material possessions.
The use of light and darkness as imagery for spiritual health or failure is familiar
from e.g. John 3:19–21; 8:12; 11:9–10; 12:35–36, and cf. “sons of light” in Luke
16:8. In Matthew the disciples have been described as themselves a light to
others (5:14, 16), but this is the only place in this gospel where the metaphor is
used in the “Johannine” sense.¹⁵
But while the imagery of light may be familiar and easily understood, that of the
eye as “the lamp of the body” is not so obvious. In the OT and later Jewish
writings we hear of the “light of the eyes” as a mark of happiness,¹
of eyes
being enlightened or darkened as a mark of vigor or decline,¹⁷ and of light
shining from the eyes, which may then be compared with torches or lamps.¹⁸
Ancient writings contain a variety of ideas about how the eye functions,¹ but
modern commentators have not been able to agree on how the image works here
in relation to the body. A common view that the eye is the “window” through
which light enters the body suggests the surprising notion that light is needed
inside the body.² Or the idea might be that our awareness of light around us
comes through the eye,²¹ but “lamp” is not the most obvious way to say that. The
lamp metaphor more naturally suggests the function of the eye in providing the
light which shows the body the way to go,²² but the following adjectives appear
to indicate that it is the body itself, not its surroundings, which is either
“illuminated” or “in the dark” depending on how well the eye functions—cf. the
final comment on “the light which is in you” being darkness. Perhaps we can be
no more definite than to say that the imagery depends on light being necessary
for the proper functioning of the body (person) and that this light is in some way
dependent on the condition of the eye.²³
To convey this sense we might expect an adjective meaning “healthy,” but that is
not in itself a normal meaning of haplous, “single,” and the choice of this term
suggests that something more is being said about what makes an eye “healthy.”
One obvious sense would be “single-minded”, “undistracted,”²⁴ and this would
fit admirably with the emphasis on spiritual priorities already expressed in vv.
19–21 and soon to be given memorable epigrammatic form in v. 24 as well as an
extended exposition in vv. 25–33. But ponēros, “bad,” is not a natural opposite
to haplous in that sense. There is, however, another probable sense of haplous
which does provide a natural opposite to ponēros: the meaning “generous” is
suggested by the use of the derivative noun haplotēs for “generosity” in e.g.
Rom 12:8; 2 Cor 8:2; 9:11, 13, and the adverb haplōs in Jas 1:5 for God’s giving
“generously” (cf. LXX 1 Chron 29:17; Prov 11:25). If generosity is to be
understood as the outworking of the “simplicity,” “openness” denoted by
haplous, this would form a direct counterpart to the phrase ophthalmos ponēros,
“bad eye,”²⁵ which is used for a jealous stinginess in 20:15. In view of the
recognized meaning of the “bad eye” to denote selfish greed or meanness,² it
seems likely that this saying is meant to indicate that one indication of a person’s
spiritual health is their generosity or lack of it in the use of their material
possessions.²⁷
So this rather obscure little saying seems to be using a word-play²⁸ which the
English translator cannot reproduce without extensive paraphrase in order to
commend either single-mindedness (in pursuing the values of the kingdom of
heaven) or generosity, or more likely both, as a key to the effective life of a
disciple. The final comment then underlines how spiritually disoriented is a life
which is not governed by those principles, but rather aims to amass and hold on
to “treasure on earth”.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: