(1) If it meant "undivided," it would doubtless continue the illustration of the lamp, with an undivided as contrasted with a divided wick, but it has no such meaning.

(2) It states the opposite, not to divisions, but to folds (vide Trench, 'Syn.,' § 56.); it is "single" as opposed to "plicate," and therefore can hardly contain any direct reference to the lamp. Its meaning rather appears to be purely metaphorical, and the word seems to be applied 'directly to the functions of the eye in relation to the body. If the eye be "single" and (to use another but related metaphor) straightforward in its working, then the body receives through it the light that it ought to receive. So is it with the gaze of the soul in its effect on the inner man.

(3) Perhaps, however, ἁπλοῦςη is here used in the sense of non-compound (cf. Plato, 'Rep.,' 547. E); in this case free from any foreign substance to bar the light from passing through it (cf. Matthew 7:3, and Basil, 'De Spiritu Sancto,' 9. § 23, sqq.). Thy whole body shall be full of light (φωτινὸν ἔσται). Well-lighted in itself, and bright in appearance to others (cf. s, νεφέλη φωτινή, Matthew 17:5). The word chosen seems to indicate, not merely that the body is, through the eye, lighted, but also that it itself becomes in measure, like the eye, full of light for others. All one's powers become illumined with the Divine light, and the illumination shines through. But if thine eye be evil, etc. Evil (πονηρός); ver. 13, note. Vitiated, worthless. As an eye that does not fulfil its natural function, so is that gaze of the soul which is directed only earthward. To limit tiffs, with Lightfoot ('Hor. Hebr.'), to covetousness (cf. also Hatch, 'Essays,' p. 81), is far too partial an interpretation. Such an earthward and selfish gaze of the soul may often issue in selfishness as regards money (cf. Matthew 20:15), but the full meaning of the phrase includes very much more. Thy whole body shall be full of darkness. What the heart craves to see it sees; but in this case, not light makes its entrance, but darkness, which, as in the case of the light, permeates the frame. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness; rather, is darkness; the change here to the indicative (εἰ... ἐστίν) indicating that the last preceding clause is assumed as fact. The light that is in thee. Our Lord does not say, "the light that comes through the eye," for he means more than this, viz. that the very information, so to speak, brought first by the outlook of the soul, comes into us and remains in us. He assumes that this, which ought to be light, is darkness. How great is that darkness! i.e. the darkness (Revised Version)just spoken of, which comes through the eye. So, probably, Luke 11:35. If' the gaze which should bring light brings only darkness, how terrible in its nature and effects must that darkness be! It is, however, possible to understand our Lord to refer in this verse to the natural darkness of the soul before it looks out of itself. In this case the thought is - you need a fixed gaze heavenwards; if your gaze is not heavenwards, it brings darkness instead of light; how black, then, must be the natural darkness! (cf. especially Trench, ' Sermon on the Mount'). It will be noticed that in these verses darkness, though scientifically only negative - the absence of light - is here represented as positive, because it is the symbol of sin and evil.

Parallel Commentaries ...