the teaching of Jesus, any more than the supposed application to his case of what is called the 'parable' of the much and the little forgiven debtor implies, that he had received from the Saviour spiritual benefit, great or small. If Jesus had taught in the 'city,' and, as always, irresistibly drawn to Him the multitude, it would be only in accordance with the manners of the time if the leading Pharisee invited the distinguished 'Teacher' to his table. As such he undoubtedly treated Him. [a St. Luke vii. 40] The question in Simon's mind was, whether He was more than 'Teacher', even 'Prophet;' and that such question rose within him indicates, not only that Christ openly claimed a position different from that of Rabbi, and that His followers regarded Him at least as a prophet, but also, within the breast of Simon, a struggle in which strong Jewish prejudice was bearing down the mighty impression of Christ's Presence.
They were all sitting, or rather 'lying' [1 Ber. vi. 6 makes the following curious distinction: if they sit at the table, each says 'the grace' for himself; if they 'lie down' to table, one says it in the name of all. If wine is handed them during dinner, each says 'the grace' over it for himself; if after dinner, one says it for all.], the Mishnah sometimes also calls it 'sitting down and leaning', around the table, the body resting on the couch, the feet turned away from the table in the direction of the wall, while the left elbow rested on the table. And now, from the open courtyard, up the verandah-step, perhaps through an antechamber, [b Ab. iv.16] and by the open door, passed the figure of a woman into the festive reception-room and dining-hall, the Teraglin (triclinium) of the Rabbis. [2 The Teraqlin was sometimes entered by an antechamber (Prosedor), Ab. iv. 16, and opened into one (Jer. Rosh haSh. 59 b), or more (Yom. 15 b), side-or bed-rooms. The common measurement for such a hall was fifteen feet (ten cubits) breadth, length, and height (Baba B. vi. 4).] How did she obtain access? Had she mingled with the servants, or was access free to all, or had she, perhaps, known the house and its owner? [3 The strangeness of the circumstance suggests this, which is, alas! by no means inconsistent with what we know of the morality of some of these Rabbis, although this page must not be stained by detailed references.] It little matters, as little as whether she 'had been,' or 'was' up to that day, 'a sinner,' [4 The other and harsher reading, 'a
woman which was in the city a sinner,' need scarcely be discussed.] in the terrible acceptation of the term. But we must bear in mind the greatness of Jewish prejudice against any conversation with woman, however lofty her character, fully to realise the absolute incongruity on the part of such a woman in seeking access to the Rabbi, Whom so many regarded as the God-sent Prophet.
But this, also, is evidential, that here we are far beyond the Jewish standpoint. To this woman it was not incongruous, because to her Jesus had, indeed, been the Prophet sent from God. We have said before that this story is a fragment; and here, also, as in the invitation of Simon to Jesus, we have evidence of it. She had, no doubt, heard His words that day. What He had said would be, in substance, if not in words: 'Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and
I will give you rest.... Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart.....Ye shall find rest unto
your souls.....' This was to her the Prophet sent from God with the good news that opened even to
her the Kingdom of Heaven, and laid its yoke upon her, not bearing her down to very hell, but easy of wear and light of burden. She knew that it was all as He said, in regard to the heavy load of her past; and, as she listened to those Words, and looked on that Presence, she learned to believe that it was all as He had promised to the heavy burdened. And she had watched, and followed Him afar off to the Pharisee's house. Or, perhaps, if it be thought that she had not that day heard for herself, still, the sound of that message must have reached her, and wakened the echoes of her heart. And still it was: Come to Me; learn of Me; I will give rest. What mattered all else to her in the hunger of her soul, which had just tasted of that Heavenly Bread?
The shadow of her form must have fallen on all who sat at meat. But none spake; nor did she heed any but One. Like heaven's own music, as Angels' songs that guide the wanderer home, it still sounded in her ears. There are times when we forget all else in one absorbing thought; when men's opinions, nay, our own feelings of shame, are effaced by that one Presence; when the 'Come to Me; learn of Me; I will give you rest,' are the all in all to us. Then it is, that the fountains of the Great Deep within are broken open by the wonder-working rod, with which God's Messenger to us, the better Moses, has struck our hearts. She had come that day to 'learn' and to 'find rest.' What mattered it to her who was there, or what they thought? There was only One Whose Presence she dared not encounter, not from fear of Him, but from knowledge of herself. It was He to Whom she had come. And so she 'stood behind at His Feet.' She had brought with her an alabastron (phial, or flask, commonly of alabaster) of perfume. [11 have so translated the word, which the A.V. renders 'ointment.' The word is evidently the Hebrew and Rabbinic which, however, is not always the equivalent for myrrh, but seems also to mean musk and mastic. In short, I regard it as designating any fluid unguent or, generally speaking, 'perfume.' So common was the use of perfumes, that Ber. vi. 6 mentions a mugmar, or a kind of incense, which was commonly burnt after a feast. As regards the word 'alabastron,' the name was given to perfume-phials in general, even if not made of alabaster, because the latter was so frequently used for such flasks.] It is a coarse suggestion, that this had originally been bought for a far different purpose. We know that perfumes were much sought after, and very largely in use. Some, such as true balsam, were worth double their weight in silver; others, like the spikenard (whether as juice or unguent, along with other ingredients), though not equally costly, were also 'precious.' We have evidence that perfumed oils, notably oil of rose, [a Shebh. vii. 6.] and of the iris plant, but chiefly the mixture known in antiquity as foliatum, were largely manufactured and used in Palestine, [b Jer. Demai 22 b.] A flask with this perfume was worn by women round the neck, and hung down below the breast (the Tselochith shel Palyeton). [c Ab. S. 35 b.] So common was its use as to be allowed even on the Sabbath, [d Shabb. vi. 3.] This
'flask' (possibly the Chumarta de Philon of Gitt. 69 b), not always of glass, but of silver or gold, probably often also of alabaster, containing 'palyeton' (evidently, the foliatum of Pliny) was used both to sweeten the breath and perfume the person. Hence it seems at least not unlikely, that the alabastron which she brought, who loved so much, was none other than the 'flask of foliatum,' so common among Jewish woman. [1 The derivation of the Rabbinic term in Buxtorf s Lexicon (p. 1724) is certainly incorrect. I have no doubt the was the foliatum of Pliny (Hist. Nat. xiii. 1, 2). In Jew. War iv. 9, 10, Josephus seems to imply that women occasionally poured over themselves unguents. According to Kethub. vi. 4, a woman might apparently spend a tenth of her dowry on such things as unguents and perfumes. For, in Kethub. 66 b we have an exaggerated account of a woman spending upwards of 3001. on perfumes! This will at any rate prove their common and abundant use.]
As she stood behind Him at His Feet, reverently bending, a shower of tears, like sudden, quick summer-rain, that refreshes air and earth, 'bedewed' [2 This is the real meaning of the verb.] His Feet. As if surprised, or else afraid to awaken His attention, or defile Him by her tears, she quickly [3 This is implied in the tense.] wiped them away with the long tresses of her hair that had fallen down and touched Him, [4 It is certainly not implied, that she had her hair dishevelled as in mourning, or as by women before drinking the waters of jealousy.] as she bent over His Feet. Nay, not to wash them in such impure waters had she come, but to show such loving gratefulness and reverence as in her poverty she could, and in her humility she might offer. And, now that her faith had grown bold in His Presence, she is continuing [5 The tense implies this.] to kiss those Feet which had brought to her the 'good tidings of peace,' and to anoint them out of the alabastron round her neck. And still she spake not, nor yet He. For, as on her part silence seemed most fitting utterance, so on His, that He suffered it in silence was best and most fitting answer to her.
Another there was whose thoughts, far other than hers or the Christ's, were also unuttered. A more painful contrast than that of'the Pharisee' in this scene, can scarcely be imagined. We do not insist that the designation 'this Man,' [e ver. 39.] given to Christ in his spoken thoughts, or the manner in which afterwards he replied to the Saviour's question by a supercilious 'I suppose,' or 'presume,' [a ver. 43.]necessarily imply contempt. But they certainly indicate the mood of his spirit. One thing, at least, seems now clear to this Pharisee: If'this Man,' this strange, wandering, popular idol, with His strange, novel ways and words, Whom in politeness he must call 'Teacher,' [1 In the A. V.] Rabbi, were a Prophet, He would have known who the woman was, and, if He had known who she was, then would He never have allowed such approach. So do we, also, often argue as to what He would do, if He knew. But He does know; and it is just because He knoweth that He doeth what, from our lower standpoint, we cannot understand. Had He been a Rabbi, He would certainly, and had he been merely a Prophet, He would probably, have repelled such approach. The former, if not from self-righteousness, yet from ignorance of sin and forgiveness; the latter, because such homage was more than man's due. [2 The Talmud, with its usual exaggeration, has this story when commenting on the reverence due by children to their parents, that R. Ishmael's mother had complained her son would not allow her, when he came from the Academy, to wash his feet and then drink the water, on which the sages made the Rabbi yield! (Jer. Peah 15 c). Again, some one came to kiss R. Jonathan's feet, because he had induced filial reverence in his son (u. s., col. d).] But, He was more than a prophet,
