(_kaffer_). It may be noticed here {90} that it is not the old theology only which a.s.sociates the infidel with intense heat.
So this religious language is the Oriental"s daily speech. I have stated in my autobiography that the men my father employed in his building operations were grouped according to their faith. He had so many Druses, so many Greek Orthodox, Maronites, and so forth.
The almost total abstinence from using "pious" language in ordinary business and social intercourse in America may be considered commendable in some ways, but I consider it a surrender of the soul to the body, a subordination of the spirit of the things which are eternal to the spirit of the things which are temporal. In my judgment, the superior culture of the West, instead of limiting the vocabulary of religion to the one hour of formal worship on Sunday, and scrupulously shunning it during the remainder of the week, should make its use, on a much higher plane than the Orient has yet discovered, coextensive with all the activities of life.
[1] Ps. cx.x.xix: 1-6.
[2] Gal. vi: 7.
[3] 2 Cor. ix: 6.
[4] Ps. xix: 9, 11.
[5] Matt. xviii: 10.
[6] x: 6.
{91}
CHAPTER II
IMPRECATIONS
Again, the Oriental"s consideration of life as being essentially religious makes him as pious in his imprecations and curses as he is in his aspirational prayer. Beyond all human intrigue, pa.s.sion, and force, the great avenger is G.o.d. "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord."[1] "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no G.o.d with me: I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."[2]
By priests and parents these precepts have been transmitted from generation to generation in the Orient, from time immemorial. We all were instructed in them by our elders with scrupulous care. Of course as weak mortals we always tried to avenge ourselves, and the idea of _thar_ (revenge) lies deep in the Oriental nature. But to us our vengeance was nothing {92} compared with what G.o.d did to our "unG.o.dly"
enemies and oppressors.
The Oriental"s impetuosity and effusiveness make his imprecatory prayers, especially to the "unaccustomed ears" of Americans, blood-curdling. And I confess that on my last visit to Syria, my countrymen"s (and especially my countrywomen"s) bursts of pious wrath jarred heavily upon me. In his oral bombardment of his enemy the Oriental hurls such missiles as, "May G.o.d burn the bones of your fathers"; "May G.o.d exterminate your seed from the earth"; "May G.o.d cut off your supply of bread (_yakta rizkak_)"; "May you have nothing but the ground for a bed and the sky for covering"; "May your children be orphaned and your wife widowed"; and similar expressions.
Does not this sound exactly like the one hundred and ninth Psalm?
Speaking of his enemy, the writer of that psalm says, "Let his days be few, and let another take his office. Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children be continually {93} vagabonds, and beg; let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.
Let there be none to extend mercy unto him; neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children. Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out."
The sad fact is that the Oriental has always considered his personal enemies to be the enemies of G.o.d also, and as such their end was destruction. Such sentiments mar the beauty of many of the Psalms.
The enemies of the Israelites were considered the enemies of the G.o.d of Israel, and the enemies of a Syrian family are also the enemies of the patron saint of that family. In that most wonderful Scriptural pa.s.sage--the one hundred and thirty-ninth Psalm--the singer cries, "Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O G.o.d: depart from me, ye b.l.o.o.d.y men. For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain. Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am I not grieved with those that rise against thee? _I hate them with perfect hatred: {94} I count them mine enemies._" Yet this ardent hater of his enemies most innocently turns to G.o.d and says in the next verse: "Search me, O G.o.d, and know my heart: try me and know my thoughts: _and see if there be any wicked way in me_, and lead me in the way everlasting."
This mixture of piety and hatred, uttered so navely and in good faith, is characteristically Syrian. Such were the mutual wishes I so often heard expressed in our neighborhood and clan fights and quarrels in Syria. When so praying, the persons would beat upon their b.r.e.a.s.t.s and uncover their heads, as signs of the total surrender of their cause to an avenging Omnipotence. Of course the Syrians are not so cruel and heartless as such imprecations, especially when cast in cold type, would lead one to believe. I am certain that if the little children of his enemy should become fatherless, the imprecator himself would be among the first to "favor" them. If you will keep in mind the juvenile temperament of the Oriental, already mentioned, and his habit of turning to {95} G.o.d in all circ.u.mstances, as unreservedly as a child turns to his father, your judgment of the son of Palestine will be greatly tempered with mercy.
The one redeeming feature in these imprecatory pet.i.tions is that they have always served the Oriental as a safety-valve. Much of his wrath is vented in this manner. He is much more cruel in his words than in his deeds. As a rule the Orientals quarrel much, but fight little. By the time two antagonists have cursed and reviled each other so profusely they cool off, and thus graver consequences are averted. The Anglo-Saxon has outgrown such habits. In the first place the highly complex social order in which he lives calls for much more effective methods for the settling of disputes, and, in the second place, he has no time to waste on mere words. And just as the Anglo-Saxon smiles at the wordy fights of the Oriental, the Oriental shudders at the swiftness of the Anglo-Saxon in using his fists and his pistol. Both are needy of the grace of G.o.d.
[1] Rom. xii: 19.
[2] Deut. x.x.xii: 39.
{96}
CHAPTER III
LOVE OF ENEMIES
The preceding chapter makes it very clear why Jesus opened the more profound depths of the spiritual life to his much-divided and almost hopelessly clannish countrymen, by commanding them to love their enemies. He who taught "as one having authority, and not as the scribes," knew the possibilities and powers of divine love as no man did. It is in such immortal precepts that we perceive his superiority to his time and people and the divinity of his character. His knowledge of the Father was so intimate and his repose in the Father"s love so perfect that he could justly say, "I and my father are one."
"Ye have heard," he said to his followers, "that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor [in the original, _quarib_--kinsman] and hate thine enemy: but I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do {97} good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your father which is in heaven."[1]
Here we have the very heart and soul of the Gospel, and the dynamic power of Jesus" ministry of reconciliation. Yet to many devout Christians, as well as to unfriendly critics of the New Testament, the command, "Love your enemies," offers a serious perplexity. An "independent" preacher in a large Western city, after reading this portion of the Sermon on the Mount to his congregation, stated that Jesus" great discourse should be called, "The Sarcasm on the Mount."
Is not love of enemies beyond the power of human nature?
This question is pertinent. And it is an obvious fact that we cannot love by command; we cannot love to order. This mysterious flow of soul which we call love is not of our own making; therefore we cannot _will_ to love. Such a discussion, however, falls outside the scope {98} of this publication. What I wish to offer here is a linguistic explanation which I believe will throw some light on this great commandment.
The word "love" has been more highly specialized in the West than in the East. In its proper English use it means only that ardent, amorous feeling which cannot be created by will and design. In the West the word "love" has been relieved of the function of expressing the less ardent desires such as the terms "to like," "to have good-will toward,"
and "to be well-disposed toward" imply.
Not so in the East. The word "like," meaning "to be favorably inclined toward," is not found either in the Bible or in the Arabic tongue. In the English version it is used in two places, but the translation is incorrect. In the twenty-fifth chapter of Deuteronomy the seventh verse, "If the man like not to take his brother"s wife," should be rendered, "If the man _consent_ not"; and in the fourth chapter of Amos, the fifth verse, "For this liketh you, O ye children of Israel,"
is in the original, "For this ye {99} _loved_, O ye children of Israel." In any standard concordance of the Bible, the Hebrew verb _Aheb_ (to love) precedes these quotations.
So to us Orientals the only word which can express any cordial inclination of approval is "love." One loves his wife and children, and loves grapes and figs and meat, if he likes these things. An employer says to an employee, "If you _love_ to work for me according to this agreement, you can." It is nothing uncommon for one to say to a casual acquaintance whom he likes, "I must say, _Sahib_ [friend], that I love you!" I know of no equivalent in the Arabic for the phrase, "I am interested in you." "Love" and "hate" are the usual terms by which to express approval and disapproval, as well as real love and hatred.
The Scriptural pa.s.sages ill.u.s.trative of this thought are not a few. In the ninth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, the thirteenth verse, it is said, "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." G.o.d does not "hate." The two terms here, "loved" and {100} "hated," mean "approved" and "disapproved." It is as a father approves of the conduct of one of his children and disapproves that of another of them. Another example of this use of the word "hate" is found in the twenty-first chapter of Deuteronomy, the fifteenth verse: "If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the first-born: but he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath." Here it is safe to infer that the writer meant to distinguish between the wife who was a "favorite" and the one who was not. There could be no valid reason why a husband should live with a wife whom he really hated when he could very easily divorce her, according to the Jewish {101} law, and marry another. In such a case the husband was simply partial in his love.
The hatred which is felt toward an enemy and a destroyer does not apply here.
Another Scriptural pa.s.sage which ill.u.s.trates the free use of the word "love" is the story of the rich man in the tenth chapter of St. Mark"s Gospel. Beginning with the seventeenth verse, the pa.s.sage reads: "And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeling to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, G.o.d. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honor thy father and mother. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. _Then Jesus, beholding him, loved him_, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest"; and so forth. Apparently the brief conversation with the young man {102} showed Jesus that his questioner was both polite and intelligent, so the Master liked him. Stating the case in Western phraseology it may be said that the young Hebrew seeker was an agreeable, or likable man.
Quite different is the import of the word "love" in such of the Master"s sayings as are found in the fifteenth chapter of St. John"s Gospel: "As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you." Here the term "love" is used in its truest and purest sense.
From all this it may be seen that when the Great Oriental Teacher said to his countrymen, who considered all other clans than their own as their enemies, "Love your enemies," he did not mean that they should be enamored of them, but that they should have good will toward them. We cannot love by will and design, but we certainly can will to be well disposed even toward those who, we believe, have ill will toward us.
He who really thinks this {103} an impossibility gives evidence not of superior "critical knowledge," but of being still in the lower stages of human evolution.
But I have something more to say on this great subject. Whether used in a general or a highly specialized sense the word "Love" speaks indeed of the "greatest thing in the world."
When the Master of the Art of Living said, "Love your enemies," he urged upon the minds of men the divinest law of human progress. Yet compliance with this demand seems, to the majority of men, to be beyond the reach of humanity. When you are admonished to love your enemies, you will be likely to think of the meanest, most disagreeable human being you know and wonder as to how you are going to love _such_ a person. But the Master"s law far transcends this narrow conception of love. Its deeper meaning, when understood, renders such a conception shallow and childish. It is to be found, not in the freakish moods of the sensibility, but in the realm of permanent ideals.
{104}
There are in the world two forces at work, love and hatred. Hatred destroys, love builds; hatred injures, love heals; hatred embitters life, love sweetens it; hatred is G.o.dlessness, love is G.o.dliness. The supreme question, therefore, is, not as to whether there are unlovable persons in the world or not, but rather, which one of these two forces would you have to rule your own life and the life of humanity at large, love or hatred? Which nutrition would you give your own soul and the souls of those who are near and dear to you, that of hatred, or that of love? Can it be your aim in life to aid that power which injures, destroys, embitters life and estranges from G.o.d, or the power which heals, builds up, sweetens life and makes one with G.o.d?
You say you have been injured through the malicious designs of others, you are pained by the injury, and a sense of hatred impels you to avenge yourself. But what formed such designs against you, love or hatred? Hatred! You enjoy, idealize, adore the love of those who {105} love you. The designs of love give you joyous satisfaction, and not pain. You know now by actual personal experience that the fruits of hatred are bitter, and the fruits of love are sweet. Is it your duty, therefore, to give your life over to the power of hatred, and thus increase its dominion among men and multiply its bitter, poisonous fruit in the world, or to consecrate your life to the power of love, which you idealize and adore, and whose fruits are joy and peace?
This, therefore, is the Master"s law of love: Give your life and service to that power which merits your holiest regard and engages your purest affections, regardless of the "evil and the undeserving."