The Deaf-Mute
The man (vv. 31–37) could neither hear nor speak, but the people were sure that Jesus could heal him (Isa. 35:6). Since the man could not hear the Word and thus have his faith strengthened and could not pray verbally, the Lord used spittle and touch to encourage him. Our Lord’s “sigh” (groan; see 8:12) reminds us of 2 Cor. 5:2 and Rom. 8:22. How His holy soul must have grieved over the sad consequences of sin in the world! Jesus took the man away from the curious crowd and did not make a spectacle of him. Jesus did not want people to follow Him because of His miracles; but the more He told people to keep quiet, the more they talked! On the other hand, He tells us to tell everyone the Good News, and we keep quiet!
Jesus took the man away from the crowd so that the healing would be private and the man would not become a public attraction. Since the man was deaf, he could not hear our Lord’s words, but he could feel Jesus’ fingers in his ear and the touch on his tongue; and this would encourage the man’s faith. The “sigh” was an inward groan, our Lord’s compassionate response to the pain and sorrow sin has brought into the world. It was also a prayer to the Father on behalf of the handicapped man. (The same word is used in connection with prayer in Rom. 8:23, and the noun in Rom. 8:26.)
Ephphatha is an Aramaic word that means “be opened, be released.” The man did not hear Jesus speak, but the creation heard the command of the Creator, and the man was healed. Both the tongue and the ears functioned normally again
that spittle supposedly had a therapeutic function in both the Greco-Roman (e.g., Pliny, Nat. Hist. 28.4.7; Tacitus, Hist. 6.18; Suetonius, Vesp. 7) and the Jewish world
his looking to heaven points to his relation with God from whom he receives the power to feed the hungry, heal the sick and raise the dead.
“He sighed” (ἐστέναξεν). This action has also been taken as a therapeutic gesture with parallels in ancient magical healings
But this gesture too is associated with prayer. It can represent a sign of deep distress that leads to prayer
But the actual healing takes place through Jesus’ authoritative word
Jesus “commanded them” (διεστείλατο αὐτοῖς) turns the attention abruptly back to the “crowd” (7:33) or to those who had brought the man to Jesus (7:32
Whether the man “could hardly talk” (NIV) or was mute, i.e., unable to utter any sound, is difficult to decide. The word in the Greek text (mogilalon) properly means speaking with difficulty. It is not found elsewhere in the New Testament and appears in the LXX only in Isa 35:6, where, however, it translates a Hebrew word meaning mute. The statement “began to speak plainly” in v. 35 also suggests the meaning in v. 32 should be “hardly talk,” but the adjective in v. 37 properly means unable to speak at all.
Touching a person, using saliva, uttering deep groans, and using foreign words were common in ancient healing stories; but this in no way suggests that Mark invented the details to conform to the usual practice. Inasmuch as Jesus could not speak to the man, touching him was an important way of expressing concern. Looking up to heaven indicates that Jesus prayed for divine help before performing the cure (cf. 6:41). Scholars are uncertain whether “Ephphatha” is Hebrew or Aramaic—probably the latter. If it refers to the healing itself, it must be the opening of the ears to hear (cf. v. 35) rather than the loosening of the tongue to speak; but it may be directed to the whole person.