John 9:1. And as Jesus passed by, he saw, &c.— Some would refer this to the last words of the foregoing chapter, and hence infer the unspeakable benignity of Jesus, which no affronts or indignities of the Jews could weary out, or prevent from dispensing blessings. Others, however, seem with better reason to suppose this event not immediately consequent to what is related in the former chapter.

John 9:4. I must work the works, &c.— called in the preceding verse the works of God,—while it is day; that is, "while I have an opportunity;" the night cometh, &c.
"death is approaching, which as it puts a period in general to human labours, so will it close the scene of such miracles as these, and remove me, as man, from the converse and society of men." It was now the sabbath-day, and Jesus was about to perform a miracle, in which a small degree of servile work was to be done. Clay was to be made of earth and spittle, and the blind man's eyes were to be anointed with it; wherefore, before he began, he told his disciples, that they need not be surprised when they saw him perform miracles of that kind on the sabbath; for though they might imagine that he could easily defer them till the holy rest was expired, he had so little time to remain on earth, that he judged it expedient to embrace every opportunity of working miracles which offered. Besides, Jesus might choose to work this miracle on the sabbath, knowing that the time when it was performed, would occasion it to be more strictly inquired into by the Pharisees; and of consequence would tend to make it more generally known, as we find was really the case.

John 9:5. As long as I am in the world, &c.— Because our Lord was going to confer sight on a man who was born blind, he thence took occasion to speak of himself, as one appointed to give light likewise to the darkened minds of men. Hence we learn that our Lord's miracles were designed, not only as proofs of his mission, but to be specimens of the power which he possessed as Messiah. For example, by feeding the multitude with meat that perished, he signified that he was come to quicken and nourish mankind with the bread of life, that sovereign cordial and salutary nutriment of the soul. His giving sight to the blind was a lively emblem of the efficacy of his doctrines, to illuminate the blinded understandings of men. His healing their bodies, represented his power to heal their souls; and was a specimen of his authority to forgive sins, as it was a real, though but a partial removal of the punishment of sin. His casting out devils, was an earnest of his final victory over Satan and all his associates. His raising particular persons from the dead, was the beginning of his triumphs over death, and a demonstration of his ability to accomplish a general resurrection;and,togivenomoreexamples,hiscuringall promiscuously who applied to him, shewed that he was come not to condemn the world, but to save even the chief of sinners. Accordingly, at performing these miracles, or soon after, while the memory of them was fresh in the minds of his hearers, we often find him turning his discourse to the spiritual things which were signified by them, as in the case before us. See the Inferences on Matthew 9.

John 9:6. He spat on the ground, &c.— We are not to imagine that he did this, because it any way contributed towards the cure. Like the other external actions which accompanied his miracles, it was designed to signify to the blind man, that his sight was coming to him, not by accident, but by the gift of the Person who spake to him. The general reason which Cyril has assigned for Christ's touching the lepers, his taking hold of the dead, his breathing on the apostles, when he communicated to them the Holy Ghost, and such like bodily actions wherewith he accompanied his miracles, may be mentioned here. He thinks that our Lord's body was, by the inhabitation of the Divinity, endued with a vivifying quality, to shew men in a visible manner, that his human nature was by no means to be excluded from the business of their salvation. See the note on Mar 7:32-33 and the Inferences at the end of this chapter.

John 9:7. Go, wash in the pool of Siloam,— Concerning these waters, the evangelist observes, that their name Siloam, or according to the Hebrew orthography, Shiloah, signifies a thing that is sent. This remark, Grotius, Dr. Clarke, and others, think was designed to insinuate that Christ's command to the blind man was symbolical, teaching him, that he owed his cure to the Messiah, one of whose names was Shiloh, the sent of God.—The waters here mentioned, came from a spring that was in the rocks of mount Zion, and were gathered into two great basons: the lower called the pool of fleeces, and the upper Shiloah, Neh 3:15 because the waters which filled it were sent to them by the goodness of God, from the bowels of the earth; for in Judea, springs of water, being very rare, were esteemed peculiar blessings. Hence the waters of Shiloah were made by the prophet a type of David's descendants, and, among the rest, of Messiah; Isaiah 8:6. Christ's benefits are fitly represented by the image of water; for his blood purifies the soul from the foulest stains of sin, just as water cleanses the body from its defilements. Moreover, his doctrine imparts wisdom, and affords refreshment to the spirit, like that which cool draughts of water impart to one who is ready to faint away with thirst and heat. But, beside the emblematical reason mentioned by the evangelist, Jesus might order the blind man to go and wash in the pool of Siloam, because there were generally great numbers of people there, who, seeing the man led thither blind, having his eyes bedawbed with clay, must have gathered round him to inquire into the cause of so strange an appearance. These having examined the man, and found that he was stone-blind, they could not but be prodigiously struck by his relation, when, after washing in the pool, they saw the new facultyinstantly imparted to him: especially if his relation was confirmed by the person who led him, as in all probability it would be. For it is reasonable to suppose, that his conductor was one of those who stood by when Jesus anointed his eyes, and ordered him to wash them in Siloam. Accordingly, when he went away, and washed, and came seeing, that is, walked by the assistance of his own eyes, without being led, the miracle was earnestly and accurately inquired into by all his acquaintance, and so universally known, that it became the general topic of conversation at Jerusalem, as the evangelist informs us, John 9:8-9. Nay, it was accurately examined by the literati or doctors there; for the man was brought before them; they looked at his eyes; they inquired what had been done to them; they sent for his parents, to know from them whether he had been really born blind; and they excommunicated the man, because he would not join them in saying that Jesus, who had cured him, was an impostor. The expression at the end of this verse, He came seeing, with eyes so remarkably strengthened that they could immediately bear the light, is a great heightening of the miracle. Perhaps this man had been taught by the example of Naaman, not to despise the most improbable means, when prescribed in the view of a miracle: but the miracle implied a divine energy and interference in every respect.

John 9:8. Which before had seen him, &c.— Who had seen him before, when he was blind.

John 9:9. Others said, He is like him:— The circumstance of having received his sight, would give him an air of spirit and cheerfulness, which would render him something unlike what he was before, and might occasion a little doubt to those who were not well acquainted with him. But see the Inferences at the end of the chapter.

John 9:11. A man that is called Jesus, &c.— It appears from this verse, that the beggar knew that it was Jesus who spake to him. Probably he distinguished him by his voice, having formerly heard him preach; or he might know him by the information of the disciples. Hence he cheerfully submitted to the operation, though in itself a very unlikely means of obtaining sight.

John 9:14. And opened his eyes.— This phrase shews that the man's blindness proceeded not from any fault or defect in the organs of vision, but from his entire want of those organs: his eyelids were grown together, or contracted, as is the case of those who are born without eyes. Hence Jesus is said to have opened the man's eyes, to intimate, that in this miracle he made, rather than recovered, his organs of vision. Dr. Lightfoot has shewn, that anointing the eyes on the sabbath-day with any kind of medicine, was forbidden to the Jews by the tradition of the elders. It was certainlya malicious intention to expose Jesus to the rage of the sanhedrim (who are meant by the Pharisees), John 9:13; John 9:15, &c., which occasioned them to bring the blind man before them.

John 9:16. Therefore said some of the Pharisees,— On hearing the man's account of the miracle, the Pharisees declared that the author of it must certainly be an impostor, because he had violated the sabbath in performing it. Nevertheless, others of them, more just and candid in their way of thinking, gave it as their opinion that no impostor could possibly do a miracle of that kind, because it was too great and beneficial, for any evil being to have either the inclination or the power to perform it. If Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, both members of the sanhedrim, were now present, they would of course distinguish themselves on this occasion. Indeed, the observation seems perfectly in their manner. Gamaliel too must have been on their side, on the principles which he afterwards avowed. See Acts 5:38-39.

John 9:17. They say unto the blind man— He is so named after having received his sight, agreeable to the scripture phraseology. Thus Matthew 10:3. Matthew is called the publican, after he had left off that employment; and Matthew 26:6. Simon is called the leper, after he was cured. The next clause should be rendered, What sayest thou of him, since he hath opened, or for having opened thine eyes? This question was proposed to the man, not so much to know his opinion, as to divert the members of the sanhedrim from carrying on their altercation any further. The man's answer, that Christ was a prophet, contained not only a testimony of his being endued with a power of working miracles, but likewise that he had a right to dispense with the strict observation of the sabbath; because a prophet, according to their own traditions, was supposed to be invested with such a power.

John 9:18. But the Jews did not believe, &c.— Nothing is more remarkable than the power and goodness of Providence, throughout this transaction, which turned the malice of the Jews to the praise of HIM, whom they wanted to prove an impostor, and whom they longed to destroy. The neighbours of the man who had known him to have been blind for many years,—his parents,—the blind man himself, though intimidated by the sanhedrim, before whom they were solemnly examined, all unanimously persist in asserting the identity of the man and his former blindness: and some of the sanhedrim likewise, as appears from Joh 9:17 were convinced of the reality of the miracle. By suspending their belief, the Jews brought forth all the proofs which could be brought to establish the truth of the man's evidence, and to clear both him and Jesus from any suspicion or shadow of collusion. Their motive was malice, their intent was destruction; but the result was the establishment of truth, and a glorious vindication of the character of Christ. See the next note.

John 9:22. These words spake his parents because, &c.— As the man who had been born blind, knew who had opened his eyes; without doubt he had given his parents an account both of the name of his benefactor, and of the manner in which he had conferred the great blessing upon him. Besides, having repeated these particulars frequently to his neighbours and acquaintance, Joh 9:11 we can conceive no reason why he should conceal them from his parents. The truth is, they were ungrateful enough to the Lord Jesus, to conceal what they knew, through a pusillanimous fear of the Jews, because by an act of the court it was resolved, that whosoever acknowledged Jesus to be the Christ, should be excommunicated. The Jews had two sorts of excommunication; one was what they called Niddai, which separated the person under it four cubits from the society of others; so that it hindered him from conversing familiarly with them, but left him free at that distance, either to expound, or hear the law expounded in the synagogue. There was another kind of excommunication called Shematta, from shem, which signifies a namein general; but by way of eminence was appropriated to God, whose aweful name denotes all possible perfection. Shematta therefore answers to the Syriac Maranatta,—The Lord cometh, a form of execration used by the apostle, (1 Corinthians 16:22.) and supposed to be derived from Enoch, because St. Jude quotes a saying of his, which begins with the word Maranatta, John 9:14. Behold, the Lord cometh, with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, &c. This kind of excommunication is said to have excluded the person under it from the synagogue for ever. We have the form of it, Ezra 10:7; Ezra 10:44. Neb. Joh 13:25 being that which was inflicted on the Jews who refused to repudiate their strange wives. It seems to have been the censure also which the council threatened against those who should acknowledge Jesus to be the Messiah, and which they actually inflicted on the beggar; for the words εξελαλον αυτον, Joh 9:34-35 apply better to this kind than to the other. Probably also it was the shematta which our Lord speaks of, Joh 16:2 when he says to his disciples, αποσυναγωγους ποιησουσιν υμας ;—They shall put you out of the synagogues. According to Selden, the synagogue from which persons under this censure were excluded, was every assembly whatever, whether religious or civil; the excommunicated person not being allowed to converse familiarly with his brethren, although he was not excluded either from public prayers or sacrifices. But in this latter opinion, the learned writer has not many followers. The excommunications of the primitive Christians seem to have resembled those of the Jews in several particulars; for theyexcluded excommunicated persons from their religious assemblies, and from all communion in sacred things; and when they restored them to the privileges of the faithful, it was with much difficulty.

John 9:24. Give God the praise:— "Give glory to God, in whose presence you now are, by making a full confession of your fraud and collusion with this man; for we know that he is an impostor, and have all the reason in the world to believe that you are his accomplice." There could not be a greater insult on the character of our Redeemer, than to be pronounced a known, scandalous sinner by this high court of judicature; an infamy which has seldom, in any civilized country, fallen on any person not legally convicted. But how does this infamy fall upon their own heads when we recollect that they asserted without proof; that they admitted their own blind malice, instead of evidence.

John 9:25. Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not:— In this answer of the beggar there is a strong and beautiful irony, founded on good sense; and therefore it must have been felt by the doctors, through they dissembled their resentment for a little while, hoping that by gentle means they might prevail with the man to confess the supposed fraud of this miracle. See the next note.

John 9:27. He answered them, I have told you already,— The resistance of the rulers to the truth, appeared so criminal to the man, that, laying aside all fear, he spoke to them with great freedom: "I have told you already, and you did not hear, that is, believe; or, as others would read it, did you not hear?—wherefore would you hear it again?" &c. In this answer the irony was more plain and pointed: "Are you so affected with the miracle, and do you entertain so high an opinion of the author of it, that you take pleasure in hearing the account of it repeated, from an inclination of professing yourselves his disciples, who glory in being masters and teachers?

John 9:35. Jesus heard that they had cast him out;— Many harmonists suppose, that our Lord conferred the faculty of sight on the blind man at the feast of Tabernacles, when he left Jerusalem; and that, returning thither at the feast of Dedication, he was then told that the council had excommunicated the man; at which time he resolved to make him full amends for the injury that he had suffered. Accordingly, having found him, he discovered himself to him as the Messiah, and invited him to believe on him. We have heretofore observed the caution used by our Lord in discovering himself to be the Messiah: here he makes use of a very unusual degree of freedom, Joh 9:37 which may well be accounted for, by considering the extraordinary circumstances of the case, this being the first instance in which any one had incurred the great inconvenience attending a sentence of excommunication out ofzeal for the honour of Christ. No doubt this passed privately between our Lord and the blind man, though presently afterwards others joined the conversation. See John 9:39-40.

John 9:39. And Jesus said, For judgment, &c.— In these words directed to the people who happened to be present, or to come up while Jesus was talking with the blind man, our Lord alluded to the cure lately performed; but his meaning was spiritual, representing not the design of his coming, but the effect which it would have on the minds of men. It would shew what character and disposition every man was of. The teachable and honest, though they were as much in the dark with respect to religion, and the knowledge of the scriptures, as the blind man had been with respect to the light of the sun, should be spiritually enlightened by his coming: whereas those who in their own opinion were wise, and learned, and clear-sighted, should appear to be, what they really were, blind, that is, quite ignorant and foolish.