This idea of filial obedience has been at once the strength and weakness of Orientals. In the absence of the restraining interests of a larger social life this patriarchal rule has preserved the cohesion of the domestic and clannish group, and thus safeguarded for the people their primitive virtues. On the other hand, it has served to extinguish the spirit of {55} progress, and has thus made Oriental life a monotonous repet.i.tion of antiquated modes of thought.
And it was indeed a great blessing to the world when Jesus broke away from mere formal obedience to parents, in the Oriental sense of the word, and declared, "Whosoever shall do the will of my Father in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother."
[1] See above, p. 14.
{56}
CHAPTER VI
FEAST AND SACRAMENT
Of Jesus" public ministry and his characteristics as an Oriental teacher, I shall speak in later chapters. Here I will give s.p.a.ce only to a portrayal of the closing scenes in his personal career. The events of the "upper room" on Mount Zion, and of Gethsemane, are faithful photographs of striking characteristics of Syrian life.
The Last Supper was no isolated event in Syrian history. Its fraternal atmosphere, intimate a.s.sociations, and sentimental intercourse are such as characterize every such gathering of Syrian friends, especially in the shadow of an approaching danger. From the simple "table manners"
up to that touch of sadness and idealism which the Master gave that meal,--bestowing upon it the sacrificial character that has been its propelling force through the ages,--I find nothing which is {57} not in perfect harmony with what takes place on such occasions in my native land. The sacredness of the Last Supper is one of the emphatic examples of how Jesus" life and words sanctified the commonest things of life. He was no inventor of new things, but a discoverer of the spiritual significance of things known to men to be ordinary.
The informal formalities of Oriental life are brimful of sentiment.
The Oriental"s chief concern in matters of conduct is not the correctness of the technique, but the cordiality of the deed. To the Anglo-Saxon the Oriental appears to be perhaps too cordial, decidedly sentimental, and over-responsive to the social stimulus. To the Oriental, on the other hand, the Anglo-Saxon seems in danger of becoming an unemotional intellectualist.
Be that as it may, the Oriental is never afraid to "let himself go" and to give free course to his feelings. The Bible in general and such portions of it as the story of the Last Supper in particular ill.u.s.trate this phase of Oriental life.
{58}
In Syria, as a general rule, the men eat their fraternal feasts alone, as in the case of the Master and his disciples at the Last Supper, when, so far as the record goes, none of the women followers of Christ were present. They sit on the floor in something like a circle, and eat out of one or a few large, deep dishes. The food is lifted into the mouth, not with a fork or spoon,--except in the case of liquid food,--but with small "shreds" of thin bread. Even liquid food is sometimes "dipped up" with pieces of bread formed like the bowl of a spoon. Here may be readily understood Jesus" saying, "He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me."[1]
In his famous painting, The Last Supper, Leonardo da Vinci presents an Oriental event in an Occidental form. The high table, the chairs, the individual plates and drinking-gla.s.ses are European rather than Syrian appointments. From a historical standpoint, the picture is misleading.
But Da Vinci"s great {59} production was not intended to be a historical, but a character, study. Such a task could not have been accomplished if the artist had presented the Master and his disciples as they really sat in the "upper room"--in a circle. He seats them on one side of the table, divides them into four groups of three each--two groups on each side of the Master. As we view the great painting, we feel the thrill of horror which agitated the loyal disciples when Jesus declared, "Verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me."[2]
The gestures, the sudden change of position, and the facial expression reveal the innermost soul of each disciple. This is the central purpose of the picture. The artist gave the event a European rather than an Oriental setting, in order to make it more intelligible to the people for whom it was intended.
But the appointments of the Great Supper were genuinely Oriental. The Master and his disciples sat on the floor and ate out of one or {60} a few large, deep dishes. In Mark"s account of that event[3] we read: "And when it was evening he cometh with the twelve. And as they sat and were eating, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you shall betray me, even he that _eateth_ with me." The fact that they were _all_ eating with him is shown in the statement, "They began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him, Is it I? And he said unto them, It is one of the twelve, he that dippeth with me in the dish."
The last sentence, "He that dippeth with me in the dish," has been construed to mean that it was Judas only (who was sitting near to Jesus) who was dipping in the dish out of which the Master was eating.
This is altogether possible, but by no means certain. The fact is that according to Syrian customs on such occasions each of the few large dishes contains a different kind of food. Each one of the guests is privileged to reach to any one of the dishes and dip his bread in it.
From this it may be {61} safely inferred that several or all of the disciples dipped _in turn_ in the dish which was nearest to Jesus. The fact that the other disciples did not know whom their Master meant by his saying that one of them should betray him, even after he had said, "He that dippeth with me in the dish," shows plainly that Judas was eating in the same fashion as all the other disciples were.
Therefore the saying, "He that dippeth with me," etc., was that of disappointed love. It may be thus paraphrased: "I have loved you all alike. I have chosen you as my dearest friends. We have often broken bread and sorrowed and rejoiced together, yet one of you, my dear disciples, one who is now eating with me _as the rest are_, intends to betray me!"
And that forlorn but glorious company who met in the upper room on Mount Zion on that historic night had certainly one cup out of which they drank. At our feasts we always drank the wine out of one and the same cup. We did not stay up nights thinking about {62} microbes. To us the one cup meant fellowship and fraternal communion. The one who gives drink (_sacky_) fills the cup and pa.s.ses it to the most honored member of the company first. He drinks the contents and returns the cup to the _sacky_, who fills it again and hands it to another member of the group, and so on, until all have been served once. Then the guests drink again by way of _nezel_. It is not easy to translate this word into English. The English word "treating" falls very short of expressing the affectionate regard which the _nezel_ signifies. The one guest upon receiving the cup wishes for the whole company "health, happiness, and length of days." Then he singles out one of the group and begs him to accept the next cup that is poured as a pledge of his affectionate regard. The pourer complies with the request by handing the next cup to the person thus designated, who drinks it with the most effusive and affectionate reciprocation of his friend"s sentiments. It is also customary for a gracious host to request as a {63} happy ending to the feast that the contents of one cup be drunk by the whole company as a seal of their friendship with one another. Each guest takes a sip and pa.s.ses the cup to the one next to him until all have partaken of the "fruit of the vine."
I have no doubt that it was after this custom that the disciples drank when Jesus "took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them: and they _all_ drank of it."[4]
No account of fraternal feasting in Syria can be complete without mention of the _z[i-breve]kreh_ (remembrance). To be remembered by his friends after his departure from them is one of the Syrian"s deepest and dearest desires. The _z[i-breve]kreh_ plays a very important part in the literature of the East, and expresses the tenderest spirit of its poetry. The expressions "I remember," "remember me," "your remembrance," "the remembrance of those days" and like phrases are legion among the Syrians. "O friends," cries the Arabian poet, {64} "let your remembrance of us be as constant as our remembrance of you; for such a remembrance brings near those that are far away."
Rarely do friends who have been feasting together part without this request being made by those of them who do not expect to meet with their friends again for a time. "Remember me when you meet again," is said by the departing friend with unspeakable tenderness. He is affectionately grateful also when he knows that he is held in remembrance by his friends. So St. Paul pours out his soul in grateful joy for his friends" remembrance of him. "But now when Timotheus came from you unto us, and brought us good tidings of your faith and charity, and that _ye have good remembrance of us always, desiring greatly to see us, as we also to see you_."[5]
This affectionate request, "remember me," signifies, "I love you, therefore I am always with you." If we love one another, we cannot {65} be separated from one another. The _z[)i]ikreh_ is the bond of fraternity between us.
Was not this the very thing which the Master meant when he said, "This do in remembrance of me"?[6] The disciples were asked never to allow themselves to forget their Master"s love for them and for the world: never to forget that if his love lived in their hearts he was always with them, present at their feasts, and in their struggles in the world to lead the world from darkness into light. "This do in remembrance of me," is therefore the equivalent of "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."[7]
"Now there was leaning on Jesus" bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved."[8] The posture of the "beloved disciple," John,--so objectionable to Occidental taste,--is in perfect harmony with Syrian customs. How often have I seen men friends in such an att.i.tude. There is not in it the slightest infringement of the rules of propriety; the act was as natural {66} to us all as shaking hands. The practice is especially indulged in when intimate friends are about to part from one another, as on the eve of a journey, or when about to face a dangerous undertaking. They then sit with their heads leaning against each other, or the one"s head resting upon the other"s shoulder or breast.
They talk to one another in terms of unbounded intimacy and unrestrained affection. The expressions, "My brother," "My eyes," "My soul," "My heart," and the like, form the life-centers of the conversation. "My life, my blood are for you; take the very sight of my eyes, if you will!" And lookers-on say admiringly, "Behold, how they love one another! By the name of the Most High, they are closer than brothers."
Was it, therefore, strange that the Master, who knew the deepest secret of the divine life, and whose whole life was a living sacrifice, should say to his intimate friends, as he handed them the bread and the cup on that {67} momentous night, "Take, eat; this is my body"; and "Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood"? Here again the Nazarene charged the ordinary words of friendly intercourse with rare spiritual richness and made the common speech of his people express eternal realities.
But let me here call attention to Da Vinci"s master-stroke which changes for a moment John"s posture and relieves the Last Supper of a feature which is so objectionable to Occidental taste. The artist seizes the moment when Peter pulled John from Jesus" breast by beckoning to the beloved disciple "that he should ask who it should be of whom he spoke" (the one who should betray him). John remains in the att.i.tude of loving repose; he simply lifts his body for an instant, and inclines his head to hear Peter.
The treachery of Judas is no more an Oriental than it is a human weakness. Traitors can claim neither racial nor national refuge. They are fugitives in the earth. But in the Judas episode is involved one of the most tender, {68} most touching acts of Jesus" whole life. To one familiar with the customs of the East, Jesus" handing the "sop" to his betrayer was an act of surpa.s.sing beauty and significance. In all my life in America I have not heard a preacher interpret this simple deed, probably because of lack of knowledge of its meaning in Syrian social intercourse.
"And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon."[9] At Syrian feasts, especially in the region where Jesus lived, such sops are handed to those who stand and serve the guests with wine and water. But in a more significant manner those morsels are exchanged by friends. Choice bits of food are handed to friends by one another, as signs of close intimacy. It is never expected that any person would hand such a sop to one for whom he cherishes no friendship.
I can never contemplate this act in the Master"s story without thinking of "the love of Christ which pa.s.seth knowledge." To the one {69} who carried in his mind and heart a murderous plot against the loving Master, Jesus handed the sop of friendship, the morsel which is never offered to an enemy. The rendering of the act in words is this: "Judas, my disciple, I have infinite pity for you. You have proved false, you have forsaken me in your heart; but I will not treat you as an enemy, for I have come, not to destroy, but to fulfill. Here is my sop of friendship, and "that thou doest, do quickly.""
Apparently Jesus" demeanor was so cordial and sympathetic that, as the evangelist tells us, "Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him. For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast, or that he should give something to the poor."[10]
Thus in this simple act of the Master, so rarely noticed by preachers, we have perhaps the finest practical example of "Love your enemies" in the entire Gospel.
{70}
Is it therefore to be wondered at that in speaking of Judas, the writer of St. John"s Gospel says, "And after the sop Satan entered into him"?
For, how can one who is a traitor at heart reach for the gift of true friendship without being transformed into the very spirit of treason?
Again, Judas"s treasonable kiss in Gethsemane was a perversion of an ancient, deeply cherished, and universally prevalent Syrian custom. In saluting one another, especially after having been separated for a time, men friends of the same social rank kiss one another on both cheeks, sometimes with very noisy profusion. When they are not of the same social rank, the inferior kisses the hand of the superior, while the latter at least pretends to kiss his dutiful friend upon the cheek.
So David and Jonathan "kissed one another, until David exceeded."
Paul"s command, "Salute one another with a holy kiss," so scrupulously disobeyed by Occidental Christians, is characteristically Oriental. As a child I always felt {71} a profound reverential admiration for that unreserved outpouring of primitive affections, when strong men "fell upon one another"s neck" and kissed, while the women"s eyes swam in tears of joy. The pa.s.sionate, quick, and rhythmic exchange of affectionate words of salutation and kisses sounded, with perhaps a little less harmony, like an intermingling of vocal and instrumental music.
So Judas, when "forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail, Master, and kissed him,"[11] invented no new sign by which to point Jesus out to the Roman soldiers, but employed an old custom for the consummation of an evil design. Just as Jesus glorified the common customs of his people by using them as instruments of love, so Judas degraded those very customs by wielding them as weapons of hate.
[1] Matt. xxvi: 23.
[2] Matt. xxvi: 21.
[3] Revised Version, xiv: 17-20.
[4] Mark xiv: 23.
[5] 1 Thess. iii: 6.
[6] Luke xxii: 19.
[7] Matt. xxviii: 10.