| Related
Articles
Example Stories in Luke's Gospel Related Maps Other |
What is a
Parable? Bernard Brandon Scott The parables of Jesus belong to a special type of Jewish storytelling. Parables appear neither in the Hebrew Bible nor in Greek literature, but they are abundant in the writings of rabbis. There are two classic definitions of parable, one from ancient times and the other from a modern scholar, C.H. Dodd. Rabbis believed that parables provided handles to a mystery, something difficult to understand. They believed that these simple stories gave insight into the true meaning of the Torah. In more recent years, the British scholar C.H. Dodd in his book The Parables of the Kingdom (1935) provides a helpful definition. It is a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or common life. Because of its "strangeness," the hearer is "teased" into active thought about its meaning. The parable is not the interpretation, but it provokes interpretation.
The parables of Jesus belong to a special type of Jewish storytelling. Parables appear neither in the Hebrew Bible nor in Greek literature, but they are abundant in the writings of rabbis. A parable is a type of folk tale, exhibiting the storytelling of common people. Rabbinic Definition Parables demand alertness and interpretation by the audience, who must hear, use their ears, and interpret. Even more, parables provide handles to a mystery. The rabbis appreciated the parable’s origin among the common folk and of its apparent simple form. So they warned: If a king loses gold from his house or a precious pearl, does he not find it by means of a wick worth a farthing? So the parable should not be lightly esteemed in your eyes, since by means of the parable a person arrives at the true meaning of the words of the Torah. Modern Definition British scholar C.H. Dodd in his book The Parables of the Kingdom (1935) has furnished the best definition by a modern interpreter. His definition has much in common with the ancient rabbis: At its simplest the parable is a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or common life, arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness, and leaving the mind in sufficient doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought. The parable is not the interpretation, but it provokes interpretation. Like handles, it enables the hearer to pick up, to engage, and to examine. Parable as Proverb The Hebrew word for parable is mashal. This one word has a variety of meanings. The same word can mean proverb, riddle, sayings of the wise, taunt, and finally parable. Its basic and root sense is proverb, and proverb provides a good guide to the meaning of parable. Proverbs are short, tight summaries of a community’s wisdom. Neither a parable nor a proverb depends on a particular context for meaning, but each searches for a context to interpret. The parable could and surely did illustrate other questions and situations besides the one presented by Jesus. Parable as Narrative To properly interpret a parable, one must pay careful attention to the story. Because parables are short, apparently simple stories, we sometimes mistake them as substitutes for abstract thought. The saying appended to several of Jesus’ parables shows his view: "Let those with ears, hear." A parable’s narrative is a way of thinking, not an inferior way, but a different way of thinking than abstract thought. These people think in stories. Thus, reducing the parable’s narrative to an abstraction forfeits its way of understanding. Instead we must learn to hear the story. Parable and Kingdom In the Jesus tradition parables are about the kingdom of God. They are, so to speak, handles on the mystery of God’s kingdom. In the parable of the Samaritan and the man in the ditch, their story tells us what it is like in God’s kingdom. Many people will use the parables as handles in different ways, and that is all right. The author of Luke’s Gospel has used the parable "From Jerusalem to Jericho" as a handle for the question about who is my neighbor. But the parable as a handle for the kingdom can lead us into the kingdom in a multitude of ways, not just one way. The Parable’s Fate in Hellenistic Christianity Parables, as we have seen, are a very Jewish way of storytelling. They have no real parallel in other literature. They are not common in early Christian writings, especially in communities where the Greco-Roman culture was strong. This meant that Christians of a Gentile background tended to understand the parable differently than those of a Jewish background. Gentile Christianity understood the parable as an allegory (see the discussion about allegory in the article "History of Interpretation . . . "). Allegory is the twice-told tale. The first tale (the parable) veils the real tale. Remove the veil and the true story appears. The tradition of interpretation that developed after the New Testament continued in the line of allegorical interpretation, greatly expanding it with evermore elaborate interpretations. A great achievement of modern interpretation of parables is the return to the ancient Jewish understanding of the parable.
The parables of Jesus belong to a special type of Jewish storytelling. Parables appear neither in the Hebrew Bible nor in Greek literature, but they are abundant in rabbinic literature. Parable is a type of common folk tale, exhibiting the storytelling of common people. It probably always retained its common place, even when the rabbis began to employ it in sophisticated exegesis. There are two classic definitions of parable, one from ancient times and the other from a modern scholar, C.H. Dodd. Rabbinic Definition The rabbis, by employing a series of complicated wordplays, portray King Solomon as the inventor of parables. In the ancient world where reading took place aloud, not silently as in our print culture, wordplays were very important and an effective means of explanation. The rabbis interpreted Ecclesiastes 12.9 as referring to Solomon: "Besides being wise, the Teacher also taught the people knowledge, weighing and studying and arranging many proverbs." The Hebrew word translated "proverbs" also means "parables." The summary sketch of Solomon in 1 Kings testified to his prolific production of parables: "He composed three thousand proverbs (parables), and his songs numbered a thousand and five" ( 1 Kgs 4.32). With these two texts the image of Solomon as inventor of the parable was complete. The quote from Ecclesiastes furnished another wordplay that led to the rabbis’ definition of parable. In the NRSV translation, Solomon is "weighing . . . many proverbs (parables)." The Hebrew word translated "weighing" literally means "to listen, to give ear." The Hebrew noun for "ear" is the same root. Furthermore, "ears" look like "handles" for the head, and so by extension this word comes to mean "handles." Thus, the Hebrew word as a verb means "to give ear to" and as a noun it means "ear" and by extension "handle." One of the earliest efforts to define a parable appears in
the Midrash Rabbah on the Song of Songs (about A.D. 600) commenting on Ecclesiastes
12.9: "(Solomon) gave ears to the words of the Torah and
investigated (the meaning of) the words of Torah. He made handles (ears)
to the Torah. You find that till Solomon came there was no parable" R. Jose said: Imagine a big basket full of produce without any handle, so that it could not be lifted, till one clever man came and made handles to it, and then it began to be carried by handles. So till Solomon arose no one could properly understand the words of Torah, but when Solomon arose, all began to comprehend Torah. R. Shila said: Imagine a big jug full of hot water with no handle by which it could be carried, until someone came and made it a handle, so that it began to be carried by its handle. . . . So proceeding from one thing to another, from one parable to another, Solomon penetrated to the innermost meaning of the Torah. Appropriately the rabbis used parables as handles for defining the parable. Parables demand alertness and interpretation on the part of the audience, who must hear, use their ears, and interpret. Even more, parables provide handles to a mystery, something difficult to understand without parables. The parable’s illustration can appear scandalous. To compare Torah to a heavy basket or a jug full of hot water, so hot it cannot safely be lifted without handles, is at least an adventuresome illustration. Finally, the parable creates meaning by suggestion. How does the parable furnish a handle for the Torah? That is left to the audience’s imagination. The rabbis appreciated the parable’s origin among the common folk and of its apparent simple form. So they warned, Let not the parable be lightly esteemed in your eyes, since by means of the parable a person can master the words of the Torah. If a king loses gold from his house or a precious pearl, does he not find it by means of a wick worth a farthing? So the parable should not be lightly esteemed in your eyes, since by means of the parable a person arrives at the true meaning of the words of the Torah. The apparent simplicity of the parable underlines both its strength and its deception. Its simplicity tempts the ancients as well as us to underestimate it, to overlook and look down on it. But it demands interpretive effort on the part of its audience. They must give it ear, weight it, but the effort is worthwhile, because it provides handles for a great mystery, the Torah. Modern Definition A return to the ancient understanding of parable marks an important gain in modern scholarship on parables. Perhaps the British scholar C.H. Dodd in his book The Parables of the Kingdom (1935) has furnished the best definition by a modern interpreter. His definition has much in common with the ancient rabbinic definition: At its simplest the parable is a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or common life, arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness, and leaving the mind in sufficient doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought. (page 5) Where the rabbis describe a parable as "handles," Dodd speaks of a metaphor or simile. A metaphor says that "A is B," while a simile employs the comparative "A is like B." But in both cases the hearer knows that A is not B and so must search out the connection between the two items. The parable is "drawn from nature or common life." This denotes its commonness, which leads folks to underestimate it. The parable’s everydayness provokes the interpretive puzzle, because the audience must figure out how the parable made up of everyday images relates to the great mystery for which it is a metaphor. For Dodd this everydayness is compounded by "vividness or strangeness," and so the audience is left "in sufficient doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought." The parable is not the interpretation, but it provokes interpretation. Like handles, it enables the hearer to pick up, to engage, and to examine. To pursue further the understanding of parable, let us follow the clues from these two definitions. Parable as Proverb The English word "parable" transliterates the Greek word parabole. The Greek word has two parts: para means "beside" and bollein means "to throw." Parable in Greek is something "thrown beside" something else, that is, a comparison. The image of "thrown beside" indicates that the parable is placed next to something, and the audience or reader must figure out how the parable and the thing thrown beside are related. While the Greek meaning of parable is enlightening, the Hebrew supplies a more secure base because the Hebrews invented the parable and fully developed it. While some have attempted to show that others tell parables, the differences are significant. "Buddhist parables" and Zen Koans, while similar, are also very different. Hebrew culture invented the parable, which bespeaks to its narrative genius. The Hebrew word for parable is mšl. This one word has a variety of meanings. The same word can mean proverb, riddle, sayings of the wise, taunt, and finally parable. Its basic and root sense is proverb, and proverb provides a good guide to the meaning of parable. Proverbs come from the common folk tradition and result from insights of wisdom based on the community’s experience. They are short, tight summaries of a community’s wisdom. Proverbs have three characteristics in common with parables. Both are illustrations. The proverb implies an image that illustrates a situation. The common proverb "Spare the rod and spoil the child" conjures up an image of misbehaving children and their parents’ response. What should the parent do? The proverb provides an illustration drawn from the community’s experience. If children are not disciplined, they will grow up to be unproductive adults. Next, the proverb is not a literal image. A particular moment alludes to, illustrates, or stands for a wider set of circumstances. In the proverb of the rod, the parent is not advised to always use the rod, but the rod stands for other forms of discipline. Nor does the proverb specify how much the child should be disciplined. Rather it warns against lack of discipline, making no implication about how much. The illustrative and allusive character of the proverb means that the audience must interpret it. A proverb demands interpretation. One must know when it fits and when it does not. While it furnishes an insight, it also raises questions. Finally, the proverb has a weak relation to its context. It depends not on a particular context for meaning, but is searching for a context to interpret. For example, in the proverb of the rod the interpretation does not depend on any specific context to understand it; rather, the proverb helps the audience understand their particular circumstance or circumstances. This aspect comes to the fore when we deal with the parables of Jesus. While many of Jesus’ parables occur without a context, a large number do have specific contexts. These contexts provide situations for the parable to interpret, not interpretations of the parable. In the parable From Jerusalem to Jericho, for example, a debate between a lawyer and Jesus provides a context for the parable. The parable tells us more about the lawyer’s question than the question tells us about the parable. The parable could and surely did illustrate other questions and situations. Parable as Narrative A parable is a proverbial narrative fiction. Story marks the fundamental dividing line between parable and proverb. A proverb usually implies a story, but parable makes the story explicit. To properly interpret a parable, one must pay careful attention to the story. Because parables are short, apparently simple stories, we sometimes mistake them as substitutes for abstract thought. If Jesus or the rabbis were addressing a more sophisticated audience, they would use more abstract forms of argumentation, or so we suppose. As we have seen, the rabbis faced this objection. The saying appended to several of Jesus’ parables indicates his view: "Let those with ears, hear." A parable’s narrative is a way of thinking, not an inferior way, but a different way of thinking than abstract thought. These people think in story. Thus, reducing the parable’s narrative to an abstraction forfeits its way of understanding. Instead we must learn to hear the story. Parable as Illustration Since a parable belongs to the Hebrew type "proverb (mšl)," it illustrates something. The rabbis described this illustrative aspect as "handles," while Dodd called a parable a "metaphor or simile." Jesus and the rabbis often use a comparative term ("it is like") to introduce a parable. Since the parable is an illustration, a comparison, is it just an ornament, so that when we understand the parable, we can dispense with it? Both the rabbis and Jesus would answer, "No, it cannot be dispensed with." The rabbis clearly indicate that "by means of the parable a man can master the words of the Torah." In Jesus’ case, while the Gospels provide interpretations for some parables, most are left without interpretation, thus indicating that the parable is more important than the interpretation and provides a unique way of approaching and understanding what it illustrates. Parable and Torah The rabbis consider the parables to be about Torah (the Law). Torah provides the horizon in which the parable makes sense for them. How the parables provide handles for the Torah varies, but most often they provide new and innovative interpretations in exegesis. The following example may help us understand how the rabbis used their parables as handles on Torah: (Parable) There was once a poor woman who dwelt in the neighborhood of a landowner. Her two sons went out to gather gleanings, but the landowner did not let them take any. Their mother kept saying, "When will my sons come back from the field; perhaps I shall find that they have brought something to eat." And they kept saying, "When shall we go back to our mother; perhaps we shall discover that she has found something to eat." She found that they had nothing and they found that she had nothing to eat. So they laid their heads on their mother’s lap and the three of them died in one day. (Commentary) Said the Holy One, blessed be He: "Their very existence you take away from them! By your life! I shall make you, too, pay for it with your very existence!" And so indeed it says, Rob not the weak, because he is
weak, neither crush the poor in the gate; for the Lord will plead their cause, and despoil
of life those that despoil them The parable and its commentary form two movements. The parable is the handles for Torah; the interpretive commentary is someone using those handles. In the parable itself, a peasant voice protests against the abuses of the wealthy. It registers a strong protest against life’s inequality. Perhaps the voice is female, that of a mother appealing to the compassion of other mothers. The tale’s tragic plot is driven by the landowner’s failure to allow for the gleanings commanded in Leviticus: "And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field to its very border, nor shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest; you shall leave them for the poor and for the stranger: I am the LORD your God" ( Lev 23.22; see also 19.9). The parable achieves its effect implicitly. It depends on the situation’s innate tragedy and the hearer’s pathos for mother and sons. Its condemnation is likewise implicit; it never refers to the landowner’s failure to follow Torah’s demands. This is a strong and moving parable, the equal of any in the Jesus tradition. At some point when the story was written down, scribes began to comment on it. First, the voice shifted, "you take away from them." The scribe who added this comment assumed that the reader/hearer and the landowner shared the same social position, and so the tale became a warning for the social elite. Scribe, landowner, and reader belong to a social elite. Also God is called upon to threaten future judgment: "Said the Holy One, blessed be He." Unlike the parable which employed protest, sympathy, and solidarity, the scribe assumes that some Power will set things aright. So the scribe invoked the apocalyptic myth. When chaos threatens to overwhelm order, God will respond. The solution is in the future; the solution is power. Then the scribe tied the parable to Scripture by quoting Proverbs 22.22-23. The parable becomes a way into the Torah, a handle on the Torah, so that one can concretely see how Torah should shape life. Parable and Kingdom Just as in the rabbinic tradition parables are about Torah, so in the Jesus tradition parables are about the kingdom of God. They are, so to speak, handles on the mystery of God’s kingdom. Without a parable one cannot enter the kingdom. The parable illustrates the kingdom, and our preconceived view of the kingdom should not dictate what the parable can illustrate about the kingdom. In the rabbinic parable of the Widow and her Sons, the parable illustrates the demands of Torah. In the parable of the Samaritan and the man in the ditch, their story tells us what it is like in God’s kingdom. Many people will use the parables as handles in different ways, and that is all right. The author of Luke’s Gospel has used the parable From Jerusalem to Jericho as a handle for the question about who is my neighbor. But the parable as a handle for the kingdom can lead us into the kingdom in a multitude of ways, not just one way. The Parable’s Fate in Hellenistic Christianity Parables, as we have seen, are a very Jewish way of storytelling. They have no real parallel in other literature. They are not widespread in early Christianity, especially Gentile, Hellenistic Christianity. The apocryphal gospels have many miracle stories, beatitudes, proverbs, and other forms common to the Gospels. But of parables there are few. Of the canonical Gospels, only Mark, Matthew, and Luke have parables. Of the apocryphal gospels, only the Gospel of Thomas has parables in any number. This infrequency indicates that parables are not indigenous to the Hellenistic mentality. This incongruity of parable and Hellenism meant that the Hellenistic, Gentile church would understand the parable differently from Judaism, whether that Judaism be rabbinic or Christian. Gentile Christianity understood the parable as an allegory (see the discussion about allegory in the article "History of Interpretation..."). Allegory is the twice-told tale. The first tale (the parable) veils the real tale. Remove the veil and the true story appears. In allegory the first tale (the parable) does not reveal the second tale, but the second tale uncovers the first tale. One cannot get from the first tale to the second, and so it is not a true illustration. The explanation of the parable of the Sower in Mark’s Gospel is a good example of an allegory. The interpretation is the second tale. In that interpretation each seed typifies different responses to hearing the gospel. The interpretation depends on the tale of different folks’ responses to the gospel. One has to know the second tale to understand the first tale. The parable of the Sower does not illustrate the interpretation of response to the gospel, as the Good Samaritan illustrates the question of the neighbor. Luke used the parable as a parable. For that author, the parable was a handle. For the author of Mark’s Gospel, the parable was an allegory, and the interpretation revealed the secret hidden in the parable. The tradition of interpretation that developed after the New Testament continued in the line of allegorical interpretation, greatly expanding it with evermore elaborate interpretations. St. Augustine’s allegorical interpretation of the parable of the Good Samaritan offers a good example of allegory. Each item in the parable represents something in the second tale. The parable becomes almost a cryptogram. The man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho is Adam. The cities have their own meaning. "Jerusalem" is the heavenly city, while "Jericho" is the moon that "signifies our mortality, because it is born, waxes, wanes, and dies." The "thieves" are the devil and his angels. The thieves (1) strip him, (2) beat him, and (3) leave him half-dead. Each item has a meaning. The "stripping" represents the loss of Adam’s immortality; the "beating" is the devil persuading him to sin, and "half-dead" means Adam is oppressed by sin. The "priest and Levite" are the priesthood of the Old Testament who "could profit nothing from salvation." The "Samaritan" is Jesus who is the Guardian, the meaning of Samaritan according to St. Augustine. The interpretation goes on in this vein with each item receiving its own interpretation. For example, the "oil" is the comfort of hope. The "inn" becomes the Church, and the "innkeeper" is the Apostle Paul. And so on in the same vein. Augustine’s interpretation derives from the second tale, the story of Christian faith. St. Augustine’s allegorical interpretation of the parable of the Good Samaritan offers a good example of allegory. Each item in the parable represents something in the second tale. The parable becomes almost a cryptogram. The man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho is Adam. The cities have their own meaning. Jerusalem is the heavenly city, while Jericho is the moon that "signifies our mortality, because it is born, waxes, wanes, and dies." The thieves are the devil and his angels. The thieves (1) strip him, (2) beat him, and (3) leave him half-dead. Each item has a meaning. The stripping represents the loss of Adam’s immortality; the beating is the devil persuading him to sin, and half-dead means Adam is oppressed by sin. The priest and Levite are the priesthood of the Old Testament who "could profit nothing from salvation." The Samaritan is Jesus who is the Guardian, the meaning of Samaritan according to St. Augustine. The interpretation goes on in this vein with each item receiving its own interpretation. For example, the oil is the comfort of hope. The inn becomes the Church, and the innkeeper is the Apostle Paul. And so on in the same vein. Augustine’s interpretation derives from the second tale, the story of Christian faith. Allegory is a fundamental way of thinking in Hellenistic and Roman Christianity. Not only were the parables allegorized, but all the Gospels and the whole of the Bible became treasure troves to mine for allegories. One of the great achievements of modern scholarship in the interpretation of parables is the return to the ancient Jewish understanding of the parable. |