure love of Christ!\n\nAs the life and words of Christ amply testify, the vision of the\nOriental has been to teach mankind not science, logic, or\njurisprudence, but a simple, loving, childlike faith in God.\nTherefore, before we can fully know our Master as the cosmopolitan\nChrist, we must first know him as the Syrian Christ.\n\n\n\n[1] Luke xxii: 15.\n\n[2] Luke xxii: 44.\n\n[3] Matt. xxvi: 37-38.\n\n[4] _Ibid._ 39.\n\n\n\n\n{81}\n\nPART II\n\nTHE ORIENTAL MANNER OF SPEECH\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nDAILY LANGUAGE\n\nThe Oriental I have in mind is the Semite, the dweller of the Near\nEast, who, chiefly through the Bible, has exerted an immense influence\non the life and literature of the West. The son of the Near East is\nmore emotional, more intense, and more communicative than his\nFar-Eastern neighbors. Although very old in point of time, his\ntemperament remains somewhat juvenile, and his manner of speech\nintimate and unreserved.\n\nFrom the remote past, even to this day, the Oriental's manner of speech\nhas been that of a worshipper, and not that of a business man or an\nindustrial worker in the modern Western sense. To the Syrian of\nto-day, as to his ancient ancestors, life, with all its activities and\ncares, revolves around a religious center.\n\nOf course this does not mean that his religion {82} has not always been\nbeset with clannish limitations and clouded by superstitions, or that\nthe Oriental has always had a clear, active consciousness of the\nsanctity of human life. But it does mean that this man, serene or\nwrathful, at work or at play, praying or swearing, has never failed to\nbelieve that he is overshadowed by the All-seeing God. He has never\nceased to cry: \"O Lord, Thou hast searched me, and known me. Thou\nknowest my downsitting and mine uprising; Thou understandest my thought\nafar off. Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand\nupon me. Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot\nattain unto it!\"[1]\n\nAnd it is one of the grandest, most significant facts in human history\nthat, notwithstanding his intellectual limitations and superstitious\nfears, because he has maintained the altar of God as life's center of\ngravity, and never let die the consciousness that he was compassed\nabout by the living God, the Oriental {83} has been the channel of the\nsublimest spiritual revelation in the possession of man.\n\nThe histories of races are the records of their desires and rewards, of\ntheir seeking and finding. The law of compensation is all-embracing.\nIn the long run \"whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.\"[2]\n\"He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which\nsoweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.\"[3] In the material\nworld the Oriental has sown but sparingly, and his harvests here have\nalso been very meager. He has not achieved much in the world of\nscience, industry, and commerce. As an industrial worker he has\nremained throughout his long history a user of hand tools. Previous to\nhis very recent contact with the West, he never knew what structural\niron and machinery were. As a merchant he has always been a simple\ntrader. He has never been a man of many inventions. His faithful\nrepetition of the past has left no gulf between him and his remote\nancestors. {84} The implements and tools he uses to-day are like those\nhis forefathers used in their day.\n\nThe supreme choice of the Oriental has been religion. To say that this\nchoice has not been altogether a conscious one, that it has been the\noutcome of temperament, does by no means lessen its significance. From\nthe beginning of his history on the earth to this day the Oriental has\nbeen conscious above all things of two supreme realities--God and the\nsoul. What has always seemed to him to be his first and almost only\nduty was and is to form the most direct, most intimate connection\nbetween God and the soul. \"The fear of the Lord,\" meaning most\naffectionate reverence, is to the son of the East not \"the beginning of\nwisdom\" as the English Bible has it, but the _height_ or _acme_ of\nwisdom. His first concern about his children is that they should know\nthemselves as living souls, and God as their Creator and Father. An\nunbeliever in God has always been to the East a strange phenomenon. I\nnever heard of atheism or of an atheist before {85} I came in touch\nwith Western culture in my native land.\n\nMy many years of intimate and sympathetic contact with the more varied,\nmore intelligent life of the West has not tended in the least to lessen\nmy reverence for religion nor to lower my regard for culture. Culture\ngives strength and symmetry to religious thought, and religion gives\nlife and beauty to culture. And just as I believe that men should pray\nwithout ceasing, so also do I believe that they should strive to make\ntheir religious faith ever more free and more intelligent.\n\nYet the history of the Orient compels me to believe that the soil out\nof which scriptures spring is that whose life is the active sympathy of\nreligion, regardless of the degree of acquired knowledge. When the\ndepths of human nature are thoroughly saturated with this sympathy,\nthen it is prepared both to receive and to give those thoughts of which\nscriptures are made. Industry and commerce have their good uses. But\nan industrial and {86} commercialistic atmosphere is not conducive to\nthe production of sacred books. Where the chief interests of life\ncenter in external things, religion is bound to become only one and\nperhaps a minor concern in life.\n\nThe Oriental has always lived in a world of spiritual mysteries.\nFearful or confident, superstitious or rational, to him God has been\nall and in all. \"The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous\naltogether. In keeping of them there is great reward.\"[4] The son of\nthe East has been richly rewarded. He is the religious teacher of all\nmankind. Through him all scriptures have come into being. All the\ngreat, living religions of the world originated in Asia; and the three\ngreatest of them--Judaism, Christianity, and Mohammedanism--have come\ninto the world through the Semitic race in that little country called\nSyria. The perpetual yearning of the Oriental for spiritual dreams and\nvisions has had its rewards. He sowed bountifully, he reaped\nbountifully.\n\n{87}\n\nNote the Syrian's daily language: it is essentially Biblical. He has\nno _secular_ language. The only real break between his scriptures and\nthe vocabulary of his daily life is that which exists between the\nclassical and the vernacular. When you ask a Syrian about his business\nhe will not answer, \"We are doing well at present,\" but \"_Allah m\u00fbn\n'aim_\" (God is giving bounteously). To one starting on a journey the\nphrase is not \"Take good care of yourself,\" but \"Go, in the keeping and\nprotection of God.\" By example and precept we were trained from\ninfancy in this manner of speech. Coming into a house, the visitor\nsalutes by saying, \"God grant you good morning,\" or \"The peace of God\ncome upon you.\" So it is written in the tenth chapter of Matthew, \"And\nas ye enter into the house, salute it. And if the house be worthy, let\nyour peace come upon it; but if it be not worthy, let your peace return\nunto you.\"\n\nIn saluting a day laborer at work we said, \"_Allah, yaatik-el-afie_\"\n(God give you health {88} and strength). In saluting reapers in the\nfield, or \"gatherers of the increase\" in the vineyards or olive groves,\nwe said just the words of Boaz, in the second chapter of the Book of\nRuth, when he \"came from Bethlehem and said unto the reapers, The Lord\nbe with you. And they answered him, The Lord bless thee.\" Or another\nScriptural expression, now more extensively used on such occasions,\n\"The blessing of the Lord be upon you!\" It is to this custom that the\nwithering imprecation which is recorded in the one hundred and\ntwenty-ninth Psalm refers: \"Let them all be confounded and turned back\nthat hate Zion: let them be as the grass upon the housetops which\nwithereth afore it groweth up: wherewith the mower filleth not his\nhand, nor he that bindeth sheaves his bosom. Neither do they which go\nby say, The blessing of the Lord be upon you: we bless you in the name\nof the Lord.\"\n\nIn asking a shepherd about his flock we said, \"How are the blessed\nones?\" or a parent about his children, \"How are the preserved ones?\"\n{89} They are preserved of God through their \"angels,\" of whom the\nMaster spoke when he said, \"Take heed that ye despise not one of these\nlittle ones; for I say unto you that in heaven their angels do always\nbehold the face of my Father.\"[5] Speaking of a good man we said, \"The\ngrace of God is poured upon his face.\" So in the Book of Proverbs,[6]\n\"Blessings are upon the head of the just.\"\n\nAkin to the foregoing are such expressions as these. In trying to rise\nfrom a sitting posture (the Syrians sit on the floor with their legs\nfolded under them), a person, using the right arm for leverage, says,\nas he springs up, \"Ya _Allah_\" (O God [help]). In inquiring about the\nnature of an object, he says, \"_Sho din\u00fb_?\" (what is its religion?) And\none of the queerest expressions, when translated into English, is that\nemployed to indicate that a kettleful of water, for example, has boiled\nbeyond the required degree: \"This water has turned to be an infidel\"\n(_kaffer_). It may be noticed here {90} that it is not the old\ntheology only which associates the infidel with intense heat.\n\nSo this religious language is the Oriental's daily speech. I have\nstated in my autobiography that the men my father employed in his\nbuilding operations were grouped according to their faith. He had so\nmany Druses, so many Greek Orthodox, Maronites, and so forth.\n\nThe almost total abstinence from using \"pious\" language in ordinary\nbusiness and social intercourse in America may be considered\ncommendable in some ways, but I consider it a surrender of the soul to\nthe body, a subordination of the spirit of the things which are eternal\nto the spirit of the things which are temporal. In my judgment, the\nsuperior culture of the West, instead of limiting the vocabulary of\nreligion to the one hour of formal worship on Sunday, and scrupulously\nshunning it during the remainder of the week, should make its use, on a\nmuch higher plane than the Orient has yet discovered, coextensive with\nall the activities of life.\n\n\n\n[1] Ps. cxxxix: 1-6.\n\n[2] Gal. vi: 7.\n\n[3] 2 Cor. ix: 6.\n\n[4] Ps. xix: 9, 11.\n\n[5] Matt. xviii: 10.\n\n[6] x: 6.\n\n\n\n\n{91}\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nIMPRECATIONS\n\nAgain, the Oriental's consideration of life as being essentially\nreligious makes him as pious in his imprecations and curses as he is in\nhis aspirational prayer. Beyond all human intrigue, passion, and\nforce, the great avenger is God. \"Vengeance is mine, I will repay,\nsaith the Lord.\"[1] \"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no\nGod with me: I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; neither is\nthere any that can deliver out of my hand.\"[2]\n\nBy priests and parents these precepts have been transmitted from\ngeneration to generation in the Orient, from time immemorial. We all\nwere instructed in them by our elders with scrupulous care. Of course\nas weak mortals we always tried to avenge ourselves, and the idea of\n_thar_ (revenge) lies deep in the Oriental nature. But to us our\nvengeance was nothing {92} compared with what God did to our \"ungodly\"\nenemies and oppressors.\n\nThe Oriental's impetuosity and effusiveness make his imprecatory\nprayers, especially to the \"unaccustomed ears\" of Americans,\nblood-curdling. And I confess that on my last visit to Syria, my\ncountrymen's (and especially my countrywomen's) bursts of pious wrath\njarred heavily upon me. In his oral bombardment of his enemy the\nOriental hurls such missiles as, \"May God burn the bones of your\nfathers\"; \"May God exterminate your seed from the earth\"; \"May God cut\noff your supply of bread (_yakta rizkak_)\"; \"May you have nothing but\nthe ground for a bed and the sky for covering\"; \"May your children be\norphaned and your wife widowed\"; and similar expressions.\n\nDoes not this sound exactly like the one hundred and ninth Psalm?\nSpeaking of his enemy, the writer of that psalm says, \"Let his days be\nfew, and let another take his office. Let his children be fatherless,\nand his wife a widow. Let his children be continually {93} vagabonds,\nand beg; let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.\nLet there be none to extend mercy unto him; neither let there be any to\nfavor his fatherless children. Let his posterity be cut off; and in\nthe generation following let their name be blotted out.\"\n\nThe sad fact is that the Oriental has always considered his personal\nenemies to be the enemies of God also, and as such their end was\ndestruction. Such sentiments mar the beauty of many of the Psalms.\nThe enemies of the Israelites were considered the enemies of the God of\nIsrael, and the enemies of a Syrian family are also the enemies of the\npatron saint of that family. In that most wonderful Scriptural\npassage--the one hundred and thirty-ninth Psalm--the singer cries,\n\"Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me, ye bloody\nmen. For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy\nname in vain. Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am I not\ngrieved with those that rise against thee? _I hate them with perfect\nhatred: {94} I count them mine enemies._\" Yet this ardent hater of his\nenemies most innocently turns to God and says in the next verse:\n\"Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me and know my thoughts: _and\nsee if there be any wicked way in me_, and lead me in the way\neverlasting.\"\n\nThis mixture of piety and hatred, uttered so na\u00efvely and in good faith,\nis characteristically Syrian. Such were the mutual wishes I so often\nheard expressed in our neighborhood and clan fights and quarrels in\nSyria. When so praying, the persons would beat upon their breasts and\nuncover their heads, as signs of the total surrender of their cause to\nan avenging Omnipotence. Of course the Syrians are not so cruel and\nheartless as such imprecations, especially when cast in cold type,\nwould lead one to believe. I am certain that if the little children of\nhis enemy should become fatherless, the imprecator himself would be\namong the first to \"favor\" them. If you will keep in mind the juvenile\ntemperament of the Oriental, already mentioned, and his habit of\nturning to {95} God in all circumstances, as unreservedly as a child\nturns to his father, your judgment of the son of Palestine will be\ngreatly tempered with mercy.\n\nThe one redeeming feature in these imprecatory petitions is that they\nhave always served the Oriental as a safety-valve. Much of his wrath\nis vented in this manner. He is much more cruel in his words than in\nhis deeds. As a rule the Orientals quarrel much, but fight little. By\nthe time two antagonists have cursed and reviled each other so\nprofusely they cool off, and thus graver consequences are averted. The\nAnglo-Saxon has outgrown such habits. In the first place the highly\ncomplex social order in which he lives calls for much more effective\nmethods for the settling of disputes, and, in the second place, he has\nno time to waste on mere words. And just as the Anglo-Saxon smiles at\nthe wordy fights of the Oriental, the Oriental shudders at the\nswiftness of the Anglo-Saxon in using his fists and his pistol. Both\nare needy of the grace of God.\n\n\n\n[1] Rom. xii: 19.\n\n[2] Deut. xxxii: 39.\n\n\n\n\n{96}\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nLOVE OF ENEMIES\n\nThe preceding chapter makes it very clear why Jesus opened the more\nprofound depths of the spiritual life to his much-divided and almost\nhopelessly clannish countrymen, by commanding them to love their\nenemies. He who taught \"as one having authority, and not as the\nscribes,\" knew the possibilities and powers of divine love as no man\ndid. It is in such immortal precepts that we perceive his superiority\nto his time and people and the divinity of his character. His\nknowledge of the Father was so intimate and his repose in the Father's\nlove so perfect that he could justly say, \"I and my father are one.\"\n\n\"Ye have heard,\" he said to his followers, \"that it hath been said,\nThou shalt love thy neighbor [in the original, _quarib_--kinsman] and\nhate thine enemy: but I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them\nthat curse you, do {97} good to them that hate you, and pray for them\nwhich despitefully use you and persecute you; that ye may be the\nchildren of your father which is in heaven.\"[1]\n\nHere we have the very heart and soul of the Gospel, and the dynamic\npower of Jesus' ministry of reconciliation. Yet to many devout\nChristians, as well as to unfriendly critics of the New Testament, the\ncommand, \"Love your enemies,\" offers a serious perplexity. An\n\"independent\" preacher in a large Western city, after reading this\nportion of the Sermon on the Mount to his congregation, stated that\nJesus' great discourse should be called, \"The Sarcasm on the Mount.\"\nIs not love of enemies beyond the power of human nature?\n\nThis question is pertinent. And it is an obvious fact that we cannot\nlove by command; we cannot love to order. This mysterious flow of soul\nwhich we call love is not of our own making; therefore we cannot _will_\nto love. Such a discussion, however, falls outside the scope {98} of\nthis publication. What I wish to offer here is a linguistic\nexplanation which I believe will throw some light on this great\ncommandment.\n\nThe word \"love\" has been more highly specialized in the West than in\nthe East. In its proper English use it means only that ardent, amorous\nfeeling which cannot be created by will and design. In the West the\nword \"love\" has been relieved of the function of expressing the less\nardent desires such as the terms \"to like,\" \"to have good-will toward,\"\nand \"to be well-disposed toward\" imply.\n\nNot so in the East. The word \"like,\" meaning \"to be favorably inclined\ntoward,\" is not found either in the Bible or in the Arabic tongue. In\nthe English version it is used in two places, but the translation is\nincorrect. In the twenty-fifth chapter of Deuteronomy the seventh\nverse, \"If the man like not to take his brother's wife,\" should be\nrendered, \"If the man _consent_ not\"; and in the fourth chapter of\nAmos, the fifth verse, \"For this liketh you, O ye children of Israel,\"\nis in the original, \"For this ye {99} _loved_, O ye children of\nIsrael.\" In any standard concordance of the Bible, the Hebrew verb\n_Aheb_ (to love) precedes these quotations.\n\nSo to us Orientals the only word which can express any cordial\ninclination of approval is \"love.\" One loves his wife and children,\nand loves grapes and figs and meat, if he likes these things. An\nemployer says to an employee, \"If you _love_ to work for me according\nto this agreement, you can.\" It is nothing uncommon for one to say to\na casual acquaintance whom he likes, \"I must say, _Sahib_ [friend],\nthat I love you!\" I know of no equivalent in the Arabic for the\nphrase, \"I am interested in you.\" \"Love\" and \"hate\" are the usual\nterms by which to express approval and disapproval, as well as real\nlove and hatred.\n\nThe Scriptural passages illustrative of this thought are not a few. In\nthe ninth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, the thirteenth verse,\nit is said, \"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I\nhated.\" God does not \"hate.\" The two terms here, \"loved\" and {100}\n\"hated,\" mean \"approved\" and \"disapproved.\" It is as a father approves\nof the conduct of one of his children and disapproves that of another\nof them. Another example of this use of the word \"hate\" is found in\nthe twenty-first chapter of Deuteronomy, the fifteenth verse: \"If a man\nhave two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him\nchildren, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be\nhers that was hated: then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to\ninherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved\nfirstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the first-born:\nbut he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by\ngiving him a double portion of all that he hath.\" Here it is safe to\ninfer that the writer meant to distinguish between the wife who was a\n\"favorite\" and the one who was not. There could be no valid reason why\na husband should live with a wife whom he really hated when he could\nvery easily divorce her, according to the Jewish {101} law, and marry\nanother. In such a case the husband was simply partial in his love.\nThe hatred which is felt toward an enemy and a destroyer does not apply\nhere.\n\nAnother Scriptural passage which illustrates the free use of the word\n\"love\" is the story of the rich man in the tenth chapter of St. Mark's\nGospel. Beginning with the seventeenth verse, the passage reads: \"And\nwhen he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and\nkneeling to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may\ninherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me\ngood? there is none good but one, that is, God. Thou knowest the\ncommandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not\nbear false witness, Defraud not, Honor thy father and mother. And he\nanswered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my\nyouth. _Then Jesus, beholding him, loved him_, and said unto him, One\nthing thou lackest\"; and so forth. Apparently the brief conversation\nwith the young man {102} showed Jesus that his questioner was both\npolite and intelligent, so the Master liked him. Stating the case in\nWestern phraseology it may be said that the young Hebrew seeker was an\nagreeable, or likable man.\n\nQuite different is the import of the word \"love\" in such of the\nMaster's sayings as are found in the fifteenth chapter of St. John's\nGospel: \"As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye\nin my love. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I\nhave loved you.\" Here the term \"love\" is used in its truest and purest\nsense.\n\nFrom all this it may be seen that when the Great Oriental Teacher said\nto his countrymen, who considered all other clans than their own as\ntheir enemies, \"Love your enemies,\" he did not mean that they should be\nenamored of them, but that they should have good will toward them. We\ncannot love by will and design, but we certainly can will to be well\ndisposed even toward those who, we believe, have ill will toward us.\nHe who really thinks this {103} an impossibility gives evidence not of\nsuperior \"critical knowledge,\" but of being still in the lower stages\nof human evolution.\n\nBut I have something more to say on this great subject. Whether used\nin a general or a highly specialized sense the word \"Love\" speaks\nindeed of the \"greatest thing in the world.\"\n\nWhen the Master of the Art of Living said, \"Love your enemies,\" he\nurged upon the minds of men the divinest law of human progress. Yet\ncompliance with this demand seems, to the majority of men, to be beyond\nthe reach of humanity. When you are admonished to love your enemies,\nyou will be likely to think of the meanest, most disagreeable human\nbeing you know and wonder as to how you are going to love _such_ a\nperson. But the Master's law far transcends this narrow conception of\nlove. Its deeper meaning, when understood, renders such a conception\nshallow and childish. It is to be found, not in the freakish moods of\nthe sensibility, but in the realm of permanent ideals.\n\n{104}\n\nThere are in the world two forces at work, love and hatred. Hatred\ndestroys, love builds; hatred injures, love heals; hatred embitters\nlife, love sweetens it; hatred is godlessness, love is godliness. The\nsupreme question, therefore, is, not as to whether there are unlovable\npersons in the world or not, but rather, which one of these two forces\nwould you have to rule your own life and the life of humanity at large,\nlove or hatred? Which nutrition would you give your own soul and the\nsouls of those who are near and dear to you, that of hatred, or that of\nlove? Can it be your aim in life to aid that power which injures,\ndestroys, embitters life and estranges from God, or the power which\nheals, builds up, sweetens life and makes one with God?\n\nYou say you have been injured through the malicious designs of others,\nyou are pained by the injury, and a sense of hatred impels you to\navenge yourself. But what formed such designs against you, love or\nhatred? Hatred! You enjoy, idealize, adore the love of those who\n{105} love you. The designs of love give you joyous satisfaction, and\nnot pain. You know now by actual personal experience that the fruits\nof hatred are bitter, and the fruits of love are sweet. Is it your\nduty, therefore, to give your life over to the power of hatred, and\nthus increase its dominion among men and multiply its bitter, poisonous\nfruit in the world, or to consecrate your life to the power of love,\nwhich you idealize and adore, and whose fruits are joy and peace?\n\nThis, therefore, is the Master's law of love: Give your life and\nservice to that power which merits your holiest regard and engages your\npurest affections, regardless of the \"evil and the undeserving.\"\nRecognize no enemies, and you shall have none. The only power which\ncan defeat the designs of hatred is love. The foams of hatred and\nfumes of vengeance are destined to pass away with all their possessors;\nonly love is permanent and sovereign good.\n\nThe man of hatred is destined, sooner or {106} later, to lose his\nnobler qualities, his own self-respect and the respect of others, and\nto occupy the smallest and most undesirable social sphere. Therefore\nlove, and do not hate! Exercise good will toward those even who have\ninjured you.\n\nYou may not be able to reach and redeem by your generous thoughts and\ndesigns such persons as have injured you, but a hundred others may\nlearn from you the law of redeeming love. Let your children grow to\nknow you as a man of love. Let your employees and fellow citizens\nthink of you as a man of peace and good will, a builder and not a\ndestroyer. Let your fireside be ever cheered by the music of love.\nWhen the shadows of night fall and you come to enter into the unknown\nland of sleep, let loving thoughts be your companions; let them course\ninto the deepest recesses of your nature and leaven your entire being.\nBe a man of love! Love even your blind and misguided enemies!\n\n\n\n[1] Matt. v: 43-45.\n\n\n\n\n{107}\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\n\"THE UNVERACIOUS ORIENTAL\"\n\nThe Oriental's juvenile temperament and his partial disregard for\nconcrete facts have led his Anglo-Saxon cousin to consider him as\nessentially unveracious. \"You cannot believe what an Oriental says.\"\n\"The Orientals are the children of the 'Father of Lies.'\" \"Whatever an\nOriental says, the opposite is likely to be the truth\"; and so forth.\n\nI do not wish in the least to undertake to excuse or even condone the\nOriental's unveracity, any more than to approve of the ethics of\nAmerican politicians during a political campaign. I have no doubt that\nthe Oriental suffers more from the universal affliction of\nuntruthfulness than does the Anglo-Saxon, and that he sorely needs to\nrestrict his fancy, and to train his intellect to have more respect for\nfacts. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to say that a {108} clear\nunderstanding of some of the Oriental's modes of thought will quash\nmany of the indictments against his veracity. His ways will remain\ndifferent from the ways of the Anglo-Saxon, and perhaps not wholly\nagreeable to the latter; but the son of the East--the dreamer and\nwriter of scriptures--will be credited with more honesty of purpose.\n\nIt is unpleasant to an Anglo-Saxon to note how many things an Oriental\nsays, but does not mean. And it is distressing to an Oriental to note\nhow many things the Anglo-Saxon means, but does not say. To an\nunreconstructed Syrian the brevity, yea, even curtness, of an\nEnglishman or an American, seems to sap life of its pleasures and to\nplace a disproportionate value on time. For the Oriental, the primary\nvalue of time must not be computed in terms of business and money, but\nin terms of sociability and good fellowship. Poetry, and not prosaic\naccuracy, must be the dominant feature of speech.\n\nThere is much more of intellectual inaccuracy than of moral delinquency\nin the Easterner's {109} speech. His misstatements are more often the\nresult of indifference than the deliberate purpose to deceive. One of\nhis besetting sins is his _ma besay-il_--it does not matter. He sees\nno essential difference between nine o'clock and half after nine, or\nwhether a conversation took plate on the housetop or in the house. The\nmain thing is to know the substance of what happened, with as many of\nthe supporting details as may be conveniently remembered. A case may\nbe overstated or understated, not necessarily for the purpose of\ndeceiving, but to impress the hearer with the significance or the\ninsignificance of it. If a sleeper who had been expected to rise at\nsunrise should oversleep and need to be awakened, say half an hour or\nan hour later than the appointed time, he is then aroused with the\ncall, \"Arise, it is noon already--_q\u00fbm sar edh-hir_.\" Of a strong and\nbrave man it is said, \"He can split the earth--_yekkid elaridh_.\" The\nSyrians suffer from no misunderstanding in such cases. They _discern_\none another's meaning.\n\n{110}\n\nSo also many Scriptural passages need to be _discerned_. The purpose\nof the Oriental speaker or writer must be sought often beyond the\nletter of his statement, which he uses with great freedom.\n\nIn the first chapter of St. Mark's Gospel, the thirty-second and\nthirty-third verses, it is said, \"And at even, when the sun did set,\nthey brought unto him all that were diseased, and them that were\npossessed of devils. And _all the city_ was gathered together at the\ndoor.\" The swiftness with which the poor people in Eastern communities\nbring their sick to a healer, be he a prophet or only a physician, is\nproverbial. Because of the scarcity of physicians, as well as of money\nwith which to pay for medical attendance, when a healer is summoned to\na home many afflicted persons come or are brought to him. The peoples\nof the East have always believed also in the healing of diseases by\nreligious means. When a prophet arises the first thing expected of him\nis that he should heal the sick. Both the priest and the physician\n{111} are appealed to in time of trouble. To those who followed and\nbelieved in him Jesus was the healer of both the soul and the body.\nBut note the account of the incident before us. The place was the city\nof Capernaum, and we are told that \"_all the city_ was gathered\ntogether at the door\" of the house where Jesus was bestowing the\nloving, healing touch upon the sick. Was the _whole city_ at the door?\nWere _all_ the sick in that large city brought into that house for\nJesus to heal them? Here we are confronted by a physical\nimpossibility. An Anglo-Saxon chronicler would have said, \"Quite a\nnumber gathered at the door,\" which in all probability would have been\na _correct_ report.\n\nBut to the Oriental writer the object of the report was not _to\ndetermine the number_ of those who stood outside, nor to insist that\neach and every sick person in Capernaum was brought into the humble\nhome of Simon and Andrew. It was rather to glorify the Great Teacher\nand his divine work of mercy, and not to give a photographic report of\nthe attendant {112} circumstances. The saying, \"Quite a number\ngathered at the door,\" may be correct, but to an Oriental it is\nabsolutely colorless and tasteless, an inexcusably parsimonious use of\nthe imagination.\n\nTake another Scriptural passage. In the seventeenth chapter of St.\nMatthew's Gospel, the first verse, we read: \"And after six days Jesus\ntaketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an\nhigh mountain apart, and was transfigured before them; and his face did\nshine as the sun.\" \"After six days\" from what time? In the preceding\nchapter a general reference to time is made in the thirteenth verse,\nwhere it is said: \"When Jesus came into the coasts of C\u00e6sarea Philippi,\nhe asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man\nam?\" But here no definite date is given. Chapter sixteenth ends with\nthose great words, \"For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and\nwhosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a\nman profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and {113} lose his own\nsoul?\" The two last verses of this chapter promise the speedy coming\nof the Kingdom.\n\n\"After six days\" from what time? Well, what does it matter from what\ntime? Do you not see that the object of the record is to give a\nglimpse of what happened on that \"high mountain\" where the light and\nglory of the unseen world were reflected in the face of the Christ?\n\nThe intelligent lay reader of the New Testament cannot fail to notice,\nespecially in the Gospels, gaps and abrupt beginnings such as \"In those\ndays\"; \"Then came the disciples to Jesus\"; \"And it came to pass\"; and\nmany similar expressions which seem to point nowhere. The record seems\nto be rather incoherent. Yes, such difficulties, which are due largely\nto the Oriental's indifference to little details, exist in the Bible,\nbut they are very unimportant. The central purpose of these books is\nto enable the reader to perceive the secret of a holy personality,\nwhose mission was, is, and forever shall be, to emancipate the soul of\nman from the {114} bondage of a world of fear, weakness, sin, and\ndoubt, and lead it onward and upward to the realms of faith, hope, and\nlove. This purpose the Scriptures abundantly subserve.\n\n\n\n\n{115}\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nIMPRESSIONS _vs._ LITERAL ACCURACY\n\nA Syrian's chief purpose in a conversation is to convey an impression\nby whatever suitable means, and not to deliver his message in\nscientifically accurate terms. He expects to be judged not by what he\n_says_, but by what he _means_. He does not expect his hearer to\nlisten to him with the quizzical courtesy of a \"cool-headed Yankee,\"\nand to interrupt the flow of conversation by saying, with the least\npossible show of emotion, \"Do I understand you to say,\" etc. No; he\npiles up his metaphors and superlatives, reinforced by a theatrical\ndisplay of gestures and facial expressions, in order to make the hearer\n_feel_ his meaning.\n\nThe Oriental's speech is always \"illustrated.\" He speaks as it were in\npictures. With him the spoken language goes hand in hand with the more\nancient gesture language. His profuse gesticulation is that phase of\nhis life which first {116} challenges the attention of Occidental\ntravelers in the East. He points to almost everything he mentions in\nhis speech, and would portray every feeling and emotion by means of\nsome bodily movement. No sooner does he mention his eye than his index\nfinger points to or even touches that organ. \"Do you understand me?\"\nis said to an auditor with the speaker's finger on his own temple. In\nrebuking one who makes unreasonable demands upon him, a Syrian would be\nlikely to stoop down and say, \"Don't you want to ride on my back?\"\n\nOne of the most striking examples of this manner of speech in the Bible\nis found in the twenty-first chapter of the Book of Acts. Beginning\nwith the tenth verse, the writer says: \"And as we tarried there [at\nC\u00e6sarea] many days, there came down from Judea a certain prophet, named\nAgabus. And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound\nhis own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall\nthe Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall\n{117} deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.\" Now an Occidental\nteacher would not have gone into all that trouble. He would have said\nto the great apostle, \"Now you understand I don't mean to interfere\nwith your business, but if I were you I would n't go down to Jerusalem.\nThose Jews there are not pleased with what you are doing, and would be\nlikely to make things unpleasant for you.\" But in all probability such\na polite hint would not have made Paul's companions weep, nor caused\nhim to say, \"What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am\nready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name\nof the Lord Jesus.\"\n\nIt is also because the Syrian loves to speak in pictures, and to\nsubordinate literal accuracy to the total impression of an utterance,\nthat he makes such extensive use of figurative language. Instead of\nsaying to the Pharisees, \"Your pretensions to virtue and good birth far\nexceed your actual practice of virtue,\" John the Baptist cried: \"O\ngeneration of vipers, who hath warned {118} you to flee from the wrath\nto come? Bring forth, therefore, fruits meet for repentance: and think\nnot to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say\nunto you that God is able _of these stones_ to raise up children unto\nAbraham.\"\n\nJust as the Oriental loves to flavor his food strongly and to dress in\nbright colors, so is he fond of metaphor, exaggeration, and\npositiveness in speech. To him mild accuracy is weakness. A host of\nillustrations of this thought rise in my mind as I recall my early\nexperiences as a Syrian youth. I remember how those jovial men who\ncame to our house to \"sit\"--that is, to make a call of indefinite\nduration--would make their wild assertions and back them up by vows\nwhich they never intended to keep. The one would say, \"What I say to\nyou is the truth, and if it is not, I will cut off my right\narm\"--grasping it--\"at the shoulder.\" \"I promise you this,\"--whatever\nthe promise might be,--\"and if I fail in fulfilling my promise I will\npluck out my right eye.\"\n\n{119}\n\nTo such speech we always listened admiringly and respectfully. But we\nnever had the remotest idea that in any circumstances the speaker would\ncarry out his resolution, or that his hearers had a right to demand it\nfrom him. He simply was in earnest; or as an American would say, \"He\nmeant that he was right.\"\n\nSuch an Oriental mode of thought furnishes us with the background for\nJesus' saying, \"If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it\nfrom thee. If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from\nthee.\"[1]\n\nTo many Western Christians, especially in the light of the Protestant\ndoctrine of the infallibility of the letter of the Bible, these sayings\nof Christ present insurmountable difficulties. To such the question,\n\"How can I be a true disciple of Christ, if I do not obey what he\ncommands?\" makes these misunderstood sayings of Christ great stumbling\nblocks. Some time ago a lady wrote me a letter saying that at a\nprayer-meeting which she attended, the minister, after {120} reading\nthe fifth chapter of Matthew, which contains these commands, said, \"If\nwe are true Christians we must not shrink from obeying these explicit\ncommands of our Lord.\"\n\nMy informant stated also that on hearing that, she asked the preacher,\n\"Suppose the tongue should offend, and we should cut it off; should we\nbe better Christians than if we did endeavor to atone for the offense\nin some other way?\" The preacher, after a moment of perplexed silence,\nsaid, \"If there is no one here who can answer this question, we will\nsing a hymn.\"\n\nThe best commentary on these sayings of Christ is given by Paul in the\nsixth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. This is precisely what the\nMaster meant: \"Neither yield ye your members as instruments of\nunrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as those that\nare alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of\nrighteousness unto God.\" Cutting or mutilation of the body has nothing\nto do with either passage, nor indeed with the Christian life. The\namputation of an {121} arm that steals is no sure guaranty of the\nremoval of the desire to steal; nor would the plucking out of a lustful\neye do away with the lust which uses the eye for an instrument.\n\nWith this should be classed also the following commands: \"Whosoever\nshall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.\" \"If\nany man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have\nthy cloak also; and whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with\nhim twain.\"[2]\n\nThe command to give the coat and the cloak to a disputant, rather than\nto go to law with him, will seem much more perplexing when it is\nunderstood that these words mean the \"under garment\" and the \"upper\ngarment.\" The Orientals are not in the habit of wearing a coat and a\ncloak or overcoat. In the Arabic version we have the _thaub_ (\"th\" as\nin \"throw\") and the _rada'_. The _thaub_ is the main article of\nclothing--the ample gown worn over a shirt next to the body. The\n_rada'_ is the cloak worn {122} on occasions over the _thaub_. The\nScriptural command literally is, \"To one who would quarrel with thee\nand would take thy _thaub_, give him the _rada'_ also.\" It may be\nclearly seen here that literal compliance with this admonition would\nleave the non-resistant person, so far as clothes are concerned, in a\npitiable condition.\n\nThe concluding portion of this paragraph in the fifth chapter of St.\nMatthew's Gospel--the forty-second verse--presents another difficulty.\nIt says, \"Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow\nof thee turn not thou away.\" Of all those whom I have heard speak\ndisparagingly of this passage I particularly recall a lawyer, whom I\nknew in a Western State, whose dislike for these words of Christ\namounted almost to a mental affliction. It seems to me that on every\nsingle occasion when he and I discussed the Scriptures together, or\nspoke of Christianity, I found him armed with this passage as his most\neffective weapon against the innocent Nazarene. \"What was Jesus\nthinking of,\" he would say, \"when he {123} uttered these words? What\nwould become of our business interests and financial institutions if we\ngave to every one that asked of us, and lent money without good\nsecurity to every Tom, Dick, and Harry?\"\n\nThe thought involved in this text suffers from the unconditional manner\nin which it is presented, and which gives it its Oriental flavor.\nSeeing that he was addressing those who knew what he meant, the writer\ndid not deem it necessary to state exactly the reason why this command\nwas given. It seems, however, that when Jesus spoke those words he had\nin mind the following passage: \"And if thy brother be waxed poor, and\nhis hand fail with thee; then thou shalt uphold him: as a stranger and\na sojourner shall he live with thee. Take thou no interest of him or\nincrease, but fear thy God: that thy brother may live with thee. _Thou\nshalt not give him thy money upon interest_, nor give him thy victuals\nfor increase.\"[3] According to this legal stipulation, an Israelite\ncould not {124} lawfully charge a fellow Israelite interest on a loan.\nTherefore, \"as a matter of business,\" the money-lenders preferred to\nlend their money to the Gentiles, from whom they were permitted to take\ninterest, and to \"turn away\" from borrowers of their own race. And as\nthe teachers of Israel of his day often assailed Jesus for his\nnon-observance of the law, he in turn never failed to remind them of\nthe fact that their own practices did greater violence to the law than\nhis own liberal interpretation of it in the interest of man.\n\nFrom all that I know of Oriental modes of thought and life I cannot\nconceive that Jesus meant by all these sayings to give brute force the\nright of way in human life. He himself drove the traders out of the\ntemple by physical force. These precepts were not meant to prohibit\nthe use of force in self-defense and for the protection of property,\nbut were given as an antidote to that relentless law of revenge which\nrequired \"an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.\" The Master does\nnot preach a gospel {125} of helplessness, but enjoins a manly attitude\ntoward peace and concord, in place of a constantly active desire for\nvengeance and strife.\n\nAgain let me say that an Oriental expects to be judged chiefly by what\nhe means and not by what he says. As a rule, the Oriental is not\naltogether unaware of the fact that, as regards the letter, his\nstatements are often sadly lacking in correctness. But I venture to\nsay that when a person who is conversing with me knows that I know that\nwhat he is saying is not exactly true I may not like his manner of\nspeech, yet I cannot justly call him a liar.\n\nA neighbor of mine in a Mount Lebanon village makes a trip to Damascus\nand comes to my house of an evening to tell me all about it. He would\nnot be a Syrian if he did not give wings to his fancy and present me\nwith an idealistic painting of his adventure, instead of handing me a\nphotograph. I listen and laugh and wonder. I know his statements are\nnot wholly correct, and he knows exactly how I feel about it. We both\nare aware, however, that {126} the proceedings of the evening are not\nthose of a business transaction, but of an entertainment. My friend\ndoes not maliciously misrepresent the facts; he simply loves to speak\nin poetic terms and is somewhat inhospitable to cross-examination.\nCertainly we would not buy and sell sheep and oxen and fields and\nvineyards after that fashion, but we like to be so entertained. Beyond\nthe wide margin of social hospitality and the latitude of intellectual\ntolerance, I am aware of the fact that in all the flourish of metaphor\nand simile, what my visitor really meant to say was either that his\ntrip to Damascus was pleasant or that it was hazardous, and that there\nwere many interesting things to see in that portion of the world; all\nof which was indubitably true.\n\nWhile on a visit to Syria, after having spent several years in this\ncountry, where I had lived almost exclusively with Americans, I was\nvery strongly impressed by the decidedly sharp contrast between the\nSyrian and the American modes of thought. The years had worked many\n{127} changes in me, and I had become addicted to the more compact\nphraseology of the American social code.\n\nIn welcoming me to his house, an old friend of mine spoke with\nimpressive cheerfulness as follows: \"You have extremely honored me by\ncoming into my abode [_menzel_], I am not worthy of it. This house is\nyours; you can burn it if you wish. My children also are at your\ndisposal; I would sacrifice them all for your pleasure. What a blessed\nday this is, now that the light of your countenance has shone upon us\";\nand so forth, and so on.\n\nI understood my friend fully and most agreeably, although it was not\neasy for me to translate his words to my American wife without causing\nher to be greatly alarmed at the possibility that the house would be\nset on fire and the children slain for our pleasure. What my friend\nreally meant in his effusive welcome was no more or less than what a\ngracious American host means when he says, \"I am delighted to see you;\nplease make yourself at home.\"\n\n{128}\n\nHad the creed-makers of Christendom approached the Bible by way of\nOriental psychology, had they viewed the Scriptures against the\nbackground of Syrian life, they would not have dealt with Holy Writ as\na jurist deals with legislative enactments. Again, had the unfriendly\ncritics of the Bible real acquaintance with the land of its birth, they\nwould not have been so sure that the Bible was \"a mass of\nimpossibilities.\" The sad fact is that the Bible has suffered violence\nfrom literalists among its friends, as from its enemies.\n\nFor example, in their failure to heal a sick lad[4] the disciples came\nto Jesus and asked him why they could not do the beneficent deed.\nAccording to the Revised and the Arabic versions, the Master answered,\n\"Because of your unbelief; for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith\nas a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove\nhence to yonder place, and it shall remove.\" Colonel Robert Ingersoll\nnever tired of challenging the Christians {129} of America to put this\nscripture to a successful test, and thus _convince_ him that the Bible\nis inspired. In the face of such a challenge the \"believer\" is likely\nto feel compelled to admit that the church does not have the required\namount of faith, else it could remove mountains.\n\nTo one well acquainted with the Oriental manner of speech this saying\nwas not meant to fix a rule of conduct, but to idealize faith. In\norder to do this in real Syrian fashion, Jesus spoke of an\ninfinitesimal amount of faith as being capable of moving the biggest\nobject on earth. His disciples must have understood him clearly,\nbecause we have no record that they ever tried to remove mountains by\nfaith and prayer. It would be most astounding, indeed, if Christ\nreally thought that those disciples, who forsook all and followed him,\nhad not as much faith as a grain of mustard seed, and yet said to them,\n\"Ye are the light of the world. Ye are the salt of the earth.\"\n\nOf a similar character is the Master's saying, {130} \"It is easier for\na camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter\ninto the kingdom of God,\"[5] which has quickened the exegetical genius\nof commentators to mighty efforts in \"expounding the Scriptures.\"\nJudging by the vast number of persons in this country who have asked my\nopinion, as a Syrian, concerning its correctness, and the fact that I\nhave myself seen it in print, the following interpretation of this\npassage must have been much in vogue.\n\nThe walled cities and feudal castles of Palestine, the explanation\nruns, have large gates. Because of their great size, such gates are\nopened only on special occasions to admit chariots and caravans.\nTherefore, in order to give pedestrians thoroughfare, a smaller opening\nabout the size of an ordinary door is made in the center of the great\ngate, near to the ground. Now this smaller door through which a camel\ncannot pass is the eye of the needle mentioned in the Gospel.\n\n{131}\n\nI once heard a Sunday-School superintendent explain this passage to his\nscholars by saying that a camel could pass through this eye of a\nneedle--meaning the door--if he was not loaded. Therefore, and by\nanalogy, if we cast off our load of sin outside, we can easily enter\ninto the kingdom of heaven.\n\nWere the camel and the gate left out, this statement would be an\nexcellent fatherly admonition. There is perhaps no gate in the\ncelestial city large enough to admit a man with a load of sin strapped\nto his soul. However, the chief trouble with these explanations of the\n\"eye-of-the-needle\" passage is that they are wholly untrue.\n\nThis saying is current in the East, and in all probability it was a\ncommon saying there long before the advent of Christ. But I never knew\nthat small door in a city or a castle gate to be called the needle's\neye; nor indeed the large gate to be called the needle. The name of\nthat door, in the common speech of the country, is the \"plum,\" and I am\ncertain the {132} Scriptural passage makes no reference to it whatever.\n\nThe Koran makes use of this expression in one of its purest classical\nArabic passages. The term employed here--_s\u00fbm-el-khiat_--can mean only\nthe sewing instrument, and nothing else.\n\nNothing can show more clearly the genuine Oriental character of this\nNew Testament passage and that of the Teacher who uttered it, than the\nintense positiveness of its thought and the unrestrained flight of its\nimagery. I can just hear the Master say it. Jesus' purpose was to\nstate that it was extremely difficult \"for them that trust in riches to\nenter into the Kingdom of God.\"[6] To this end he chose the biggest\nanimal and the smallest opening known to his people and compared the\nimpossibility of a camel passing through the eye of a needle with that\nof a man weighted down with earthly things becoming one with God.\n\nThe Master's rebuke of the scribes and pharisees, {133} \"Ye blind\nguides, which strain at a gnat and swallow a camel,\"[7] expresses a\nsimilar thought in a different form and connection. There is no need\nhere to puzzle over the anatomical problem as to whether the throat of\na Pharisee was capacious enough to gulp a camel down. The strong and\nagreeable Oriental flavor of this saying comes from the sharp contrast\nbetween the size of the gnat and that of the camel. So the Master\nemployed it in order to show the glaring contradictions in the precepts\nand practices of the priests of his day, who tithed mint and rue, but\n\"passed over judgment and the love of God.\"\n\nOne of the most interesting examples of Oriental speech is found in the\neighteenth chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, the twenty-first verse:\n\"Then came Peter and said to him, Lord how oft shall my brother sin\nagainst me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him,\nI say not unto thee, until seven times; but, until seventy times\nseven.\" Did Jesus {134} really mean that an offender should be\nforgiven four hundred and ninety times? Would it be to the interest of\nthe offender himself and to society at large to forgive an embezzler, a\nslanderer or a prevaricator four hundred and ninety times? Is not\npunishment which is guided by reason and sympathy, and whose end is\ncorrective, really a great aid in character-building? Let us try to\ninterpret this passage with reference to certain scenes in Jesus' own\nlife. In the sixteenth chapter of Matthew, the twenty-first verse, we\nread: \"From that time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how\nthat he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders\nand chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the\nthird day. Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Lord:\nthis shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, _Get\nthee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence to me_: for thou savourest\nnot the things that be of God, but those that be of men.\"\n\nIn the second chapter of St. John's Gospel, {135} the thirteenth verse,\nwe are told: \"And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to\nJerusalem, and found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and\ndoves, and the changers of money sitting: _and when he had made a\nscourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple_, and the\nsheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew\nthe tables; and said unto them that sold doves, Take these things\nhence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.\"\n\nThe forgiving \"seventy times seven\" did not apply, as it seems, in\nthese cases. In the very chapter from which this saying comes,[8] the\nMaster gives us two superb examples of certain and somewhat swift\nretribution for offenses. In the fifteenth verse, he says: \"Moreover,\nif thy brother shall trespass against thee, go tell him his fault\nbetween thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy\nbrother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two\nmore, that in the mouth {136} of two or three witnesses every word may\nbe established. And if he neglect to hear them, tell it unto the\nchurch; but if he neglect to hear the church, _let him be unto thee as\nan heathen man and a publican_.\"\n\nThe parable of the \"certain king\" and the \"wicked servant\" follows\nimmediately the \"seventy times seven\" passage. \"Therefore is the\nkingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account\nof his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto\nhim, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not\nto pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children,\nand all that he had, and payment be made. The servant therefore fell\ndown and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I\nwill pay thee all. Then the Lord of that servant was moved with\ncompassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. But the same\nservant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him\nan hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, {137} and took him by the\nthroat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell\ndown at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and\nI will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into\nprison, till he should pay the debt. So when his fellowservants saw\nwhat was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord\nall that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said\nunto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because\nthou desiredst me: shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy\nfellow-servant, even as I had pity on thee? _And his lord was wroth,\nand delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was\ndue unto him_. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you,\nif ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their\ntrespasses.\"\n\nNow as a matter of fact the lord of the wicked servant did not forgive\nhim seventy times seven, but \"delivered him to the tormentors\" for his\nfirst offense. Will the heavenly Father do {138} _likewise_? Do we\nnot have irreconcilable contradictions in these Scriptural passages?\n\nNo doubt there are difficulties here. But once the\n\"seventy-times-seven\" passage is clearly understood, the difficulties\nwill, I believe, disappear. In harmony with his legalistic\npreconception, Peter chose the full and sacred number \"seven\" as a very\nliberal measure of forgiveness. Apparently Jesus' purpose was to make\nforgiveness a matter of disposition, sympathy, and discretion, rather\nthan of arithmetic. To this end he made use of an Oriental saying\nwhich meant _indefiniteness_, rather than a fixed rule. This saying\noccurs in one of the most ancient Old Testament narratives, and, most\nfittingly, in a bit of poetry:[9]\n\n \"And Lamech said unto his wives:\n Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;\n Ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech:\n For I have slain a man for wounding me,\n And a young man for bruising me:\n If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold\n Truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.\"\n\n{139}\n\nIn both Testaments the meaning of the saying is the\nsame--indefiniteness. It is one of that host of Bible passages and\ncurrent Oriental sayings which must be judged by what they _mean_, and\nnot by what they _say_. The writer of the eighteenth chapter of\nMatthew grouped those seemingly contradictory passages together,\nbecause they all dealt with forgiveness. That they must have been\nspoken under various circumstances is very obvious. The object of the\nadmonition concerning the trespassing brother (verses 15-17) is to\nencourage Christians to \"reason together\" in a fraternal spirit about\nthe differences which may arise between them, and, _if at all\npossible_, to win the offending member back to the fold. And the\nobject of the parable of the \"wicked servant\" is to contrast the spirit\nof kindness with that of cruelty.\n\n\n\n[1] Matt. v: 29-30.\n\n[2] Matt. v: 39-41.\n\n[3] Lev. xxv: 35; Revised Version.\n\n[4] Matt. xvii: 19.\n\n[5] Matt. xix: 24.\n\n[6] Mark x: 24.\n\n[7] Matt. xxiii: 24.\n\n[8] Matt. xviii.\n\n[9] Gen. iv: 23; Revised Version.\n\n\n\n\n{140}\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nSPEAKING IN PARABLES\n\nTeaching and conversing in parables and proverbs is a distinctly\nOriental characteristic. A parable is a word picture whose purpose is\nnot to construct a definition or to establish a doctrine, but to convey\nan impression. However, the Oriental makes no distinction between a\nproverb and a parable. In both the Hebrew and the Arabic, the word\n_mathel_ signifies either a short wise saying, such as may be found in\nthe Book of Proverbs, or a longer utterance, such as a New Testament\nparable. In the Arabic Bible, the wise sayings of the Book of Proverbs\nare called _amthal_, and the parabolic discourses of Jesus are also\ncalled _amthal_. This term is the plural of _mathel_ (parable or\nproverb). This designation includes also any wise poetical saying, or\nany human state of fortune or adversity. Thus a very generous man\nbecomes a _mathel bilkaram_ (a parable of generosity); and a man {141}\nof unsavory reputation becomes a _mathel beinennass_ (a saying or a\nby-word among the people). In the forty-fourth Psalm, the fourteenth\nverse, the poet cries: \"Thou makest us a by-word among the nations, a\nshaking of the head among the people.\" A fine illustration of the\n_mathel_ as a poetical saying, although not strictly allegorical, is\nthe opening passage of the twenty-ninth chapter of the Book of Job,\nwhere it is said:--\n\n \"And Job again took up his parable and said,\n Oh that I were as in the months of old,\n As in the days when God watched over me;\n When his lamp shined upon my head,\n And by his light I walked through darkness;\n As I was in the ripeness of my days,\n When the friendship of God was upon my tent;\n When the Almighty was yet with me,\n And my children were about me;\n When my steps were washed with butter,\n And the rock poured me out rivers of oil!\"[1]\n\n\nWhere in human literature can we find a passage to surpass in beauty\nand tenderness this introspective utterance?\n\n{142}\n\nParabolic speech is dear to the Oriental heart. It is poetical,\nmystical, sociable. In showing the reason why Jesus taught in\nparables, Biblical writers speak of the indirect method, the picture\nlanguage, the concealing of the truth from those \"who had not the\nunderstanding,\" and so forth. But those writers fail to mention a most\nimportant reason, namely, the _sociable_ nature of such a method of\nteaching, which is so dear to the Syrian heart. In view of the small\nvalue the Orientals place upon time, the story-teller, the speaker in\nparables, is to them the most charming conversationalist. Why be so\nprosy, brief, and abstract? The spectacular charm and intense\nconcreteness of the parable of the Prodigal Son is infinitely more\nagreeable to the Oriental mind than the general precept that God will\nforgive his truly penitent children. How romantic and how enchanting\nto me are the memories of those _sehrat_ (evening gatherings) at my\nfather's house! How simple and how human was the homely wisdom of the\nstories and the parables which were spoken on {143} those occasions.\nThe elderly men of the clan loved to speak of what \"was said in the\nancient days\" (_qadeem ezzeman_). \"_Qal el-wathel_\" (said the parable)\nprefaced almost every utterance. And as the speaker proceeded to\nrelate a parable and to reinforce the ancient saying by what his own\npoetic fancy could create at the time of kindred material, we listened\nadmiringly, and looked forward with ecstatic expectation to the _maana_\n(meaning, or moral). Oral traditions, the Scriptures, Mohammedan\nliterature, and other rich sources are drawn upon, both for instruction\nin wisdom and for entertainment.\n\nIn picturing the condition of one who has been demoralized beyond\nredemption, the entertaining speaker proceeds in this fashion: \"Once\nupon a time a certain man fell from the housetop and was badly injured.\nThe neighbors came and carried him into the house and placed him in\nbed. Then one of his friends approached near to the injured man and\nsaid to him, 'Asaad, my beloved friend, how is your condition [_kief\nhalak_]?' The much-pained man {144} opened his mouth and said, 'My two\narms are broken; my back and one of my legs are broken; one of my eyes\nis put out; I am badly wounded in the breast, and feel that my liver is\nsevered. But I trust that God will restore me.' Whereupon his friend\nanswered, 'Asaad, I am distressed. But if this is your condition, it\nwill be much easier for God to make a new man to take your place than\nto restore you!'\"\n\nOne of the most beautiful parables I know, and which I often heard my\nfather relate, bears on the subject of partiality, and is as follows:--\n\n\"Once upon a time there were two men, the one named Ibrahim, the other\nYusuf. Each of the men had a camel. It came to pass that when Yusuf\nfell sick he asked of his neighbor Ibrahim, who was about to journey to\nAlappo, to take his camel with him also, with a load of merchandise.\nYusuf begged Ibrahim to treat the camel in exactly the same manner as\nhe did his own, and promised him that if God kept him alive until he\ncame back he would repay him both the good deed, and the cost of the\n{145} camel's keep. Ibrahim accepted the trust, and took his journey\nto Alappo, with the two camels. Upon his return Yusuf saw that his own\ncamel did not look so well as Ibrahim's. So he spoke to his friend:\n'Ibrahim, by the life of God, what has happened to my camel? He is not\nas good as your camel. O Ibrahim, did you care for my camel as you did\nfor your camel?' Then Ibrahim answered and said, 'By the life of God,\nO Yusuf, I fed, and watered, and groomed your camel as I did my camel.\nGod witnesseth between us, Yusuf, this is the truth. But I will say to\nyou, you my eyes, my heart, that when night came and I lay me down on\nmy cloak to sleep between the two camels, I placed my head nearer to my\ncamel than to yours.'\"\n\nIt was the desirableness to Orientals of this type of speech which\nprompted the writer of the Gospel of Matthew to say of Jesus, \"And\nwithout a parable spake he not unto them.\"[2] This utterance itself is\ncharacteristically {146} Oriental. As a matter of fact, Jesus _did_\noften speak to the multitude _without_ parables. But his strong\ntendency to make use of the parable, and its agreeableness to his\nhearers, seemed to the Scriptural writer to be a sufficient\njustification for his sweeping assertion.\n\nOf the New Testament parables some are quoted in this work in\nconnection with other subjects than that with which this chapter deals.\nI will mention here a few more of these sayings as additional\nillustrations of the present subject, and with reference to the\nallusions to Oriental life which they contain.\n\nIn the thirteenth chapter of Matthew, we have the parable of the wheat\nand the tares: \"The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed\ngood seed in his field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed\ntares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung\nup, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.\"\n\nThe tare (_zewan_) is a grain which when ground with the wheat and\neaten causes dizziness {147} and nausea, a state much like seasickness.\nFor this reason this plant is hated by the Syrians, although they use\ntares very extensively as chicken feed. Wheat merchants are likely to\nsell _kameh mizwen_ (wheat mixed with tares) in hard times, because\nthey can buy it for less money than pure wheat. I do not believe there\nis a family among the common people of Syria which has not suffered at\none time or another from \"tare-sickness.\" Having tasted the gall of\nthis affliction a few times myself, I do not at all wonder at the\nSyrians' belief that tares must have come into the world by the Devil.\nAnd what I still remember with both amusement and sympathy are the\nheartfelt, withering imprecations which the afflicted ones always\nshowered upon the seller of the \"tarey wheat.\" When the food had taken\nreal effect and the staggering, nauseated members of a family felt\ncompelled to allow nature to take its course, the gasps and groans\npunctuated the ejaculations, \"May God destroy his home!\" \"May the gold\nturn into dust in his hands!\" {148} \"May he spend the price of what he\nsold us at the funerals of his children!\"--and so forth.\n\nDo you feel now the force of the allusion to the tares in the parable?\n\"So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst\nnot thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?\nHe said unto them, An enemy hath done this.\"\n\nEnemies are of course always disposed to injure one another, and in an\nagricultural country like Syria harm is often done to property for\nrevenge. So the scattering of tares for this purpose in a newly sown\nwheat-field is not utterly unnatural or unthinkable. But the reference\nin the parable is to a belief which is prevalent in some districts in\nSyria, to the effect that in spite of all that the sower can do to\nprevent it, the tares do appear mysteriously in fields where only wheat\nhad been sown. Some evil power introduces the noxious plant. Once I\nlistened to a heated controversy on the subject between some Syrian\nlandowners and an American missionary. The landowners clung to the\nbelief {149} that tares would appear in a field even if no tare seed\nwas ever planted in that field, while the son of the West insisted that\nno such growth could take place without the seed having first been\nintroduced into the field in some natural way. The fight was a draw.\n\n\"The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them\nup? But he said, Nay, lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up\nalso the wheat with them.\"\n\nThe attempt is often made to pull up the hated tares from among the\nwheat, but in vain. The concluding admonition in the parable may well\nbe taken to heart by every hasty reformer of the type of a certain\nregenerator of society, who, when asked to proceed slowly, said, \"The\nfact is I am in a hurry, and God is not!\"\n\nIn the same chapter (Matt. XIII) occurs the parable of the \"leaven.\"\n\"The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid\nin three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.\" The setting\nof this short {150} parable in Syrian life is given in another\nchapter.[3] But I mention it here in order to give my comment on a\nrather strange interpretation of the parable which came recently to my\nknowledge. In the course of a conversation I had with a prominent\nBaptist minister not long since, he stated to me that certain\ninterpreters assert that the leaven in this parable meant the\ncorruption which has come into the Christian Church, etc. My friend\nwas anxious to know whether to my knowledge the Syrians associated\nleaven with corruption.\n\nThis interpretation echoes an ancient idea of leaven of which modern\nSyrians have no knowledge. They hold the leaven in high and\nreverential esteem.[4] To them it is the symbol of growth and\nfecundity. In many of the rural districts of Syria, upon approaching\nthe door of her future home the bride is given the _khamera_ (the lump\nof leaven) which she pastes on the upper doorsill and passes under it\ninto the house. As she performs the solemn act her {151} friends\nexclaim, \"May you be as blessed and as fruitful as the _khamera_!\"\n\nHowever, it is a well-known fact to readers of ancient records that in\nthe earliest times bread was entirely unleavened. When the Israelites\nwere roaming tribes they ate and offered to Jehovah unleavened bread.\nThe Arab tribes of to-day on the borders of Syria eat no leavened\nbread. They believe that it tends to reduce the vitality and endurance\nof the body. Perhaps the real reason for preferring the unleavened\nbread is that it is much easier to make, and dispenses with taking care\nof the lump of leaven between bakings, which is not so convenient for\nroaming tribes to do. The use of unleavened bread for so many\ngenerations among the Israelites constituted its sacredness, and it was\nthe conservatism of religion which still called for unleavened bread\nfor the offering, even after leavened bread had become universally the\ndaily food of the people.\n\nSo to the ancients the fermentation in the process of leavening was\nconsidered corruption. {152} It was something which entered into the\nlump and soured it. The New Testament use of the word \"leaven\" as\nmeaning corruption is purely figurative, and signifies influence, or\nbad doctrine. It was in this sense that Jesus used the word when he\nsaid to his disciples:[5] \"Take heed and beware of the leaven of the\nPharisees and of the Sadducees\"; and again:[6] \"Take heed, beware of\nthe leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.\" The fact\nthat the disciples did not understand at first what the Master meant\nshows that to the general public \"leaven\" and \"corruption\" were not\nsynonymous terms. Had they been, it is certain that Jesus never would\nhave said, \"The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven.\"\n\nThe fifteenth chapter of St. Luke's Gospel contains the parables of the\nlost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal son. The parable of the\nlost sheep is discussed in another chapter.[7] The parable of the lost\ncoin portrays a very familiar scene in the ordinary Syrian home. \"What\n{153} woman,\" says the Master, \"having ten pieces of silver, if she\nlose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek\ndiligently till she find it? And when she hath found it, she calleth\nher friends and her neighbors together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I\nhave found the piece which I had lost.\"\n\nThe candle spoken of here is a little olive-oil lamp--an earthen\nsaucer, with a protruding lip curled up at one point in the rim for the\nwick. How often have I held that flickering light for my mother while\nshe searched for a lost coin or some other precious object. The common\nSyrian house has one door and one or two small windows, with wooden\nshutters, without glass.[8] Consequently the interior of the house is\ndimly lighted, especially in the winter season. The scarcity of money\nin the hands of the people makes the loss of a coin, of the value of\nthat which is mentioned in the parable (about sixteen cents), a sad\nevent. The {154} little house is searched with eager\nthoroughness--\"diligently.\" The straw mats, cushions, and sheepskins\nwhich cover the floor are turned over, and the earthen floor swept.\nThe search continues, with diligence and prayerful expectations, until\nthe lost coin is found. The Arabic Bible states that the gladdened\nwoman \"calls her _women_ neighbors and friends (_jaratiha\nwesedikatiha_), saying, Rejoice with me; for I have found the piece\nwhich I had lost.\" The singling out of the _women_ neighbors is\nsignificant here. As a rule the loss of a precious coin by a woman\ncalls her husband's wrath upon her, regardless of whether the coin had\nbeen earned by her or by him. The _women friends_ have a keen\nfellow-feeling in such matters. They keep one another's secrets from\nthe men, and rejoice when one of their number escapes an unpleasant\nsituation.\n\nThe total meaning of this parable is plain as it is most precious.\nThrough this common occurrence in a Syrian home, Jesus impresses upon\nthe minds of his hearers, as well as upon {155} the consciousness of\nall mankind, the infinite worth of the human soul, and the Father's\nlove and care for it. \"Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the\npresence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.\"\n\nThe parable of the prodigal son follows immediately that of the lost\ncoin. \"A certain man had two sons: and the younger of them said to his\nfather, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And\nhe divided unto them his living.\" The first thing in this parable to\nchallenge the attention is the father's quick compliance with the\nrequest of his son. \"And he divided unto them his living.\" The custom\nof a father dividing his property among his grown sons before his death\nprevails much more extensively in the East than in the West. As a rule\nneither the law nor custom gives legal standing to a will. Sometimes\nthe father's wishes with regard to how his property should be divided\nafter his death are carried out by his sons. But as a general rule the\nfather who does not divide his property legally between his sons before\nhis {156} death leaves to them a situation fraught with danger.\nLitigation in such cases is very slow and uncertain.\n\nIt was such a situation, no doubt, which led the man referred to in the\ntwelfth chapter of Luke, the thirteenth verse, to say to Jesus,\n\"Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.\nAnd he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?\"\nAnd we may easily infer what Jesus thought of that particular case from\nhis saying which follows immediately his answer to this man. \"And he\nsaid unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life\nconsisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.\" So\nthe father of the prodigal son acted normally when he divided his\nsubstance between his two sons.\n\n\"And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and\ntook his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance\nwith riotous living.\" The singling out of the younger son for this\nadventure comports with {157} a highly cherished Oriental tradition.\nThe elder son, who was the first-born male child in this household,\ncould not very well be made to commit such an act. In a Syrian family\nthe _bikkr_ (the first-born son) stands next to the father in the\nesteem, not only of the members of his own household, but of the\ncommunity at large. He cannot be supposed to be so rash, so unmindful\nof his birthright, as to break the sacred family circle, and to waste\nhis inheritance in riotous living.\n\n\"And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land;\nand he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a\ncitizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.\nAnd he would fain have been filled with the husks that the swine did\neat; and no man gave unto him.\"\n\nTo be a swineherd, or a \"swine-shepherd,\" is the most contemptible\noccupation an Oriental can think of. It is no wonder at all to me that\nthe Gospel writers make the destination of the \"legion\" of devils which\nJesus cast out of the {158} man \"in the country of the Gadarenes,\" a\nherd of swine.[9] You cannot hire a Syrian to make a pet of a \"little\npiggie.\" If he did, he would be called \"_Abu khenzier_\" (pig man) for\nthe rest of his life, and transmit the unenviable title to his\nposterity, \"even unto the third and fourth generation.\"\n\nThe word \"husks\" in the English version is not a correct rendering of\nthe original term. The marginal note in the Revised Version reads,\n\"the pods of the carob tree.\" The Arabic version says simply _kherr\u00fbb_\n(carob). The carob tree is very common in the lowlands of Syria. It\nis a large tree of dense foliage, and round, glossy, dark-green leaves.\nThe pods it bears measure from five to ten inches in length, are flat,\nand largely horn-shaped. I do not know why the English translators of\nthe Bible called those pods \"husks.\" They are sold in almost every\ntown in western Syria for food. Children are very fond of _kherr\u00fbb_.\nSome of the pods contain no small amount of sugar. In my boyhood {159}\ndays, a pocketful of _kherr\u00fbb_, which I procured for a penny, was to me\nrather a treat. The older people, however, do not esteem _kherr\u00fbb_ so\nhighly as do the children. The bulk of it is so out of proportion to\nthe sugar it contains that its poverty is proverbial in the land. Of\none whose conversation is luxuriant in words and barren of ideas it is\nsaid, \"It is like eating _kherr\u00fbb_; you have to consume a cord of wood\nin order to get an ounce of sweet.\" By eating these pods, the poor\npeople seem to themselves \"to have been filled\" while in reality they\nhave received but little nutrition. Therefore _kherr\u00fbb_ is generally\neaten by animals.\n\nIt may be observed that the saying in the parable, \"and he would fain\nhave been filled with _kherr\u00fbb_ that the swine did eat: and no man gave\nunto him,\" simply describes the prodigal's poverty. For as a\n\"swine-shepherd\" the \"_kherr\u00fbb_ that the swine did eat\" was certainly\nvery accessible to him. The purpose of the passage is to draw the\ncontrast between the rich parental home which the prodigal had\nwillingly {160} left and the extremely humble fare on which in his\nwretched state he was compelled to subsist.\n\nThe return of the prodigal son to his father's house, impoverished but\npenitent, the affectionate magnanimity of the father toward his son,\nand the spreading of the feast in honor of the occasion, are acts of\nhumility and generosity which cannot be said to be exclusively\nOriental. But the command of the father to his servants, \"Bring hither\nthe fatted calf and kill it; and let us eat and be merry,\" brings out\nthe idea of the _zebihat_ (animal sacrifice) with which the West is not\nfamiliar.\n\nThe ancient custom, whose echoes have not yet died out in the East, was\nthat the host honored his guest most highly by killing a sheep at the\nthreshold of the house, upon the guest's arrival, and inviting him to\nstep over the blood into the house. This act formed the \"blood\ncovenant\" between the guest and his host. It made them one. To us one\nof the most cordial and dignified expressions in {161} inviting a\nguest, especially from a distant town, was, \"If God ever favors us with\na visit from you, we will kill a _zebihat_!\"\n\nIn his great rejoicing in the return of his son, the father of the\nprodigal is made to receive him as he would a most highly honored\nguest. \"The fatted calf\"--and not only a sheep--is killed as the\n_zebihat_ of a new covenant between a loving father and his son, who\n\"was dead and is alive again; was lost, and is found.\"[10]\n\nThe parable of the \"treasure hid in a field\"[11] alludes to a very\ninteresting phase of Syrian thought. \"Again, the kingdom of heaven is\nlike unto a treasure hid in a field, the which when a man hath found,\nhe hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and\nbuyeth that field.\"\n\nI cannot refrain from quoting again in this connection the famous\ncommentator, Adam Clarke. Speaking of this parable, he says: \"We are\nnot to imagine that the _treasure_ here {162} mentioned, and to which\nthe gospel salvation is likened, means a _pot_ or _chest_ of money\nhidden in the field, but rather a gold or silver _mine_, which he who\nfound out could not get at, or work, without turning up the field, and\nfor this purpose he bought it. Mr. Wakefield's observation is very\njust: 'There is no sense in the _purchase_ of a field for a _pot_ of\n_money_, which he might have carried away very _readily_ and as\n_honestly_, too, as by overreaching the owner by an unjust purchase.'\n... From this view of the subject, the translation of this verse, given\nabove, will appear proper--a _hidden treasure_, when applied to a _rich\nmine_, is more proper than a _treasure hid_, which applies better to a\n_pot of money_ deposited there, which I suppose was our translator's\nopinion; and _kept secret_, or _concealed_, will apply better to the\nsubject of his discovery till he made the purchase, than _hideth_, for\nwhich there could be no occasion, when the pot was already _hidden_,\nand the place known only to himself.\"\n\nI have inserted here this double quotation, {163} italics and all, in\norder to show how when the real facts are not known to a writer the\ntemptation to play on words becomes irresistible. In this exposition\nthe simple parable is treated as a legal document. Every word of it is\nsubjected to careful scrutiny. \"Hid\" is converted into \"hidden,\" and\n\"concealed\" is summoned to supplant \"hideth,\" in order to make the\n\"treasure\" mean a vast deposit of gold ore, and get the poor Syrian\npeasant into the mining business.\n\nThe facts in the case, however, stand opposed to this explanation. I\nam absolutely safe in saying that every man, woman, and child in Syria\nunderstands that this parable refers simply and purely to a treasure of\ngold and silver which had been buried in a field by human hands. The\nentanglement of the commentator just quoted in the literary fault of\nthe parable is inexcusable.\n\nThe New Testament writer might have said, not that the man in the\nparable _found_ the treasure, but that he was _led_ by certain {164}\nsigns _to believe_ that a treasure lay hidden in the field. However,\nthis is not the Oriental way of stating things, nor should the speaker\nin parables be denied the freedom of the poet and the artist to\nmanipulate the particulars in such a way as to make them serve the\ncentral purpose of his production.\n\nI could fill a book with the stories of hidden treasures which charmed\nmy boyhood days in Syria. I have already put into print[12] a detailed\naccount of my personal experience in digging for a hidden treasure,\nwhich will clearly show that the securing of such riches is not always\nso easy to diggers as the quotation just cited would make one believe.\nIn order to show the attitude of Syrians in general toward this\nsubject, I will quote the following from my own personal account:--\n\n\"In Syria it is universally believed that hidden treasures may be found\nanywhere in the land, and especially among ancient ruins. This {165}\nbelief rests on the simple truth that the tribes and clans of Syria,\nhaving from time immemorial lived in a state of warfare, have hidden\ntheir treasures in the ground, especially on the eve of battles.\n\n\"Furthermore, the wars of the past being wars of extermination, the\nvanquished could not return to reclaim their hidden wealth; therefore\nthe ground is the keeper of vast riches. The tales of the digging and\nfinding of such treasures fill the country. There are thrilling tales\nof treasures in various localities. Gold and other valuables are said\nto have been dug up in sealed earthen jars, often by the merest\naccident, in the ground, in the walls of houses, under enchanted trees,\nand in sepulchers. From earliest childhood the people's minds are fed\non these tales, and they grow up with all their senses alert to the\nremotest suggestions of such possibilities.\"\n\nThe writer of the parable did not need to explain the situation to his\nOriental readers. The mere mention of a \"hidden treasure\" was {166}\nsufficient to make them know what the words meant. His supreme purpose\nwas to impress them with the matchless worth of the kingdom of heaven\nwhich Christ came to reveal to the world.\n\n\n\n[1] Revised Version.\n\n[2] Matt. xiii: 34.\n\n[3] See page 198.\n\n[4] See page 199.\n\n[5] Matt. xvi: 6.\n\n[6] Mark viii: 15.\n\n[7] See page 308.\n\n[8] See the author's autobiography, _A Far Journey_, chap. 1, entitled\n\"My Father's House.\"\n\n[9] Matt. viii: 32; Mark v: 13; Luke viii: 33.\n\n[10] For the reason why the mother of the prodigal is not mentioned in\nthe parable, see pages 207 and 334.\n\n[11] Matt. xiii: 44.\n\n[12] _Atlantic Monthly_, December, 1915. This story, with other\nessays, will soon appear in book form.\n\n\n\n\n{167}\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nSWEARING\n\nPerhaps the one phase of his speech which lays the Oriental open to the\ncharge of unveracity is his much swearing. Of course this evil habit\nknows no geographical boundaries and no racial limits. However,\nprobably because of their tendency to be profuse, intense, and positive\nin speech, the Orientals no doubt have more than their legitimate share\nof swearing. But it should be kept in mind that in that part of the\nworld swearing is not looked upon with the same disapproval and\ncontempt as in America; swearing by the name of the Deity has always\nbeen considered the most sacred and solemn affirmation of a statement.\nIt is simply calling God to witness that what has been said is the\nsacred truth. Thus in the twenty-first chapter of the book of Genesis\nAbimelech asks Abraham, \"Now therefore swear unto me here by God that\nthou wilt not deal falsely with me, nor {168} with my son, nor with my\nson's son.\" \"And Abraham said, I will swear.\"\n\nSt. Paul employs this type of speech in a milder form, after the New\nTestament fashion, in the opening verse of the twelfth chapter of his\nEpistle to the Romans, where he says: \"I beseech you, therefore,\nbrethren, _by the mercies of God_, that ye present your bodies a living\nsacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable\nservice.\" In the opening verse of the ninth chapter of the Epistle to\nthe Romans, Paul succeeds in an elegant manner in dispensing with\nswearing altogether, when he says: \"I say the truth in Christ, I lie\nnot, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost.\"\n\nGenerally speaking, however, the custom of swearing after the manner of\nthe Old Testament has undergone no change in Syria since the days of\nAbraham. Swearing is an integral element in Oriental speech.\nInstinctively the speaker turns his eyes and lifts his hands toward\nheaven and says, \"By Allah, what I have {169} said is right and true.\n_Yeshhedo-Allah_ [God witnesseth] to the truth of my words.\" In a\nsimilar manner, and as in a score of places in the Old Testament, the\nmaker of a statement is asked by his hearer to swear by God as a solemn\nassurance that his statement is true and sincere.\n\nThe Mohammedan law, which is the law of modern Syria, demands swearing\nin judicial contests. The judge awards the accuser--that is, the\nplaintiff--the right to lead the defendant to any shrine he may choose,\nand cause him to swear the _yem\u00een_ (solemn oath) as a final witness to\nhis innocence. By this act the plaintiff places his adversary in the\nhands of the Supreme Judge, whose judgments are \"true and righteous\naltogether.\" A false oath is supposed to bring awful retribution upon\nits maker and upon his posterity.\n\nOf such importance is this mode of speech to Orientals that the\nIsraelites thought of Jehovah Himself as making such affirmations. In\nthe twenty-second chapter of Genesis we have the words, \"By myself have\nI sworn, saith the {170} Lord.\" Further light is thrown on this point\nby the explanation given to the verse just quoted in the sixth chapter\nof the Epistle to the Hebrews, where it is said, \"For when God made\npromise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he swore by\nhimself.\"\n\nI have no doubt that this thought of God swearing by himself sprang\nfrom the custom of Oriental aristocrats of sealing a vow, or solemnly\naffirming a statement, or an intention to do some daring deed, by\nsaying, \"I swear by my head\"--an oath which, whenever I heard it in my\nyouth, filled me with awe. Thus, also, in the sixty-second chapter of\nIsaiah we have the words, \"The Lord hath sworn by his right hand, and\nby the arm of his strength.\"\n\nAmong the Mohammedans, swearing \"by the most high God\" and \"by the life\nof the Prophet\" and \"by the exalted Koran\" in affirmation of almost\nevery statement, is universal. The Christians swear by God, Christ,\nthe Virgin, the Cross, the Saints, the repose of their dead, the Holy\nCity, the Eucharist, {171} Heaven, great holidays, and many other\nnames. A father swears by the life of a dear child, and sons of\ndistinguished fathers swear by them. \"By the life of my father, I am\ntelling the truth,\" is a very common expression. The antiquity of this\ncustom is made evident by the passage in the thirty-first chapter of\nGenesis and the fifty-third verse: \"And Jacob sware by the fear of his\nfather Isaac.\" However, the word \"fear\" does violence to the real\nmeaning of the verse, which the Arabic version rescues by saying, \"And\nJacob swore by the _heybet_ [benignity, or beautiful dignity] of his\nfather.\" He swore by that which he and others loved, and not feared,\nin his father.\n\nBut what must seem to Americans utterly ridiculous is the Oriental\nhabit of swearing by the mustache and the beard, which is, however, one\nphase of swearing by the head. To swear by one's mustache, or beard,\nmeans to pledge the integrity of one's manhood. \"I swear by this,\" is\nsaid solemnly by a man with his hand upon his mustache. Swearing by\nthe {172} beard is supposed to carry more weight because, as a rule, it\nis worn by the older men. To speak disrespectfully of one's mustache\nor beard, or to curse the beard of a person's father, is to invite\nserious trouble.\n\nThe sacredness of the beard to Orientals goes back to the remote past\nwhen all the hair of the head and the face was considered sacred.\nGrowing a beard is still esteemed a solemn act in Syria, so much so\nthat, having let his beard grow, one cannot shave it off without\nbecoming a by-word in the community. To speak of the scissors or of a\nrazor in the presence of one wearing a beard, especially if he be a\npriest, or of the aristocracy, is considered a deep insult to him.\nSuch unseemly conduct seldom fails to precipitate a fight. In 2\nSamuel, the tenth chapter, fourth verse, we have the record of Hanun's\ndisgraceful treatment of David's men, whom he had thought to be spies.\n\"Wherefore Hanun took David's servants, and shaved off the one half of\ntheir beards, and cut off their garments in the middle, even to their\nbuttocks, {173} and sent them away. When they told it unto David, he\nsent to meet them, because the men _were greatly ashamed_: and the king\nsaid, Tarry at Jericho _until your beards be grown_, and then return.\"\n\nIt is because of this ancient conception of the hair that the Syrians\nstill swear by the mustache and the beard, although the majority of\nthem know not the real reason why they do so.\n\nI remember distinctly how proud I was in my youth to put my hand upon\nmy mustache, when it was yet not even large enough to be respectfully\nnoticed, and swear by it _as a man_. I recall also to what roars of\nlaughter I would provoke my elders at such times, to my great dismay.\n\nHere it may easily be seen that swearing in the Orient had so lost its\noriginal sacredness and become so vulgar, even as far back as the time\nof Christ, that He deemed it necessary to give the unqualified command,\n\"Swear not at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne, nor by\nthe earth, for it is his footstool: neither by {174} Jerusalem, for it\nis the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head,\nbecause thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your\ncommunication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these\ncometh of evil.\" This was perhaps the most difficult command to obey\nthat Jesus ever gave to his countrymen.\n\n\n\n\n{175}\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nFOUR CHARACTERISTICS\n\nOf the other characteristics of Oriental speech, I wish to speak of\nfour before I bring this part of my book to a close.\n\nThe first, the many and picturesque dialects. The entire absence of\nthe public school, the scarcity of other educational institutions, as\nwell as of books and periodicals, and the extreme slowness of\ntransportation, have always tended to perpetuate the multitude of\ndialects in the speech of the Syrian people. The common language of\nthe land is the Arabic, which is divided into two types--the classical\nand the common, or the language of learning and that of daily speech.\nThe classical language is one, but the common language is a labyrinth\nof dialects. Each section of that small country has its _lehjah_\n(accent), and it is no exaggeration to say that each town within those\nsections has a _lehjah_ of its own. Certain letters of the {176}\nalphabet are also sounded differently in different localities. Thus,\nfor an example, the word for \"stood\" is pronounced _qam_ in certain\nlocalities, and _aam_ in others. The word for \"male\" is pronounced\n_zeker_ by some communities, and _deker_ by others.\n\nThat such a state of things prevailed also in ancient Israel and in New\nTestament times is very evident. In the twelfth chapter of the Book of\nJudges we have the record of a fight between the Gileadites and the\nEphraimites, in which we find the following statement: \"And the\nGileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites: and it\nwas so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped said, Let me go\nover; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If\nhe said, Nay; then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said\nSibboleth: _for he could not frame to pronounce it right_. Then they\ntook him, and slew him.\"\n\nThis simple means of identification might be used in present-day Syria\nwith equal success.\n\n{177}\n\nIn the fourteenth chapter of St. Mark's Gospel we have another striking\nillustration of this characteristic of Oriental speech, in Peter's\nexperience in the palace of the high priest. In the fifty-third verse\nit is said: \"And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him\nwere assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes.\nAnd Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high\npriest.\" The record continues (verses 66-71): \"And as Peter was\nbeneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high\npriest: and when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him,\nand said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied,\nsaying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went\nout into the porch.... And a little after, they that stood by said\nagain to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean,\n_and thy speech agreeth thereto_.[1] But he began to curse and to\nswear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak.\"\n\n{178}\n\nPoor Peter! the more he swore and cursed the more clearly he revealed\nhis identity. His cowardice might have concealed him, but for his\ndialect. He spoke the dialect of Galilee in the city of Jerusalem, and\nso far as the identification of his person was concerned, even a\ncertificate from the authorities of the town of his birth, testifying\nto his being a native of Galilee, could not have so effectively served\nthat purpose.\n\nThe second characteristic is the juvenile habit of imploring \"in season\nand out of season\" when asking a favor. To try to exert \"undue\"\ninfluence, virtually to beg in most persuasive tones, is an Oriental\nhabit which to an American must seem unendurable. Of the many\nillustrations of this custom which fill my memory I will relate the\nfollowing incident, which I once heard a man relate to my father.\n\nThis man had bought, for six hundred piasters, a piece of land which\nhad been given as a _nezer_ (vow) to our Greek Orthodox Church. After\nhe had given his note for the {179} sum and secured the deed, it\noccurred to him that the price was too high, and, being himself a son\nof the Church, that he ought to secure the land for four hundred\npiasters. So, as he stated, he went to Beyrout, the seat of our\nbishop, where he stayed three days. By constant petitioning, he\nsecured the privilege of interviewing the bishop four times on the\nsubject. With great glee he stated that at the last interview he\nrefused to rise from his seat at the feet of that long-suffering\necclesiastic until his petition was granted.\n\nOne of the most striking examples of this characteristic is the parable\nof the unrighteous judge, in the eighteenth chapter of Luke. \"There\nwas in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: and\nthere was a widow in that city, and she came unto him saying, Avenge me\n[the original is \"do me justice\"] of mine adversary. And he would not\nfor a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not\nGod, nor regard man, yet because this widow troubleth me, I will {180}\navenge her, _lest by her continual coming she weary me_.\"\n\nHere is a case--by no means a rare exception in that country--where a\njudge rendered a verdict against his own best judgment in sheer\nself-defense. And I must say that, knowing such Oriental tendencies as\nI do, especially as manifested by widows, I am in deep sympathy with\nthe judge.\n\nYet it was this very persistence in petitioning the Father of all men\nwhich gave mankind the lofty psalms and tender prayers of our\nScriptures. It was this persistent filial pleading and imploring which\nmade Israel turn again and again to the \"God of righteousness\" and say,\n\"We have sinned,\" and ask for a deeper revealing of his ways to them.\nJob's cry, \"Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him,\" may not be the\nproper language of modern etiquette, but it certainly is the language\nof religion. In the very parable just quoted, Jesus recommends to his\ndisciples the insistence of the widow as a means to draw the\nbenediction of heaven upon {181} them, and to secure for them\njustification at the hands of the righteous judge. Honest seekers\nafter spiritual gifts should not be averse to imitating this Oriental\ntrait. They should never be afraid to come to their Father again and\nagain for his gracious blessing, or refrain from \"storming the gates of\nheaven with prayer.\"\n\nThe third characteristic of Oriental speech is its intimacy and\nunreserve. Mere implications which are so common to reserved and\nguarded speech leave a void in the Oriental heart. It is because of\nthis that the Orientals have always craved \"signs and wonders,\" and\ninterpreted natural phenomena in terms of direct miraculous\ncommunications from God to convince them that He cared for them.\nAlthough Gideon was speaking with Jehovah Himself, who promised to help\nhim to save his kinsmen from the Midianites, he asked for a more\ntangible, more definite sign. We are told in the sixth chapter of\nJudges, thirty-sixth verse: \"And Gideon said unto God, If thou wilt\nsave Israel by mine hand, as thou hast spoken, behold, I will put a\n{182} fleece of wool on the threshing-floor; if there be dew on the\nfleece only, and it be dry upon all the ground, then shall I know that\nthou wilt save Israel by mine hand, as thou hast spoken. And it was\nso.\" But Gideon, still unsatisfied, speaks again in childlike\nsimplicity and intimacy; \"Let not thine anger be kindled against me,\nand I will speak but this once: let me make trial, I pray thee, but\nthis once with the fleece; let it now be dry only upon the fleece, and\nupon all the ground let there be dew. And God did so that night.\"\n\nIt is not at all uncommon for old and tried friends in Syria to give\nand ask for affectionate assurances, that they do love one another.\nSuch expressions are the wine of life. Especially when new confidences\nare exchanged or great favors asked, a man turns with guileless eyes to\nhis trusted friend and says, \"Now you love me; I say you love me, don't\nyou?\" \"My soul, my eyes,\" answers the other, \"you know what is in my\nheart toward you; you know and the Creator knows!\" Then the request is\nmade. {183} One of the noblest and tenderest passages in the New\nTestament, a passage whose spirit has fed the strength of the Christian\nmissionaries throughout the ages, is that portion of the twenty-first\nchapter of St. John's Gospel where Jesus speaks to Peter in this\nintimate Syrian fashion. How sweet and natural it sounds to a son of\nthe East! \"So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon,\nson of Jonas, lovest thou me?\" How characteristic also is Peter's\nanswer, \"Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee.\" Then came the\nprecious request, \"Feed my lambs.\" Three times did the affectionate\nMaster knock at the door of Peter's heart, till the poor impetuous\ndisciple cried, \"Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I\nlove thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.\"\n\nThe fourth characteristic of Oriental speech is its unqualified\npositiveness. Outside the small circles of Europeanized Syrians, such\nqualifying phrases as \"in my opinion,\" \"so it seems to me,\" \"as I see\nit,\" and the like, are {184} almost entirely absent from Oriental\nspeech. The Oriental is never so cautious in his speech as a certain\nAmerican editor of a religious paper, who in speaking of Cain described\nhim as \"the _alleged_ murderer of Abel\"! Such expressions, also, are\nrarely used in the Bible, and then only in the New Testament, in which\nGreek influence plays no small part. Thus in the seventh chapter of\nhis second Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul, in giving his opinion on\nmarriage said, \"_I suppose_, therefore, that this is good for the\npresent distress,\" and so forth. I am not aware that this form of\nspeech is used anywhere in the entire Old Testament.\n\nThe language of the Oriental is that of sentiment and conviction, and\nnot of highly differentiated and specialized thought. When you say to\nhim, \"I think this object is beautiful,\" if he does not think it is so,\nhe says, \"No, it is not beautiful.\" Although he is expressing his own\nindividual opinion, he does not take the trouble to make that perfectly\nclear: if an object is not beautiful to him, it _is not_ beautiful.\n\n{185}\n\nFrom an intellectual and social standpoint, this mode of speech may be\nconsidered a serious defect. So do children express themselves. But\nit should be kept in mind that the Oriental mind is that of the prophet\nand the seer, and not of the scientist and the philosopher. It is the\nmind which has proven the most suitable transmissive agency of divine\nrevelation.\n\nWhen the seer beholds a vision of the things that are eternal, he\ncannot speak of it as a supposition or a guess, or transmit it with\nintellectual caution and timidity. \"Thus saith the Lord.\" \"The word\nof the Lord came unto me saying, Son of man, prophesy.\" When we speak\nof the deepest realities of life, we do not beset our utterances with\nqualifying phrases. True love, deep sorrow, a real vision of spiritual\nthings transcend all speculative speech; they press with irresistible\nmight for direct and authoritative expression.\n\nTake for an example Jesus' matchless declaration: \"The Spirit of the\nLord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the {186} gospel\n[glad tidings] to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted,\nto preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the\nblind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the\nacceptable year of the Lord.\"[2] How would this great utterance sound\nif given in the nice, cautious language of an \"up-to-date\" thinker?\nWhat force would it carry if put in this form, \"It seems to me,\nalthough I may be entirely mistaken, that something like what may be\ntermed the 'Spirit of the Lord' is upon me, and I feel that, in my own\nlimited way, I must preach the Gospel\"?\n\nOf course reckless, dogmatic assertions from the pulpit are never wise\nnor profitable. Ultimately, whether in the realms of science or\nspiritual experience, the facts are the things which will count.\nNevertheless, it must be admitted that the modern pulpit suffers to a\nlarge extent from overcautiousness. By many ministers the facts are\nevaluated more in an intellectual than in a spiritual sense. Hence\nthat {187} cautiousness in utterance which is seriously threatening the\nspirit of prophecy and the authority of real spiritual _experience_ in\nthe religious teachers of the present day. Legitimate intellectual\ncaution should never be allowed to degenerate into spiritual timidity,\nnor the knowledge of outward things to put out the prophetic fire in\nthe soul. There is, no doubt, much food for thought in the following\nlegend. It is said of a preacher, who was apparently determined not to\nmake \"rash statements,\" that in speaking to his people on repentance he\nhad this for his final word: \"If you do not repent, as it were, and be\nconverted, in a measure, you will be damned, to a certain extent.\" The\ncongregation that has such a preacher is damned already! And I\nperceive some difference between such a preacher and Him who says,\n\"Verily, I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little\nchildren, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.\"[3]\n\nThis seeming weakness in Oriental speech {188} and in the Bible is in\nreality tremendous spiritual strength. Through our sacred Scriptures\nwe hear the voices of those great Oriental prophets who spoke as they\nsaw and felt; as seers, and not as logicians. And it was indeed most\nfortunate for the world that the Bible was written in an age of\ninstinctive listening to the divine Voice, and in a country whose\njuvenile modes of speech protected the \"rugged maxims\" of the\nScriptures from the weakening influences of an overstrained\nintellectualism.\n\n\n\n[1] See also Matt. xxvi: 73.\n\n[2] Luke iv: 18.\n\n[3] Matt. xviii: 3.\n\n\n\n\n{191}\n\nPART III\n\nBREAD AND SALT\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nTHE SACRED 'AISH\n\nTo an Oriental the phrase \"bread and salt\" is of sacred import. The\nsaying, \"There is bread and salt between us,\" which has been prevalent\nin the East from time immemorial, is equal to saying, \"We are bound\ntogether by a solemn covenant.\" To say of one that he \"knows not the\nsignificance of bread and salt\" is to stigmatize him as a base ingrate.\n\nA noble foe refuses to \"taste the salt\" of his adversary--that is, to\neat with him--so long as he feels disinclined to be reconciled to him.\nSuch a foe dreads the thought of repudiating the covenant which the\nbreaking of bread together forms. In the rural districts of Syria,\nmuch more than in the cities, is still observed the ancient custom that\na man on an important mission should not eat his host's bread until the\nerrand is made known. The covenant of \"bread and salt\" should not be\nentered into {192} before the attitude of the host toward his guest's\nmission is fully known. If the request is granted, then the meal is\nenjoyed as a fraternal affirmation of the agreement just made. So in\nthe twenty-fourth chapter of the Book of Genesis we are told that\nAbraham's servant, who had gone to Mesopotamia, \"unto the city of\nNahor,\" to bring a wife of his master's kindred to his son Isaac,\nrefused to eat at Laban's table before he had told his errand. With\ncharacteristic Oriental hospitality the brother of Rebekah, after\nhearing his sister's story, sought Abraham's faithful servant, \"and,\nbehold, he stood by the camels at the well. And he said, Come in, thou\nblessed of the Lord; wherefore standest thou without? for I have\nprepared the house, and room for the camels. And the man came into the\nhouse.... And there was set meat before him to eat: but he said, _I\nwill not eat, until I have told mine errand_.\"[1] The errand having\nbeen told, \"the servant brought forth jewels of silver, and jewels of\ngold, and raiment, and {193} gave them to Rebekah.... _And they did\neat and drink_, he and the men that were with him.\"[2]\n\nOf all his enemies, the writer of the forty-first Psalm considered the\n\"familiar friend\" who went back on his simple covenant to be the worst.\n\"Yea,\" he cries, mournfully, \"mine own familiar friend, in whom I\ntrusted, which did eat my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.\"\n\nAs the son of a Syrian family I was brought up to think of bread as\npossessing a mystic sacred significance. I never would step on a piece\nof bread fallen in the road, but would pick it up, press it to my lips\nfor reverence, and place it in a wall or some other place where it\nwould not be trodden upon.\n\nWhat always seemed to me to be one of {194} the noblest traditions of\nmy people was their reverence for the _'aish_ (bread; literally, \"the\nlife-giver\"). While breaking bread together we would not rise to\nsalute an arriving guest, whatever his social rank. Whether spoken or\nnot, our excuse for not rising and engaging in the cordial Oriental\nsalutation before the meal was ended, was our reverence for the food\n(_hirmetel-'aish_). We could, however, and always did, invite the\nnewcomer most urgently to partake of the repast.\n\nAt least once each year, for many years, I carried the _korban_ (the\nbread offering) to the _mizbeh_ (altar of sacrifice) in our village\nchurch, as an offering for the repose of the souls of our dead as well\nas for our own spiritual security. Bread was one of the elements of\nthe holy Eucharist. The mass always closed with the handing by the\npriest to the members of the congregation of small pieces of\nconsecrated bread. The Gospel taught us also that Christ was the\n\"bread of life.\"\n\nThe _'aish_ was something more than mere {195} matter. Inasmuch as it\nsustained life, it was God's own life made tangible for his child, man,\nto feed upon. The Most High himself fed our hunger. Does not the\nPsalmist say, \"Thou openest thine hand, and satisfieth the desire of\nevery living thing\"? Where else could our daily bread come from?\n\n\n\n[1] Verses 30-33.\n\n[2] Verses 53-54. The word \"drink,\" which is frequently used in the\nBible in connection with the word \"eat,\" does not necessarily refer to\nwine drinking. The expression \"food and drink\" is current in Syria,\nand means simply \"board.\" An employer says to an employee, \"I will pay\nyou so much wages, and your food and drink\" (aklek washirbek). The\ndrink may be nothing but water.\n\n\n\n\n{196}\n\nCHAPTER II\n\n\"OUR DAILY BREAD\"\n\nI have often heard it said by \"up-to-date\" religionists in this country\nthat the saying in the Lord's Prayer, \"Give us this day our daily\nbread,\" was at best a beggar's lazy petition. It has been suggested\nthat those words should be omitted from the prayer, because they\npertain to \"material things.\" And at any rate we can get our daily\nbread only by working for it.\n\nYes; and the Oriental understands all that. But he perceives also that\nby working for his daily bread he does not _create_ it, but simply\n_finds_ it. The prayer, \"Give us this day our daily bread\" is a note\nof pure gratitude to the \"Giver of all good and perfect gifts.\" The\nOriental does not know \"material things\" as the Occidental knows them.\nTo him organic chemistry does not take the place of God. He is, in his\ntotality, God-centered. His center of gravity is the altar and not the\nfactory, and back {197} of his prayer for daily bread is the momentum\nof ages of mystic contemplation. The Oriental finds kinship, not with\nthose who go for their daily bread no farther than the bakery, but with\nthe writer of this modern psalm:--\n\n \"Back of the loaf is the snowy flour,\n Back of the flour the mill;\n Back of the mill is the wheat and the shower\n And the sun and the Father's will.\"\n\n\nIt is not my purpose to exaggerate the piety and moral rectitude of the\nOriental. I am fully aware of the fact that he is lamentably lacking\nin his efforts to rise to the height of his noblest traditions.\nNevertheless, those who know the Oriental's inner life know also that\nfrom seed-time until harvest, and until the bread is placed upon the\nfamily board, this man's attitude toward the \"staff of life\" is\nessentially religious. In the name of God he casts the seed into the\nsoil; in the name of God he thrusts the sickle into the ripe harvest;\nin the name of God he scatters his sheaves on the threshing floor and\ngrinds his grain at the mill; and in the name of {198} God his wife\nkneads the dough, bakes the bread, and serves it to her family.\n\nIn my childhood days \"kneading-day\" at our house was always of peculiar\nsignificance to me. I had no toys or story-books to engage my\nattention, and it was with the greatest interest that I watched my\nmother go through the process of kneading. Her pious words and actions\nmade kneading a sort of religious service.\n\nAfter making the sign of the cross and invoking the Holy Name, she drew\nthe required quantity of flour out of a small opening near the bottom\nof the earthen barrel in which the precious meal was stored. It was\nout of such a barrel that the widow of \"Zarephath which belongeth to\nZidon\" drew the \"handful of meal\" she had, and made of it a cake for\nElijah, for which favor the fiery prophet prayed that the widow's\nbarrel of meal \"shall not waste.\"\n\nThen my mother packed the flour in the shape of a crescent on one side\nof the large earthen _maajan_ (kneading basin) which is about thirty\ninches in diameter. She dissolved the {199} salt in warm water, which\nshe poured in the basin by the embankment of flour. Then with a \"God\nbless\" she took out the leaven--a lump of dough saved from the former\nbaking--which she had buried in flour to keep it \"from corruption,\"\nthat is, from overfermentation. This leaven she dissolved carefully in\nthe salt water, and by slowly mixing the meal with this fluid, she\n\"hid\" the leaven in the meal. It was this process which Jesus\nmentioned very briefly in the parable of the leaven in the thirteenth\nchapter of St. Matthew's Gospel. \"The kingdom of heaven is like unto\nleaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the\nwhole was leavened.\"\n\nThe kneading done, my mother smoothed the surface of the blessed lump,\ndipped her hand in water, and with the edge of her palm marked a deep\ncross the whole length of the diameter of the basin, crossed herself\nthree times, while she muttered an invocation, and then covered the\nbasin and left the dough to rise. The same pious attitude was resumed\n{200} when the raised dough was made into small loaves, during the\nbaking, and whenever the mother of the family put her hand into the\nbasin where the loaves were kept, to take out bread for her family's\nneeds.\n\nDoes it now seem strange, unnatural, or in any way out of harmony with\nthe trend of her whole life, for such a woman to pray, \"Give us this\nday our daily bread\"? Shall we receive the gifts and forget the Giver?\nHowever circuitous our way to our daily bread may be, the fact remains\nthat we do feed on God's own life. \"The earth is the Lord's and the\nfullness thereof.\"\n\nThe use of iron stoves was unknown to the Syrians in my childhood days;\nand this modern convenience is now used only by some of the well-to-do\npeople in the large cities. The rank and file of the people, as in the\ndays of ancient Israel, still bake their bread at semi-public ovens, a\nfew of which are found in every village and town. This baking-place is\nmentioned often in the Bible, but the word \"oven\" in the English\ntranslation is somewhat misleading. It {201} is so because the\n_tenn\u00fbr_ (translated \"oven\" in the Bible) is unknown to the\nEnglish-speaking world, if not to the entire Occident. The _tenn\u00fbr_ is\na huge earthen tube about three feet in diameter and about five feet\nlong; it is sunk in the ground within a small, roughly constructed hut.\nThe women bake their bread at the _tenn\u00fbr_ in turn, certain days being\nassigned to certain families. The one baking comprises from one\nhundred to two hundred loaves. The fuel, which consists of small\nbranches of trees, and of thistles and straw, is thrown into the\n_tenn\u00fbr_ in large quantities. It is to this that Jesus alludes in the\npassage, \"If then God so clothe the grass which is to-day in the field,\nand to-morrow is _cast into the oven_, how much more will he clothe\nyou, O ye of little faith?\"\n\nWhen I recall the sight of a burning _tenn\u00fbr_, I do not find it\ndifficult to imagine what the old theologians meant by the \"burning\npit.\" The billows of black smoke, pierced at intervals by tongues of\nflame issuing from the deep hole, convert the chimneyless hut into an\nactive {202} crater. No one who has seen such a sight can fail to\nunderstand what the prophet Malachi meant when he exclaimed, \"For,\nbehold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud,\nyea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble.\"[1] And no one who\nhas seen that little hut, virtually plastered with the blackest soot,\ncan fail to understand the full meaning of that passage in the fifth\nchapter of the Book of Lamentations, the tenth verse, which says, \"Our\nskin was black like an oven, because of the terrible famine.\"\n\nA large baking is a source of pride as well as a means of security. A\nSyrian housewife is proud to have the oven all to herself for a whole\nday. It is a disgrace--nay, a curse--to have a small baking, or to buy\nbread in small quantity, \"one weight\" at a time. One of the terrible\nthreats to Israel, recorded in the twenty-sixth chapter of the Book of\nLeviticus, the twenty-sixth verse, is this: \"When I have broken the\nstaff of your bread, ten women shall {203} bake your bread in one oven,\nand they shall deliver you your bread again by weight: and ye shall eat\nand not be satisfied.\" My mother often admonished us to be thankful\nthat we were not like those who had to buy their bread by weight--that\nis, in small quantities.\n\nBut this saying, \"and they shall deliver you your bread again by\nweight,\" may mean also the weighing of the portions delivered to the\nvarious members of the family, in order that no one may receive more\nthan any other, and that the scanty supply of food may be more\ncarefully doled out. However, probably because no real famine ever\noccurred in Syria within my memory, I never knew of the actual\nresorting, within the family circle, to such severe restrictions in the\ndistribution of the daily food. A similar practice, however, prevails\namong the Arab tribes in sharing their meager supply of water, while\ntraveling in the desert. In order to insure equality, a pebble is\nplaced in the bottom of a small wooden cup into which the water is\npoured. The draught {204} which each traveler receives at long\nintervals is \"the covering of the pebble,\" that is, only the quantity\nof water needed just to cover the pebble in the cup.\n\n\n\n[1] Mal. iv: 1.\n\n\n\n\n{205}\n\nCHAPTER III\n\n\"COMPEL THEM TO COME IN\"\n\nThe hospitality of Orientals is proverbial the world over. And while\nsome Westerners have an exaggerated idea of Oriental generosity, the\nson of the East is not unjustly famous for his readiness to offer to\nwayfarers the shelter of his roof and his bread and salt. The person\nwho fails to extend such hospitality brings reproach, not only upon\nhimself, but upon his whole clan and town.\n\nBut whether hospitality is extended to strangers or to friends, it is\nthe man who entertains, and not the woman. The invitation is extended\nin the name of the husband alone, or, if the husband is not living, in\nthe name of the eldest son. In the case of a widow who has no male\nchildren, a man relative is asked to act as host. The man of the house\nshould not allow a wayfarer to pass him without offering him a \"morsel\nof bread to sustain his heart.\" So did {206} Abraham of old extend\nhospitality to the three mysterious strangers who came upon him \"in the\nplains of Mamre,\" as stated in the eighteenth chapter of Genesis, the\nsecond and following verses, \"And he lift up his eyes and looked, and,\nlo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them\nfrom the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, and said, My\nLord, if now I have found favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray\nthee, from thy servant; ... and I will fetch a morsel of bread, and\ncomfort ye your hearts: after that ye shall pass on.\"\n\nHow natural and how truly Syrian all this sounds! Sarah was not at all\nslighted because Abraham did not say, \"Sarah and I will be glad to have\nyou stop for lunch with us, if you can.\" On the contrary, she was\ngreatly honored by not being mentioned in the invitation.\n\nWe have another striking illustration of this Syrian custom in the\nparable of the prodigal son, in the fifteenth chapter of St. Luke's\nGospel. Here we are told that, when the wayward {207} boy returned to\nhis father's house, desolate but penitent, it was the father who ran\nout to meet the son and \"fell on his neck, and kissed him.\" It was the\nfather who said to his servants, \"Bring forth the best robe, and put it\non him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet; and bring\nhither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry.\" I\nknow well that the mother of the prodigal could not have been less\naffectionate nor less effusive in her welcome to her poor son than his\nfather was. But in harmony with the best traditions of the East, and\nwithout the least intention of slighting the good mother, the record\ntakes no notice of her.\n\nIt should be stated here that the prominent mention in the Gospels of\nMary and Martha as Jesus' friends and entertainers is due to the fact\nthat to those women the Master was not merely a _guest_, but a _saint_,\nnay, the \"promised One of Israel.\" As such Jesus was a privileged\npersonage. Yet--and it is not at all strange in view of Oriental\ncustoms--Jesus took with him none of his women friends and disciples on\nsuch {208} great occasions as the Transfiguration and the Last Supper.\n\nTo extend hospitality in genuine Syrian fashion is no small\nundertaking. Brevity on such occasions is the soul of stinginess.\nOriental effusiveness and intensity of speech are never more\nstrenuously exercised than at such times. The brief form of the\nAmerican invitation, \"I should be pleased to have you dine with us, if\nyou can,\" however sincere, would seem to an Oriental like an excuse to\nescape the obligation of hospitality. Again, the ready acceptance of\nan invitation in the West would seem to the son of the East utterly\nundignified. Although the would-be guest could accept, he must be as\ninsistent in saying, \"No, I can't,\" as the would-be host in saying,\n\"Yes, you must.\"\n\nApproaching his hoped-for guest, a Syrian engages him in something like\nthe following dialogue, characterized by a glow of feeling which the\ntranslation can only faintly reveal:--\n\n\"Ennoble us [_sherrifna_] by your presence.\"\n\n{209}\n\n\"I would be ennobled [_nitsherref_] but I cannot accept.\"\n\n\"That cannot be.\"\n\n\"Yea, yea, it must be.\"\n\n\"No, I swear against you [_aksim 'aleik_] by our friendship and by the\nlife of God. I love just to acquaint you with my bread and salt.\"\n\n\"I swear also that I find it impossible [_gheir mimkin_] to accept.\nYour bread and salt are known to all.\"\n\n\"Yea, do it just for our own good. By coming to us you come to your\nown home. Let us repay your bounty to us [_fadhlek_].\"\n\n\"_Astaghfero Allah_ [by the mercy of God] I have not bestowed any\nbounty upon you worth mentioning.\"\n\nHere the host seizes his guest by the arm and with an emphatic, \"I\n_will not_ let you go,\" pulls at him and would drag him bodily into his\nhouse. Then the guest, happy in being vanquished \"with honor,\"\nconsents to the invitation.\n\nDo you now understand fully the meaning {210} of the passage in the\nfourteenth chapter of Luke's Gospel? \"A certain man made a great\nsupper, and bade many ... and they all with one consent began to make\nexcuse.... And the Lord said unto the servant, Go out into the\nhighways and hedges, and _compel_ them to come in, that my house may be\nfilled.\"[1] So also did Lydia, \"a seller of purple, of the city of\nThyatira,\" invite the apostles, who had converted her to the new faith.\nIn the sixteenth chapter of the Book of Acts, the fifteenth verse, Paul\nsays, \"And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us,\nsaying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my\nhouse, and abide there. _And she constrained us_.\"\n\nIn the interior towns and villages of Syria the ancient custom still\nprevails that, when a stranger arrives in a town late in the day, he\ngoes and sits in the \"open space\" (_saha_). While not designed to be\nso, this open space corresponds to the village common. In the English\nBible it is called \"the street.\" Streets, however, {211} are unknown\nto Syrian towns. Sitting in the _saha_, the stranger is the guest of\nthe whole village. The citizen who first sees such a wayfarer must\ninvite him to his home in real Syrian fashion. Failing in this, he\nbrings disgrace, not only upon himself, but upon the whole town. It is\nneedless to say that no people ever rise to the height of their ideals,\nand that failure to be \"given to hospitality\" occurs, even in the East.\n\nIn the nineteenth chapter of the Book of Judges we have the record of a\nstranger who sat in the _saha_ of a certain village, but was not\noffered the usual hospitality very readily. This man was a Levite,\nand, with his wife, servant, and a couple of asses, was on his way from\nBethlehem \"toward the side of Mount Ephraim.\" \"And the sun went down\nupon them when they were by Gibeah, which belongeth to Benjamin. And\nthey turned aside thither, to go in and to lodge in Gibeah: and when he\nwent in, he sat him down in a street of the city; for there was no man\nthat took them into his house to lodging. And, behold, there came an\nold man from {212} his work out of the field at even.... And when he\nhad lifted up his eyes, he saw a wayfaring man in the street of the\ncity: and the old man said, Whither goest thou? and whence comest\nthou? And he said unto him, We are passing from Bethlehem-Judah toward\nthe side of Mount Ephraim ... but I am now going to the house of the\nLord; and there is no man that receiveth me to house.\"\n\nAnd in order to add to the shame of the inhospitable village the\nstranger adds, \"Yet there is both straw and provender for our asses;\nand there is bread and wine also for me, and for thy handmaid [the\nwife], and for the young man which is with thy servants: there is no\nwant of any thing.\" What a rebuke to that community!\n\n\"And the old man said, Peace be with thee; howsoever let all thy wants\nlie upon me; _only lodge not in the street_. So he brought him into\nhis house, and gave provender unto the asses: and they washed their\nfeet, and did eat and drink.\"\n\nThe old man saved the name of the town.\n\n{213}\n\nOne of the noblest and most tender utterances of Job is the\nthirty-second verse of the thirty-first chapter. Here the afflicted\npatriarch, in pleading his own cause before the Most High, says, \"The\nstranger did not lodge in the street, but I opened my doors to the\ntraveller.\"\n\nSyrian rules of hospitality make it improper for a householder to ask a\nguest who has suddenly come to him such a question as \"Have you had\nyour lunch?\" before putting food before him. The guest, even though he\nhas not had the meal asked about by the host, considers it below his\ndignity to make the fact known. Upon the arrival of such a visitor,\nthe householder greets him with the almost untranslatable words,\n\"_Ahlan wa sahlan_.\" Literally translated, these words are \"kindred\nand smooth ground\"; which, elucidated further, mean, \"You have come not\nto strangers but to those who would be to you as your kindred are, and\namong us you tread smooth and easy ground.\" And even while the guest\nis being yet saluted by the man of the house in the {214} protracted\nmanner of Oriental greeting, the good wife proceeds to prepare \"a\nmorsel\" for the wayfarer, whatever hour of the day or night it may\nhappen to be. The food then is placed before the guest and he is\n\"compelled\" to eat.\n\nThere is in the eleventh chapter of St. Luke's Gospel a parabolic\nsaying which is uncommonly rich in allusions to Syrian home life.\nBeginning with the fifth verse we read: \"And he said unto them, Which\nof you shall have a friend, and shall go unto him at midnight, and say\nunto him, Friend, lend me three loaves; for a friend of mine in his\njourney is come to me, and I have nothing to set before him; and he\nfrom within shall answer and say, Trouble me not: the door is now shut,\nand my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee?\"\n\nHere we have a man to whom a guest comes at midnight; he must set\nsomething before him, whether the wayfarer is really hungry or not.\nThe host happens to be short of bread, and he sets out to borrow a few\nloaves. Owing to the homogeneous character of life in the East, {215}\nborrowing has been developed there into a fine art. The man at the\ndoor asks for three loaves. Three of those thin Syrian loaves is the\naverage number for one individual's meal. It was for this reason that\nthe Master used this number in the parable, and not because that was\nall the bread the occasion required. For obvious reasons, the host\nneeded to put before his guest more than the exact number of loaves\nnecessary for one adult's meal. Perhaps because he is very sleepy, the\nman \"within\" runs counter to the best Syrian traditions in his answer.\nHis excuse--that because the door is shut he cannot open it and\naccommodate his friend--has been a puzzle to a host of Western readers\nof the Bible. Could he not have opened the door? Or, as a certain\npreacher asked in my hearing, \"Could it be possible that the man,\nbecause of fear of robbers in that country, had a sort of combination\nlock on his door which could not be easily opened?\" The simple fact is\nthat in Syria as a rule the door of a house is never shut, summer or\nwinter, until bedtime. The words of my {216} father and mother to me\nwhenever they thought that I had \"remained wakeful\"--that is, \"stayed\nup\"--longer than I should after they had gone to bed,--\"Shut the door\nand go to sleep,\"--still ring in my ears. What the man \"within\" meant\nwas, not that he could not open the door, but that at such a late hour,\n_after the door had been shut_, it was no time to call for such favors\nas the neighbor asked for.\n\n\"And my children are with me in bed.\" From this it may be inferred\neasily that individual beds and individual rooms are well-nigh unknown\nto the common people of Syria. The cushion-mattresses are spread side\nby side in the living room, in a line as long as the members of the\nfamily, sleeping close together, require. The father sleeps at one end\nof the line, and the mother at the other end, \"to keep the children\nfrom rolling from under the cover.\" So the man was absolutely truthful\nwhen he said by way of an excuse, \"My children are with me in bed.\"\n\nIn the remaining portion of this parable, as in that of the unrighteous\njudge, Jesus {217} emphasizes, by commending to his disciples, the\nSyrian habit of importuning. \"I say unto you, though he will not rise\nand give him, because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity\nhe will rise and give him as many as he needeth.\" Again, the Master\ngives dignity and elevation to the common customs of his people by\nusing them as means of approach to high spiritual ideals, when he says,\n\"And I say unto you, ask and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall\nfind; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.\"\n\n\n\n[1] Verses 16-23.\n\n\n\n\n{218}\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nDELAYING THE DEPARTING GUEST\n\nThe best rules of Syrian hospitality require that when a guest from a\ndistant town makes it known what day he expects to take his leave, the\nhost should do his best to trick his visitor into forgetfulness of the\ntime set, or devise some other means to delay his departure as much as\npossible. On the day he wishes to depart, the wayfarer says to his\nhost, \"Your exceeding bounty has covered me, far above my head; may God\nperpetuate your house and prolong the lives of your dear ones. May He\nenable me some day to reward you for your boundless generosity. And\nnow I who have been so immersed in the sea of your hospitality [_baher\nkaramek_] beg you to permit me to depart.\" Then the host, confessing\nhis unworthiness of such praise and manifesting great surprise at the\nsudden announcement, begs his guest to \"take no thought of departing.\"\nThe {219} guest insists that he \"must go,\" even though he could stay.\nThe host says, \"Stay, I pray you [_betrajjak_], until you partake of\nour noon meal; then you may depart.\" After the noon meal the host\nsays, \"I beg you to consider that the day is already far spent, and\nyour journey is long, and the road is dangerous for night travel.\nTarry until the morrow, and then go.\" The same performance takes place\non the morrow, and perhaps another morrow, until the guest prevails.\n\nIn the nineteenth chapter of the Book of Judges, in the story of the\nLevite mentioned above, we have a fine example of a generous Syrian\nhost. His words are so much like those I often heard spoken in Syria\non such occasions that it makes me feel homesick to read them. The\nancient Bethlehemite was entertaining his son-in-law, who had stayed\nwith them three days, the traditional length of such a visit in the\nEast. So the record says: \"And it came to pass on the fourth day, when\nthey arose early in the morning, that he rose up to depart: and the\n{220} damsel's father said unto his son-in-law, Comfort thine heart\nwith a morsel of bread, and afterward go your way. And they sat down,\nand did eat and drink both of them together; for the damsel's father\nhad said unto the man, Be content, I pray thee, and tarry all night,\nand let thine heart be merry. And when the man rose up to depart, his\nfather-in-law urged him: therefore he lodged there again. And he rose\nearly in the morning on the fifth day to depart: and the damsel's\nfather said, Comfort thine heart, I pray thee. And they tarried until\nafternoon,[1] and they did eat both of them. And when the man rose up\nto depart, ... his father-in-law, the damsel's father, said unto him,\nBehold, now the day draweth toward evening, I pray you tarry all night:\n... lodge here, that thine heart may be merry; and to morrow get you\nearly on your way, that thou mayest go {221} home. But the man would\nnot tarry that night, but he rose up and departed.\"\n\nWhen an honored guest takes his departure, as a mark of high regard his\nhost walks with him out of town a distance the length of which is\ndetermined by the affectionate esteem in which the host holds his\nvisitor. At times we walked for a whole hour with our departing guest,\nand desisted from going farther only at his most urgent request. So in\nthe eighteenth chapter of the Book of Genesis we are told that\nAbraham's guests \"rose up from thence, and looked toward Sodom: and\nAbraham went with them _to bring them on the way_.\" The English\nphrase, however, \"to bring them on the way,\" falls far short of\nexpressing the full meaning of the term _shy-ya'_.\n\nPilgrimages to holy places and fraternal feasts--such as are enjoyed on\nbetrothal occasions, weddings, baptisms of children, and great\nholidays--are practically the only occasions the common people of Syria\nhave to bring them together. On such occasions the guests {222} are\ninvited in families; therefore the number of those who come to the\nfeast is never exactly known in advance. The food is served in large\nquantities, but not in such great variety as in the West. The table\nappointments are very simple. There are no flowers, no lace doilies,\nnor the brilliant and sometimes bewildering array of knives, forks, and\nspoons which grace an American host's table on such festive occasions.\nThe guests sit close together on the floor, about low tables, or trays,\nand eat in a somewhat communistic fashion from comparatively few large\ndishes. If twenty guests are expected, and thirty come, they simply\nenlarge the circle, or squeeze closer together. Their sitting so close\nto one another makes the \"breaking of bread together\" for these friends\nmore truly fraternal.\n\nIn the third chapter of St. Mark's Gospel, the twentieth verse, the\nwriter speaks of the large concourse of people who followed Jesus and\nhis disciples into a certain house. He tells us that \"the multitude\ncometh together again, so that they _could not so much as eat bread_.\"\n{223} The cross-reference in the Bible points to the sixth chapter of\nthe same Gospel, the thirty-first verse, where it is said, \"For there\nwere many coming and going, and they _had no leisure so much as to\neat_.\" My opinion is that the two occasions are not the same,\ntherefore the reference is incorrect. The first passage alludes to the\nfact that although, owing to the very simple table appointments among\nthe common people of Syria, only _little space_ is required for one to\neat his dinner, the crowd was so dense that not even such space was\navailable. The second passage points to the fact that the Master's\naudience was a stream of people \"coming and going\" so that _his\ndisciples_ had not leisure enough to eat. The preceding verse and the\nfirst half of the verse just quoted say: \"And the apostles gathered\nthemselves together unto Jesus, and told him all things, both what they\nhad done, and what they had taught. And he said unto them, Come ye\nyourselves apart into a desert place, and rest a while.\" The remainder\nof the verse gives the reason why Jesus {224} felt so concerned about\nhis fatigued and hungry disciples, by saying, \"For there were many\ncoming and going, and they [the disciples] had no leisure so much as to\neat.\" The Syrian feels satisfied even on ordinary occasions when he\ncan secure one or two loaves of the thin bread he habitually eats, and\na few olives, or some other modest delicacy, for what the Americans\nwould call a \"lunch.\" He needs neither a table nor even a \"lunch\ncounter\" to facilitate his eating. He can perform that essential\nfunction sitting down on the floor with his legs folded under him,\nstanding up, or even walking, as well as seated at a table. In view of\nall this there is no little significance in the saying of the Gospel\nwriter, \"And the multitude cometh together again, so that they _could\nnot so much as eat bread_.\"\n\nIn several places in the Gospels reference is made to Jesus' \"sitting\nat meat.\"[2] The marginal note in the Revised Version gives the word\n\"recline\" as the real equivalent of the {225} original Greek term which\nis rendered \"sit\" in the text. This, no doubt, is correct, so far as\nthe original text is concerned, but the reference is to a Greek and not\nto a Syrian custom. The Greeks were in the habit of reclining on\ncouches while eating, and it is not at all improbable that certain\nwealthy Orientals imitated this custom in the time of Christ, as\ncertain wealthy Syrian families of the present time imitate European\ncustoms. But I fail to find, either within my own experience, or in\nthe traditions and literature of Syria, that reclining at the table was\never countenanced as at all a proper posture; certainly never among the\ncommon people of which the Master was one. To sit erect on the floor\nat the low table, with the legs either folded under the body, or thrown\nback as in the act of kneeling, is the seemly (_laiyik_) posture, which\nis ever sung in Arabic poetry. In this we were instructed from\nchildhood. On unusual occasions, such as those of sorrow or great joy,\nfriends might rest their heads on one another's shoulders, or breasts,\nas John did at the Last {226} Supper, but these are rare exceptions.\nGood breeding and \"reverence for the food\" require the sitting erect at\nmeat.\n\nCertain commentators have found the reference to the habit of reclining\nat meat very serviceable in explaining Mary's act of anointing Jesus'\nfeet with nard, as he sat at supper at her home in Bethany. In the\ntwelfth chapter of the Gospel of John, the third verse, it is said:\n\"Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and\nanointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair.\" A\nsimilar incident is mentioned also in the seventh chapter of Luke, the\nthirty-sixth and following verses:[3] \"And one of the pharisees desired\nhim that he would eat with him. And he entered into the pharisee's\nhouse, and sat down to meat. And behold, a woman which was in the\ncity, a sinner; and when she knew that he was sitting at meat in the\npharisee's house, she brought an alabaster cruse of ointment, and\nstanding behind at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his {227} feet\nwith her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head, and kissed\nhis feet, and anointed them with the ointment.\" The explanation is\nthat it was convenient for the woman to wash and anoint Jesus' feet in\nthis manner, because he was _reclining_ on a couch.\n\nWhat I am certain of is that the couch or any elevated seat is not at\nall necessary in such cases. Whenever an Oriental indulges in the\npractice of washing his feet he sits on the floor, as is his custom,\nand lifts the feet into the basin of water. This is the only way I\never knew in my old home, and it is no less effective than is the more\n\"scientific\" way of the West. King James's Version renders the passage\na little more difficult by giving greater definiteness to the woman's\nposition at Jesus' feet. While the Revised Version says, \"And standing\nbehind at his feet,\" the older Version says, \"And stood behind _him_,\"\netc. Yet even here the couch affords no greater advantage than the\nfloor, because by folding the legs under the body, the feet are\npartially visible under the knee joints {228} and could be touched from\nbehind, and in the case of a kneeling posture, the feet may be easily\nreached from that direction.[4] However, it should be borne in mind\nhere that the real significance of the entire passage is to be found,\nnot in the woman's physical but spiritual act. It was her spirit of\nlove and devotion to the Master, and, in the case of her who was a\n\"sinner,\" her profound repentance and deep humility in touching Jesus'\nfeet in this manner, which immortalized her act in the Scriptures. To\nthe Orientals the feet are unclean in a ceremonial sense; they are not\n\"honorable\" members of the body; therefore to touch them in an act of\ndevotion marks the deepest depth of humility. It was in this sense\nthat Jesus humbled himself as an example to his disciples by washing\ntheir feet.\n\nBut objections may be made to the foregoing explanation on the ground\nthat reclining at meat is mentioned in one of the most ancient books\n{229} in the Old Testament, and which cannot be ascribed to the\ninfluence of Greek thought. In the sixth chapter of the Book of Amos,\nthe third and fourth verses, it is said, according to the Revised\nVersion: \"Ye that put far away the evil day, and cause the seat of\nviolence to come near; that lie upon beds of ivory, and _stretch\nthemselves upon their couches, and eat the lambs out of the flock, and\nthe calves out of the stall_.\" To some writers there is here a direct\nreference to the habit of reclining on couches while eating. But a\ncareful study of the passage will show that its construction does not\nwarrant such a conclusion. The passage cannot be made to read, \"Ye ...\nthat stretch themselves upon their couches _and eat_.\" The Hebrew word\n_weaukhalim_ may mean, in this connection, \"while eating,\" or, \"and the\neaters,\"--those that eat. The rendering of the Arabic, which is a\nclose kin of the Hebrew, is, \"Ye ... who lie upon beds of ivory, and\nwho are stretched on cushions [_f\u00fbrsh_], _and who eat lambs_,\" and so\nforth. Here it may easily be seen that the {230} passage gives the\ntheory of reclining at meat no real support, and the table customs of\nSyria past and present oppose any effort to force the passage to yield\nsuch a meaning. In his scathing condemnation of those who rolled in\nluxury and forgot God and his people, the prophet mentioned\ncontemptuously the ease and the feasting of those whose life should\nhave been more productive of good. He might have said, \"Ye who lie on\ncouches, and sing idle songs, and drink wine,\" as fittingly as, \"Ye who\nlie on couches, and who eat lambs and calves.\"\n\n\n\n[1] The more accurate rendering of this sentence in the Revised Version\nis, \"And tarry ye until the day declineth.\" In the hot season a good\nexcuse to delay a departing guest is to beg him to wait until the cool\nlate afternoon, \"The decline of the day [_assar_].\"\n\n[2] Matt. xxvi: 7, 20; John xii: 2.\n\n[3] The Revised Version.\n\n[4] As has already been mentioned, the common people of Syria wear no\nshoes in the house.\n\n\n\n\n{231}\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nFAMILY FEASTS\n\nOf the feasts which are considered more strictly family affairs, I will\nspeak of two which live in my memory clothed with romantic charms. The\none is that which we enjoyed at the \"killing of the sheep.\" As a rule\nevery Syrian family fattens a sheep during the summer season. The\nhousewife feeds the gentle animal by hand so many times during the day\nand so many during the night, until he is so fat that he \"cannot rise\nfrom the ground.\" No person is expected to speak of this sheep or\ntouch him without saying, \"The blessing from God\" (be upon the lamb).\nOh, if I could but feel again the thrilling joy which was always mine\nwhen, as a small boy, I sat beside my mother and rolled the small\n\"morsels\" of mulberry and grape-leaves, dipped them in salted bran\nwater, and handed them to my mother to feed the \"blessed sheep\"!\n\n{232}\n\nEarly in the autumn came the time for \"killing.\" Wherever my father\nwas, he came home, for the father of the household must kill the sheep.\nAs a rule the blood of the animal was shed upon the threshold--a custom\nwhich echoes the ancient Semitic practice of thus honoring the\nhousehold god. Now, however, perhaps for sanitary reasons, the sheep\nis killed a short distance from the door. The solemnity of the act\nrobbed it for us of its cruelty. On the day of \"killing\" we sharpened\nthe knives, crushed the salt in the stone mortar, and fed the sheep\nonly sparingly. As the day began to decline the animal was \"led to the\nslaughter,\" and laid gently on the ground, as the ancient sacrifice was\nlaid before the Lord. My father, holding with his left hand the\nanimal's head, made the sign of the cross with the knife on the\ninnocent throat, and, in the name of God, slew the sheep.\n\nThe fact that many householders in a community \"kill the sheep\" on the\nsame day makes the occasion a reproduction of the night of the {233}\nexodus from Egypt. In the twelfth chapter of the Book of Exodus, the\nthird and sixth verses, Jehovah speaks to Moses concerning Israel,\nsaying, \"In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every\nman a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an\nhouse.... And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same\nmonth: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill\nit in the evening.\"\n\nWith a few intimate friends we feasted at the killing of the sheep, and\nthen cut the red meat in small pieces \"the size of a fledgeling's\nhead,\" fried it in the fat, and sealed it in glazed earthen jars for\nour winter use.\n\nThe other most joyous feast was that of the _Marafeh_--the carnivals\nwhich precede the Great Lent. For about two weeks before Lent begins,\nthe Christians of the East give themselves over to feasting. The dish\nwhich is a great favorite on this occasion is called _kibbey_. It is\nmade of meat and crushed wheat. The meat is \"beaten\" in a stone\nmortar, with a {234} large wooden masher, until it is reduced to a very\nfine pulp. Then the crushed wheat, soaked in cold water, is mixed with\nthe meat, together with a generous supply of spices and salt. The\nwhole mixture is then \"beaten\" together so thoroughly that when rightly\ndone it resembles a lump of dough.\n\nThe writer of the Book of Proverbs, with characteristic Syrian\nintensity, alludes to the process of _kibbey_-making in one of his\nassaults upon \"the fool.\" In the twenty-second verse of the\ntwenty-seventh chapter he says, \"Though thou shouldest bray a fool in a\nmortar among wheat with a pestle, yet will not his foolishness depart\nfrom him.\"\n\nBe that as it may, the craving of a Syrian for _kibbey_ (and I fully\nknow whereof I speak) makes the craving of a Bostonian for baked beans\nand fish-balls for a Sunday breakfast pale into insignificance.\n\nDuring _Marafeh_ friends and neighbors feast together until the last\nnight that precedes the beginning of Lent. The feast of that night is\none {235} of family solemnity, upon which no outsiders may intrude.\nThe members of the family come together to eat the last feast and drink\ntheir cup of wine before entering upon the solemn period of\nself-denial, fasting, and prayer. As at the ancient sacrificial\nfeasts, all the members of the family must be present. It was this\nvery custom which afforded Jonathan the excuse to send his beloved\nfriend David away from King Saul's court, and thus save him from the\nmurderous design which that monarch had against the son of Jesse. So\nit was when the suspicious Saul asked his son, \"Wherefore cometh not\nthe son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday nor to-day?\" Jonathan\nanswered Saul, \"David earnestly asked leave of me to go to Bethlehem:\nand he said, Let me go, I pray thee; for our family hath a sacrifice in\nthe city; and my brother, he hath commanded me to be there.\"[1]\n\nOn that solemnly joyous evening my mother spreads the feast, and with\nmost tender and pious affections my parents call their sons and {236}\ndaughters to surround the low table. My father pours the wine. To us\nall the cup is symbolic of sacred joy. Holding the cup in his hand, my\nfather leans forward and says to my mother, \"May God prolong your life\nand grant you the joy of many returns of this feast!\" And to us, \"May\nyour lives be long; may we be granted to drink the cup at your\nweddings; may God grant you health and happiness and many future\nfeasts!\" We all answer, \"May your drinking be health and happiness and\nlength of days!\" My mother, after wishing my father the blessings he\nwished for her, and imploring the Most High to bless and keep him \"over\nour heads,\" drinks next. Then the wine is passed to every one of us.\n\"Drink ye all of it\" is my father's command; for who can tell whether\nthe family circle shall remain unbroken until the Easter festival? Not\na trace of the feast is kept in the house until the morrow. What is\nnot eaten is burned or thrown away, for on the next day no meat, eggs,\nor milk is permitted to the faithful. Wine also is not supposed to be\nindulged in {237} during Lent, until the Easter bell heralds the\ntidings of the Resurrection.\n\nSo did the Master speak to his disciples on the eve of his suffering.\nIn the twenty-sixth chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel we read, \"And he\ntook the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye\nall of it.... But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this\nfruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my\nFather's kingdom.\"\n\nThus from the simplest conception of bread as a means to satisfy\nphysical hunger to the loftiest mystic contemplation of it as a\nsacramental element, the Orientals have always eaten bread with a sense\nof sacredness. \"Bread and salt,\" \"bread and wine,\" \"Christ the bread\nof life,\" \"For we, being many, are one bread,\" \"Give us this day our\ndaily bread,\" these and other sayings current in the Bible and in\nOriental speech all spring from the deepest life of the ancient East.\n\nAnd the sacredness of this common article of food has been of most\ninestimable value to {238} Oriental peoples. In the absence of other\nmeans of social cohesion, and the higher civil interests which bind men\ntogether, it has been a great blessing indeed to those much-divided\nOrientals to find peace and security in the simple saying, \"There is\nbread and salt between us.\"\n\n\n\n[1] 1 Sam. xx: 27-29.\n\n\n\n\n{241}\n\nPART IV\n\nOUT IN THE OPEN\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nSHELTER AND HOME\n\nSome one has said that the ancient Israelites called God a \"shelter\"\nand a \"refuge,\" and not a \"home,\" because for the most part the Syrians\nlived out of doors. All the habitation an Israelite needed was a\nshelter from the storm and a refuge from the enemy. Hence the prayer\nof the Psalmist: \"For thou hast been a shelter for me, and a strong\ntower from the enemy,\"[1] and the prophecy of Isaiah, the fourth\nchapter and the sixth verse, according to the Revised Version: \"And\nthere shall be a pavilion for a shadow in the day-time from the heat,\nand for a refuge and for a covert from storm and from rain.\"\n\nThe assertion that the Syrian, both ancient and modern, lives for the\nmost part out of doors is substantially correct. The long and rainless\nsummers, the almost exclusively agricultural {242} and pastoral life of\nthe people, outside the few large cities, and the primitive modes of\ntravel, enable the Syrian to live his life out in the open. His\none-story house, consisting of one or two rooms very simply furnished,\nconveys the impression that it is only an emergency shelter. Yet that\nartless structure and the living \"close to nature\" have proved so\nagreeable and so satisfactory to the people of the East as to defy the\nforces of evolution. Certainly the continuance of that simple\nenvironment, \"from age to age the same,\" indicates that in the\nuniversal scheme of things evolution is not altogether compulsory. Man\ncan, if he chooses, stand still, and live somewhat comfortably by\nsimply repeating the past.\n\nTo the Oriental life is neither an evolution nor an achievement, but an\ninheritance. To his passive yet poetical mind the ancient landmarks\npossess enchanting sentimental value. The thought of the same modes of\nlife linking fifty centuries together appeals powerfully to his\nimagination. It spells security, and establishes {243} confidence in\nthe laws of being, at least to old age.\n\nHowever, it should not be inferred from the foregoing that the Syrian\nthinks lightly of his humble home. No; he is a passionate lover of it,\nand associates with it the deepest joys and sorrows of life. But he\ndoes not have for his abode the two designations \"house\" and \"home,\"\nwhich prevail in the West. The Hebrew word _bayith_ and the Arabic\n_bait_ mean primarily a \"shelter.\" The English equivalent is the word\n\"house.\" The richer term, \"home,\" has never been invented by the son\nof Palestine because he has always considered himself \"a sojourner in\nthe earth.\" His tent and his little house, therefore, were sufficient\nfor a shelter for him and his dear ones during the earthly pilgrimage.\nThe word which is translated \"home\" in about forty places in the\nEnglish version of the Bible does not differ in the original from the\nword \"house,\" which is found in about three thousand five hundred\npassages in the Bible. The terms \"tent,\" \"house,\" \"place of\nresidence,\" {244} and the phrases, \"to go to his kindred,\" \"to return\nto his place,\" etc., are all translated \"home,\" and \"go home.\"\n\nTo the Oriental the word \"house\" is very precious. It means the place\nof safe retreat (malja). And it is this word which he uses in speaking\nof God as his protector. It means more than \"shelter.\" It is a place\nof protection and comfort. The word \"refuge\" is a more suitable\nequivalent. In that contentious East we always thought of a safe\nrefuge in time of trouble. Every family of the common people\n\"belonged\" to some powerful lord who was its refuge in time of danger.\nHe was strong, rich, compassionate. He protected his own. How much\nstronger, richer, and more compassionate, therefore, is the Lord of\nHosts! The needy and much terrified Oriental discovered long ago the\nfrailty of all earthly shelters. The King of Kings and the Lord of\nHosts was his never-failing refuge. The trustful contemplation of God\nas an ever-present helper has steadied the faltering steps of countless\ngenerations. \"The {245} Lord is my rock, and my fortress, and my\ndeliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and\nthe horn[2] of my salvation, and my high tower.\"[3] \"God is our refuge\nand strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore will not we\nfear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried\ninto the midst of the sea.\"[4]\n\nIs it not really worth while to fear and to suffer, if by so doing one\nis brought so close to God? The writer of the one hundred and\nnineteenth Psalm had the world in his debt when he turned his inward\nvision toward the Most High and prayed:[5] \"It is good for me that I\nhave been afflicted; that I might learn thy statutes. The law of thy\nmouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver.\" And who\ncan estimate the debt which humanity owes to the Sufferer of Calvary?\n\n\n\n[1] Ps. lxi: 3.\n\n[2] The \"horn\" symbolizes strength.\n\n[3] Ps. xviii: 2, 3.\n\n[4] Ps. xlvi: 1, 2.\n\n[5] Ps. cxix: 71, 72.\n\n\n\n\n{246}\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nRESIGNED TRAVELERS\n\nTraveling by the \"Twentieth Century, Limited,\" is fast transit; but,\nexcepting in case of a wreck, the trip is devoid of incident. The\nmechanical perfection of the conveyance, and the infallibility of the\ntime-table reduce journeying to transportation. There is no girding of\nthe loins, no pilgrim's staff, no salutations by the way and no\nwayfarer's song. The journey is not humanized by the tender care for\nthe camel, the mule, and the ass, nor are the hunger and thirst\nsatisfied by the breaking of bread beside the lonely springs of water.\n\nThe terrors and triumphs of St. Paul in his \"journeyings often, in\nperils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own\ncountrymen, in perils by the heathen, ... in weariness and painfulness,\nin watchings often, in hunger and thirst, ... in cold and\nnakedness,\"[1] are all to the {247} modern Western traveler echoes of a\nremote past.\n\nBut such are still the common experiences of the sons of the East. One\nof the heroic wedding songs which was much in vogue in my boyhood days\nwas this (addressed to the bride): \"Thy father, O beauteous one,\njourneyed to Damascus alone!\" Previous to the introduction of the\nrailway train, which now runs between Beyrout and Damascus, the journey\nfrom my home town to the latter city consumed two days. In those days,\nas is still the case in many parts of Syria, men traveled in large\ngroups for mutual protection from the \"hidden dangers of the way,\" and\nhe who journeyed to the ancient city alone was proclaimed hero. My\nmemories of the tales of adventure which I heard the men relate are\nvery thrilling. Tales of encounters with robbers, battles with snakes\nand wild beasts, suffering from the insufficiency of \"the food for the\nway\" (_zad_) and the thirst occasioned by the early \"failure,\" that is,\nthe {248} drying up, of springs of water which had been thought to be\nstill flowing.\n\nOnly those who have traveled under such circumstances can fully\nappreciate the promise given in the fifty-eighth chapter of Isaiah, the\neleventh verse, \"And the Lord shall guide thee continually, and satisfy\nthy soul in drought, and make fat[2] thy bones: and thou shalt be like\na watered garden, and like a spring of water, _whose waters fail not_.\"\n\nThis recalls forcibly to my mind the occasions when in our travels in\nthe late summer we would stand at the parting of two roads and wonder\nwhich one to take. The opinion of the more experienced men in the\nparty, that the spring of water on one of those roads was likely to be\ndry in that season of the year, always turned our steps in the other\ndirection. In that thirsty land such a possibility could not be safely\nignored. In those long summer days, when the mouth of the traveler on\nthe dusty roads of Syria \"turns bitter from the thirst,\" the arrival\n{249} at a spring which had \"failed\" is almost a tragic experience.\nHence it is that the \"springs of water\" are one of the precious\npromises of the Bible, and their failure was one of the fearful threats.\n\nIt was indeed a call to his disciples to make the great renunciation\nwhen Jesus sent them out to preach the glad tidings of the kingdom\nwhich was \"at hand,\" with the command, \"Provide neither gold, nor\nsilver, nor brass in your purses, nor scrip for your journey, neither\ntwo coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves.\"[3] So far as the comforts\nand protection that earthly things can give, those disciples were sent\nout perfectly helpless. The Master's programme for those disciples is\njust the antithesis of that which an ordinary Oriental traveler follows.\n\nNo traveler in the interior of Syria ever starts out on a journey, be\nit short or long, without _zad_. True, Syrian generosity to a wayfarer\nis to be depended upon, but the traditions of the country are that\nself-respect requires that a {250} traveler shall provide himself with\n_zad_, and shall accept hospitality only as a last resort. The best\netiquette requires that when a traveler is invited to another's table,\nhe should take out his _zad_ and place it before him. The host, on the\nother hand, positively refuses to allow his chance guest to eat of his\nown _zad_. The host removes the _zad_ from the table, and either adds\nto it and gives it to the guest upon his departure or gives him a new\n_zad_. Without scrip, the traveler seems to himself to be utterly a\ndependent, a beggar, and not a guest.\n\n\"Put up a few loaves for _zad_,\" is the first thing said when a person\nis about to start out on a journey. The thin loaves are folded into\nsmall bundles, which may contain such delicacies as ripe black olives,\ncheese, boiled eggs, and figs conserved in grape molasses, and wrapped\nup in a large napkin, which the traveler ties around his waist, with\nthe bread on the back. The bread is often carried in a leather bag\n(_jerab_). This is the \"scrip\" and \"wallet\" of the Gospel command. On\na long {251} journey, say of a day or more, the thin bread dries up and\nbreaks into small pieces. A dry and crumby _zad_ indicates a long\njourney. The Gibeonites certainly \"did work wilily\" when they used\ntheir dry and broken bread as a means to deceive Joshua. Although they\nwere Israel's near neighbors, by carrying dry crumbs in their bags and\nsaying to Joshua upon their arrival at his camp, \"This our bread we\ntook hot for our provision out of our houses on the day we came forth\nto go unto you; but now, behold, it is dry, and it is mouldy,\"[4] made\nhim and \"the princes of the congregation\" believe that the wily\ntravelers had come from a distant country. The English translation,\nhowever, by using the word \"mouldy\" introduces a foreign element into\nthe text. In the dry climate of Palestine the bread does not get\n_mouldy_ on a journey, but it dries up and crumbles into small\nfragments, as every Syrian knows. The Arabic version has it, \"This our\nbread ... is now dry and in crumbs [_fetat_].\"\n\n{252}\n\n\"Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses.\" The\noriginal text has \"girdles\" instead of \"purses.\" While traveling in\nthe East we always carried our money in the girdle and only a few coins\nin the purse. The girdle of the present day is a stout woolen or\ncotton belt, which is called, in the vernacular Arabic, _kummer_. It\nis worn under the sash, and the longest specimen of it measures about\nfive feet. It is double to the length of about thirty inches. The two\nfolds are very securely sewed together at the edge, and only a small\nopening provided near the buckle, through which the money is inserted.\nThe double part, containing the money, is first fastened around the\nwaist by means of a short leather buckle, then the single part is wound\nover it. It may be seen here that in case of an encounter with\nrobbers, the money cannot be snatched from its owner until he is\ncompletely subdued by his antagonist.\n\nThe common people of Syria speak of the _kummer_ as of a man's\nfinancial strength. There are practically no \"bank accounts.\" \"How is\n{253} the _kummer_?\" means, \"How do you stand financially?\" To tap the\n_kummer_ cheerfully indicates good circumstances. It is joy and glory\nfor a youth when he reaches the age when he may have a _kummer_. The\nthrill of satisfaction which that possession gives still lingers with\nme. It was as much of a sign of maturity and independence for me to\ntap that Scriptural girdle which I wore, when I had money in it, as to\nswear by my newly sprouting mustache. It was my treasure!\n\nFrom all this it may be noted that the Master's command, \"Provide\nneither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your girdles,\" meant, not only\nto carry no money on their missionary journey, but to seek and _horde_\nno money. An Oriental's girdle is his bank.\n\nThe part of the command which says, \"Neither two coats,\" means two\nchanges of clothing. The thing sought here, however, as well as in the\nsaying, \"Neither shoes,\" is not the abandonment of the necessary\nwearing apparel, but willing self-denial.\n\n{254}\n\n\"Nor yet staves.\" The staff, or the \"stick of travel,\" is the symbol\nof journeying in Syria. There, _Elkeina el'asa_ (rested the staff)\nmeans we reached the end of our journey. _El'asa_ (staff) occupies a\nsignificant place in Syrian lore. It is difficult for me to imagine a\nSyrian starting on a journey without an _asa_. The Israelites were\ngiven explicit directions concerning their preparations for the journey\non the eve of their exodus from Egypt. They were told[5] to eat the\nlamb of the passover \"with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet,\n_and your staff in your hand_.\"\n\nIn our travels in Syria the staff was to us a most valuable support in\nclimbing the steep hills, crossing the streams of water, battling with\nsnakes and ferocious dogs, and with highway robbers. \"The staff is a\ncompanion\" is a current saying in the land. The disciples were\ncommanded in this manner to detach themselves from the material\ninterests of this world, and to give themselves wholly to the preaching\n{255} of the kingdom. In their need and in their weakness they were to\nbe rich and strong through their vision of the eternal realities.\n\nIn the tenth chapter of St. Luke's Gospel, Jesus' commission to the\ndisciples contains the command, \"And salute no man by the way.\" It\nwould seem strange, indeed, that those messengers of peace and\ngood-will, who were being sent out to spread the leaven of friendliness\nand good cheer in the world, should be enjoined by their Master to\nsalute no man by the way. But when it is known in what manner the\nOrientals salute one another on those weary journeys, the Gospel\nrestriction will not seem so very strange. Wayfarers in the East do\nnot content themselves with the severely brief Western salutation, \"How\nd' you do; nice day,\" and then pass on. The Oriental salutation is a\ncopious flow of soul, whose intimacy and inquisitiveness are quite\nstrange to the mentality of the West.\n\nWhen the ways of two travelers converge, or the one overtakes the\nother, and they decide to _yatrafeko_ (be companion the one to the\nother) {256} and \"wear away the road in friendly speech,\" the\nsalutation runs as follows:--\n\n\"_Allah y'atek el'afieh_ [May God give you health and strength].\"\n\n\"_Allah y'afie imrak_ [May God refresh and strengthen your life].\"\n\n\"Whence has your excellent presence [_heth-retek_] come, and whither\nare you facing?\"\n\n\"From Nazareth have I come, and am facing towards Damascus.\"\n\n\"What is the precious name?\"\n\n\"Your humble servant Mas'ud, son of Yusuf of the clan of Ayyub [Job].\"\n\n\"_Wann'am, wann'am_ [All honor, all honor]!\"\n\n\"_Wann'am_ to your excellent presence, and your respected clan!\"\n\n\"What are your years?\"\n\n\"My years, friend, are four and thirty.\"\n\n\"May your life be long and happy!\"\n\n\"May Allah lengthen your days!\"\n\n\"What children have you?\" (It is taken for granted that a man of that\nage has been long since married.)\n\n{257}\n\n\"Three sons in the keeping of God.\"\n\n\"Long life to them and health and happiness!\"\n\n\"What men does your clan count?\"\n\n\"We turn out _seb'een baroody_ [seventy shotguns].\"\n\n\"_Seb'een baroody_! Valiant men. What enemies have you in your native\ntown?\"\n\n\"Our chief enemy is the clan of Haddad. They turn out one hundred\n_baroody_, but whenever the iron gets hot [that is, whenever a fight\noccurs] we shatter their forces.\"\n\nThus the mutually complimentary conversation and the searching of\nhearts continue until each of the travelers is thoroughly informed\nconcerning the personal, domestic, and social affairs of the other.\nThe trade, the income, the profession, the cares and anxieties, and\neven the likes and dislikes of each are made known to the other before\ntheir ways part.\n\nHence the Master's command, \"Salute no man by the way.\" Surely the\nintention was not to be rude and unfriendly to fellow travelers, {258}\nbut to be completely absorbed by the glorious message of the Gospel.\nThe command was given because \"the king's business required haste.\"\nEven an Oriental must quicken his pace when his mission is \"to seek and\nto save that which was lost.\"\n\n\n\n[1] 2 Cor. xi: 26, 27.\n\n[2] The Arabic and the Revised Versions: \"make strong.\"\n\n[3] Matt. x: 9, 10.\n\n[4] Joshua ix: 12.\n\n[5] Exod. xii: 11.\n\n\n\n\n{259}\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nTHE MARKET PLACE\n\nI cannot think of the market place in the East without at the same time\nthinking of the camel caravan. In many parts of Syria, the arrival of\nthe caravan makes the market. _El-habbet_ (the grain) is the chief\ncommodity, and the camel is the chief carrier. In very recent years\nthe railway train has to a certain extent taken from the camel his\nancient occupation, but it has by no means completely supplanted the\n\"ship of the desert.\"\n\nThe coming of camel caravans from the \"land of the east\" to our Lebanon\ntown, laden with the \"blessed grain,\" is one of my most enchanted\nmemories of outdoor life in Syria. The sight of a train of camels,\nwith their curved necks bridging the spaces between them, suggests to\nthe beholder an endless line. It is not at all surprising to me to\nread the assertion of the writer of the seventh chapter of the Book of\n{260} Judges, where he speaks of the Midianites and Amalekites, that\n\"their camels were without number, as the sand of the sea-side for\nmultitude.\" It seems to me that it does not require more than a train\nof one hundred camels to convey the idea of endlessness.\n\nAt the first glimpse of the approaching caravan we boys would swarm to\nthe _saha_ (the open space) of the town. There the caravan unloads,\nand awaits the buyers of wheat. It makes me long for my early years\nwhen I read in the twenty-fourth chapter of the Book of Genesis the\nstory of Abraham's servant when he journeyed to Mesopotamia. \"And the\nservant took ten camels of the camels of his master and departed....\nAnd he made his camels to kneel down without the city by a well of\nwater at the time of the evening, even the time that women go out to\ndraw water.\" It is decidedly thrilling to hear the cameleer say, _ich,\nich, i--ch--ch!_ and pull at the halter of his camel to make him\n\"kneel.\" And, with a friendly roar, the great beast drops, first\nforward on his huge, thick, {261} hardened knees, then comes down on\nhis haunches, and then, swaying in all directions, like an island\nshaken by an earthquake, rests his enormous body on the ground.\n\n\"At the time of the evening [in the late afternoon], even the time that\nwomen go out to draw water,\" the camels are led to the fountains to be\nwatered. The ancient writer's reference to \"the time that women go out\nto draw water\" is to a Syrian as definite as the reference to a Swiss\nclock. _Wakket elmeliah_ (the time to fill the jars) is in the early\nmorning and the late afternoon. For obvious reasons the women choose\nthe \"cool of the day\" for carrying their heavy jars of water from the\nfountain to the house. The Syrian women have faithfully kept this\ncustom from before the days of Abraham. And it is in the cool of the\nday that the cameleers also deem it best to water their precious\nanimals. The women always view this event with disfavor. The thirsty\ncamels completely drain the pond into which the surplus water of the\nslender fountain flows, and which the {262} housewives put to other\nhousehold uses than drinking. No doubt the ancient Israelitish women\nin certain sections of Palestine grumbled when the cameleers drew\nheavily out of the wells on which the home-makers depended entirely for\ntheir water supply.\n\nBut to us boys the occasion was festive. By bribing the cameleers with\ngifts of grapes, figs, raisins, or any other sweets, for which the\ncraving of the Bedouins is proverbial, we were allowed to mount the\ncamels and lead them to the water. It may be true, as some scholars\nassert, that the swaying walk of the camel first quickened the measured\nsong of the Arab, but my first camel ride was anything but poetical. I\nhad, upon the arrival of the caravan, smuggled from our store of\nraisins two large pocketfuls, the one with which to bribe the Bedouin\nto give me a ride, the other to eat while on the camel's back, like a\ngay rider. As I climbed confidently on the wooden saddle of the\nkneeling beast, the Arab, who was already devouring the raisins, stems\nand all, by the handful, gave {263} the familiar signal, _tshew,\ntshew_, and instantly the thirsty camel rose and flew toward the\nfountain. I felt as if my brain was being torn off its base. I lost\nthe sense of direction, and seemed to myself to be suspended between\nearth and heaven, tossed by violent winds. I screamed; but the Bedouin\nwould not let me down until I promised him the other pocketful of\nraisins.\n\nIn Syria the _s\u00fbk_ (market place) is more than a place of exchange of\ncommodities. It is rather an occasion of varied business and social\ninterests. The Oriental knows no business without sociability. His\n_dekkan_ (store) is a gathering-place for friends, and a business\ntransaction with him, especially in the interior of the country, is\nalmost always preceded by a friendly visit with the customer. So the\nmarket is a place where the dignitaries of the town meet and exchange\nsalutations and discuss various interests. The social nature of such\noccasions is indicated in Jesus' warning to his disciples, \"Beware of\nthe scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and _love salutations\nin the {264} marketplaces_.\"[1] Apparently those teachers of Israel\nwere very frequent visitors at the markets, where men of all classes\npaid them the homage which their calling, if not their person, merited.\nIn the past the Arab markets were also significant conventions of\nliterary men, especially poets. Discussions of all sorts of subjects\nare carried on at the market. So it was in Athens in Paul's time,\nwhere he \"disputed ... in the market daily with them that met with\nhim.\"[2] And, of course, the children love to gather in the market\nplace, play their pranks, and watch the interesting activities of their\nelders. It was to such a crowd of youngsters that Jesus likened the\nfickle and peevish men of his time. In the eleventh chapter of St.\nMatthew's Gospel, the sixteenth verse, he says, \"But whereunto shall I\nliken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the\nmarkets, and calling unto their fellows, and saying, We have piped unto\nyou, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not\nlamented.\"\n\n{265}\n\nTo my youthful mind the chief charm of the market place was the\n_keyyal_ (measurer). The strong man who measured the wheat will live\nin my memory as long as life endures. He it is who gives the \"good\nmeasure, pressed down, shaken together, running over.\" In Syria the\ncustom is that every measure must run over. Friendship must forever be\nmixed with business. Liquid measures, also, of such things as milk and\noil, must run over a little into the vessel of the buyer, for \"with\nwhat measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.\"[3]\n\nAfter the price has been agreed upon, the sturdy cameleer spreads his\nample cloak on the ground and pours the golden grain in a heap upon it.\nThe _keyyal_ kneels by the little hillock of wheat, and, naming the\nHoly Name, thrusts the _midd_ (a wooden measure) into the precious\nwheat. The grain is sacred; therefore, the language of the _keyyal_\nmust be pious. As he tosses the first measure into the buyer's bag, or\nthe skirt of his cloak, he says, \"Blessing!\" that {266} means \"One\";\n\"From God\" means \"Two.\" Then the counting is continued in the ordinary\nlanguage--three, four, and so on.\n\nAfter it is first thrust into the heap of wheat, the _midd_, about half\nfull, is whirled around on its bottom, lifted slightly from the ground\nand dropped several times. The _keyyal_, constantly repeating the\nnumber of the _midds_ he has already measured, \"lest he forget,\" pours\nthe wheat into the measure with his hands, packs it down with his\npalms, and all his strength. He whirls the _midd_ round again, shakes\nit, presses it, and again heaps the wheat, pyramid-like, above the rim.\nThe circular shower of the golden grain falls gently over the edges.\nThe artful _keyyal_ pours small handfuls of wheat with his right hand\ninto his left, which is formed into a funnel over the apex of the\nheaped _midd_, until the point is \"as sharp as a needle's.\" Then with\nswift deftness, which elicits the admiration of the spectators, he\nlifts the heaped measure and tosses it into the bag, without allowing a\nsingle grain to fall outside.\n\n{267}\n\nWith what telling effect and rich simplicity does the Master allude to\nthis custom of measuring grain in the Eastern markets. In the sixth\nchapter of St. Luke's Gospel, the command and the promise are, \"Give,\nand it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken\ntogether, and running over, shall men give into your bosom.\" But the\nword \"bosom\" here somewhat weakens the sense of the text. I do not\nknow why the English translators used it in place of the original word\n\"lap.\" The Oriental does not carry grain in his _bosom_, but in the\nskirt of his ample garments, much as a woman carries things in the fold\nof her apron. Again the word \"lap\" is used here in another and a more\nsignificant sense. It is the symbol of plentifulness; just as the\n\"bosom\" is the symbol of affection. The generous measure, even though\nit be poured into one's bag, as a _blessing_, may be said to be given\ninto his _lap_.\n\nHere again, as in many other Scriptural passages, Jesus gives the ideal\nspiritual touch to the common things of life. Here an ordinary {268}\nact is made the symbol of the fullness of the spiritual life. He whose\nlife is like the divine Parent's life--a perpetual outgoing and an\neverlasting gift--shall never lack anything. Men will be taught by his\ngenerosity how to be generous themselves, and the divine Giver will\ngive him of the fullness of his own life. There is no void which the\ndivine life cannot fill, no need which it cannot meet, and no hunger\nwhich it cannot satisfy.\n\n\n\n[1] Mark xii: 38.\n\n[2] Acts xvii: 17.\n\n[3] Matt. vii: 2.\n\n\n\n\n{269}\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nTHE HOUSETOP\n\nWhile a caravan of camels needs no other means than its own majestic\nappearance to herald its arrival into a town, muleteer merchants shout\ntheir wares from the housetop. Upon the arrival of a muleteer into the\n_saha_ of the town with a load of lentils, potatoes, apricots, or any\nother commodity, he \"drops the load\" from the animal's back onto the\nground, and goes upon the roof of the nearest house and proclaims his\nwares at the top of his voice, in prolonged strains. To reach the flat\nearthen roof of the one-story Syrian house needs no extension ladder.\nIt is so easily and quickly reached by the few rough stone steps in the\nrear of the house that Jesus, in speaking of the incredibly swift\ncoming of the \"end\" in the twenty-fourth chapter in St. Matthew's\nGospel, says, \"Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take\nany thing out of his {270} house.\" So sudden was to be the\nconsummation of the Eternal's design, \"because iniquity shall abound,\nand the love of many shall wax cold,\" that even the short distance\nbetween the housetop and the ground could not be safely traversed by\nthose who cared for earthly possessions.\n\nThe ease with which the roof of an ordinary Syrian house is reached\naccounts also for the carrying of the man who was \"sick of the palsy\"\nupon the housetop. The account in the second chapter of St. Mark's\nGospel, the third and fourth verses, runs, \"And they came unto him,\nbringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they\ncould not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof\nwhere he was; and when they had broken it up [the Arabic, \"broken\nthrough\"], they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay.\"\n\nThis account describes perfectly the process of making an opening in a\nSyrian roof.\n\nIn St. Luke's Gospel, however, the statement {271} is:[1] \"And when\nthey could not find by what way they might bring him in because of the\nmultitude, they went upon the housetop, and let him down through the\n_tiling_ with his _couch_ into the midst before Jesus.\" The coloring\nhere is decidedly Roman and not Syrian. The writer of Luke was a Latin\nChristian. He related the incident in terms which were easily\nunderstood by his own people. The Syrians never covered their roof\nwith tiles nor slept on couches. Mark's account speaks of uncovering\nthe _roof_ and letting down the _bed_. The Syrian roof is constructed\nas follows: The main timbers which carry the roof covering are laid\nacross, horizontally, at intervals of about two to three feet.\nCrosswise over the timbers are laid the _khasheb_ (sticks long enough\nto bridge the spaces between) quite close together. Over the _khasheb_\nreeds and branches of trees and thistles are laid, and the whole is\ncovered with about twelve inches of earth. The dirt is rolled down by\na stone roller and made hard enough to {272} \"shed water.\" In many\nhouses during the summer season an opening, called _qafa'a_, is made in\nthe roof for the purpose of letting down the grain and other provisions\nwhich are dried in the sun on the housetop. The space between the\ntimbers admits easily the large basket called _sell_, which is as big\naround as a bushel basket.\n\nNow, those who let down the palsied man either made an entirely new\nopening in the roof, or simply extended the _qafa'a_ enough to admit\nthe unfortunate man in his folded quilt or thick cushion, tied by the\nfour corners. And it was this which Jesus commanded him to carry, when\nhe said to him, \"Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk.\" From the\nforegoing it may be seen that a couch could not have been so easily let\ndown through the roof, nor _carried_ by the newly healed man.\n\nSleeping on the housetop in the summer season is an Oriental custom the\nadvantage of which the Occident has just \"discovered.\" To use the\nroofs of high buildings in American cities as sleeping quarters is a\n\"new\" suggestion of {273} that genius known as the \"social reformer.\"\nTo the ancient East, \"there is nothing new under the sun.\" However, to\ndwell on the housetop is an expression which symbolizes desolation.\nNevertheless the writer of Proverbs says:[2] \"It is better to _dwell_\nin a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman in a wide\nhouse.\"\n\nFrom the housetop the muleteer merchant shouts his wares; from the\nhousetop men call one another for various purposes; from the housetop\nthe _nowateer_ (men appointed by the municipality to watch the\nvineyards) proclaim the names of trespassers; and from that elevation\nthe special orders of the governor of the district are proclaimed to\nthe populace. By night or by day, whenever we heard a voice calling\nfrom a housetop, we instinctively listened most intently in order to\ncatch the message. The voice of the crier is so much like a distant,\nprolonged railway whistle that in my first few years in America,\nwhenever I heard {274} such a sound, especially in the night, I\nlistened involuntarily, expecting to hear a message.\n\nHow often must Jesus have heard the free and full voice of the crier\nfrom the housetop! How it must have appealed to him as the very\nantithesis of the whisperings of fear, cowardice, and doubt, may be\nrealized from his command to his disciples. In the tenth chapter of\nSt. Matthew's Gospel we read Christianity's declaration of\nindependence. Here the antagonism of the world is portrayed with\ncomplete fullness. \"Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of\nwolves.\" \"Ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.\" \"Fear\nthem not ... for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed;\nand hid, that shall not be known.\" In the face of all hatred and\ndanger and death the Master's command to those who carried the\nworld-transcending message, the supreme treasure of time and eternity,\nwas, \"What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what ye\nhear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetop.\"\n\n{275}\n\nIn the rainless Syrian summer the housetop is used for various\nhousehold purposes. The grass which grows on the earthen roof,\nespecially on its thick edges, withers early in the season. To this\nthe Scripture alludes in several places where it speaks of the enemies\nof Israel as being \"like the grass upon the housetops, which withereth\nafore it groweth up.\" In some cases the whole roof is plastered with\nclay mortar and used for drying grain, fruits, and vegetables. Also in\nthe summer season the housetop is used for holding wedding festivities\nand funeral gatherings, which almost all the adult inhabitants of the\ntown are supposed to attend. With solemn brevity does the prophet\nJeremiah refer to this custom in the forty-eighth chapter, and the\nthirty-eighth verse. The more accurate rendering of the Revised\nVersion is: \"_On all the housetops_ of Moab and in the streets thereof\nthere is lamentation every where.\"\n\nThe custom of praying on the housetop, which has come down from the\ntime when the Syrians worshiped the \"hosts of heaven,\" still {276}\nsurvives in the East. In the first chapter of the Book which bears his\nname, the prophet Zephaniah threatens with the awful retribution of\nJehovah those who indulged in this practice. \"I will also stretch out\nmine hand upon Judah, and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and I\nwill cut off the remnant of Baal from this place ... and _them that\nworship the host of heaven upon the housetops_.\" This custom survives\nin Syria, although much less extensively than in the past, and it is\n\"the God of the whole earth\" that is worshiped, and not the host of\nheaven. With much reverential regard I still remember an old neighbor\nof ours, a devout Maronite, a man who really feared God and worked\nrighteousness, whose habit was to say his evening prayer upon the\nhousetop.\n\nOf all the rich treasures of our Scriptures, few perhaps are more\nprecious and dearer to Christian hearts than the record of Peter's\nvision while in the city of Joppa, and which is so intimately\nassociated with that low, flat, earthen Syrian roof. The tenth chapter\nof the Book of {277} Acts hints at the broader and more profound spirit\nwhich had begun to agitate the inner life of the \"very small remnant\"\nof expectant souls in Israel. The wider horizon which the Christ of\nGod had revealed to his Jewish disciples had engendered serious doubts\nin their minds with regard to the exclusive claims of Judaism to the\nblessings of the Messianic kingdom. The spirit of the Beatitudes and\nthe Parables was resistlessly pressing the claims of all the eager\nGentiles to a share in those blessings. No doubt the soul of Peter,\nthe ultra-conservative disciple, was rent in twain and wavered in its\nallegiance between the old claims of a \"chosen people\" and the new\nvision of a universal kingdom founded on purity of heart and hunger and\nthirst after righteousness.\n\nIt would seem that while in such a state of mind, and after the\nOriental custom, \"Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the\nsixth hour;[3] and he became very hungry, and {278} would have eaten:\nbut while they made ready, he fell into a trance, and saw heaven\nopened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a\ngreat sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth;\nwherein were all manner of four-footed beasts of the earth, and wild\nbeasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a\nvoice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so,\nLord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And\nthe voice spake unto him the second time, What God hath cleansed, that\ncall not thou common.\"\n\nPeter obeyed. That Oriental, who was not afraid of the mystic\nrevelations of God's designs took the lesson to heart. Presently we\nsee this conservative Jew again at the home of Cornelius, the Roman,\nand hear him interpret his own vision. \"Of a truth,\" he said to the\nRoman soldier, \"I perceive that God is no {279} respecter of persons:\nbut in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is\naccepted with him.\" Here we have the sure basis of Christian unity and\nthe unshaken foundation of a human commonwealth. \"Other foundation can\nno man lay.\" When all the sects and nations who profess to be the\nfollowers of Jesus Christ respond to this Scriptural summons, and give\ndecent burial to their divisive creeds, however \"authoritative\" they\nmight think them to be, then will the world have valid reason to expect\nswords to be beaten into ploughshares, and to hope for the coming of\nGod's kingdom upon the earth.\n\n\n\n[1] Luke v: 19.,\n\n[2] Prov. xxi: 9.\n\n[3] The noon hour, according to Oriental calculation: Timepieces are\nset at twelve, at sunset. Six o'clock is the hour of midnight and\nmidday. The time kept by Western peoples is known in Syria as\n_affrenje_. So the laborers who came to work at \"the eleventh hour,\"\nas it is mentioned in Matthew, the twentieth chapter, and the ninth\nverse, came one hour before sunset.\n\n\n\n\n{280}\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nTHE VINEYARDS AND THE FIELDS\n\nFrom time immemorial the vine and the fig tree have been the Oriental's\nchief joy. Together with their actual value they possessed for him a\nsacred symbolic value, especially the vine. The fullness and sweetness\nof their fruits symbolized the joys of the kingdom of heaven. The\nmystery of the wine cup, which the world has so sadly vulgarized,\nremains very sacred to the Oriental. Christ used \"the fruit of the\nvine,\" or, as the Arabic version has it, the _yield_ of the\nvine,--meaning the wine, and not grapes,--as the visible means of\nspiritual communion. In the fifteenth chapter of St. John's Gospel the\nMaster says, \"I am the vine, ye are the branches.\" This usage was no\ndoubt extant in the East before Christ. The vine, as a symbol of\nspiritual as well as physical family unity, is spoken of in the Old\nTestament. Israel's was Jehovah's vine. \"Thou hast brought a vine out\nof Egypt\" is the {281} plaintive cry of the writer of the eightieth\nPsalm: \"thou hast cast out the heathen, and planted it. Thou preparest\nroom before it, and didst cause it to take deep root, and it filled the\nland.... Return, we beseech thee, O God of hosts: look down from\nheaven, and behold, and visit this vine; and the vineyard which thy\nright hand hath planted.\"\n\nWe always thought and spoke of the Church as \"the vine which God has\nplanted.\" The chanting of the foregoing words of the Psalmist by our\npriest of the Greek Orthodox Church, with his hand uplifted over the\nsolemnly silent congregation, remains one of the most beautiful\nmemories of my youth. We spoke also of the family as a vine. One of\nthe tenderest passages in the whole Bible is the third verse of the one\nhundred and twenty-eighth Psalm: \"Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine\nby the sides of thine house: thy children like olive plants round about\nthy table.\"\n\n\"They shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and\nnone shall make them {282} afraid,\"[1] is Micah's vision of peace and\nsecurity. To a Syrian in America the reading of this passage is\nstrongly conducive to homesickness. To sit in the luxuriant shade of\nthe fig tree was a daily blessing to us in the summer season. It must\nhave been in that season of the year that Jesus first met Nathanael.\nIn the first chapter of St. John's Gospel we read: \"Jesus saw Nathanael\ncoming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is\nno guile! Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus\nanswered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, _when thou\nwast under the fig tree, I saw thee_.\"\n\nI have no doubt that Nathanael's habit of sitting under the fig tree\nwas one of the characteristics which made him \"an Israelite indeed.\"\n\nThe wine press is an ancient landmark in Syrian life, and one of the\nmost picturesque features of the Scriptures. The word \"press\" is\nlikely to be misleading in this mechanical age. The grapes are not\n_pressed_ by any mechanical {283} contrivance, but are trodden with the\nfeet. Therefore, to the Orientals the wine press is _ma'sara_\n(squeezing place). The grapes are thrown in a heap in a stone-flagged\nenclosure about the size of an ordinary room, and trodden by the men in\ntheir bare feet. Much gayety characterizes the _ma'sara_ season. The\nwork is carried on day and night until all the grapes which had been\ngathered by the various families for the _ma'sara_ are converted into\nwine and molasses. The quaint songs and stories which I always loved\nto hear the \"treaders\" exchange, as they walked back and forth over the\ngrapes, come to me now like the echoes of a remote past. And as I\nrecall how at the end of a long \"treading\" those men came out with\ntheir garments spattered with the rich juice of the grapes of Lebanon,\nthe words of Isaiah--\"Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy\ngarments _like him that treadeth the wine fat_?\"[2]--breathe real life\nfor me.\n\nBut in this age of rampant microbiology I {284} introduce this subject\nwith at least an implied apology. The picture of men treading grapes\nin this manner and under such circumstances will not, I fear, appeal\nstrongly to the \u00e6sthetic sense of my readers. Nevertheless, all the\nScriptural wine, including the cup of the Last Supper, was produced in\nthis way. To the Orientals the mystic fermentation and the fire purify\nthe juice of the vine. The precious juice runs from the wide,\nstone-flagged enclosure into deep wells, where it is allowed to become\n_rawook_ (clear juice). The fresh _rawook_ is considered a delicious\ndrink. One of Job's bitter complaints against those who oppressed the\npoor was that those unfortunates were made to \"tread the wine presses,\nand _suffer thirst_.\"[3] Having been allowed thoroughly to settle, the\njuice is then heated according as to whether the wine is to be \"sweet\"\nor \"bitter.\" The longer the juice is boiled the sweeter the wine.\nSweet wine is called _khemer niswani_ (woman wine); the men, as a rule,\npreferring the \"bitter\" wine. In {285} making molasses of the grape\njuice, fine white clay is scattered over the grapes before they are\ntrodden, in order to hasten and insure a perfect settling of all the\ncoarse organic matter while the juice is in the \"clearing wells.\"\n\n\nI often wonder whether it is because the memories of youth grow more\nromantic with the passing of the years, that the agricultural life of\nthe Orient seems to me more poetical than that of the Occident, or\nwhether it really is more enchanting. It seems to me that tools\npossess more charms than machinery does, and handwork of the more\ninstinctive type is much more interesting than the carefully studied\nand designed task. The life of the American farmer is too intelligent\nto be romantic. There is so much in him of the agricultural college\nand the farm journal. No awful mysteries haunt his scientifically\ntreated fields. Insect powders and the daily weather report and the\nmarket \"quotations\" arm him with forethought, and make of him a\nspeculating merchant. The constant {286} improvements of agricultural\nimplements place a wide and ever-widening gulf between the American\nfarmer and his forefathers.\n\nNot so with the Syrian farmer. To this man life is not an evolution,\nbut an inheritance. If the men who tilled Abraham's fields in Hebron\nshould rise from the dead to-day, they would find that the four\nthousand years of their absence from the earth had effected no\nessential changes in the methods and means of farming in the \"land of\npromise.\" They would lay their hand to the plough and proceed to\nperform their daily tasks, as though nothing had happened. A very few\nEuropean ploughs are being tried in certain sections of Syria, but that\nis all.\n\nThe Syrian sower goes forth to sow with his long, primitive plough on\nhis right shoulder, the yoke hanging from the left shoulder and the\nleather bag of seed strapped to his back. In his left hand he carries\nhis long, hard, strong goad--the same as the one with which \"Shamgar,\nson of Anath, slew of the Philistines six hundred men.\" Through this\nsimple instrument he keeps {287} in touch with his pair of oxen, or\ncows, which pace leisurely before him. The plough, which consists of\ntwo wooden beams joined together, measures about twelve feet in length.\nThe quantity of wood in the Syrian plough makes plain the meaning of\nthe passage in the story of the prophet Elisha, son of Shaphat. In the\nnineteenth chapter of the First Book of Kings, the nineteenth verse, we\nhave the account of Elijah's first meeting with his successor Elisha,\nwhen he was ploughing in the field, \"with twelve yoke of oxen before\nhim, and he with the twelfth.\" So, when Elijah cast his mantle upon\nhim, the son of Shaphat \"took a yoke of oxen, and slew them, _and\nboiled their flesh with the instruments of the oxen_, and gave unto the\npeople, and they did eat. Then he arose, and went after Elijah, and\nministered unto him.\"\n\nAt the forward end the long plough is hooked to the yoke, and at the\nrear end joined to a cross-piece, whose upper extremity forms the\n_cabousa_ (handle); and the lower holds the iron ploughshare. When he\nputs \"his hand to the {288} plough,\" he simply grasps the _cabousa_\nwith his right hand while he wields the goad with his left. The\nuneven, stony ground and the lightness of the plough compel him to\nmaintain a firm hold on it, and to look ever _forward_. In the ninth\nchapter of St. Luke's Gospel, the sixty-second verse, Jesus makes\nexcellent use of this point when he says, \"No man, having put his hand\nto the plough, and _looking back_, is fit for the kingdom of God.\"\n\nThe parable of the sower, in the thirteenth chapter of St. Matthew's\nGospel, is a faithful picture of the environment of the farmer in the\nregion of Galilee and Mount Lebanon. That primitive farmer does not\nsow his seed by means of \"drills\" in symmetrical rows. Out of his\nleathern seed bag he takes generous handfuls of grain and, \"in the name\nof the bounteous God,\" he casts the blessed seed into the soil, and\nthen \"covers it\" by ploughing. The bridle paths which wind through the\nfields, and the still narrower footpaths which the wayfarers make\nthrough those fields every season in {289} taking \"short cuts\" on their\nweary journeys, provide ample chance for \"some seeds\" to fall \"by the\nwayside,\" and be devoured by the fowls of the air. In certain sections\nof the country where I was brought up the \"stony places\" are the rule\nand the \"good ground\" the exception. So the seeds which \"fell upon\nstony places\" came up quickly \"because they had no deepness of earth;\nand when the sun was up, they were scorched.\" There is another reason\nfor this than the shallowness of the soil. The almost utter lack of\nrain in that country from April to October leaves no chance for seed\ncast into shallow soil to live long.\n\n\"And some fell among the thorns; and the thorns sprang up, and choked\nthem.\" For this the Syrian farmer himself is largely to blame. He\npreserves the thorns for cattle feed and for fuel. Certain kinds of\nthorns, especially _bellan_, are used as fuel for summer cooking, which\nis done out of doors, and for baking at the _tenn\u00fbr_.[4] Other thorns\nare harvested, after the barley and {290} wheat harvests, threshed, and\nstored for winter feed. In the sixth verse of the seventh chapter of\nthe Book of Ecclesiastes the writer says, \"For as the crackling of\nthorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fool.\" The threshing of\nthorns is referred to in the Book of Judges,[5] where it says, \"When\nthe Lord hath delivered Zabah and Zalmunna into mine hand, then I will\ntear your flesh with the thorns of the wilderness and with briers.\"\nBut here again the English translation fails to give an exact rendering\nof the text, although the marginal note replaces the word \"tears\" by\nthe word \"thresh.\" The Arabic version says, \"I will _thresh_ your\nflesh with the thorns and briers of the wilderness _with the threshing\nboards_,\" which is an exact picture of the treading of the oxen as they\ndrag the threshing board over the thorns upon the threshing floor.\n\nWhen a boy it was a great delight to me to wander in the wheatfields\nwhen the grain had just passed the \"milk stage\" and had begun to {291}\nmature and harden. It is then called _fereek_, and is delicious to\neat, either raw or roasted. I could subsist a whole day by plucking\nthe heads of wheat, rubbing them in my hand and eating the fat, soft,\nfragrant grain. From time immemorial wayfarers in the East have been\nallowed to trespass in this manner, provided they carried no more grain\naway than that which they ate. In the twenty-fifth verse of the\ntwenty-third chapter of the Book of Deuteronomy the reading of the\nRevised Version is, \"When thou comest into thy neighbor's standing\ncorn, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt\nnot move a sickle unto thy neighbor's standing corn.\" It was the\nindulgence in this practice by the disciples, on the Sabbath, which\nformed the basis of the Pharisees' protest to Jesus to the effect that\nhis followers dishonored the sacred day. In the sixth chapter of St.\nLuke's Gospel, the first verse, the Revised Version rendering of the\ntext is, \"Now it came to pass on a sabbath, that he was going through\nthe grainfields and his disciples plucked the {292} ears, and did eat,\nrubbing them in their hands.\" The protest of the guardians of Israel's\nlaw, and Jesus' answer in the verses which follow, give us another\nrevelation of the Master's central thought and motive as a religious\nteacher; namely, that man's legitimate needs take precedence of all\necclesiastical formalities.\n\nI do not believe any account of agricultural life in Syria should omit\nmentioning the plague which above all others strikes terror into the\nheart of the Eastern tiller of the soil. In his prayer at the\ndedication of the temple, Solomon mentions \"blasting, mildew, locust,\nand caterpillar.\"[6] Of all those unwelcome visitors, the locusts are\nthe most abhorred. I will give my impression of this pest in a\nquotation from my autobiography:[7]\n\n\nOne of the never-to-be-forgotten phenomena of my early years, a\nspectacle which the most extravagantly imaginative American mind cannot\npicture, was the coming of the locusts into our part of the country.\nIf my memory serves me well, I was about twelve years old when my\nfather {293} and all his men, together with all the male population\nover fifteen, were impressed by the governor of our district to fight\nthe devastating hosts of Oriental locusts. No one who has not seen\nsuch a spectacle and the desolation those winged creatures leave behind\nthem can appreciate in the least degree the force of the saying of \"The\nLord God of the Hebrews\" to Pharaoh, \"If thou refuse to let my people\ngo, behold, to-morrow I will bring the locusts into thy coasts.\"[8]\nFor a few weeks before they deluged our district the news came with the\ncaravans that the locusts were sweeping toward our region from the\n\"land of the south.\" We youngsters did not know why our elders were so\nterror-stricken when they heard of it, until the scourge had come and\ngone.\n\nIt was a few weeks before the time of the harvest when the clouds of\nlocusts enveloped our community. They hid the sun with their\ngreenish-yellow wings, covered the trees and the ground, the walls and\nroofs of the houses, and dashed in our faces like flakes of snow driven\nby the wind. The utter hopelessness of the task which confronted our\npeople and seemed to unite all classes in despair, assumed in my sight\na very comic aspect, and converted the calamity into a holiday. It was\nso amusing to me to see our sedate aristocrats and old men and women\njoin the youth {294} and the common laborers in shouting, beating on\ntin cans, firing muskets, setting brush on fire, striking at the cursed\ninsects with their hands, stamping them with their feet, and praying\nGod to send \"a strong wind\" to drive the enemy of man away. Every\n_mutekellif_ (payer of the toll-tax) had to fight the locusts for so\nmany days or hire a substitute,\n\nI do not clearly remember whether it was the beating on tin cans and\nhowling of the people or the prayed-for \"strong wind\" that drove the\nmerry locusts away. What I do remember is that when they did go away\nthey left the land almost stripped clean of every green thing.\n\nIt was no vain threatening when the writer of Deuteronomy warned\nIsrael, saying, \"If thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord\nthy God,, to observe to do all his commandments.... All thy trees and\nfruit of thy land shall the locust consume.\"[9]\n\n\n\n[1] Mic. iv: 4.\n\n[2] Is. lxiii: 2.\n\n[3] Job xxiv: 11.\n\n[4] See page 201.\n\n[5] Judges viii: 7.\n\n[6] 1 Kings viii: 37.\n\n[7] _A Far Journey_, page 109, etc.\n\n[8] Exod. x: 40.\n\n[9] Deut. xxvii: 15, 42.\n\n\n\n\n{295}\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nTHE SHEPHERD\n\n\"I am the good shepherd\" is one of Jesus' most tender, most\ncompassionate sayings. The first sixteen verses of the tenth chapter\nof St. John's Gospel, from which this saying comes, should be joined to\nthe twenty-third Psalm. Notwithstanding the fact that John's words are\ntinged with Greek thought, as descriptive of shepherd life in the East,\nthose two portions of Scripture belong together.\n\nThe various phases of shepherd life in Syria are indelibly printed in\nmy memory. Our mountain village home was situated on the upper slope\nof a rather steep hill, at the base of which a thin stream flowed over\nits rocky bed. Across the narrow ravine, on the lower slope of another\nhill, just opposite our home, there were three sheep and goat folds.\nThere for years I watched the shepherds and their flocks go out and\ncome in, morning and evening, from early {296} spring until late\nautumn, when the shepherds dismantled the folds by removing their\nthorny fences, pulled down their rude bowers, and led their flocks to\nthe \"lowlands,\" where they spent the short winter season. The wailing\nof Isaiah, in the twelfth verse of the thirty-eighth chapter (Revised\nVersion), \"My dwelling is removed and is carried away from me as a\nshepherd's tent,\" reminds me very strongly of the easy removal and\ncomplete disappearance of that temporary shelter, which I so often saw\ntorn down and carried away.\n\nWhile at work in the fields cutting stone for my father's building\noperations in various parts of Mount Lebanon, the shepherds were all\naround us. In those days I watched the shepherd lead his flock \"into\nthe waters of rest,\" or the restful, refreshing waters, which the\nEnglish version renders \"still waters.\" I watched him as, by\ninarticulate, deep, guttural sounds, whistling, certain characteristic\nwords which the flock seemed to understand, and the flinging of pebbles\nor \"smooth stones,\" such as those {297} with which David smote Goliath,\nhe guided, I might say invited, the \"blessed creatures,\" into every\nnook and corner among the rocks where there was pasture. It was this\nsolicitous watchfulness of the shepherd which the writer of the\ntwenty-third Psalm had in mind when he said, \"The Lord is my shepherd,\n_I shall not want_.\" In the heat of the day the shepherd made his\nflock \"to lie down\" in the pasture ground, and the \"blessed ones,\" as\nthe shepherd always calls his sheep and goats, would fold their nimble\nlegs and lie down, singly and in small groups, a surpassing picture of\ncontentment, trustfulness, and peace. They seemed to realize that\nalthough they were in the wilderness they had nothing to fear. For the\nloving shepherd, with his strong and heavy staff, was in their midst to\nward off all danger from them.\n\nThe opening verses of the tenth chapter of the Gospel of John contain\nmost significant allusions to the sheepfold. \"Verily, verily, I say\nunto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but\nclimbeth up some other {298} way, the same is a thief and a robber.\"\nHere the reference is to the fold of the dry season, such as those I\nhave already mentioned. The winter sheepfold is a roofed stone hovel\ncalled _merah_. It has one low door and no windows; therefore, by\nclimbing up the fold, \"some other way\" the robber could secure no\nbooty. The roofless fold is called _hedherah_ and is built of rough\nstones (such as are used in New England stone fences) to the height of\nfive feet. Above the stone construction rises a high _seyaj_ (hedge)\nof thorny branches, securely fastened between the stones. It is this\nhedge which is especially designed to prevent the \"thief and robber\"\nfrom climbing into the sheepfold.\n\n\"But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To\nhim the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth\nhis own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.\" The shepherd's rude tent\nis located near the door. There also his faithful dog lies. The word\n\"porter\" in the text refers more, perhaps, to a Greek than Syrian\ncustom. However, in case of {299} large flocks, the under-shepherd, or\nthe \"helper,\" who guards the door, answers to the \"porter.\"\n\nThe calling of the sheep or goats by name should not be taken\nliterally. The animals are not named as persons are. The shepherd\n_knows_ all the members of his flock by certain individual\ncharacteristics, and realizes the fact quickly when one of them is\nlost. The more prominent ones are given adjectival names, such as the\n\"pure white,\" the \"striped,\" the \"black,\" the \"brown,\" the\n\"gray-eared,\" etc. But it should be borne in mind that the saying,\n\"And he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out,\" indicates\nthe tender love of the shepherd for his flock, but not that the animals\nanswer to their names. They are never trained to do that. He \"leadeth\nthem out,\" not by calling their names, but by giving certain sounds\nwhich they recognize.\n\n\"And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the\nsheep follow him: for they know his voice.\" I find that the strong\nemphasis which commentators in general place {300} upon the shepherd's\ngoing _before_ the flock carries the impression that he does so\n_invariably_. So far as I know, this is not absolutely correct. _As a\nrule_, the shepherd goes before the flock, but not infrequently he is\nseen behind it. The shepherd walks behind, especially in the evening\nwhen the flock is on its way to the fold, in order that he may gather\nthe stragglers and protect them from the stealthy wolf. The shepherd\noften walks by the side of the flock, at about the middle of the line.\nIn case of large flocks the shepherd goes before, and the helper behind.\n\nOne of the great delights of my boyhood days was the sight of the\n\"returning flock\" every evening on the pebbly road on the side of the\nhill close by our house. I go up on the housetop at dusk. As soon as\nI hear the swishing roar of the multitude of little sharp hoofs on the\nstony road, which is like the sound of an approaching hailstorm among\nthe trees, then I know that the \"blessed ones\" are near. The long line\nof horny and hornless heads sweeps down the slope {301} of the hill\nlike an army on a \"double-quick.\" With his strong, protecting staff in\nhand, the stalwart, tender, ever-watchful shepherd appears at the end\nof the line, and like an overshadowing Providence _guides_ his beloved\nflock safely over the little stream and into the fold.\n\nThe effective, and, I might say, unerring, guidance of the shepherd is\nespecially shown when he leads his flock in the \"narrow paths.\" In\nSyria as a rule the fields are not fenced. The pastures and the\nplanted fields are separated by narrow footpaths, and here and there by\nlow stone walls, which are intended, however, more for landmarks than\nfor fences. The fields are the forbidden ground. In transferring his\nflock from one pasture to another, the shepherd must not allow any of\nhis animals to stray from the beaten path into the fields. For if he\ndoes, he will not only have to pay damages to the owners of the fields,\nbut will ruin his own reputation as a shepherd. In my home town we had\na shepherd who was widely famed for his skill in leading his flock in\nthe narrow paths. Sa'ied, who {302} supplied our community with goat's\nmilk during the summer, was often known to guide a flock of about one\nhundred and fifty head of goats (which are much more unruly than sheep)\nwithout a helper, in a narrow path or over a stone wall, for a\nconsiderable distance, without allowing a single one of them to set\nfoot on the forbidden ground. The flock obeyed him because they _knew\nhis voice_ as that of their good shepherd.\n\nIt was no doubt such shepherds as Sa'ied that lent the writer of the\ntwenty-third Psalm his telling figure. It was the faithful guidance of\nsuch earthly shepherds that led the ancient singer to meditate upon the\nLord's faithfulness to his own, and to utter his faith in the line, \"He\nleadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.\" The\nfields of temptation lie on either side of the narrow path of rectitude\nand life. The Lord will protect and lead in the right path all those\nwho know Him and hear His voice.\n\nAnother enchanting picture of Syrian pastoral {303} life is the\ngathering of the flock. The shepherd seeks and gathers his sheep for\nthe purpose of transferring them to a richer pasture, or, at the end of\nthe day, to lead them back to the fold. He stands in the midst of the\nfar-scattered flock and gives certain sounds, which are to the sheep\nwhat the notes of a bugle are to an army. His trained right arm, whose\nlong range and precision are proverbial, sends the pebbles whirring in\nall directions, and thus \"turns back\" the more heedless of the flock.\nIt was this which the Psalmist had in mind when he said, \"He restoreth\nmy soul.\" The Arabic phrase _yeriddo nefsee_, means, \"he turns back my\nsoul,\" and refers to the action of the shepherd in turning the course\nof his sheep toward himself. The faithful shepherd never proceeds to\nlead his flock away until he is assured that all his dumb companions\nare gathered together.\n\nWith what pathos does the prophet Ezekiel portray this pastoral scene\nwhen he speaks of the infinite compassion of the divine shepherd of\nIsrael, who never slumbers nor sleeps! In the {304} thirty-fourth\nchapter, the eleventh verse, the promise to scattered Israel is, \"For\nthus saith the Lord God: Behold, I, even I, will both search for my\nsheep, and seek them out. As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the\nday that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out\nmy sheep, and will deliver them out of all the places where they have\nbeen scattered in the cloudy and dark day. And I will bring them out\nfrom the people, and gather them from the countries, and will bring\nthem to their own land, and feed them upon the mountains of Israel by\nthe rivers, and in all the inhabited places of the country. I will\nfeed them in a good pasture, and upon the high mountains of Israel\nshall their fold be; there shall they lie in a good fold, and in a fat\npasture shall they feed upon the mountains of Israel.... I will seek\nthat which was lost, and bring again that which was driven away.\"\n\nThe climax of the shepherd figure, as it is used in the tenth chapter\nof the Gospel of John, is reached in Christ's saying, \"I am the good\n{305} shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep,\" and\nin the twenty-third Psalm, in the passage, \"Though I walk through the\nvalley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for thou art with\nme: thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.\" Only those who have heard\nthe howling of a faithful shepherd at the approach of a wild beast to\nthe flock can clearly realize how literally true is this saying of\nChrist's: \"The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.\"\n\nOf all the shepherds I have known or have known about in my native\nland, the commanding figure of one--Yusuf Balua'--rises most\nprominently before me. I never want to forget old Yusuf. He was over\nsixty when I first knew him. He was every inch a shepherd, having\nknown no other vocation in all his life. I knew that elemental man in\nthe \"lowlands,\" where I spent two winters with my father, who was\ncalled thither to erect several farmhouses for the lord of the land.\nYusuf, as he himself expressed it, \"revered\" my father; therefore, I\n{306} was always welcome to visit Yusuf at his cave in the rocky gorge,\nand to roam with him and his flock whenever my duties as my father's\nhelper permitted.\n\nThe flocks are kept in the \"lowlands\" until after the \"time of birth,\"\nwhich comes in March; then they are led up into the mountains. It was\nduring that blessed time of birth, and while with Yusuf, that I first\nbeheld the original of that infinitely tender picture which is drawn in\nthe fortieth chapter of Isaiah, the eleventh verse, and which is also\nChrist's most appealing picture. \"He shall feed his flock like a\nshepherd,\" says the prophet; \"he shall gather the lambs with his arm,\nand carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with\nyoung.\" The text is very effectively improved by the marginal note\nwhich says, \"and shall gently lead those that _give suck_.\" It was\nthat which Yusuf Balua' was doing once when I happened to be with him.\nHis roughly hewn figure stands now before me, with three newly born\nlambs held close to his bosom, and their {307} wilted heads resting on\nhis massive arm. He walked gently before the anxious, slowly moving\nmothers, which came close behind him, emitting low, humming sounds,\nthrough which Nature poured out her compassionate heart.\n\n\"Let me carry one of them,\" I begged Yusuf. \"No, my boy, not the\nhelpless ones,\" answered the tender friend. \"They need the shepherd's\ncare now. Besides, the mothers don't know you and they would fear.\"\nBut they knew _his_ voice and followed him!\n\nOh, if we will but know and trust and follow our heavenly Shepherd, as\nthe sheep trust and follow theirs!\n\nBut I must not lose sight of what I have called the climax of the\nshepherd figure in the Gospel and the Psalms; namely, the shepherd's\ninterposing with his own life between the flock and the wolf. The\nwolf, the hyena, and the leopard are the flock's most formidable foes.\nDuring his long life Yusuf fought many battles with those ferocious\nbeasts, but never lost a hoof to them in all those encounters. On more\n{308} than one occasion he followed the hyena to his lair, and, by his\ncharacteristic howling, flinging his deadly stones with his sling, and\nstriking with his heavy staff on the rocks, compelled the beast to\nabandon his prey. Whether the unfortunate sheep was yet alive or\nwhether it had died, Yusuf, as a good and faithful shepherd, always\ncarried it back to the fold. Does not the prophet Amos assure Israel\nof their Shepherd's infinite care for them in an allusion to the\nfaithful seeking by the earthly shepherd for even a fragment of his\nlost sheep? \"Thus saith Jehovah,\" cries Amos; \"As the shepherd\n_rescueth out of the mouth of the lion two legs, or a piece of an ear_;\nso shall the children of Israel be rescued.\"[1] To this care and\ndevotion of the shepherd, Jesus also alludes in his parabolic saying in\nwhich he speaks of his having \"come to save that which was lost.\" \"How\nthink ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone\nastray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the\nmountains, {309} and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be\nthat he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that\nsheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it\nis not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these\nlittle ones should perish!\"[2]\n\nWhen I think of that deep, rocky gorge where Yusuf wintered with his\nflock, and the many similar valleys which the Syrian shepherds have to\ntraverse daily; when I think of the wild beasts they have to fight, of\nthe scars they bear on their bodies as marks of their unreserved and\nboundless devotion to their flocks, I realize very clearly the depth of\nthe Psalmist's faith when he said, \"Though I walk through the valley of\nthe shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for thou art with me: thy rod\nand thy staff, they comfort me.\"\n\n\n\n[1] Amos iii: 12. Revised Version.\n\n[2] Matt. xviii: 12-14.\n\n\n\n\n{313}\n\nPART V\n\nSISTERS OF MARY AND MARTHA\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nWOMAN EAST AND WEST\n\nPerhaps on no other subject do the Orient and the Occident diverge more\nwidely than on that of the status of woman. So far as they really\ndiffer, and as they imagine that they differ in their regard for woman,\nthe Orientals and the Occidentals form two distinct human types.\n\nFrom the beginning of their history, the Teutonic races, especially the\nAnglo-Saxons, have been characterized by their high regard for woman.\nThis trait of the dwellers of north-western Europe so impressed the\nLatin Christian missionaries, when they first visited those peoples,\nthat they described them as having \"such high regard for woman to the\nextent that adultery was unknown among them.\" And while the concluding\nphrase of this historical testimony does not describe the present state\nof Anglo-Saxon society with absolute correctness, {314} the statement\nas a whole seems to me to be a substantially correct description of\npresent Anglo-Saxon life. Among the peoples of north-western Europe,\nand especially among their descendants in America, woman enjoys man's\nhighest regard.\n\nOn the other hand, \"the Oriental view of woman\" has always been\nconsidered by those Western peoples to be very contemptuous. We always\nhate most deeply that vice which is the opposite of our strongest\nvirtue. We are most likely to exaggerate and to condemn mercilessly\nany deviation from that which we ourselves consider to be the sacred\npath of duty. Respect for woman being one of his strongest virtues,\nthe Anglo-Saxon is lashed to fury by what seems to him to be the\nOriental's utter disrespect for the mother of the race.\n\nAs I have already stated in other connections in this work, my object\nis neither to accuse the Oriental nor to excuse his moral failures. My\naim is rather to interpret him to my Western readers and to determine,\nif possible, to what {315} extent he really is a transgressor of the\nnormal rules of behavior toward woman. My intimate knowledge of life\nin both hemispheres and my affectionate regard for the good qualities\nof both the Orientals and the Occidentals lead me to venture to be a\nreconciler of their differences. They certainly misunderstand one\nanother, especially with reference to the domestic and social relations\nof the sexes. Time was when the various races hugged their prejudices\nclose to their own hearts and really enjoyed ridiculing one another.\n\nBut \"the hour cometh and now is\" when the peoples of the earth are\nbeginning to realize that righteousness and truth, kindness and good\nmanners, are the exclusive possessions of no one race. The peoples of\nthe earth are beginning to realize that a mutual sympathetic\nunderstanding between the various races is an asset of civilization,\nand a promoter of the cause of that human commonwealth for which all\ngood men pray and hope. Therefore, as one who owes much to both the\nEast and the West, {316} I deem it my duty to do what I can to promote\nsuch a sympathetic understanding, without doing violence to the truth.\n\nWhat is an obvious fact, and which can by no means be ignored, even by\nthe most zealous special pleader, is that the Eastern woman is far from\nbeing the equal of her Western sister, either in culture or in domestic\nand social privileges. Perhaps in no other country does woman enjoy\nthese blessings to the extent to which the American woman enjoys them.\nWoman as man's intellectual companion, as a promoter of ideals, as a\nfactor in domestic and social evolution, the Orient has never known.\nThe Western type of woman is now partially represented in my native\nland by a minority of cultivated women, but their number is\ncomparatively very small.\n\nThe Oriental social code (if the simple social usages in that part of\nthe world may be termed such) gives man the precedence. To give woman\nthe social and domestic prominence, the little attentions and\ncourtesies which she {317} enjoys in America, is to the Orientals not\nonly unnecessary, but uncomplimentary to both sexes.\n\nIt is perhaps for lack of such attentions and courtesies, more than for\nanything else, that the Occidentals consider the Oriental woman to be\nthe slave of her husband. And, conversely, because of his giving the\nprecedence to woman in all the courtesies and comforts of life, the\nOrientals, _both men and women_, consider the Occidental to be the\nslave of his wife. How often have I heard Syrians say, \"An _affrenjee_\n[that is, a European] is quite a man until his wife whispers something\nto him. Then he becomes her slave; he does just what she tells him.\"\n\nThe Oriental's indifference to those fine points of behavior toward\nwoman does not spring from the fact that he considers her to be\nintrinsically his inferior, and consequently his slave. I never had\nthe slightest reason, nor the faintest suggestion, either by example or\nprecept, to believe that my mother was in any way {318} my father's\ninferior. \"Thou shalt honour thy father _and_ thy mother\" is a\ncommandment which was born of the deepest life of the East. I can\nthink of no circumstances in Eastern life which compel a Syrian to\nthink of his mother, sister, and wife in other than terms of equality\nin all essentials with the male members of the family.[1]\n\nIn my judgment it is the Oriental's deportment, rather than his real\nintentions, which condemns him in the sight of Occidentals for his\nattitude toward woman. It is perhaps hazardous to undertake to\ndifferentiate between character and conduct, between the motive and the\nmethod by which that motive is put into action. It is customary,\nhowever, to say of a person that \"his heart is in the right place, but\nhe does not know how to act.\" I venture to say that {319} this\ncharacterization fits the case of the average Oriental. His heart is\nin the right place. His natural endowments are good. He is\nquick-witted, kind, generous, pious, obedient to parents, and a lover\nof his home. So far as all these fundamentals are concerned, I find no\ngreat difference between the Easterners and the Westerners.\n\nHowever, compared with his Western cousin, the son of the Near East has\nonly a slight acquaintance with the _art_ of living. The working-out\nof details with the view of creating harmony has always seemed to him\nvanity and vexation of spirit. His intense desire for simple,\nspontaneous, easy living has always refused to be encumbered by\nexacting standards. In this respect he is a boy in man's clothing.\nFor an example, the home to him is little more than a shelter. The\nriches of the home are not the artistic appointments, but human\nassociations. Architectural schemes, interior decorations, books,\nmusical instruments, living by the clock, and other Western glories are\nto the Oriental {320} dispensable luxuries. The one-room or two-room\nhouse, very simply furnished, is the essential part of the home. Why\nthen should one be burdened with more? The \"color scheme,\" the harmony\nor contrast of wall-paper with picture frames and carpets, and the\nthousand and one articles of useful and ornamental furniture which\ncrowd the American home and make the \"servant-girl problem\" well-nigh\ninsoluble, are to the average Oriental a delusion and a snare. His\ntable appointments are also very simple. To him the \"one thing\nneedful\" is enough food to sustain life. He has no \"cook-book.\" The\nvarieties of cake and pie, and the multitude of side dishes which load\nthe American table, do not appear on the Syrian's bill of fare. One\ndish of cooked cereals, or meat and rice or some other wholesome\ncombination, and a few loaves of bread, satisfy his hunger. His modest\nstores of grape molasses, figs, and raisins, which he visits at\nirregular intervals, satisfy his craving for sweets, and his home-made\nwine gives color and gayety to his feasts.\n\n{321}\n\nThe same simple rules govern the Oriental's social activities. Whether\nas an individual or as a domestic and social being, he hates to be\nstandardized. To him formalities have no claim upon those who are true\nfriends and social equals. Spontaneous living must not be too closely\nyoked with etiquette, nor native wisdom with technical culture. \"_Meta\nweck'at elmahabbet artafa' ettekleef_\" (when love occurs formalities\ncease) is one of the Oriental's ancient and cherished maxims. From\nearly childhood the Americans are taught to observe, even within the\nfamily circle, the niceties of \"Please,\" \"Thank you,\" \"Pardon me,\" \"I\nbeg your pardon,\" \"May I trouble you,\" and so forth. To a son of the\nEast such behavior is altogether proper among strangers, but not among\nthose who really _love one another_. Between husband and wife, parent\nand child, brothers and sisters, and true friends such formalities\nappear to Easterners not only superficial, but utterly ridiculous. For\nsuch persons the most essential thing is that they should love one\nanother. As {322} lovers they have a right to _demand_ favors from one\nanother. The commands of love are sweet; they must not be alloyed with\ntiresome formalities.\n\nOf course this \"friendliness\" of the Oriental is not altogether an\nunmixed blessing. He relies too much upon his good intentions, which\nhis conduct does not always show. Judged, not only by Western\nstandards, but by the standards of the cultivated minority of his own\npeople, he is found wanting. It is not always easy for him to be\nfamiliar without being vulgar, and to distinguish between the\nlegitimate claims of friendship and intrusion upon the exclusive rights\nof others. His plea always is that he means well, which is generally\ntrue. \"His heart is in the right place.\"\n\nNow I believe it can be easily seen that the Easterner's attitude\ntoward woman, which now rises to the height of religious reverence, now\nverges on contempt, is to be traced to his uneven, juvenile temperament\nand lack of culture, and not to the fact that he despises her. {323}\nSo long as he respects her \"in his heart\" and is ready to defend her at\nwhatever cost, he considers the fine points of conduct toward her after\nthe American fashion to be simply dispensable little details. Nor does\nhis attitude toward woman differ essentially from his attitude toward\nthe male portion of mankind. He has one vocabulary for both sexes,\nwith the inclination to be more respectful toward the gentler sex.\n\nSo woman in the East is not considered a slave by the man, and there is\na multitude of wife-ruled husbands. The family system, however, is\npatriarchal. The man is recognized as the \"lord of the household.\"\nThe venerable father of a family is supposed to rule, not only over the\nwomen of the household, but over his grown sons, his younger brothers,\nand even the men of his clan who are younger than himself. But such an\nauthority is often purely formal. The higher the level of culture in\nthe home, the more freedom and equality exists among the members of the\nfamily. In cultivated Syrian {324} homes the women are free and highly\nand uniformly respected by the men. Such women have no reason to envy\neven the happiest American women.\n\n\n\n[1] My statements apply particularly to the Christian women of Syria,\nwho enjoy greater domestic and social privileges than the Mohammedan\nwomen. However, notwithstanding the serious limitations which orthodox\nMohammedanism imposes upon women, it would be sheer injustice to the\nbetter class of Mohammedans to be stigmatized as enslavers and debasers\nof woman.\n\n\n\n\n{325}\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nPAUL AND WOMAN\n\nPerhaps nowhere else is the Syrian attitude toward woman so clearly\nstated as in the teachings of St. Paul. The great Apostle deals with\nthe fundamentals of this subject, and speaks freely of both the\nprivileges and the limitations of woman in the Christian East.\n\nIn the third chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians, the twenty-eighth\nverse, Paul says, \"There is neither male nor female: for ye are all one\nin Christ Jesus.\" And this equality is not to be understood to be\nlimited to the bestowal of church rites upon men and women alike. It\nembraces the essential points of conduct of the male and female members\nof the household toward one another. Fidelity to the marriage vow is\nto be equally observed by both husband and wife. This the Apostle\nurges upon his fellow believers, not as a superior authority, {326} but\nas a friend. In the seventh chapter of the First Epistle to the\nCorinthians, the fourth verse, he says, \"The wife hath not power over\nher own body, but the husband; and _likewise_ also the husband hath not\npower over his own body, but the wife.\" In the fourteenth verse of\nthis same chapter, the equal potency of the spiritual influence of both\nthe husband and the wife is also recognized. \"The unbelieving\nhusband,\" says the Apostle, \"is sanctified by the wife, and the\nunbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband.\" In the fifth chapter\nof the Epistle to the Ephesians, the \"Apostle to the Gentiles\" rises to\nthe noblest height of Eastern thought concerning woman and reveals\nChristianity's conserving and sanctifying power. Beginning at the\ntwenty-fifth verse, he says: \"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ\nalso loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify\nand cleanse it, ... that he might present it to himself a glorious\nchurch, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it\nshould be holy and without blemish. {327} So ought men to love their\nwives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.\nFor no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth\nit, even as the Lord the church.\"\n\nThis is precisely what the marriage union in the East always meant to\nus. By this sacred bond the husband and the wife are made \"one flesh.\"\nThat the Oriental has not definitely succeeded in making his daily\nconduct always conform to his highest ideals and to the noble precepts\nof the Gospel is evident, and not at all strange. Here he has\nsucceeded no better than his Anglo-Saxon superior has in conforming his\nconduct to the command, \"Love your enemies.\" My point is that down\ndeep in the Syrian heart the spirit of Paul's words abides. It serves\nthe son of the East in time of trouble as his quick and tender\nconscience. The real trouble with him has been his aversion to\nstrictly systematic living. He does love his wife as he loves himself,\nbut in reality he does not fully know how to love himself.\n\n{328}\n\nPaul, on the other hand, does not ignore the conventional limitations\nwhich Eastern traditions impose upon woman. He recognizes the\npatriarchal government of the family. In the chapter just quoted, the\nApostle says: \"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto\nthe Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is\nthe head of the Church.\" Much trouble may be avoided by the unfriendly\ncritics of Paul and Christianity in general, if such critics would keep\nin mind the conditional nature of this command. Whether as a Syrian or\nas an American I do not believe in subjecting the wife to the husband,\nnor the husband to the wife. Domestic life should be based on perfect\nco\u00f6peration of husband and wife, in spiritual as well as in\nadministrative matters. Toward this goal the Americans have made the\ngreatest advance. However, Paul's command can by no means be justly\nconstrued as giving the husband unlimited tyrannical authority over the\nwife. \"The husband is the head of the wife, _even as Christ is the\nhead of the {329} Church_.\" The church is not the slave of Christ, but\nhis beloved bride. So the supremacy here is that of loving care and\nconsideration. Therefore, the fact that the traditions of the East\ngive the man conventional supremacy over the woman has never meant to\nus sons of that land that our mothers and sisters were abject slaves.\nAnd it should be borne in mind that the women of Syria are not always\nso submissive as those traditions would lead a Westerner to believe. I\nmight say that in the majority of cases the man finds it no easy task\nto make his formal authority over the woman of real effect. The\nheartfelt complaints of discouraged husbands, that \"not even all the\nangels of heaven can subdue a woman,\" are not unfrequently heard in the\nland of the Bible.\n\nPerhaps the part of Paul's teaching which seems to Westerners to seal\nthe fate of woman is that found in the eleventh chapter of the First\nEpistle to the Corinthians. Here the Apostle declares: \"For a man\nindeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and\nglory {330} of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. Neither was\nthe man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.\"\n\nI think any serious Bible student will easily realize that as a good\nshepherd Paul must have felt that he should not travel much faster than\nthe weakest of his flock. In the passage just quoted he stoops low for\nthe purpose of accommodating the prejudices of _certain_ Orientals.\nAnd in so doing he contradicts his own saying, \"There is neither male\nnor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus,\" and the great passage\nin the first chapter of Genesis, the twenty-seventh verse, \"So God\ncreated man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; _male\nand female_ created he them.\"\n\nThe Eastern man has from time immemorial decreed that woman's social\nprivileges should be limited, because of his fear for her. In such an\nunstable social order as that which has existed in the East for ages\nwoman is constantly exposed to danger. Woman-stealing was very\nprevalent in ancient times, and is still practiced {331} among the\nArabian tribes which hover on the eastern borders of Syria. In modern\nSyria such practices no longer exist, but their faint echoes are still\nheard in times of tribal fights. On such occasions the cry is heard\n(and I often heard it myself), \"You dogs, to-day we shall take your\nwomen booty [_nesbee hereemek\u00fbm_].\"\n\nIt is because of these ancient fears, and not from a desire on the part\nof the man to enslave her, that the social privileges of the woman in\nthe East are so limited. The duty to protect always carries with it\nthe right to discipline. And the greater the danger, the more strict\nthe discipline. The weaker men of the clan, because they need to be\nprotected, are also in subjection to the \"men of counsel\" (_ahil erry_)\nand to the stronger fighters.\n\nAnd it may be easily inferred that in such circumstances woman's charms\nare a danger to her. She must be secluded, as among the Mohammedans,\nor simply limited in her social intercourse, as among the Christians,\nin order to hide those charms from the curious stranger. {332} For\nthis reason also she must be heavily veiled when she goes out, as among\nthe Moslems, or at least have her head covered always, as among the\nChristians. So when Paul said, \"Every woman that prayeth or\nprophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoreth her head,\"[1] he simply\ngave wise recognition to an ancient social custom. A more liberal\ncourse on his part would have marked Paul as a violent disturber of\nvenerable traditions.\n\nThe chief charm of an Oriental woman is her _hishmat_ (modesty). But\nmodesty in a stricter sense than that accepted in the Occident.\nFeminine timidity (_jubn_) is very extensively sung by the Arabian\npoets. A charming woman, especially a maiden, is she who is timid,\nshy, retiring, of a few words. \"She has a mouth to eat, but not to\nspeak,\" is a high tribute paid to a maiden. For a woman to take a\nleading part in conversation in the presence of men is boldness. I do\nnot know how they manage to do it, but, _as a rule_, in the presence of\nmen the women of {333} Syria exercise marvelous control over their\norgans of speech.\n\nDo you understand now why Paul says, in the fourteenth chapter of his\nFirst Epistle to the Corinthians, the thirty-fourth verse, \"Let your\nwomen keep silence in the Churches: for it is not permitted unto them\nto speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience\"? To Oriental\nears, as perhaps to Puritan ears of the good old type, such words are\npoetry set to music. They do not degrade, but honor woman by not\nmaking her common.\n\nIt would, perhaps, throw further light on the Easterners' regard of\nwoman as a sacred being when it is known why they call the wife\n_h\u00fbrmat_. This term is derived from _heram_--a consecrated and wholly\nsacred object. _Heram_ is the name of the Mohammedans' most sacred\nshrine of Mecca. The wife is the husband's most sacred possession,\ntherefore she is called _h\u00fbrmat_. The plural of this is _harem_, a\nterm which to Westerners has a most obnoxious connotation. But not so\nto Orientals. In the West {334} _harem_ simply means sensuality and\npolygamy in their worst form. In the East it means simply and purely\nthe women of a household, or of a clan, whether it be Christian or\nMohammedan. It does not necessarily mean plurality of wives. A man's\nmother, wife, sisters, and daughters constitute his _harem_; for they\nare all sacred to him.\n\nNow it will not be difficult to understand, I believe, why it is that\nthe man in the East takes precedence of the woman in all social\naffairs, and why the sexes are segregated at public feasts and on other\nsimilar occasions. It is for the same reason that we find no women\ndisciples at the Last Supper. In the parable of the prodigal son, the\nfather meets the returning penitent, the father bestows \"the best robe\"\non the son, the father orders the feast, and doubtless presides over\nit. So it was also when Abraham entertained the angels, and Zacch\u00e6us\nentertained Jesus--the man was the entertainer. However, in these two\ncases the women might have acted as hostesses,--because the {335}\nguests were holy persons. We have a striking example of the freedom\nwhich is permitted to women in such cases in the story of Mary and\nMartha. They entertained Jesus, first because apparently they had no\nparents living, and their brother was young, and second because Jesus\nwas no mere guest, but a holy person.[2]\n\nNotwithstanding all these social conventions, however, the mother has a\nright to demand from her children the same loving obedience which they\naccord to their father. They must honor their father and their mother\nalike. Upon coming home from a journey I always saluted my parents by\nkissing their hands, as a mark of loving submission. According to\ncustom, I saluted my father first, and my mother second, but in the\nsame identical manner, and invoked their _radha_ (good pleasure) toward\nme, with religious reverence. I always knew that to disrespect and\ndisobey my mother was not only bad manners, but a sin. So obnoxious\nhas disobedience to parents been to the respectable {336} families of\nthe East that the ancient Israelites made it a capital crime. In the\ntwenty-first chapter of the Book of Deuteronomy the stipulation of the\nlaw is: \"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not\nobey the voice of his father, or the voice of _his mother_, and that,\nwhen they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: then shall\nhis father _and_ his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the\nelders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; and they shall say\nunto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious,\nhe will not obey our voice.... And all the men of his city shall stone\nhim with stones, that he die.\"[3] Needless to say that this cruel\npunishment is no longer inflicted upon rebellious sons in the East.\nThe record, however, indicates the joint authority of the husband and\nwife over their own children, and the public approval of it.\n\nBut there is more to be said about _radha-elwalideen_ (the parents'\ngood pleasure). I do {337} not know whether the words \"good pleasure\"\nconvey the real significance of the word _radha_, which as it pertains\nto parents is one of the most sacred terms in Oriental speech. The\n_radha_ of a parent is a benediction which includes complete\nforgiveness to the child of all offenses and indicates the parent's\nspiritual satisfaction with his offspring. To secure the parent's\nexpressed _radha_ at the hour of death is equal to a sacrament. I can\nthink of no human experience that can be more impressive, more tender,\nand more deeply religious than that of an Oriental imploring a dying\nparent to assure him of his or her _radha_ before the end came. The\nweeping son grasps the hand of his dying parent, and, leaning over\ntenderly to catch the faint utterances, says: \"Father,[4] bestow your\n_radha_ upon me; forgive me and bless me, so that Allah also may\nforgive and bless me; your _radha_, father!\" If the departing parent\nis still able to speak, he looks up toward heaven and says: \"You have\nmy _radha_, my dearly beloved {338} son; and may Allah bestow his holy\n_radha_ upon you and bless you and the work of your hands. May the\nearth produce riches for you, and heaven shower benedictions upon you;\npray for me, my dearly beloved.\" But if the departing father or mother\nis no longer able to utter words, the repeated pressing of the hand and\nthe turning of the eyes upward indicate the parent's response to the\npetition of the son or daughter. The refusal of a parent to grant his\n_radha_, which is most rare, is to an Oriental a haunting horror.\n\nIn ancient Israel the deathbed blessing was bestowed with special\nemphasis upon the first-born son because with it came the heritage of\nthe patriarchal office. Thus, when Isaac bestowed his last blessing\nupon his tricky son Jacob, he said:[5] \"God give thee of the dew of\nheaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine: Let\npeople serve thee, and nations bow down to thee: be lord over thy\nbrethren, and let thy mother's sons bow down {339} to thee.\" And what\nis also most touching in this story is poor Esau's agony when he\ndiscovered that the blessing to which he was the rightful heir had gone\nto his brother. \"And Esau said unto his father, Hast thou but one\nblessing, my father? bless me, even me also, O my father. And Esau\nlifted up his voice and wept.\"[6]\n\n\n\n[1] 1 Cor. xi: 5.\n\n[2] See page 207.\n\n[3] Verses 18-21.\n\n[4] The same also is asked of the mother.\n\n[5] Gen. xxvii: 28, 29.\n\n[6] Gen. xxvii: 38.\n\n\n\n\n{340}\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nJESUS AND HIS MOTHER\n\nOne of the perplexing passages in the New Testament is that found in\nthe fourth verse of the second chapter of St. John's Gospel, where\nJesus says to his mother, \"Woman, what have I to do with thee?\" That\nit has been very difficult for many devout readers of the Bible to\nreconcile this passage to the Master's gentleness and goodness is very\nwell known to me. On numerous occasions I have been asked to give my\ninterpretation of this saying in the light of the status of woman in\nthe East, and to state whether, in my opinion as a Syrian, Jesus could\nhave meant to be harsh and disrespectful to his mother. Before\nundertaking to give my own view of this passage, I wish to present two\ninterpretations of it which I have heard certain American preachers\ngive. One of those preachers who was proud to call himself \"a free\nlance\" stated in my hearing that on the {341} occasion when Jesus spoke\nthese words \"he simply lost his temper.\" The redeeming feature of this\ncomment, in my opinion, is its brevity. It is short, but neither sweet\nnor to the point. The other interpreter (or interpreters, for I do not\nrecall where and when I heard this), assuming that the station of woman\nin the East was very low, stated that by addressing his mother in a\nseemingly harsh manner, Jesus infringed no rule of propriety. Having\nalready stated at considerable length the \"Oriental view of woman,\" I\ndeem it necessary here simply to say that the foregoing interpretation\nrests on a misconception of the facts.\n\nIn trying to throw some light on this passage I will say that,\nnotwithstanding its seeming harshness in the English translation, I\nfind no real reason to believe that in uttering it Jesus indicated that\nhe was angry, or that he meant to be disrespectful to his mother. This\nsomewhat impersonal form of address to a woman is very common in the\nEast. It _might_ be so spoken as to mean disrespect, but as a rule,\nand {342} according to the Oriental manner of speech, it is dignified\nand in good taste. At present the term _h\u00fbrmat_ is more extensively\nused in such cases in Syria. Among the nobility and the educated\nminority of the people the word _sitt_ (lady) is employed in addressing\na woman. However, this impersonal form of address is employed by a man\nwhen speaking to a woman who is a stranger to him. The correct form\nis, \"O woman,\" the same which Jesus used in saying to the \"woman of\nCanaan,\" in the fifteenth chapter of Matthew, the twenty-eighth verse,\n\"O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt.\" In\nthe same manner the Master assured the woman who had \"a spirit of\ninfirmity,\"[1] \"Woman,[2] thou art loosed from thine infirmity.\" A\nsuperb example of this Oriental usage is found in the fourth chapter of\nSt. John's Gospel, the twenty-first verse, in Jesus' conversation with\nthe Samaritan woman. With solemn dignity he says to her: \"Woman, {343}\nbelieve me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain,\nnor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.... But the hour cometh, and\nnow is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit\nand in truth.\"\n\nFrom the foregoing examples it may be easily seen that the form of\nJesus' address to his mother could not be considered disrespectful.\nTherefore the difficulty which the text offers springs from the fact\nthat it represents Jesus as speaking to his own mother as he would\nspeak to a woman _who was a stranger to him_. Why did he do that? The\nanswer to this question depends partially on thorough knowledge of\nOriental thought and largely on acquaintance with the theology of St.\nJohn's Gospel.\n\nAs every Bible scholar knows, the purpose of this Gospel is to present\nJesus to the world as the incarnation of the Logos--the Word. Here the\nMaster is spoken of, not as the prophet of Galilee, but as the One who\ncame down from heaven. Therefore the Son of God was by virtue of this\nsupernatural character above all {344} earthly connections. His mother\nwas only human, only finite. On the occasion of his addressing her as\na stranger she is represented as interfering with him as he was about\nto work a miracle. Such a thing, according to St. John's Gospel, was\nbeyond her understanding. Consequently as a _divine_ being speaking to\na _human_ being, Jesus said to his earthly mother, \"Woman, what is mine\nand what is thine?\" This is the original form. The English\ntranslation, \"Woman, what have I to do with thee,\" is good, although\nthe more refined attitude of the West toward woman makes the expression\nseem rather harsh. Stated in simplest terms the Oriental understanding\nof these words is, \"Leave me alone.\" In Jesus' case the further\nimplication of the passage is that, as Mary's vision of spiritual\nthings was not Jesus' vision, even though he was her son in the flesh,\nshe was not competent to exercise authority over him, seeing that he\nwas a divine being. In a higher sense she was a stranger to him.\n\nWith real consistency the writer of the Fourth {345} Gospel clings to\nthis view of Jesus' divinity to the end. In the nineteenth chapter we\nfind the Master speaking from the cross. He speaks, not as a human\nsufferer, but as a triumphant heavenly being. He addresses his mother\nin the same manner as he did at the marriage feast in Cana of\nGalilee--\"Woman.\" In the twenty-fifth verse it is said: \"Now there\nstood by the Cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary\nthe wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his\nmother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his\nmother, Woman, behold thy son!\" In this lofty yet tender manner the\nMaster committed his loving mother to the care of his beloved disciple.\n\nThe excellent qualities of a man are credited by Orientals largely to\n_haleeb el-omm_ (the mother's milk) and the mysterious influences of\nthe prenatal period. Aside from its nutritive qualities, _el-redha'_\n(suck) is supposed to possess certain mystic influences which tend to\nfashion the possibilities of character. Whenever a man, {346}\nespecially a youth, speaks \"words of wisdom,\" his admiring hearer is\nlikely to exclaim, \"Precious was the milk that nourished thee!\" Among\nthe choice blessings which Jacob asked for Joseph the patriarch did not\nforget to include the \"blessings of the breasts, and of the womb.\"[3]\nNothing can be loftier to an Oriental than the passage in the eleventh\nchapter of St. Luke's gospel, the twenty-seventh verse. Jesus is\nrepresented in the preceding verses as disputing triumphantly with his\ntheological adversaries. His trenchant periods, \"Every kingdom divided\nagainst itself is brought to desolation.... He that is not with me is\nagainst me,\" and his simple yet profound reasoning that a human heart\nwhich is not filled with the spirit of God is bound to become the abode\nof evil spirits, deeply stir his hearers. So the text tells us, \"A\ncertain woman of the company lifted up her voice and said unto him,\nBlessed is the womb that bare thee, and the breasts which thou hast\nsucked!\"\n\n{347}\n\nThe most solemn occasion on which I heard this expression used in my\nnative land was that when the great Patriarch of Antioch visited our\ntown in Mount Lebanon. Upon his arrival at the priest's house, where\nhe was entertained, the waiting multitude, including the governor of\nthe district, stood with bowed heads to receive the prelate's\nbenediction. I shall never forget that scene. Standing in the door,\nour revered and beloved patriarch seemed to us to be a visitor from the\ncelestial sphere, full of truth and grace. As he lifted his right arm\nand imparted his blessing to the silent assemblage, a woman of our\nchurch, a mother, who was almost overcome with emotion, advanced toward\nthe spiritual ruler, and with her face and open palms turned toward\nheaven, exclaimed, in the vernacular Arabic, \"Blessed be the inwards\nthat bore you, and the breasts you sucked!\" Whereupon the\ndistinguished visitor bestowed a special blessing upon the humble\nsuppliant, to the great satisfaction of the profoundly affected\nmultitude.\n\n\n\n[1] Luke xiii: 12.\n\n[2] The English translation changes the form, \"O woman\" to \"Woman\"\narbitrarily.\n\n[3] Gen. xlix: 25.\n\n\n\n\n{348}\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\n\"A GRACIOUS WOMAN\"\n\nTo the East woman is known only as wife and mother, and, of course, as\nthe home-maker. The statement, \"Woman's place is in the home,\" is\nnever a matter of dispute in that part of the world. In the home are\nto be found both \"woman's rights\" and woman's duties. Education,\nliterary pursuits, \"club life,\" and civic endeavors are no vital\ninterests to the Eastern woman, nor to her husband to any appreciable\nextent. Marriage is a religious union. The highest and most sacred\nduty of the husband and wife is to beget many children, bring them up\n\"in the fear of the Lord,\" and be such good example to them, as to\nenable them to live a pious life, and to transmit their good heritage\nto the unborn generations. Marriage of inclination, preceded by a\nperiod of courtship as in the West, is very rare in the East. The\nreason of this has {349} been hinted in the preceding chapters. Lack\nof education and social and political stability necessitates the\ncurtailing of woman's social privileges, for her own safety. These\nlimitations are especially narrow in the case of \"maidens,\" or\n\"virgins\"; that is, unmarried young women. They are not supposed to\nparticipate in social functions as their mothers do, nor to form\nfriendships with young men, even among their near relatives. The\ncontracting of a marriage is not so much an individual as it is a\nclannish affair. The young people may, or may not be acquainted with\none another. Among Christians, the young man may frequent the home of\nhis future wife's parents, and even converse with her now and then, but\nonly in the presence of other members of the family. \"Going with a\nyoung lady\" is unknown to the East, and is a feature of Western life\nwhich Orientals generally condemn. The marriage is agreed upon by the\nfamilies or clans of the contracting parties, because the family or\nclan is involved in the conduct and affected by the {350} reputation of\neach one of its members. The shame of a woman is a burden to all her\nkindred. Interclannish marriages form alliances and impose defensive\nand offensive obligations. Whenever a woman of one clan, who is\nmarried into another, is cruelly treated by her husband, her own\nclansmen are supposed to rise and defend her, else they become a byword\nin the community.\n\nThis difference of procedure between the East and the West in\ncontracting a marriage does not seem to result in a decidedly marked\ndifference in domestic happiness. In both the East and the West, the\nperfectly happy and the perfectly unhappy marriages are rare. In both\nhemispheres the large majority of married people soon learn that\ndomestic happiness depends in no small measure on adherence to the\nwell-known rule: \"In essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; in\nall things charity.\" As I have already stated, the Oriental does not\nknow the art of living as the Occidental does, yet the Easterner enjoys\nas much home happiness {351} as those Occidentals who are on the same\nlevel of culture with him.\n\nWomen in the East are classified, not with reference to education and\nsocial interests or the lack of them, but with reference to virtue and\nits opposite. A happy husband says, \"I lift my head high [_arfa'\nrasy_] because of my wife. Her _siett_ [reputation] is like musk in\nfragrance. She is _taj rasy_ [a crown to my head].\" So also speaks\nthe writer of the Book of Proverbs, in the twelfth chapter, and the\nfourth verse: \"A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband: but she that\nmaketh ashamed is as rottenness in his bones.\" In both the East and\nthe West the opinion is accepted that \"as a jewel of gold in a swine's\nsnout, so is a fair woman which is without discretion.\"[1]\n\nThe Orient and the Occident diverge considerably in their description\nof feminine charms in poetry and literature. Here I find the Orientals\nto be very inconsistent. Their strong aversion to the free mention of\nwomen in {352} conversation and to her sharing of social privileges\nequally with the man, contrasts very sharply with their license in\ndescribing her charms in their poetry. A most perfect specimen of this\npoetry in the Bible is Solomon's Song. Its Oriental freedom in\ndescribing the \"beloved spouse,\" renders it practically unfit for\npublic use. Its poetical charms are exquisite, and its passion is\npure, but judged by Western standards, the faithfulness of its realism\nappears licentious. It is exhilarating to read the poet's lines in\nwhich he calls his \"fair one\" to go with him into the fields and\nvineyards.\n\n \"Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come away.\n For, lo, the winter is past,\n The rain is over and gone;\n The flowers appear on the earth;\n The time of the singing of birds is come,\n And the voice of the turtle dove is heard in our land;\n The fig tree ripeneth her green figs,\n And the vines are in blossom,\n They give forth their fragrance.\n Arise, my love, my fair one, and come away.\n O my dove, that art in the clefts of the rock,\n In the covert of the steep place,\n Let me see thy countenance,\n\n{353}\n\n Let me hear thy voice;\n For sweet is thy voice, and thy countenance is comely.\"[2]\n\n\nIn the opening verses of the fourth chapter the poet's vision of his\n\"love\" is also beautiful.\n\n \"Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold, thou art fair;\n Thine eyes are as doves behind thy veil:\n Thy hair is as a flock of goats,\n That lie along the side of mount Gilead.\n Thy teeth are like a flock of ewes that are newly shorn\n Which are come up from the washing; ...\n Thy lips are like a thread of scarlet,\n And thy mouth is comely.\"\n\n\nAll this is beautiful and perfectly acceptable to both the East and the\nWest. Not so the opening lines of the seventh chapter. The Revised\nVersion modifies the original text. King James's Version gives the\nlines just as Oriental poetry past and present would render them. The\nrendering of the second verse by the Revised Version, \"Thy body is like\na round goblet,\" and, \"Thy waist is like an heap of wheat,\" renders the\nwords meaningless. However, the modesty of the revisers is to be\ncommended.\n\n{354}\n\nArabic poetry is full of such passages, which abound also in Syrian\nvernacular songs, which are sung with perfect propriety among all\nclasses. In discussing such a subject as this one can hardly resist\nthe temptation to judge. To me the more chaste way of the West in\npoetizing feminine charms is far superior to the altogether too free\nrealism of the East, which I do not feel at all inclined to defend.\nYet I would not be loyal to good conscience if I did not offer an\nexplanation in behalf of the land of my birth. Ever since I began to\nread Arabic poetry, for which I developed great fondness, to the\npresent day, I do not remember that its descriptions of feminine\nloveliness ever really suggested to me licentious thoughts. The\ngeneral effect of such delineations upon me was of the same sort as\nthat which the sketching of love scenes by a great novelist produces.\nIts charms were those of the poetic art, and not those of the seductive\nfeelings of sordid passion.\n\nTo us _'aroos esshi'ar_ (the bride, or spouse of the poet) is purely an\nimaginary creature. It is {355} the poet's spirit of inspiration\nobjectified in a female form. He does not describe a woman, but an\nangelic creature whose body and soul are both pure. Only the very\ncommonplace versifier gets demoralized and infects his reader with the\nsame feeling. The true poet soars far above \"the things that perish,\"\nand is perfectly safe to follow. His infatuation is known as _el howa\nel'adhry_ (pure, or aspirational love). Here, then, without the\nslightest attempt to excuse his phraseology, I find at least a partial\njustification for the Eastern poet, and for the writer of Solomon's\nSong.\n\nThe simple, eloquent, and fully inclusive description of the \"virtuous\nwoman,\" in the thirty-first chapter of the Book of Proverbs, is rather\na composite than an individual picture. It expresses the Syrian's\nnoblest idea of the true wife and the real home-maker:--\n\n\nWho can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies.\n\nThe heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall\nhave no need for spoil.\n\n{356}\n\nShe will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.\n\nShe seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands.\n\nShe is like the merchant's ships; she bringeth her food from afar.\n\nShe riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her\nhousehold, and a portion to her maidens.\n\nShe considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruits of her hands\nshe planteth a vineyard.\n\nShe girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms.\n\nShe perceiveth that her merchandise is good: her candle goeth not out\nby night.\n\nShe layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.\n\nShe stretcheth out her hands to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her\nhands to the needy.\n\nShe is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household\nare clothed with scarlet.\n\nShe maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and\npurple.\n\nHer husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of\nthe land.\n\nShe maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the\nmerchant.\n\nStrength and honor are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to\ncome.\n\n{357}\n\nShe openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of\nkindness.\n\nShe looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread\nof idleness.\n\nHer children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he\npraiseth her.\n\nMany daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all.\n\nFavour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the\nLord, she shall be praised.\n\nGive her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in\nthe gates.\n\n\nHere we have the real \"Oriental view of woman,\" and a glorification of\nvirtue, loyalty, industry, wisdom, kindness, and charity, unsurpassed\nin its beauty and simplicity. I have said that this remarkable picture\nis rather composite than individual. Yet the true, diligent, and\nvirtuous Syrian wife and mother comes near being the ideal woman of the\nancient Scriptural writer. His question, \"Who can find a virtuous\nwoman?\" does not mean that such a woman cannot be found; nor his\nsaying, \"For her price is far above rubies\" mean that women are bought\nand sold in the market. The {358} sense of the writer can be\nadequately expressed by saying, \"Happy is he who hath a virtuous woman,\nfor her worth is far above all earthly riches.\" But for the existence\nof women approaching his ideal, this writer could not have given the\nworld his picture of the \"virtuous woman.\"\n\nI feel that no detailed commentary on these verses is needed. The\nvirtues here enumerated are universally cherished. I will, however,\ncall attention to the Oriental features of this great passage. In\nsaying that \"the heart of her husband doth safely trust in her,\" the\nwriter shows that the good wife is by no means a despised creature in\nthe Syrian home. She is loved and trusted as her husband's\nlife-partner, and exerts no inconsiderable influence upon him. The\nvalue of such a wife's counsel in the estimation of her husband and\nfriends is also indicated in the saying, \"She openeth her mouth with\nwisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness.\" \"She seeketh wool,\nand flax, and worketh willingly with her hands,\" or, as the Arabic\nversion {359} has it, \"with willing hands.\" The flax is now rarely\nfound in Syria. Wool and silk cocoons are spun into thread by means of\nthe spindle, woven on hand looms, and made into garments by the women,\nespecially in the rural districts. This verse should be joined to\nverse nineteen, which says, \"She layeth her hands to the spindle, and\nher hands hold the distaff.\" The Revised Version says, \"She layeth her\nhands to the distaff, and her hands hold the spindle.\" In explaining\nthis passage some commentators speak of the spinning wheel, and of the\ndistaff, as the dictionary defines it: \"A rotating vertical staff that\nholds the bunch of flax or wool in hand-spinning.\" But this is not the\n\"spindle\" which is intended in the passage before us. The Syrian\nspindle (_meghzel_) which a woman may carry wherever she goes, is a\nsmall instrument. It consists of a smooth wooden pin, or stem, about\nthe size and shape of a long wooden pen holder. This is inserted at\nits thick end into a hole of a hemispherical \"top\" or whorl, which is\nthe exact shape of the crown of a small {360} mushroom. It is this top\nwhich the English translation calls \"distaff.\" A small brass hook\nfastened to the end of the stem, which protrudes slightly above the\nwhorl, completes the spindle. In spinning a quantity of wool is wound\non a small wooden or wire frame into which the woman inserts her left\nhand, the frame passing over the fingers and held inside the palm next\nto the thumb, thus leaving the thumb and all the fingers free. The\nspinner fastens the hook of the spindle to the bunch of wool and twirls\nthe spindle swiftly at its lower end, between the thumb and the middle\nfinger of the right hand, and then draws the thread deftly with the\nfingers of both hands. When the twisted thread is about the \"length of\nan arm,\" the spinner unhooks it without breaking it off, winds it on\nthe stem of the spindle, just below the whorl, then fastens it again to\nthe hook close to the raw material. The operation is thus continued\nuntil the bunch of wool is converted into a \"spindleful\" of thread.\n\nThe spindle as it is mentioned in the passage {361} under\nconsideration, and in this peculiarly constructed language, symbolizes\ndiligence and industry. \"She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her\nhands hold the distaff\" is equivalent to saying \"She is never idle,\" or\nas the Syrians say, \"Her spindle is never out of her hands.\"\n\nAs a general rule spinning in Syria is done by the older women. It is\noften used as an occasion for diligent spinners \"to get together.\" I\nrecall very clearly the palmy days of my grandmother as a spinner, and\nsome of the delightful spinning sociables she enjoyed with her peers.\nIt was a delight to me to watch those good women lay their hands to the\nspindle. It is always delightful to watch an expert at his work. They\nworked with the ease and inerrancy of instinct. They spun while\nwalking, talking, eating (informally) or even disputing. The only\nthing about the useful industry which I hated heartily as a boy was\nthat when I came close to the feminine spinners the flying hairs from\ntheir whirling spindles fell on me, and \"made my flesh creep.\"\n\n{362}\n\nAgain the virtuous woman \"Considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the\nfruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.\" Here the language of the\nScriptural writer is figurative. It refers to a good wife's thrift.\nShe saves the coins she earns and treasures them in the well-known\n_kees_ (money bag) in a corner of the clothes chest, where heirlooms\nand other precious objects are stored. In time of need she surprises\nher husband by the substantial sum of money she places in his hands,\nwhich enables him to buy a field or plant a vineyard.\n\n\"She is not afraid of the snow for her household; for all her household\nare clothed in scarlet.\" The marginal note greatly improves the\ntranslation by saying \"double garments\" instead of \"scarlet.\" The\nArabic version says _hillel_--that is, full, or substantial, garments.\nThe snow is always dreaded by the common people of Syria. With it come\nno sleighbells and no skating. It is a time of stress (_dhieq_). The\nsnow \"blocks the roads and cuts a man off from his neighbor.\" At such\na time, because {363} of lack of fuel and adequate clothing, many of\nthe people suffer. So the writer of Proverbs praises the \"virtuous\nwoman\" very highly when he says, \"She is not afraid of the snow for her\nhousehold,\" because by her foresight and unremitting care she has amply\nprovided for their comfort.\n\n\"Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of\nthe land.\" The Syrian husband of the good old type does not buy his\nwearing apparel \"ready-made\" at the clothier's. His garments are made\nby his wife. When he sits with the elders of the community in the\nmarket place or at the gate of the town where those dignitaries\nconverse on matters of public interest, and speak parables and tell\nstories, his neat appearance bespeaks the diligence and loving care of\nhis wife. \"Verily his wife is a costly jewel,\" is the likely remark of\nsuch a fortunate man's admirers. How true also to the nobler instincts\nof the East are these words in this poetical description of the\nvirtuous woman. \"Her children arise up, and call {364} her blessed;\nher husband also, and he praiseth her.\"\n\nThe closing words of this Oriental writer who lived long before the\nadvent of \"modern culture,\" reveal him as one of woman's truest friends\nand wisest counselors. \"Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a\nwoman that feareth the Lord, she shall be praised. Give her of the\nfruits of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.\"\nThis is the true \"Order of Merit.\"\n\n\n\n[1] Prov. xi: 22.\n\n[2] Revised Version; ii: 10-14.\n\n\n\n\n{367}\n\nPART VI\n\nHERE AND THERE IN THE BIBLE\n\n\n\n\nHERE AND THERE IN THE BIBLE\n\nDuring the time when the earlier chapters of this book were being\npublished in the \"Atlantic Monthly,\" requests came to the author from\nreaders of those chapters for his comments on certain Scriptural\npassages which did not appear in them. Some of the passages suggested\nby those interested readers, I have considered in other parts of this\npublication. The other passages thus suggested, and others which\npresented themselves to the author during the progress of this work,\nbut which for some reason or other he could not include in the\npreceding chapters, will now be considered, without the attempt to make\nof this portion of the book a coherent whole.\n\n\n\"And Abraham said unto his eldest servant of his house, that ruled over\nall that he had, Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh: and I will\nmake thee swear by the Lord, the God of {368} heaven, and the God of\nthe earth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters\nof the Canaanites, among whom I dwell: but thou shalt go unto my\ncountry, and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac.\"[1]\n\nIn the East the general custom is that the \"speaking concerning a\ndamsel\" in behalf of a young man is entrusted to the most distinguished\nof his male relatives. Sometimes women are included in the mission.\nThey approach the young woman's father and clansmen in a very dignified\nand formal manner, and, if possible, secure the \"promise\" for their\nson. It is only in rare instances that this significant undertaking is\nentrusted to one who is an alien to the groom's family (_ghareeb_) and\nwho acts as an ambassador. Abraham was compelled to assign this duty\nto his trusted servant, because the patriarch had no relatives in\nCanaan. His demand from his servant to put his hand under his master's\nthigh and {369} swear by the God of heaven and earth that he would do\nas he was asked is characteristically Oriental. The custom of calling\nupon God to \"witness\" a promise or a covenant between two individuals\nor clans is still extant in Syria. The placing of the hand under the\nthigh, however, is no longer done, but the habit of placing the hand\nunder the girdle (_zinnar_) for the same purpose is generally\npracticed. However, it is the one who makes the request who puts his\nhand under the girdle of the one from whom the favor is asked. _Eedy\ntahit zinnarek_ (my hand is under your girdle) means I come to you with\nthe fullest confidence to do such and such a thing for me. In the\neastern parts of Syria this practice is highly valued. Putting one's\nhand under another person's girdle is almost the equivalent of entering\n\"under his roof\" for protection from a pursuing enemy. If at all\npossible, the favor must be granted. I have no doubt that this custom\nis a survival in a different form of that of placing the hand under the\nthigh in making a solemn promise.\n\n{370}\n\nAbraham's experience upon the death of his wife with \"the children of\nHeth\" and with \"Ephron son of Zohar,\" presents an interesting picture\nof Oriental courtesy. In the twenty-third chapter of Genesis,\nbeginning with the third verse, the record reads, \"And Abraham stood up\nfrom before his dead, and spake unto the sons of Heth, saying, I am a\nstranger and a sojourner with you: give me a possession of a\nburying-place with you, that I may bury my dead out of my sight.\" The\nburying-places in the East are clannish or church possessions. The\nOrientals, now as in ancient times, dread \"a lonely grave.\" It is\nalways expected that a worthy stranger be offered a burying-place for\nhis dead in a sepulcher of the community where he happens to be, as\nthat he should be offered the hospitality of a home. So we read, \"And\nthe children of Heth answered Abraham, saying unto him, Hear us, my\nlord: thou art a mighty prince among us: in the choice of our\nsepulchres bury thy dead; none of us shall withhold from thee his\nsepulchre.\"\n\n{371}\n\nThat was noble of the children of Heth; they upheld the noblest\nOriental tradition by their generous act. So also did Joseph of\nArimathea when he took Jesus' body, \"wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,\nand laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock.\"[2]\n\nAbraham, however, who expected to be a permanent dweller in Canaan,\nwished to have a burying-place of his own. So the aged patriarch said\nagain to the Hittites (verse 8), \"If it be your mind that I should bury\nmy dead out of my sight, hear me, and entreat for me to Ephron the son\nof Zohar, that he may give me the cave of Machpelah, which he hath,\nwhich is in the end of his field.\" But Ephron would not be outdone in\ncourtesy by his kinsman; at least he would not be accused of having\nomitted the nice formalities of such an occasion. \"Nay, my lord,\" he\nsaid to Abraham (verse 11), \"hear me: the field give I thee, and the\ncave that is therein, I give it thee; in the presence of the sons of my\npeople give I it thee: bury thy dead.\"\n\n{372}\n\nTo me this sounds \"very natural.\" Ephron meant simply to be courteous.\nIt is an Oriental custom to avoid a business transaction whenever a\nquestion of hospitality is involved, although it is not expected that\nthe gift would be received as offered. The language on such occasions\nis purely complimentary. An Oriental offers to give you anything you\nmay admire of his personal possessions, but as a rule you are not\nexpected to accept the offer. Ephron did not really mean that he would\ngive his field to Abraham without money and without price, but he would\nhave Abraham know that he was ready to befriend him in his sorrow, and\nnot to deal with him simply as a customer. The patriarch acknowledged\nthe kindness by bowing himself down before the Hittites, but would not\naccept the field as a gift. Thereupon Ephron quoted the price of the\nfield to the father of Israel in a truly characteristic Syrian fashion,\nby saying (verse 15), \"My lord, hearken unto me: a piece of land worth\nfour hundred shekels of silver, what is that betwixt me and thee?\n{373} bury therefore thy dead.\" The gentle hint accomplished its\npurpose, \"and Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver which he had named\nin the audience of the children of Heth, four hundred shekels of\nsilver, current money with the merchant.\"\n\n\nIn speaking of the haste in which the Israelites were compelled to\nleave Egypt, the writer of the Book of Exodus says,[3] \"And the people\ntook their dough before it was leavened, their kneading-troughs being\nbound up in their clothes upon their shoulders.\" In the thirty-first\nverse it is said that Pharaoh \"called for Moses and Aaron by night, and\nsaid, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people.\" As a rule the\nSyrian housewife kneads the dough in the evening in order that it may\n\"leaven\" during the night and be ready for baking early the next\nmorning. The saying, \"And the people took their dough before it was\nleavened,\" is meant to show that they departed before the early {374}\nmorning hours. Apparently the Israelites had wooden kneading-troughs\nsuch as at present the Arabs in the interior of Syria still use. The\nSyrians use earthen basins.[4] What is called kneading-trough in the\nBible resembles a large chopping-bowl, but is heavier and not so\nperfectly round as the chopping-bowl which is commonly used in the\nAmerican home. In this basin the bread is also kept after it is baked.\nIn the thirty-ninth verse it is said, \"And they baked unleavened cakes\nof the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt, for it was not\nleavened; because they were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry,\nneither had they prepared for themselves any victual.\" The \"cakes\" are\nknown to the East as _melleh_; this is the word the Arabic Bible uses.\nThe _melleh_ is a round cake or loaf about fifteen inches in diameter\nand about three inches thick. It is baked, unleavened, on the\n_redhef_; that is, hot pebbles. The fire is built over an especially\nprepared bed of small stones; when these are {375} thoroughly heated,\nthe _melleh_ is placed upon them and covered with the live coals until\nit is baked. The shepherds in the mountains of Syria bake the _melleh_\nvery often and think there is no bread like it in delicious flavor and\nsustaining quality.\n\nIt was such a \"cake\" which Elijah fed upon on his way to \"Horeb the\nmount of God.\" In the nineteenth chapter of the First Book of Kings,\nthe fourth verse, we are told that Elijah \"sat down under a juniper\ntree: and he requested for himself that he might die; and said, It is\nenough; now, O Lord, take away my life; for I am not better than my\nfathers.\" It is of no small significance that the legend states that\nthe Lord answered Elijah's prayer in terms of food. The prophet was\nboth tired and hungry, so when he \"lay and slept under a juniper tree,\nbehold, then an angel touched him, and said unto him, Arise and eat.\nAnd he looked, and, behold, there was a cake baken on the coals, and a\ncruse of water at his head.\" We have no record that Elijah after he\nhad eaten {376} of the _redhef_ cake, which was provided, no doubt, by\nthe shepherds in that region for the _nasik_ (hermit), ever longed for\ndeath.\n\n\nIn the sixth chapter of the Book of Judges, the eleventh verse, begins\nthe story of Gideon, the \"mighty man of valour,\" who delivered Israel\nout of the hands of the Midianites. \"And there came an angel of the\nLord, and sat under an oak which was in Ophrah, that pertained unto\nJoash the Abiezrite: and his son Gideon threshed wheat by the\nwine-press, to hide it from the Midianites.\"\n\nIt is a prevailing belief in the East that spirits and angelic visitors\nappear especially under trees and by streams of water. Huge oaks are\noften found in burying-grounds and in front of houses of worship. \"Rag\ntrees\" also may be seen in many localities in Syria. A rag tree\n(_shajeret-omm-shrateet_) is a supposedly sacred or \"possessed\" tree,\ngenerally an oak, on whose branches the people hang shreds of the\ngarments of afflicted dear ones for the {377} purpose of securing\nhealing power for them. When the angel visited him, Gideon, we are\ntold, was threshing wheat by the wine-press. The more correct\nrendering of the Revised Version and of the Arabic is, \"Gideon was\nbeating out wheat in the wine-press.\" As I have already stated,[5] the\ngrapes are squeezed by being trodden in a large stone-flagged\nenclosure, which is about the size of an ordinary room. As the harvest\ntime comes early in the summer, long before the wine-making season,\nGideon could use the clean floor of this enclosure to beat out wheat,\nwith a fair chance of escaping being discovered by his oppressors, the\nMidianites. He was not \"threshing.\" He was beating with a club the\nsheaves he had smuggled, before threshing time came when the Midianites\nexacted their heavy toll from oppressed Israel. Threshing is done with\nthe threshing-board (_nourej_), which is called in the Bible the\n\"threshing instrument.\" The _nourej_ resembles a stone-drag. It\nconsists of two heavy pine planks joined {378} together, and is about\nthree feet wide, and six feet long. On its under side are cut rows of\nsquare holes into which sharp stones are driven. It is these sharp\nstones which Isaiah, refers to when he says, \"Behold, I will make thee\na new sharp threshing instrument _having teeth_; thou shalt thresh the\nmountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff.\"[6]\nThe sheaves are scattered on the threshing-floor about a foot deep; the\nthresher attaches the threshing-board to the yoke and sits on it, with\nhis goad in his hand. As the oxen which \"tread the corn\" drag the\nheavy board round and round, the sharp stones cut the sheaves. In\nthree days the \"threshing\" is ready to be sifted. The finely cut\nsheaves are thrown up into a heap and tossed up in the air with large\nwooden pitchforks. The breeze blows the chaff and straw away, leaving\nthe heap of the golden grain in the center of the threshing-floor to\ngladden the eyes of the grateful tiller of the soil. To this \"purging\"\nof the threshing-floor--that {379} is, the freeing of the wheat from\nthe chaff and straw--Luke alludes in the third chapter, the seventeenth\nverse, where he says, referring to the Christ, \"Whose fan is in his\nhand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat\ninto his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.\"\nThe reference to the burning of the chaff is meant to show its\ncomparative worthlessness. I am not aware that the Syrian farmer\nalways takes the trouble to burn the chaff, which is not easy to gather\nafter the wind has carried it away from the threshing-floor and\nscattered it over acres of ground. The coarser part of it, which falls\nnear the floor, is gathered and saved to be used in making the clay\nmortar with which the houses are plastered, and also sun-dried brick.\nWe always went to the threshing-floor and secured a few bagfuls of\nchaff which we used in the annual plastering of the floor of our house.\n\nAmong the chief joys of my boyhood days were those hours when I was\npermitted to sit {380} on the threshing-board and goad the oxen which\ncarried me round and round over the glistening, fragrant sheaves. I\noften bribed the owner to grant me the precious privilege; and even now\nI should in all probability prefer threshing after this manner to an\nautomobile ride.\n\n\nIn the seventh chapter of the Book of Judges we have a description of\nthe simple process by which Gideon's army, with which he attacked the\nMidianites, was selected. The very honest record states that out of\nthirty-two thousand men whom Gideon had first mobilized only three\nhundred stood the final test. That test was very simple. In the fifth\nverse it is said, \"So he brought down the people unto the water: and\nthe Lord said unto Gideon, Every one that lappeth of the water with his\ntongue, as a dog lappeth, him shalt thou set by himself; likewise every\none that boweth down upon his knees to drink. And the number of them\nthat lapped, putting their hand to their mouth, were three {381}\nhundred men: but all the rest of the people bowed down upon their knees\nto drink water.\" The three hundred constituted Gideon's army.\n\nBowing down upon the knees while drinking from a stream or a bubbling\nspring (_fowwar_) is the prevailing custom in Syria. This kind of\ndrinking is called _ghebb_; that is, the sucking in of the water with\nthe lips. But to strong and wary men this is disdainful. Such a\nprostration betokens lassitude; besides it is not always safe for one\nto be so recklessly off his guard while traveling, and to render\nhimself an easy prey to lurking robbers. Therefore the men of strength\nand valor (_shijaan_) upon approaching the water assume a squatting\nposition, lift the water with the hand to the mouth and lap it quickly\nwith the tongue. This manner of drinking indicates strength,\nnimbleness, and alertness.\n\n\nOne of the most reprehensible Syrian habits is the mocking of those\nafflicted with diseases, or any sort of physical defects. I have no\n{382} doubt that the afflicted of Palestine flocked to Jesus to be\nhealed by him as much for the purpose of escaping the shame of the\naffliction as of securing bodily comfort. \"There comes the one-eyed\nman [_'awar_]\"; \"there goes the limping man [_afkah_]\"; \"the half dumb\n[maybe one who stutters] is trying to discourse\"; \"the hunch-back is\ntrying to class himself with real men\"; \"the diseased head [_akkra'_]\nis approaching, give way.\" These and other stigmatizations are very\nextensively current in the East. In the story of Elisha[7] it is said,\n\"And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the\nway, there came forth little children [\"young lads,\" Revised Version]\nout of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald\nhead; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them,\nand cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she\nbears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.\"\n\nWhat those children really said to Elisha {383} was, \"Go up thou\n_akkra'_.\" The _akkra'_ is one who is afflicted with a disease of the\nscalp, a malady not uncommon among the poor people of Syria. Complete\nbaldness of the head is spoken of also as _qara'_. It was this perhaps\nwhich the ill-mannered children noticed in the itinerant prophet. His\ncursing of the lads \"in the name of the Lord\" was no less an Eastern\ncharacteristic than their mocking of him.\n\nAs to the coming of the hungry bears out of the wood and devouring or\ntearing forty-two of those children, all I can say is that such\nnarratives, which filled my childhood days, are deemed by Syrian\nparents to be the best means to teach the children not to be naughty.\n\n\nIn the opening verses of the fourth chapter of the Second Book of Kings\nwe have the record of Elisha's kindness to a poor widow. \"Now there\ncried a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets unto\nElisha, saying, Thy servant my husband is dead; and thou knowest that\nthy servant did fear the Lord: and the {384} creditor is come to take\nunto him my two sons to be bondmen. And Elisha said unto her, What\nshall I do for thee? tell me, what hast thou in the house? And she\nsaid, Thine handmaid hath not anything in the house, save a pot of oil.\nThen he said, Go, borrow thee vessels abroad of all thy neighbors, even\nempty vessels; borrow not a few. And when thou art come in, thou shalt\nshut the door upon thee and upon thy sons, and shalt pour out into all\nthose vessels, and thou shalt set aside that which is full. So she\nwent from him, and shut the door upon her and upon her sons, who\nbrought the vessels to her; and she poured out. And it came to pass,\nwhen the vessels were full, that she said unto her son, Bring me yet a\nvessel. And he said unto her, There is not a vessel more. And the oil\nstayed.\"\n\nThe belief in the miraculous increase of certain products, especially\noil and wheat, is prevalent in Syria. In almost every community\nstories of such occurrences are told. Godly men and women, largely of\nthe past, are said to have {385} seen such wonders, and to have spoken\nof them to many before their death. Such blessings are supposed to\ncome especially on the blessed night of Epiphany.[8] In the locality\nwhere I was brought up, the miracle of \"increase\" was said to happen in\nthis wise: In some holy hour the cover of the jar of oil is thrown off\nby some unseen power and the oil begins to flow out of the mouth of the\njar. The person who is fortunate enough to see such a sight must show\nneither fear nor surprise, but in the spirit of deepest prayer he must\nbring empty vessels and receive into them the increase. If he should\nfear or manifest surprise, the blessed flow would immediately cease,\nbut if he receives the blessing in a spirit of gratitude and prayer the\nflow continues until all the vessels that can be brought are filled.\nBut only godly men and women can see such a sight. Among the noble\ntraditions of our clan is the story of one godly man of the Rihbany\nstock who witnessed the \"miracle of increase\" in his own storehouse.\nThe flow of {386} the blessing stopped, however, when his wife, who\nwent into the storehouse to see why he was there so long, came in and\nthrew up her hands in surprise at the strange occurrence. From\nchildhood I heard this enchanting story, but I never felt deeply\ncurious to investigate it until after I had gone to the American\nmission school in my native land. Then I sought the son of the \"godly\nman\" and begged him to tell me all that he knew about it. He assured\nme of his firm conviction that the miracle did happen in their\nstorehouse when he was too young to see such wonders, and that his\nfather and mother both saw it and spoke of it on occasions. At the\ntime I became interested in the study of the origins of such\nnarratives, both those good parents were dead.\n\nBut why allow shallow curiosity to weaken one's faith in the great\nspiritual principle which underlies all such beliefs? Attach all such\npious tales to the Oriental's foundation belief that all good comes\nfrom God, and they become intelligible and acceptable. His\nintellectual {387} explanations are faint attempts to grasp the great\nmystery of divine providence, to explain the ways of the Great Giver.\nIf you do not attempt to make an infallible creed of these spiritual\nimaginings, they will serve as well as any intellectual devices to urge\nupon the mind the truth that ultimately \"every good and every perfect\ngift cometh from above.\" Whether the resources were a few loaves and\nfishes, or thousands of loaves and fishes, it was God who fed the \"five\nthousand,\" and it is he who feeds all the millions of his children\nthrough the annual miracle of increase in all the fields and vineyards\nof the world.\n\n\nIn his heart-stirring prayer, which begins with, \"Out of the depths\nhave I cried unto thee, O Lord,\" the writer of the one hundred and\nthirtieth Psalm says, \"My soul waiteth for the Lord more than they that\nwatch for the morning: I say more than they that watch for the\nmorning.\" The Revised Version's rendering, \"More than watchmen wait\nfor the {388} morning,\" limits the sense of the text, and,\nconsequently, fails to express fully the phase of Eastern thought to\nwhich the Psalmist alludes. I have no doubt that the ancient poet\nmeant that his longing for the manifestation of God was as keen as the\nlonging of _el-m\u00fbtesehhid_ for the dawn. This term comes from _s\u00fbhad_\n(sleeplessness). Eastern poetry is full of references to the _s\u00fbhad_,\neither from fear or other intense feelings like sorrow or love. In a\nland of tribal feuds and where wild beasts abound, the night is full of\nterror. _El-m\u00fbtesehhid_ \"wrestles\" with the night, keenly observes the\nstars which mark the night watches, and restlessly watches for the\nadvent of the day to dispell his haunting fears. The Arabian poet\nexclaims, \"Oh, the night's curtains which are like the waves of the sea\nare fallen upon me, to afflict me with every type of anxiety. It seems\nthat the Pleiades [which marked the march of the night] have been\narrested in their course by being tied with hemp ropes to an adamant!\"\n\nIt is not the watchman only that is meant {389} here. He might watch\nkeenly for the morning in times of fear, but the reference is to all\nthose who watch for the morning in times of _s\u00fbhad_--a state which\nOrientals readily understand. The Psalmist would have that confidence\nand cheer in the presence of the Lord which come to the restless\nwatcher of the night with the dawning of the day; that inward calm and\npeace which only the presence of God in the soul can give.\n\n\n\"Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the\nGentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring\nthy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their\nshoulders.\"[9]\n\nThe reference in these lines is to the custom of carrying the children\nin the East. The habit of carrying the children on the shoulders is, I\nbelieve, unknown to the West, but is universal in the East. In early\ninfancy the little ones are carried in the arms. (The Revised Version\n{390} prefers the word \"bosom.\") As soon, however, as the child is old\nenough to sit up alone, it is carried on the shoulder. The mother\nlifts the child and places it astride her right shoulder, and\ninstinctively the little one clings to her head, where there is no\ndainty hat to hinder. The custom is so familiar to the mothers that\noften one sees a mother spinning or knitting with the child astride her\nshoulder.\n\nAs is well known, the message in the lofty strains of the later Isaiah\nis the glad tidings of the restoration of scattered and oppressed\nIsrael. It is a prophecy born of Israel's ever-lasting hope that God\nwill not cast off his own forever. So the prophet assures Israel in\nthe name of the Lord that he will lead the alien peoples, not only to\nlet Israel return to its own home, but to carry the children of the\n\"chosen people\" in their arms and on their shoulders, as do the\nservants of aristocratic parents. The prophet's hope of the\nrestoration of his own people appears in the succeeding verse clothed\n{391} in language which Oriental aristocrats love to use. It is the\nphraseology of earthly glory and a narrow vision of national destiny,\nwhich the New Testament liberates and enlarges. Says Isaiah: \"And\nkings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing\nmothers: they shall bow down to thee with their faces toward the earth,\nand lick up the dust of thy feet.\" Our world still has many grave\nfaults, but it has certainly progressed since the days of Isaiah.\n\n\nIn the third chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, the eleventh verse, John\nthe Baptist, in paying his tribute to the coming Messiah, says: \"I\nindeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after\nme is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall\nbaptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.\" The same thought is\nexpressed in the somewhat different presentation in the third chapter\nand sixteenth verse of Luke's Gospel, where it is said, \"the latchet of\nwhose shoes I am {392} not worthy to unloose.\" I have already stated\nelsewhere that to the Syrians the feet are ceremonially unclean;\ntherefore it is very improper for one to mention the feet or the shoes\nin conversation, without first making ample apology by saying to his\nhearer, _Ajell Allah shanak_ (may God elevate your dignity); that is,\nabove what is about to be mentioned. In the presence of an aristocrat,\nhowever, no apology is sufficient to atone for the mention of such an\nunclean object as the shoes. Therefore, when one says to another, in\npleading for a favor, \"I would carry your shoes, or bow at your feet,\"\nhe sinks to the lowest depth of humility. So when some of those who\ncame to him to be baptized thought that John the Baptist was the\nPromised One of Israel, he humbled himself in Oriental fashion by\nsaying that he was not worthy to carry the shoes of the coming\nDeliverer, or even to touch the latchet with which those shoes were\ntied to the ankles. In this last expression, the sandals, rather than\nthe shoes, are meant.\n\n{393}\n\nThe three evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, speak of the woman who\nwas healed from a long illness by touching the hem or border of Jesus'\ngarment. Luke's version is found in the eighth chapter, and the\nforty-third verse, and is as follows: \"And a woman, having an issue of\nblood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians,\nneither could be healed of any, came behind him, and touched the border\nof his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched. And Jesus\nsaid, Who touched me? ... Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that\nvirtue is gone out of me. And when the woman saw that she was not hid,\nshe came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him\nbefore all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she\nwas healed immediately. And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good\ncomfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace.\"\n\nThe belief that holy persons and holy things impart divine power to\nthose who trustfully and reverently touch them is not exclusively an\n{394} Oriental possession. The Orientals, however, have always\nbelieved this doctrine. The woman mentioned in the Gospel followed a\ncustom which no doubt antedated her own time by many centuries. The\npractice is followed by Orientals of all shades of religious opinion.\nAs a son and adherent of the Greek Orthodox Church in my youth, I\nalways considered it a great privilege to touch the hem of the priest's\ngarment as he passed through the congregation, elevating the Host. To\nme the act was a means of spiritual reinforcement. I never would pass\nthe church building without pressing my lips to the door or to the\ncornerstone of the sanctuary. Virtue, as I believed, came out of those\nsacred objects into me. The interpretation of the details of such\nrecords as the passage which is before us can be easily pressed too\nfar. Such Gospel pictures should be sought for the general impression\nthey make upon the mind, and not subjected to minute critical analysis\nas the reports of a scientific expedition. Jesus' reported saying,\n\"for I perceive that virtue is {395} gone out of me,\" refers perhaps to\nthe belief that holy persons impart virtue or spiritual power to those\nwho come in touch with them. Whatever really happened in Palestine\nnineteen hundred years ago, this belief is well founded. Whomsoever\nand whatsoever we love and reverence becomes to us a source of power.\nMany indifferent and merely curious persons touched Jesus, but nothing\nhappened; for the _garment_ possesses no healing virtues. But when an\nafflicted woman came to him with dearest hope and deepest prayer, the\nmere touch of his person reinforced her strength and revived her\nspirits. The Master indicated plainly that the healing power was not\nin the garment when he said to the woman, \"Daughter, be of good\ncomfort: _thy faith_ hath made thee whole; go in peace.\"\n\n\nIn the story of the crucifixion[10] we read: \"And as they led him away,\nthey laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country,\nand on him they laid the cross, that {396} he might bear it after\nJesus. And there followed him a great company of people, and of women,\nwhich also bewailed and lamented him. But Jesus, turning unto them,\nsaid, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves,\nand for your children.... For if they do these things in a green tree,\nwhat shall be done in the dry?\"\n\nThe saying with which the passage ends is current in Oriental speech in\nvarious forms. Of one who is greedy and voracious it is said (when the\nthing he eats is not very tempting), \"If his tooth works so effectively\nin the bitter, what would it do in the sweet?\" And, reversing the\nScriptural saying, \"If the dry is so palatable to him, how much more\nmust the green be!\" Again, \"If one is not good to those that are his\nkin, what must he be to strangers?\"--and so forth.\n\nJesus' saying to the women who followed him, \"Daughters of Jerusalem,\nweep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and your children,\"\nfacilitates the understanding of the closing sentence {397} of the\npassage. He admonishes them not to lament the state of one who, though\ncondemned, is utterly innocent, but the state of those who are so hard\nof heart, so devoid of human sympathy as to condemn one so innocent.\nWith amazement he exclaims, \"For if they do these things in a green\ntree, what shall be done in the dry?\" If they deal so cruelly with a\ngood and innocent person, what must be their attitude toward a real\nculprit.\n\n\nThe mention in the Gospel of the crowing of the cock recalls to my mind\na very familiar Oriental expression. The shrill sound of the wakeful\nfowl always served us in the night as a \"striking clock.\" We always\nbelieved that the cock crew three times in the night, and thus marked\nthe night watches. The first crowing is at about nine o'clock, the\nsecond at midnight, and the third about three in the morning. The\ncommon people of Syria house the chickens in a small enclosure which is\nbuilt, generally, immediately under the floor of the house. It has one\n{398} small opening on the outside, which is closed at night with a\nstone, and another opening on the inside, through which the housewife\nreaches for the eggs. So \"the evening crow,\" \"the midnight crow,\" and\nthe \"dawn crow\" can be very conveniently heard by members of the\nhousehold. And how often, while enjoying a sociable evening with our\nfriends at one of those humble but joyous homes, we were startled by\nthe crowing of the cock, and said, \"Whew! it is _nissleil_ [midnight].\"\nThe hospitable host would try to trick us into staying longer by\nassuring us that it was the evening and not the midnight crow.\n\nNow some \"enlightened\" critics assert that \"in fact the cock crows at\nany hour of the night.\" Well, the critics are welcome to their\n\"enlightenment.\" For us Syrians of the unsophisticated type the cock\ncrowed only three times, just as I have stated, and thus marked for us\nthe four divisions of the night.\n\nThe New Testament makes definite reference to the \"evening crow\" and\nthe \"dawn {399} crow.\" As a rule the cock crows three times (separated\nby short intervals) at the end of each watch of the night. We are told\nthat after the Last Supper, the Master and his disciples \"went out into\nthe mount of Olives,\" where Jesus said to them, \"All ye shall be\noffended because of me this night.... But Peter said unto him,\nAlthough all shall be offended, yet will not I. And Jesus saith unto\nhim, Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before\nthe cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.\"[11] This refers to\nthe \"evening crow,\" for the entire scene falls in the early evening.\nAnd so it was that when Peter did deny his Master in most earnest\nterms, \"he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.\"[12] Again,\nwhile Peter was still being questioned as to whether he was not one of\nJesus' followers, \"he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not\nthis man of whom ye speak. And the second time the cock crew.\"[13]\n\n{400}\n\nThe other passage[14] refers to the \"dawn crow.\" \"Watch ye, therefore:\nfor ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at\nmidnight, or at the cock-crowing, or in the morning.\"\n\n\nIn speaking of the speedy and mysterious \"coming of the Son of man,\" in\nthe twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, Jesus alludes to the grinding at\nthe handmill--a very common Syrian custom. The portentous saying in\nthe forty-first verse is: \"Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the\none shall be taken, and the other left.\"\n\nThe _jaroosh_ (handmill, literally, \"grinder\") has always been\nconsidered a necessary household article in Syria.[15] Our family\npossessed one, which, however, was shared by the families of my two\nuncles. The _jaroosh_ consists of two round stones--an upper and a\nnether--from eighteen to twenty inches in diameter, and about four\ninches in thickness. It is a portable {401} article. The two stones\nare held together by a wooden pin which is securely fastened in the\ncenter of the nether stone, and passes through a funnel-shaped hole in\nthe center of the upper stone. A wooden handle is inserted near the\nouter edge of the upper stone. As a rule a strong woman can grind a\nsmall quantity of wheat at this mill alone. But as co\u00f6peration tends\nto convert drudgery into pleasant work, the women grind in pairs. The\nmill is placed on a cloth--something like a bed-sheet--or on a\nsheepskin. The two women sit on the floor, exactly opposite, and of\nnecessity close to each other, with the mill between them. They both\ngrasp the wooden handle and turn the upper stone with the right hand,\nwhile they feed the mill through the funnel-shaped hole with the left\nhand. The circular shower of coarse flour falls from between the\nstones onto the cloth or skin below.\n\nAt present the handmill is rarely used in Syria for grinding wheat into\nflour, which is now ground by the regular old-fashioned, {402}\nwaterwheel flouring mills. The _jaroosh_ is used in the Lebanon\ndistricts and in the interior of Syria for crushing wheat into\n_b\u00fbrgh\u00fbl_. The wheat is first boiled and then thoroughly dried in the\nsun on the housetop. Just before it is poured into the mill the wheat\nis dampened with cold water, so that while it is being crushed it is\nalso hulled. The _b\u00fbrgh\u00fbl_ is one of the main articles of food among\nthe common people; it is especially used for making the famous dish,\n_kibbey_.[16] The whole season's supply of a family is ground in one\nor two evenings. The occasion is usually a very gay one. The\nneighbors gather around the mill, the men help in the grinding, and the\ntelling of stories and singing of songs make of what is ordinarily a\nhard task a joyous festival.\n\nThe foregoing makes evident the meaning of the passage as used by the\nevangelist. \"The coming of the Son of man,\" that great consummation of\nall things in the advent of the Kingdom, which the faithful disciples\nof Christ {403} hoped and prayed for, was to be so swift and so\nmysterious that only the fully awake and watchful could have a share,\nin it. No one could tell who would be included in the Family Kingdom.\nFor even those, who in this world sat as close together as \"two women\ngrinding at the mill,\" were not certain of being taken together.\n\"Watch, therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.\"[17]\nIt is vain to deny that this watchfulness, this expectation of the\nsudden and mysterious coming of the Kingdom, has been a mighty factor\nin the development of the Christian Church.\n\n\nAmong my correspondents who have been readers of my articles in the\n\"Atlantic Monthly,\" are those who are interested to know the attitude\nof the Syrian Christians in general toward the creeds and dogmas of the\nChurch as they are known and accepted in the West, and also whether I\nwould not enlarge the scope of this publication so as to include {404}\nin it a discussion of certain doctrines which claim to have firm\nScriptural basis.\n\nAs may be very readily seen, these questions involve the study of a\ncomplexity of subjects which the original plan of this book was never\nintended to compass. Again the author feels that it would be\ninexcusable boldness on his part to enter a field of thought which\nnoted scholars and historians have thoroughly explored, and to pretend\nto discuss issues which only such scholars have a right to discuss.\nHowever, in compliance with the requests of those interested readers I\nwill contribute my mite to the vast literature of a very old subject.\n\nAs is well known to church historians, the Syrian Christians of the\nSemitic stock have had very little to do with the development of the\n\"creeds of Christendom.\" Theological organization has been as foreign\nto the minds of the Eastern Christians as political organization. They\nhave always been worshippers rather than theologians, believers rather\nthan systematic {405} thinkers. Their religious thinking has never\nbeen brought by them into logical unity, nor their mysticism into full\nmetaphysical development.\n\nThe Oriental has been a lender in religion and a borrower in theology.\nThe course of religion ran from the East to the West, the course of\ntheology ran from the West to the East. Had it been left to itself, it\nis certain that the Christianity of Palestine never would have built up\nsuch a massive structure of doctrine as the Athanasian Creed. Wherever\nthe great doctrinal statements of our religion may have\noriginated,--whether in Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, or\nAlexandria,--their essential parts were Greek and Roman, and not\nOriental.\n\nThe Christian Church had its simple origin with a group of Jewish\nfollowers of Jesus Christ in Palestine, but it had its marvelous\nexpansion and organization among the \"Gentiles.\" In Palestine the\nfaith of the Church may be said to have been instinctive, but {406}\namong the Gentiles and under Greek and Roman influences that faith\nbecame highly reflective. Faith in God the Father, and in his Son (by\nanointing) Jesus Christ, and love of the brethren, constituted the\nsimple creed of the Palestinian Christians.\n\nIt is not within my power, nor do I deem it necessary here, to trace\nthe steps by which this simple faith was transformed into a ponderous,\nlearned, and authoritative creed, whose essentials were finally fixed\nin the early years of the fourth century. It is sufficient for the\npurpose of this sketch to state that when the great doctrines which\nwere wrought by the Ecumenical Councils were thus fixed, sealed with an\n\"anathema,\" and backed up by imperial and ecclesiastical power, the\nchurches which refused to accept them had but a very slender chance to\nlive. The intention of those beneficent ecclesiastics and politicians\nwho controlled the actions of the Councils was to do away with the\nschismatic spirit in the Church and to have \"one flock and one\nshepherd.\"\n\n{407}\n\nThus it may be readily realized that it was not very long after the\ncrucifixion when the subtle mentality of the Greek and the organizing\ngenius of the Roman began to assume control of the thought and practice\nof the Syrian churches. Excommunication, exile, and martyrdom swept\naway in course of time all obstacles out of the way of the\n\"authoritative creed\"; simple faith in Christ was forced to be\nhospitable to intricate scholastic statements of doctrine, and \"love of\nthe brethren\" gave way, as a bond of union, to ecclesiastical\nauthority. When the ambitious ecclesiastics of Rome and Constantinople\nfinally brought about the great schism which divided Christendom into\ntwo bodies, known as the Eastern and the Western, or the Greek and the\nLatin churches, the churches of Syria aligned themselves with either\nthe one or the other. The creeds became to those churches party\nslogans and means of division and hatred, and thus Christ was\n\"divided,\" and those who claimed to be his followers, in both the\nOrient and the Occident, {408} took up the cry, \"I am of Paul; and I of\nApollos; and I of Cephas.\" So the doctrines of the Syrian churches of\nevery name are essentially those of the two great Roman Catholic and\nGreek Orthodox communions.\n\n\nIn answer to the second question I will say that I have refrained from\ndoctrinal discussion in the present work; first, because so many of the\nspeculative doctrines of Christendom have very little to do with the\nNew Testament; second, because the central purpose of this publication\nis simply and purely to give the Oriental background of certain\nScriptural passages, whose correct understanding depends upon knowledge\nof their original environment. I have deemed it unnecessary even to\nfollow in the footsteps of the \"higher critics\" and inquire into the\n\"genuineness\" and \"non-genuineness\" of some of those passages. For the\npurpose of this work every Scriptural passage which reflects a phase of\nEastern thought and life is \"genuine.\" The aim of the author is {409}\nthat this book shall be as free from labored arguments as the simple\nstatements of the Gospel themselves.\n\nThere is perhaps no phase of human thought which the Christian churches\nhave not used in the advancement of their divisive creeds and pet\nspeculative doctrines. There is an untold number of doctrinal\ndocuments which are now lying in the libraries of the world as\nrepositories of moth and dust. They are of the earth earthy. The idea\nof universal brotherhood and human solidarity which is agitating the\nminds of men of all races and countries at the present time, is leading\nthe Christian bodies back to the simple faith of Jesus of Nazareth, and\ncausing them to heap contempt upon their technical subtleties and\nforced uniformities of intellectual belief. At least Protestantism is\nbeginning to be sympathetically aware of its own precious heritage, and\nto feel the urging of its own genius. Free and co\u00f6perative\nindividualism is winning signal victories over the unnatural authority\nof creed in the Protestant {410} bodies, and the bondage of the letter\nis giving way to the freedom of the spirit. The Gospel of Christ is\ntriumphing over the theories _about_ Christ, and spiritual\nself-fulfillment by becoming Christ-like is crowding out of existence\nall theories of magical salvation. The creed of the theologians\nconsists of many \"articles\"; the creed of Christ only of two,--\"Love\nthe Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbor as thyself.\"\n\nI prefer Christ's creed.\n\n\n\n\nTHE END\n\n\n\n[1] Gen. xxiv: 2-4.\n\n[2] Matt. xxvii: 59, 60.\n\n[3] Exod. xii: 34.\n\n[4] See page 198.\n\n[5] See page 283.\n\n[6] Is. xli: 15. Revised Version.\n\n[7] 2 Kings 11: 23-24.\n\n[8] See my autobiography, _A Far Journey_, page 94.\n\n[9] Is. xlix: 22.\n\n[10] Luke xxiii: 26-31.\n\n[11] Mark xiv: 27-30.\n\n[12] Mark xiv: 68.\n\n[13] Mark xiv: 71, 72.\n\n[14] Mark xiii: 35.\n\n[15] See Deut. xxiv: 6.\n\n[16] See page 233.\n\n[17] Matt. xxiv: 42.\n\n\n\n\n{413}\n\nINDEX\n\n\nAdmittance of an infant into the Church, 37-40.\n\nAgricultural life, in America, 285; in Syria, 286-94.\n\n_'Aish_, the sacred, 194.\n\nAmerican and Syrian modes of thought, contrast between, 126, 127.\n\nAmerican farmer, lack of romance in his life, 285.\n\nAmerican life, interpretation of, 9, 10.\n\nAmerican mind, attitude toward conception and birth, 22.\n\nAmerican women, highly regarded by men, 314; cultivation and privileges\nof, 316.\n\nAmerican youth, seem to be indifferent to filial obedience, 52, 53.\n\nAngels as heavenly messengers, 12.\n\nAnglo-Saxon, the, and the Oriental, as they appear to each other, 57;\nthe reserve of, 72, 73; uses deeds rather than words in his quarrels,\n95; curtness of, 108; has high regard for woman, 313.\n\nAnointing the feet, 226-28.\n\nArabic, the language of the Syrians, 175; poetry, 354.\n\nAthanasian Creed, 405.\n\nAtheism unknown among the Orientals, 84, 85.\n\nAthens, 264.\n\n\n\nBaking of bread in Syria, 200-02.\n\nBaldness, 383.\n\nBaptism, 38, 221.\n\nBarrenness, 20.\n\nBasins for kneading, 198, 374.\n\nBeard, swearing by the, 172, 173; the sacredness of the, among\nOrientals, 172.\n\nBears, 382, 383.\n\nBed, letting down the, 270-72; taking up the, 272.\n\nBethlehem, star of, 31, 36, 37, 41.\n\nBetrothals, 221.\n\nBible, the, cast in Oriental moulds of thought, 4; reads like a letter\nfrom Syria, 5, 6; characteristics of, 5, 6; as a repository of divine\nrevelation, knows no geographical limits, 6; as literature, an imported\narticle in the Western world, 7; misunderstood through misunderstanding\nof Syrian life, 11; critics of, 41, 119, 128; inaccuracy of statement\nin, 110-14; metaphors and exaggerations of, 119-25; many passages of,\nto be judged by what they mean rather than by what they say, 139; the\npositiveness of speech of, 184, 188; prominent mention of Mary and\nMartha as Jesus' entertainers in, 207, 335; the words _home_ and\n_house_ in the translation of, 243; purpose of St. John's Gospel,\n343-45.\n\n_Passages cited or expounded_:\n\nActs x, p. 277-79; xvi: 15, p. 210; xvii: 17, p. 264; xviii: 18, p. 17;\nxxi: 10-13, p. 116; xxi: 23, p. 18; xxvi: 8, p. 21.\n\nAmos iii: 12, p. 308; iv: 5, p. 98; vi: 3-4, p. 229.\n\n1 Cor. vii: 4, 14, p. 326; vii: 26, p. 184; xi: 5, p. 332; xi: 7-8, p.\n329; xiv: 34, p. 333.\n\n2 Cor. ix: 6, p. 83; xi: 26-27, p. 246.\n\nDeut. xxi: 15-17, p. 100; xxi: 18-21, p. 336; xxiii: 25, p. 291; xxiv:\n6, p. 400; xxv: 7, p. 98; xxv: 15, p. 100; xxviii, 15, 42, p. 294;\nxxviii: 62, p. 32; xxxii: 39, p. 91.\n\nEccles. vii: 6, p. 290.\n\nEphes. v: 22-23, p. 328; v: 25-29, p. 326.\n\nExod. x: 40, p. 293; xii: 3, 6, p. 233; xii: 11, p. 254; xii: 34, p.\n373; xii: 39, p. 374.\n\nEzek. xvi: 1-4, p. 30; xxxiv: 11-13, 16, p. 304.\n\nGal. iii: 28, p. 325; vi: 7, p. 83.\n\nGen. i: 27, p. 330; iii, p. 54; iv: 23, p. 138; xv: 5, p. 33; xviii:\n2-3, 5, p. 206; xviii: 16, p. 221; xxi: 23, p. 167; xxii: 16, p. 169;\nxxiii: 3-6, p. 370; xxiii: 8-9, p. 371; xxiii: 11, p. 371; xxiii:\n15-16, p. 372; xxiv: 2-4, pp. 367, 368; xxiv: 10-11, p. 260; xxiv:\n30-33, p. 192; xxiv: 53-54, pp. 192, 193; xxiv: 60, p. 23; xxvii:\n28-29, p. 338; xxvii: 38, p. 339; xxx: 1, p. 23; xxxi: 53, p. 171;\nxlix: 25, p. 346.\n\nHebr. vi: 13, p. 170.\n\nIs. iv: 6, p. 241; xxxviii: 12, p. 296; xl: 11, p. 306; xli: 15, p.\n378; xlvii: 13-14, p. 36; xlix: 22-23, pp. 389-91; lviii: 11, p. 248;\nlxii: 8, p. 170; lxiii: 2, p. 283.\n\nJerem. lxviii: 38, p. 275.\n\nJob xiii: 15, p. 180; xxi: 32, p. 213; xxiv: 11, p. 284, xxix: 1-6, p.\n141; xxxi: 32; p. 213.\n\nJohn i: 47-48, p. 282; ii: 4, p. 340; ii: 13-16, pp. 134, 135; iv: 21,\n23, p. 342; x: 1-4, pp. 297-99; x: 1-16, p. 295; x: 11, p. 304; xii: 2,\np. 224; xii: 3, p. 226; xiii: 23, p. 65; xiii: 26, p. 68; xiii: 28-29,\np. 69; xv: 5, p. 280; xv: 9, 12, p. 102; xix: 25-26, p. 345; xxi:\n15-16, p. 183.\n\nJoshua ix: 12, p. 251.\n\nJudges vi: 11, p. 376; vi: 36-40, pp. 181, 182; vii: 5-6, p. 380; vii:\n12, p. 260; viii: 7, p. 290; xii: 5-6, p. 176; xix: 5-10, pp. 219-21;\nxix: 14-21, pp. 211, 212.\n\n1 Kings viii: 37, p. 292; xix: 4, p. 375; xix: 19, p. 287.\n\n2 Kings 11: 23-24, p. 382; iv: 1-6, pp. 383, 384; iv: 22, 24-25, p. 14.\n\nLament. v: 10, p. 202.\n\nLev. xii: 2-4, p. 385; xxv: 35, p. 123; xxvi: 26, p. 202.\n\nLuke i: 28, 31, p. 20; ii: 8-14, pp. 42, 43; ii: 12, 15-16, p. 28; ii:\n22, p. 37: ii: 29, p. 39; ii: 41, p. 48; ii: 44, p. 50; ii: 51, p. 51;\niii: 16, p. 391; iii: 17, p. 379; iv: 18, p. 186; v: 19, pp. 270-71;\nvi: 1-11, p. 291; vi: 38, p. 267; vii: 36-38, p. 226; viii: 33, p. 158;\nvii: 43-48, p. 393; ix: 62, p. 288; x: 4; p. 255; xi: 5-7, p. 214; xi:\n8-9, p. 217; xi: 11, 23, 27, p. 346; xii: 13-15, p. 156; xiii: 12, p.\n342; xiv: 16-23, p. 210; xv: 8-16, pp. 152-57; xv: 20-23, pp. 206, 207;\nxviii: 2-5, p. 179; xxii: 15, p. 74; xxii: 19, p. 65; xxii: 44, p. 75;\nxxiii: 26-31, p. 395.\n\nMal. iv: 1, p. 202.\n\nMark 1: 32-33, p. 110; ii: 3-4, p. 270; iii: 20, p. 222; v: 13, p. 158;\nvi: 31, p. 223; viii: 15, p. 152; x: 17-21, p. 101; x: 24, p. 132; xii:\n38, pp. 263, 264; xiii: 35, p. 400; xiv: 17-20, p. 60; xiv: 23, p. 63;\nxiv: 27-30, 68, 71-72, p. 399; xiv: 53, 66-71, p. 177.\n\nMatt. i: 20-21, p. 16; ii: 11, p. 27; iii: 7-9, pp. 117, 118; iii: 11,\np. 391; v, p. 120; v: 29-30, p. 119; v: 34-37, pp. 173, 174; v: 39-41,\np. 121; v: 42, p. 122; v: 43-45, p. 97; vii: 2, p. 265; viii: 32, p.\n158; x: 9-10, p. 249; x: 12-13, p. 87; x: 16, 22, 26-27, p. 274; xi:\n16-17, p. 264; xiii: 24-30, pp. 146-48, 288; xiii: 33-35, pp. 149, 199;\nxiii: 34, p. 145; xiii: 44, p. 161; xv: 28, p. 342; xvi: 6, p. 152;\nxvi: 13, p. 112; xvi: 21-23, p. 134; xvi: 25-26, p. 112; xvii: 1, p.\n112; xvii: 19, p. 128; xviii: 3, p. 187; xviii: 10, p. 89; xviii:\n12-14, pp. 308, 309; xviii: 15-17, pp. 135, 136, 139; xviii: 21-22, p.\n133; xviii: 23-35, pp. 136, 137; xix: 24, p. 130; xx: 9, p. 277 n.;\nxxiii: 24, p. 133; xxiv: 17, p. 269; xxiv: 41, p. 400; xxiv: 42, p.\n403; xxvi: 7, 20, p. 224; xxvi: 21, p. 59; xxvi: 23, p. 58; xxvi: 27,\n29, p. 237; xxvi: 37-39, p. 76; xxvi: 49, p. 71; xxvi: 73, p. 177;\nxxvii: 59-60, p. 371; xxviii: 20, p. 65.\n\nMic. iv: 4, p. 282.\n\nProv. x: 7, p. 89; xi: 22, p. 351; xii: 4, p. 351; xxi: 9, p. 273;\nxxvii: 22, p. 234; xxxi: 10-31, pp. 355-57; xxxvii: 22, p. 234.\n\nPsalms v: 7, p. 38; viii: 3-4, p. 31; xviii: 2-3, p. 245; xix, p. 36;\nxix: 1-2, p. 32; xix: 9, 11, p. 86; xx: 22, p. 39; xxiii, pp. 73, 295;\nxxiii: 1, p. 297; xxiii: 3, pp. 302, 303; xxiii: 4, pp. 305, 309; xli:\n9, p. 193; xliv: 14, p. 141; xlvi: 1-2, p. 245; li, p. 73; lxi: 3, p.\n241; lxxx: 8-9, 14-15, p. 281; cix: 8-13, pp. 92, 93; cxix: 71-72, p.\n245; cxxviii: 3, p. 281; cxxix: 5-8, p. 88; cxxx: 1, 6, p. 387; cxxxix:\n1-6, p. 82; cxlv: 16, p. 195; cxlvii: 4-5, p. 33.\n\nRom. vi: 13, p. 120; ix: 1, p. 168; ix: 13, p. 99; xii: 1, p. 168; xii:\n19, p. 91.\n\nRuth ii: 4, p. 88.\n\n1 Sam. xx: 27-29, p. 235.\n\n2 Sam. x: 4-5, p. 172.\n\nSol. ii: 10-14, pp. 352, 353; iv: 1-3, p. 353; vii: 1-9, p. 353.\n\n1 Thess. iii: 6, p. 64.\n\nZeph. i: 4-5, p. 276.\n\nBirth, of Jesus, 12; a miracle, 20; attitude of Syrian mind toward,\n20-25; attitude of American mind toward, 22, 24; of man-child, 27-29;\ncustoms at, 28. _See_ Nativity.\n\nBlood Covenant, the, 160.\n\nBooks on the East, 10.\n\nBorrowing and lending, 122-24, 215.\n\n_Bosom_, in the translation of the Bible, 267.\n\nBread, unleavened, 150; not to be eaten until errand is known, 191,\n192; considered to possess mystic sacred significance, 193; the\n\"life-giver, \" 194; offering of, 194; of life, Christ, 194; \"our daily\nbread, \" 196, 197; the Oriental's attitude toward, is religious, 197;\nthe process of mixing, 198-200; the process of baking, 200-02; bought\nby weight, 203; always eaten with a sense of sacredness, 237, 238;\ncarried on a journey, 250, 251; does not mould in Syria, 251.\n\nBread and salt, 191-95, 238.\n\n_B\u00fbrgh\u00fbl_, an article of food, 402.\n\nBurning pit, the, 201.\n\nBurying-places in the East, 370, 371.\n\n\"Business success, \" 53.\n\n\n\nCakes of the Bible, 374-76.\n\nCameleers, 260-63, 265.\n\nCamels, caravans of, 259, 260; the watering of, 261, 262; riding on,\n262, 263.\n\nCaravans, 259, 260.\n\nCarnivals, 233.\n\nCarob tree, the, 158, 159.\n\nCarrying children on the shoulder, 389-91.\n\nChaff, 379.\n\nChildlessness, evidence of divine disfavor, 20, 23.\n\nChildren, a heritage from the Lord, 23, 24; presentation of, at the\ntemple, 37; owe obedience to both mother and father, 335, 336; carrying\non the shoulder, 389-91.\n\nChrist. _See_ Jesus.\n\nChristian Church. _See_ Church.\n\nChristians, oaths of, 170, 171; Syrian, of the Semitic stock, have had\nlittle to do with the development of creeds, 404; creed of the\nPalestinian, 406.\n\nChristmas, 41.\n\nChristmas carol, 41, 45.\n\nChurch, spoken of as the vine which God has planted, 281; the origin\nand the expansion and organization of, 405; division of, 407, 408.\n\nChurches, of Syria, 407, 408; the Greek and the Latin, 407; the Roman\nCatholic and the Greek Orthodox, 408.\n\nClarke, Adam, and Jesus pilgrimage to Jerusalem, 49; on the parable of\nthe treasure hid in the field, 161, 162.\n\nClocks in Syria, 277 n.\n\nClothing made at home in Syria, 363.\n\n_Coat_ and _cloak_, the words, 121, 253.\n\nCock crow, 397-99.\n\nCoin, lost, parable of the, 152-55.\n\nComing of the Son of man, the, 400-03.\n\nConception, attitude of the Syrian mind toward, 20-25; attitude of the\nAmerican mind toward, 23, 24.\n\nConstantinople, 405, 407.\n\nCorruption, fermentation considered to be, 151, 152.\n\nCouches, reclining on, 227-30; sleeping on, 271, 272.\n\nCourtesy, example of Oriental, 370-73.\n\nCreed-makers of Christendom, 128.\n\nCreeds, 403, 404, 407, 409, 410.\n\nCrier from the housetop, 273, 274.\n\nCritics, of the Bible, 41, 119, 128; of Paul and Christianity, 328;\nhigher, 408.\n\nCrowds, 222-24.\n\nCrowing of the cock, 397-99.\n\nCrucifixion, the story of the, 395-97.\n\nCulture gives strength and symmetry to religious thought, 85.\n\nCurses. _See_ Imprecations.\n\nCurtness of the Anglo-Saxon, 108.\n\n\n\nDa Vinci, Leonardo, his painting of The Last Supper, 58, 59, 67.\n\nDependence of the Oriental, 72, 73.\n\nDialects of the Oriental's speech, 175-78.\n\n\"Dipping in the dish, \" 58, 60, 61.\n\nDisobedience, 54, 335, 336.\n\nDistaff, the, 359, 360.\n\nDough, 373.\n\nDrawing water, 261.\n\n_Drink_, the word as used in the Bible, 193 n.\n\nDrinking, at feasts, 61-63, 236, 237; manner of, 380, 381.\n\n\n\nEating, 58-61, 222-24.\n\nEcumenical Councils, 406.\n\nEleventh hour, the, 277 n.\n\nElijah, 375.\n\nElisha, the story of, 382, 383; his kindness to a poor widow, 383, 384.\n\nEnemies, love of. _See_ Love.\n\nEvolution, not altogether compulsory, 242.\n\nExaggeration, Oriental fondness for, 118.\n\n\"Eye-of-the-needle\" passage, the, 130-32.\n\n\n\nFaith, of the Oriental, 21; Syrian idealization of, 129; early\nPalestinian, 406.\n\nFamiliar friend, the, 193.\n\nFamily, spoken of as a vine, 281.\n\nFarmer, the American, 285; the Syrian, 286-94.\n\nFasting, 15.\n\nFeasts, fraternal, in Syria, 56-69, 221; family, 231-38.\n\nFecundity, a gift of the Lord, 20; leaven a symbol of, 150.\n\nFeet, washing and anointing, 226-28; unclean in a ceremonial sense,\n228, 292.\n\nFermentation, considered to be corruption, 151, 152.\n\nFig tree, and the vine, the Oriental's chief joys, 280; sitting under,\n281, 282.\n\nFilial obedience, 51-55, 335, 336.\n\nFlocks of sheep and goats, and their folds, 295, 296; returning, 300;\nthe shepherd's guidance of, 301, 302; the gathering of the, 303.\n\nFolds, sheep and goat, 295-98.\n\nForgiveness, 133-39.\n\nForty days, the purification period, 38.\n\n\n\nGarment, cure effected by touch of, 393-95.\n\nGathering of the flock, the, 303.\n\nGentiles, the, 405, 406.\n\nGesticulation of the Oriental, 115-17.\n\nGethsemane, the kiss in, 70, 74, 76.\n\n_Ghebb_ (sucking of the water with the lips), 381.\n\nGideon, the story of, 376, 377; his army, 380, 381.\n\nGirdle, the Syrian, 252, 253; placing the hand under, 369.\n\nGoad, the Syrian, 286, 288, 378.\n\nGoatfolds, 295-98.\n\nGoats, the calling of, by name, 299.\n\nGod, called shelter and refuge, 241, 244, 245; the Oriental's belief\nthat all good comes from, 386, 387.\n\nGood pleasure, 335-39.\n\nGospel. _See_ Bible.\n\nGracious woman, a, 348-64.\n\nGrain, measuring, 265-67; threshing, 377-80.\n\nGreeks, their custom of reclining at meals, 225.\n\nGreen tree, 396, 397.\n\nGrinding wheat, 400-03.\n\nGuest, at the feast, 62; sudden arrival of, 213-16; delaying the\ndeparting, 218-21; departure of, 221; invited in families, 221, 222;\nsit on the floor, 222; and _zad_, 250.\n\n\n\nHair, cutting the, release from vow, 17, 18.\n\nHandmill, 400-03.\n\n_Harem_, the, 333, 334.\n\n_Hate_, the word, in the Arabic tongue, 99; in the Bible, 99, 100.\n\nHatred and love, 104-06.\n\nHidden treasures, 161-66.\n\nHolidays, 221.\n\nHome, no word for, among the Syrians, 241, 243; the word in the\ntranslation of the Bible, 243.\n\nHonoring father and mother, 335.\n\nHorn, symbol of strength, 245 n.\n\nHospitality, of Orientals, 205; extended by the man, not the woman,\n205-07, 334, 335; Syrian fashion of extending, 208-13; compulsion to\naccept, 210, 214; Syrian rules of, 213-21; to the traveler, 249, 250.\n\nHost, the man, not the woman, acts as, 205-07, 334, 335; the urging of\nhospitality by, 208-21; bringing the guest on the way, 221; and _zad_,\n250.\n\n_House_, Syrian use of the word, 241-44; the word in the translation of\nthe Bible, 243; the word precious to the Oriental, 244.\n\nHouse, the Syrian, 242, 269.\n\nHousetop, the shouting of wares from, 269, 273; easily reached, 269,\n270; making an opening in, 270-72; the construction of, 271; sleeping\non, 272; to dwell on, 273; calling from, 273, 274; used for household\npurposes, 275, 402; praying on, 275-79.\n\n_H\u00fbrmat_, term for _wife_, 333; term for _woman_, 342.\n\nHusband and wife, according to St. Paul, 326-29, 358.\n\nHusks, 158.\n\nHyenas, 307, 308.\n\n\n\nImploring, Oriental habit of, 178-81, 217.\n\nImportunity, Oriental habit of, 178-81, 217.\n\nImprecations, 88, 91-95, 146. _See_ Swearing.\n\nImpressions _vs._ literal accuracy, 115-39.\n\nInaccuracy, intellectual, of the Oriental, 108-14.\n\nIncrease, the miracle of, 384-87.\n\nIndefiniteness, effect produced by, 138, 139.\n\nIndividualism, 409.\n\nInfant, the, in Syria, 28, 29; admittance of, into the church, 37-40.\n\nIngersoll, Robert, 128.\n\nInheritances, division of, 155, 156.\n\nInterpretation, sympathetic, a duty of present-day culture, 19.\n\nIsaiah, 36.\n\n\n\n_Jaroosh_ (handmill), 400-02.\n\nJerusalem, arraignment of, 30; Jesus goes on pilgrimage to, 47-51.\n\nJesus Christ, a man without a country, 3; belongs to all races and all\nages, 3; as regards his modes of thought and life and his method of\nteaching, was a Syrian of the Syrians, 4; never out of Palestine, 4;\nstory of his birth, 12; goes on pilgrimage to Jerusalem, 47-51; filial\nobedience of, 51-55; closing scenes in his personal career, 56, 72; his\ncommand to his countrymen to love their enemies, 96; and the\nmoney-lenders, 123-25; tendency of, to use parables, 146; his command\nin regard to swearing, 173, 174; his words to Peter, 183; entertained\nby Mary and Martha, 207, 335; the anointing of his feet, 226-28;\nsending his disciples forth, 249; his injunction, \"Salute no man by the\nway, \" 255, 257; his first meeting with Nathaniel, 282; on dishonoring\nthe sacred day, 291, 292; and his mother, 340-45; his conversation with\nthe Samaritan woman, 342; as the incarnation of the Logos, 343-45; cure\neffected by the hem of his garment, 393-95; the crucifixion of, 395-97;\nconversation of, with Peter after the Last Supper, 399; the Gospel of\nChrist is triumphing over the theories about, 410; his creed, 410.\n\nJohn, \"leaning on Jesus' bosom, \" 65-67.\n\nJohn the Baptist, 391, 392.\n\nJoseph, story of, 16.\n\nJourneys. _See_ Traveling.\n\nJudas, the treachery of, 67-71.\n\nJudicial contests, swearing in, 169.\n\n\n\n_Keyyal_ (measurer), 265, 266.\n\n_Kherr\u00fbb_ (carob), 158, 159.\n\n_Kibbey_, a dish of meat and crushed wheat, 233, 234, 402.\n\nKilling of the sheep, the, 231-33.\n\nKiss, Judas's, 70, 71.\n\nKissing, among men, a Syrian custom, 70, 71; of the hands of parents,\n335.\n\nKneading done in the evening, 373.\n\nKneading-day, 198-200.\n\nKneading-troughs, 374.\n\n_Kummer_ (girdle), 252, 253.\n\n\n\nLambs, newly born, carried by shepherd, 306, 307.\n\nLanguage, daily, of the Syrian, is Biblical, 87-90; abstinence from\n\"pious, \" in America, 90. _See_ Speech.\n\n_Lap_, in the Bible, 267.\n\nLast Supper, the, 56-69, 74; in harmony with Syrian life, 56, 57;\npainted by da Vinci in Occidental form, 58, 59; appointments of, were\nOriental, 59-69; no women at, 207, 334; conversation of Jesus and Peter\nafter, 399.\n\nLeaven, parable of the, 149, 199; held in esteem by the Syrians, 150;\nthe meaning _corruption_ figurative, 152; use of, in making bread, 199.\n\nLent, 233-38.\n\nLeopards, 307.\n\nLevite, the story of the, 211, 212, 219-21.\n\nLife, of a people, cannot be studied from the outside, 7-11; to the\nOriental an inheritance, 242.\n\n_Like_ (\"to be favorably inclined toward\"), not in the Bible or the\nArabic tongue, 98; in English version of the Bible, 98.\n\nLiterature, difficult to understand if it has not sprung from the\npeople's racial life, 6; the Bible as, 7.\n\nLoaves, parable of the three, 214-17.\n\nLocusts, 292-94.\n\nLord's Prayer, the, 196.\n\nLove, of enemies, 96-106; not of our own making, 97; meaning of, in the\nWest, 98; meaning of, in the East, 98-102; speaks of the greatest thing\nin the world, 103; and hatred, 104-06; assurances of, 182.\n\n\n\nMan-child, birth of, 27-29.\n\n_Marafeh_, feast of the, 233-37.\n\nMarket-place, Syrian, and the caravan, 259; a place of sociability as\nwell as business, 263, 264; measuring grain in, 265-68.\n\nMarriage in the East, 348-50.\n\nMarriage wishes, 23, 24.\n\nMartha, not at the Last Supper, 207, 208, 335.\n\nMary, not at the Last Supper, 207, 208, 335; Jesus and, 340-45.\n\nMaternity, pilgrimage for, 12-16.\n\n_Mathel_, meaning of, 140.\n\nMattresses, 216.\n\nMeasure, the generous, 265-68.\n\nMeasurer, the, 265-68.\n\nMecca, 47.\n\n_Melleh_ (cakes), 374, 375.\n\nMerchants, muleteer, 269, 273.\n\nMetaphor, Oriental fondness for, 118.\n\n_Midd_ (a wooden measure), 265, 266.\n\nMiracles, 20, 21, 384-87.\n\nMocking of the afflicted, 381-83.\n\nModesty the chief charm of the Oriental woman, 332.\n\nMohammedans, pilgrimages of, 47; oaths of, 169, 170; position of women\namong, 318 n., 331.\n\nMolasses, the method of making, in the East, 285.\n\nMoney-lenders, 123-25.\n\nMortar, 379.\n\nMother, claiming same obedience as father, 335, 336; Jesus and his,\n340-45; the mother's milk, 345-47.\n\n_Mouldy_, in translation of the Bible, 251.\n\nMount Zion, meeting in the upper room on, 56-69.\n\nMuleteer, merchants, 269, 273.\n\nMustache, swearing by, 171-73.\n\nMysticism, 41, 42.\n\n\n\nNativity, narrative of the, 37, 41-44.\n\nNazarite (_nedher_), 16, 18.\n\n_Nezel_, 62.\n\n\n\nOaks, 376.\n\nOaths. _See_ Imprecations, Swearing.\n\nObedience, filial, 51-55, 335, 336.\n\nOil, miraculous increase of, 384-86.\n\nOpen space, the, in Syrian villages, 210.\n\nOptimism, 45.\n\nOriental, the, and the Anglo-Saxon, in each other's eyes, 57; not\nafraid to \"let himself go, \" 57, 72; dependence of, 72, 73; craves\nsympathy, 73; the vision of, 77; his manner of speech, 81; has not\nachieved much in the material world, 83; his supreme choice has been\nreligion, 84; always conscious of God and the soul, 84; does not know\nof atheism, 84, 85; has always lived in a world of spiritual mysteries,\n86; his imprecations, 91-95; considers his personal enemies to be the\nenemies of God, 93; more cruel in words than in deeds, 95; the\nunveracious, 107-14; intellectual inaccuracy of, 108; expects to be\njudged by what he means, not by what he says, 115, 125; his speech is\nalways illustrated, 115; fond of metaphor and exaggeration, 118; does\nnot maliciously misrepresent, 126; use of parables and proverbs, a\ncharacteristic of, 140; makes no distinction between a parable and a\nproverb, 140; his contempt for swineherds, 157, 158; his tendency to\nswear, 167-74; the dialects of his speech, 175-88; his habit of\nimploring, 178-81; the intimacy and unreserve of his speech, 181-83;\nthe unqualified positiveness of his speech, 183-88; bread and salt to,\n191-95; his understanding of the prayer \"Give us our daily bread, \"\n196, 197; religious attitude of, toward bread, 197; bread-making of,\n198-204; hospitality of, 205-17; his table appointments, 222, 320; life\nis an inheritance to, 242; the word _house_ precious to, 244; his\nmethod of salutation, 255-58; knows no business without sociability,\n263; his reputed lack of regard for women, 314, 315; gives man the\nprecedence, 316, 317; his manner rather than intentions toward woman at\nfault, 318, 319, 322, 323; has only comparatively slight acquaintance\nwith the art of living, 319; his life simple and without exacting\nstandards, 319, 320; his social activities simple, 321; hates to be\nstandardized, 321; abhors formalities in the family circle, 321, 322;\nthe family system of, patriarchal, 323, 328; his attitude toward woman\naccording to St. Paul, 325-33; limits woman's social privileges because\nof fear for her, 330, 331; his descriptions of feminine loveliness,\n351-55; his description of the virtuous woman, 355-64; example of\ncourtesy of, 370-73; his belief that all good comes from God, 386, 387;\nhis belief in the efficacy of touch to impart divine power, 394; has\nbeen a leader in religion and a borrower in theology, 405. _See_\nSyria, Syrians.\n\nOven, of the Bible, 200-02.\n\nOvercautiousness in the pulpit, 186, 187.\n\n\n\nPalestine, 405.\n\nParable, of the prodigal son, 142; 152, 155-61, 206, 207; to picture\ndemoralization beyond redemption, 143, 144; on partiality, 144, 145; of\nthe wheat and the tares, 146-49; of the leaven, 149, 199; of the lost\nsheep, 152, 308; of the lost coin, 152-55; of the treasure hid in the\nfield, 161-66; of the unrighteous judge, 179, 180; of the three loaves,\n214-17.\n\nParables, speaking in, 140-66; and proverbs, Oriental makes no\ndistinction between, 140; fondness of Oriental for, 140, 141;\nsociableness of, 142.\n\nParents, honoring and obeying, 51-55, 335, 336.\n\nPassover, feast of the, 49.\n\nPath, the beaten, 301, 302.\n\nPatron saints as heavenly messengers, 12.\n\nPaul, his statements concerning the Syrian attitude toward women,\n325-33.\n\nPebble, the covering of the, 203, 204.\n\nPersonality, secret of, an impenetrable mystery, 4.\n\nPessimism, 45.\n\nPeter, his experience in the palace of the high priest, 177, 178; Jesus\nand, 183; his vision, 276-79.\n\nPilgrimage, meaning, to a Syrian, 13, 14; the _zeara_, 13-17, 47, 48;\nof Jesus to Jerusalem, 47-51; still common in Syria, 47; occasion of\nunion among the common people, 221.\n\nPlace of residence, the term, 243.\n\nPlough, the Syrian, 286-88.\n\nPoetry, dominant feature of Oriental speech, 108; description of\nfeminine loveliness in, 354, 355.\n\n_Porter_, in translation of the Bible, 298.\n\nPositiveness of speech, Oriental fondness for, 118, 132, 183-88.\n\nPrayer, 15; the Lord's, 196.\n\nPrayers of the Scriptures, due to persistence in petitioning, 180.\n\nPraying on the housetop, 275-79.\n\nPresentation of child at temple, 37.\n\nProdigal son, parable of the, 142, 152, 155-61, 206, 207.\n\nPronunciation of the Syrians, 176-78.\n\nProtestantism, 409.\n\nProverbs, use of, an Oriental characteristic, 140; and parables,\nOriental makes no distinction between, 140.\n\nPsalms due to persistence in petitioning, 180.\n\nPurification period, 38.\n\nPurse, the, 252.\n\n\n\n_Rada'_ (cloak), 121, 122.\n\n_Radha_ (good pleasure), 335-39.\n\nRag trees, 376.\n\nRationalism, modern, 19.\n\nRebecca, 23, 26.\n\nReclining at meals, 224-30.\n\n_Refuge_, use of the term, 241, 244.\n\nReligion, gives life and beauty to culture, 85; the course of, has been\nfrom the East to the West, 405.\n\nReligions, the three greatest, have originated in Syria, 86.\n\nRemembrance, 63-65.\n\nReproduction, attitude of Eastern peoples toward, 25, 26; attitude of\nAnglo-Saxons toward, 26.\n\nRetribution, 133-39.\n\nRevenge, idea of, lies deep in Oriental nature, 91.\n\nRome, 405, 407.\n\nRoof. _See_ Housetop.\n\n\n\nSt. John's Gospel, the purpose of, 343-45.\n\nSacrament, feasts and, 56-71.\n\nSalt, used at births, in Syria, 28; bread and, 191-95, 238.\n\n\"Salted, \" 28-30.\n\nSalutation, the Oriental method of, 255-58.\n\nSarah, 26.\n\nScribes and pharisees, rebuke of, 132, 133.\n\nScrip, the, 250.\n\nScriptures, spring from soil whose life is active sympathy of religion,\n85.\n\nScriptures, the. _See_ Bible.\n\nSermon on the Mount, the, 97.\n\n\"Seventy times seven, \" 133-39.\n\nSheep, lost, parable of the, 152, 206-08; the killing of the, 231-33;\nthe calling of, by name, 299; the return of, at evening, 300; guided by\nthe shepherd, 301, 302; the gathering of, 303; their trust in their\nshepherd, 307.\n\nSheepfolds, 295-98.\n\n_Shelter_, use of the term, 241, 244.\n\nShepherd, solicitous watchfulness of, 296, 297, 299; his tent and dog,\n298; going before the flock, 299, 300; the guidance of, 301, 302; the\ngood, 304, 305; carrying newly born lambs, 306, 307; rescuing from wild\nbeasts, 307-09.\n\nShepherd life in Syria, 295-309.\n\nShoes, 228 n., 292.\n\nSigns and wonders, 181.\n\nSin, origin of, 54.\n\nSitting at meals, 58, 224-30.\n\nSleeping, on couches, 271; on the housetop, 272.\n\nSleeplessness, 388, 389.\n\nSnow in Syria, 362, 363.\n\nSociability, no business without, 263.\n\nSociableness of parabolic speech, 142.\n\nSolomon's Song, the realism of, 352-55.\n\n\"Sop, \" the, handed to Judas, 68-70.\n\nSower, the Syrian, 286-94.\n\nSowing in Syria, 288, 289.\n\nSpeech, Oriental's, his manner that of a worshipper, 81, 185; his\ndaily, 81-90; imprecations, 90-95; intellectual inaccuracy of, 108;\nalways illustrated, 115; full of metaphor and exaggeration, 118-39,\n372; its positiveness, 118, 132, 183-88; parabolic, 140-66; swearing,\n167-74; the many and picturesque dialects of, 175-78; habit of\nimploring, 178-81; its intimacy and unreserve, 181-83.\n\nSpindle, the Syrian, 359-61.\n\nSpinning in Syria, 358-61.\n\nSpiritual visions, little room for, in modern life, 46.\n\nSprings of water, 248, 249.\n\nStaff, the Syrian, 254.\n\nStar of Bethlehem, 31, 36, 37, 41.\n\nStar-gazers, 34, 35.\n\nStars, Oriental attitude toward, 31, 32; multitude likened to, 32, 33;\nof persons, 33, 34; belief that they are alive with God, 36.\n\nStoves, 200.\n\n\"Strain at a gnat and swallow a camel, \" 133\n\nStreets, 210-13.\n\nSuperstitions, 18-20.\n\nSwaddle, the, 28, 29.\n\nSwearing, 167-74. _See_ Imprecations.\n\nSwineherds, 157.\n\nSyria, life in, to-day, the same as in the time of Christ, 5, 6; life\nof, must be studied from the inside, 8, 10, 11; pilgrimages still\ncommon in, 47; events on Mount Zion and in Gethsemane illustrative of\nlife in, 56-71; belief in regard to tares in wheat-field, common in,\n148; hidden treasures in, 164, 165; sitting and reclining at meals in,\n224-26; traveling in, 247-58; the market-place in, 259-68; caravans in,\n259, 260; drawing water in, 261; measuring grain in, 265-68; the\nhousetop in, 269-77; the vineyard and the fig tree in, 280-82; making\nwine in, 282-84; agricultural life in, 286-94; shepherd life in,\n295-309; status of woman in, _see_ Oriental, Woman; marriage in,\n348-50; the process of spinning in, 359-61; snow in, 362, 363; grinding\nwheat in, 400-03. _See_ Oriental, Syrians.\n\nSyrian and American modes of thought, contrast between, 126, 127.\n\nSyrian churches, 407, 408.\n\nSyrians, attitude toward miracles, 21; attitude toward conception and\nbirth, 22; customs of, at birth, 28; attitude of, toward the stars,\n31-36; their custom of kissing, 70; life revolves around a religious\ncenter to, 81, 82; their daily language is Biblical, 87-90; have no\nsecular language, 87; mixture of piety and hatred characteristic of,\n94; expect to be judged by what they mean, not by what they say, 115;\nlove to speak in pictures, 115-17; their use of figurative language,\n117; their regard for leaven, 150; the dialects of, 175-78; hospitality\nof, 205-30; family feasts of, 231-38; their use of the words _shelter_,\n_house_, _refuge_, 241-45; live for the most part out of doors, 241,\n242; have no word for _home_, 243; lovers of their homes, 243. _See_\nOriental, Syria.\n\n_S\u00fbhad_ (sleeplessness), 388, 389.\n\n\n\nTable appointments, 222, 320.\n\nTares, 146-49.\n\nTare-sickness, 147.\n\n_Tenn\u00fbr_, for use in baking, 201.\n\n_Tent_, the term, 243.\n\n_Thaub_ (gown), 121.\n\nTheology, the course of, has been from the West to the East, 405.\n\nTheories about Christ, 410.\n\nThigh, placing the hand under, 367-69.\n\nThorns, 289, 290.\n\nThreshing, 290, 377-80.\n\nThreshing-board, 290, 377-80.\n\nTiles, 271.\n\nTimepieces in Syria, 277 n.\n\nTouch, divine power imparted by, 393-95.\n\nTourists, books by, 8, 10.\n\nTraitors, 67.\n\nTraveling, in America, 246; in the East, 247-58.\n\nTreading, the grapes, 283, 377; the grain, 290, 378.\n\nTreasure hid in a field, parable of, 161-66.\n\n\"Treating, \" 62.\n\n\n\nUnleavened bread, 150.\n\nUnrighteous judge, parable of the, 179, 180.\n\nUnveracity of the Oriental, 107-14.\n\n\n\nVengeance, Oriental idea of, 91.\n\nVine, and the fig tree, the Oriental's chief joys, 280; symbol of\nspiritual as well as physical family unity, 280; the church as a, 281;\nthe family as a, 281.\n\nVineyard, blessings for the increase of, 25.\n\nVows, 16-18, 49.\n\n\n\nWakefield, Mr., quoted, 162.\n\nWallet, the, 250.\n\nWashing the feet, 226-28.\n\nWatching for the dawn, 387-89.\n\nWedding songs, 247.\n\nWeddings, 221.\n\nWheat, measuring, 265-67; plucking and eating, 291; threshing, 377-80;\nmiraculous increase of, 384; the grinding of, 400-03.\n\nWild beasts, 307-09.\n\nWills, 155.\n\nWine, the method of making, in the East, 282-84, 377; sweet and bitter,\n284.\n\nWine cup, the mystery of, 280.\n\nWine-drinking, 15, 237.\n\nWine press, 282, 283, 377.\n\nWise Men, the, 27, 37, 44.\n\nWolves, 307.\n\nWoman, with child, 26; East and West differ greatly in status of, 313,\n314; Anglo-Saxon regard for, 313; reputed Occidental contempt for, 314,\n315; culture and privileges of the American, 316; the Oriental\nindifferent to fine points of behavior toward, 316, 317; the Oriental\ndoes not consider man superior to, 317-19; Christian and Mohammedan, in\nSyria, 318 n., 331; explanation of the Oriental's attitude toward, 318,\n319, 322; in home of cultivated Syrian, 323, 324; Syrian attitude\ntoward, according to St. Paul, 325-33; of Syria, not always submissive,\n329; her social privileges in the East limited because of fear for her,\n330, 331, 349; a reason for veiling, in the East, 332; modesty the\nchief charm of Oriental, 332; why called _h\u00fbrmat_, 333; the _harem_,\n333, 334; reason for man's precedence of, in social affairs, 334, 335;\nher place is in the home, 348; classified with reference to virtue and\nits opposite, 351; the Oriental's descriptions of, 351-55; the\nvirtuous, description of, 355-64.\n\n_Woman_, as a term of address, 340-45.\n\nWoman-stealing, 330, 331.\n\nWrestling in prayer, 12.\n\n\n\nYusuf Balua', 305-09.\n\n\n\n_Zad_, 249-51.\n\n_Zeara_, the (pilgrimage to a shrine), 12-17, 47-48.\n\n_Z\u00fbkreh_ (remembrance), 63, 65.\n\n\n\n\nThe Riverside Press\n\nCAMBRIDGE . MASSACHUSETTS\n\nU. S. A.","title":"The Syrian Christ","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":75335}