Why seest thou a mote in thy brother's eye and perceivest not
the beam that is in thine own eye?
The word beam is especially awkward here,[3] because the beam that
is proper to the eye is not the kind of beam which is intended.
The absurdity is not excused by our familiarity, which Shakespeare
submitted to, though he omits the incriminating eye:
You found his mote; the king your mote did see,
But I a beam do find in each of three.
[Footnote 3: It is probable that in Tyndal's time the awkwardness was
not so glaring: for 'beam' as a ray of light seems to have developed
its connexion with the eye since his date, in spite of his proverbial
use of it in the other sense.]