[1710] St. John i 51.
[1711] For a full discussion of that most important and significant appellation Son of Man,' comp. Lücke, u. s. pp. 459-466; Godet (German transl.) pp. 104-108; and especially Westcott, pp. 33-35. The main point is here first to ascertain the Old Testament import of the title, and then to view it as present to later Jewish thinking in the Pseudepigraphic writings (Book of Enoch). Finally, its full realisation must be studied in the Gospel-history.
[1712] Hebr. ii. 10.
[1713] We may, however, here again notice that, if this narrative had been fictitious, it would seem most clumsily put together. To introduce the Forerunner with fasting, and as an ascetic, and Him to Whom he pointed with a marriage-feast, is an incongruity which no writer of a legend would have perpetrated. But the writer of the fourth Gospel does not seem conscious of any incongruity, and this because he has no ideal story nor characters to introduce. In this sense it may be said, that the introduction of the story of the marriage-feast of Cana is in itself the best proof of its truthfulness, and of the miracle which it records.
[1714] Yalkut on 1 Sam. xiii. 1 vol ii. p. 16 d.
[1715] The Biblical proofs adduced for attaching this benefit to a sage, a bridegroom, and a prince on entering on their new state, are certainly peculiar. In the case of a bridegroom it is based on the name of Esau's bride, Machalath (Gen. xxviii. 9), a name which is derived from the Rabbinic Machal,' to forgive. In Jer. Biccur. iii. p. 65 d, where this is also related, it is pointed out that the original name of Esau's wife had been Basemath (Gen. xxxvi. 3), the name Machalath, therefore, having been given when Esau married.
[1716] In Yalcut on Is. lxi. 10 (vol. ii. p. 57 d Israel is said to have been ten times called in Scripture bride' (six times in Canticles, three times in Isaiah, and once in Jeremiah). Attention is also called to the ten garments' with which successively the Holy One arrayed Himself; to the symbolic priestly dignity of the bridegroom, &c.
[1717] Everything, even a funeral, had to give way to a marriage-procession.
[1718] Ber. R. 8.
[1719] Ab. de R. Nath. iv.
[1720] Sot. 14 a.
[1721] 2 Kings. ix. 35.
[1722] Yalkut on 2 Kings ix 35, vol. ii. p. 36 a and b.
[1723] St. Luke vii. 12.
[1724] For details I must refer to the Encyclopædias, to the article in Cassell's Bible Educator,' and to the corresponding chapters in Sketches of Jewish Social Life.'
[1725] Pesiq. R. 15 applies the first clause of Prov. xiii. 12 to a long engagement, the second to a short one.
[1726] The reader who is curious to see these and other legal documents in extenso, is referred to Dr. Sammter's ed. of the tractate Baba Metsia (notes at the end, fol. pp. 144-148).
[1727] Jer. Yeb. Md.
[1728] Some of these joyous demonstrations, such as the wearing of crowns, and even the bridal music, were for a time prohibited after the destruction of Jerusalem, in token of national mourning (Sot. ix. 14). On these crowns comp. Wagenseil, Sota, pp. 965-967.
[1729] Comp. Tob. vii. 14.
[1730] I quote the very words of the formula, which, it will be noticed, closely agree with those in our own Marriage Service.
[1731] If the Zuz be reckoned at 7d., about 5l. 16s. 8d.
[1732] This, of course, represents only the minimum. In the case of a priest's daughter the ordinary legal minimum was doubled.
[1733] The Talmud (Tos. Kethub.) here puts the not inapt question, How if the bridegroom has no goods and chattels?' but ultimately comforts itself with the thought that every man has some property, if it were only the six feet of ground in which he is to be buried.