As we pass through the court of that house in Cana, and reach the covered gallery which opens on the various rooms - in this instance, particularly, on the great reception room - all is festively adorned. In the gallery the servants move about, and there the water-pots' are ranged, after the manner of the Jews,' for purification - for the washing not only of hands before and after eating, but also of the vessels used. [1742] How detailed Rabbinic ordinances were in these respects, will be shown in another connection. Purification' was one of the main points in Rabbinic sanctity. By far the largest and most elaborate [1743] of the six books into which the Mishnah is divided, is exclusively devoted to this subject (the Seder Tohoroth,' purifications). Not to speak of references in other parts of the Talmud, we have two special tractates to instruct us about the purification of Hands' (Yadayim) and of Vessels' (Kelim). The latter is the most elaborate in all the Mishnah, and consists of not less than thirty chapters. Their perusal proves, alike the strict accuracy of the Evangelic narratives, and the justice of Christ's denunciations of the unreality and gross hypocrisy of this elaborateness of ordinances. [1744] This the more so, when we recall that it was actually vaunted as a special qualification for a seat in the Sanhedrin, to be so acute and learned as to know how to prove clean creeping things (which were declared unclean by the Law). [1745] And the mass of the people would have regarded neglect of the ordinances of purification as betokening either gross ignorance, or daring impiety.
At any rate, such would not be exhibited on an occasion like the present; and outside the reception-room, as St. John with graphic minuteness of details relates, six of those stone pots, which we know from Rabbinic writings, [1746] were ranged. Here it may be well to add, as against objectors, that it is impossible to state with certainty the exact measure represented by the two or three firkins apiece.' For, although we know that the term metretes (A.V. firkin') was intended as an equivalent for the Hebrew bath,' [1747] yet three different kinds of bath' were at the time used in Palestine: the common Palestinian or wilderness' bath, that of Jerusalem, and that of Sepphoris. [1748] The common Palestinian bath' was equal to the Roman amphora, containing about 5 ¼ gallons, while the Sepphoris bath' corresponded to the Attic metretes, and would contain about 8 ½ gallons. In the former case, therefore, each of these pots might have held from 10 ½ to 15 ¾ gallons; in the latter, from 17 to 25 ½. Reasoning on the general ground that the so-called Sepphoris measurement was common in Galilee, the larger quantity seems the more likely, though by no means certain. It is almost like trifling on the threshold of such a history, and yet so many cavils have been raised, that we must here remind ourselves, that neither the size, nor the number of these vessels has anything extraordinary about it. For such an occasion the family would produce or borrow the largest and handsomest stone-vessels that could be procured; nor is it necessary to suppose that they were filled to the brim; nor should we forget that, from a Talmudic notice, [1749] it seems to have been the practiceto set apart some of these vessels exclusively for the use of the bride and of the more distinguished guests, while the rest were used by the general company.
Entering the spacious, lofty dining-room, [1750] which would be brilliantly lighted with lamps and candlesticks, the guests are disposed round tables on couches, soft with cushions or covered with tapestry, or seated on chairs. The bridal blessing has been spoken, and the bridal cup emptied. The feast is proceeding - not the common meal, which was generally taken about even, according to the Rabbinic saying, [1751] that he who postponed it beyond that hour was as if he swallowed a stone - but a festive evening meal. If there had been disposition to those exhibitions of, or incitement to, indecorous and light merriment, [1752] such as even the more earnest Rabbis deprecated, surely the presence of Jesus would have restrained it. And now there must have been a painful pause, or something like it, when the Mother of Jesus whispered to Him that the wine failed.' [1753] There could, perhaps, be the less cause for reticence on this point towards her Son, not merely because this failure may have arisen from the accession of guests in the persons of Jesus and his disciples, for whom no provision had been originally made, but because the gift of wine or oil on such occasions was regarded a meritorious work of charity. [1754]