SG Heritage Dictionary

Deaf [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1828

1. deef.

2. Not perceiving sounds; not receiving impressions from sonorous bodies through the air; as a deaf ear.

3. Wanting the sense of hearing; having organs which do not perceive sounds; as a deaf man. It is followed by to before that which ought to be heard; as deaf to the voice of the orator.

4. In a metaphorical sense, not listening; not regarding; not moved, persuaded or convinced; rejecting; as deaf to reason or arguments. Men are deaf to the calls of the gospel.

5. Without the ability or will to regard spiritual things; unconcerned; as, hear, ye deaf Is. x1ii.

6. Deprived of the power of hearing; deafened; as deaf with clamor.

7. Stifled; imperfect; obscurely heard; as a deaf noise or murmur.

Deaf [Verb transitive] Webster's Dictionary 1828

to deafen, is used by Dryden, but is obsolete, unless perhaps in poetry.

Deaf [Adjective] Webster's Dictionary 1913

1. Wanting the sense of hearing, either wholly or in part; unable to perceive sounds; hard of hearing; as, a deaf man.

2. Unwilling to hear or listen; determinedly inattentive; regardless; not to be persuaded as to facts, argument, or exhortation; -- with to; as, deaf to reason.

3. Deprived of the power of hearing; deafened.

4. Obscurely heard; stifled; deadened.

5. Decayed; tasteless; dead; as, a deaf nut; deaf corn.

Deaf [Verb transitive] Webster's Dictionary 1913

To deafen.

Deaf Encyclopedia Britannica

DEAF and DUMB. It is a not uncommon supposition that deaf mutes are dumb on account of some vocal or organic defect, whereas the dumbness arises, with very rare exceptions, from the deprivation of hearing caused by some natural or accidental disease. Where partial or total dumbness exists with the sense of hearing perfect, it will be generally found to proceed either from great nervous debility or from some mental derangement, and not, as is often supposed, from some defect in the vocal organs, which in the congenitally deaf, with hardly an exception, are in their normal condition. Many children who are enumerated as congenitally deaf have the sense of hearing to a greater or less degree, but not to such an extent as to be of service to them in the acquisition of language. It is remarkable that the,defect of hearing is not generally dis covered till an advanced period of childhood, and though the child remains mute the real cause is neither readily acknowledged nor properly attended to. Children who have lost their hearing after the acquisition of the power of speech cannot be included in the class of deaf mutes; the impression which language has made on their minds gives to them a marked superiority over those who are deaf from birth....

Such a calamity as the deprivation of hearing must be productive of great and varied disadvantages, as it totally excludes the mind from an extensive class of ideas and associations. It is then not to be wondered at that this state of social isolation should occasionally give rise to moroseness and despondency, and that external objects should inspire little sense of surprise or admiration. They are simply objects recognized by their form, colour, and texture, and the emotions they raise are different both in character and in intensity from those experienced by hearing children. This physical defect has not, however, any necessary connection with the presence or absence of intellectual capacity, or with the active principles of our nature. There is only the want of one of the natural and most important avenues to intellectual development, with its primary consequence of dumbness, and its secondary one of social isolation. Still, the denial of all such knowledge as can be derived through the medium of the ear is somewhat atoned for by the quickened influence of other senses, especially that of sight. Thus the visible marks of attention the deaf and dumb receive from others,—their caresses, frowns, and smiles,—all make a corresponding impression on their tender minds, and as they grow older they watch the looks and gestures of those near them with a keenness unknown to other children, so that the slightest change of expression does not escape their observation. Their affections are stimulated and their passions excited much in the same way as in other children.

The proportion of children born deaf was formerly supposed to be much smaller than it really is. Cases have come to be known in largely increased numbers since institutions for the deaf and dumb have been established, and such statistical tables as are given in this article suggest the incorrectness of the popular supposition. The institutions which have been founded on their behalf have not only diffused correct information concerning their number, but by the gratifying success of the educational methods adopted have greatly contributed to dissipate prejudicial notions concerning their capacity to receive instruction, and to direct public sympathy towards the claims of this class. The latter office it is still needful that they fulfil, for prejudices yet exist against deaf mutes,—one of these being the general supposition that they are very vicious and hot-tempered. It máy be admitted that some of them are so; and it may even be granted that the proportion of mutes with such dispositions is as high as in any other class of afflicted persons, for in the case of the deaf and dumb there are undoubtedly special circumstances of early life which tend in no small degree to such a result. The total inability of parents to deal with their abnormal peculiarities must be included among the causes which prejudicially affect their dispositions, and overshadow attractive features of their character; and the kindly-intended interference of neighbours with the parental management often proves morally injurious to them. Their discernment of right and wrong is equal to that of other children; and hence, when neighbours unwisely seek to screen them from merited punishment, a spirit of insubordination is excited, and sullenness or passionateness is induced. It should therefore be the parents’ utmost endeavour, when punishment is to be administered, to treat these children impartially. It is most desirable also that external circumstances should be as favourable to them as possible, and everything calculated to pollute their uncultivated minds kept from their acute powers of observation.

Causes.— The causes assigned for congenital deafness are consanguineous marriages, hereditary transmission, weak constitutions of parents, scrofula, climate, and the ill-health of the mother at a certain period of life. There is necessarily difficulty in ascertaining the real cause of deafness. That difficulty has its ground in the unwillingness of parents to admit that their children were born deaf. Their deafness is often attributed to some infantile disease, though the defect is congenital. On the other hand, when they have lost the sense of hearing at an early age, they may be included among the congenitally deaf. But all institutions for the deaf and dumb contain instances which illustrate scientific investigations, and establish the position that such causes as those now alluded to tend to induce and perpetuate the disease of deafness. In all cases of congenital deafness it will be found that there exists some disorganization of the organ of hearing itself, some obstruction in the internal ear or compression of the auditory nerve, whereby the vibrations of the ear are prevented from producing the required effect upon the internal parts of the ear, or from being communicated to the brain.

After-birth or acquired deafness occurs at all ages, and has its origin in such diseases as small-pox, measles, typhus, convulsions, paralysis, hydrocephalus, and other affections of the brain, and “scarlatina, which more frequently than any other disease leaves the patient deaf, in consequence of the inflammatory state of the throat extending to the internal ear, causing suppuration and destruction of the delicate apparatus on which hearing depends; such being the case, especial attention should be directed during the course of the disease to the state of the throat, so as to prevent if possible the inflammation extending.” Vaccination has been the means of greatly decreasing the cases of deafness; and doubtless, as sanitary laws become more genera], the introduction of perfect sewerage, pure water, and good ventilation, will all tend to lessen the liability to those zymotic diseases upon which deafness supervenes. Amongst other causes of deafness are cold, and severe blows or falls upon the head. It has been ascertained that the proportion is about 60 per cent, congenitally deaf to 40 per cent, accidentally so; and the census returns for 1871 show that of the 1054 inmates of 12 institutions of England and Wales 63 per cent, were congenitally deaf. Consanguineous marriages are perhaps the most fertile source of deafness, which fact is established by the numerous cases of deaf children who are the offspring of first cousins. It is not only so in England, but in other countries of Europe and in America. Dr Buxton says, “In an inquiry which I made some time ago, I found that about every tenth case of deafness resulted from the marriage of cousins.” The Irish Commissioners’Report for 1871 says, “Too close consanguinity in the intermarriage of relatives, and also hereditary predisposition, have long been supposed to be causes of congenital deaf-muteism.” The results obtained by the census of 1871 tend to establish these suppositions.

The following table from census returns for Ireland exhibits the amount of deaf-muteism where consanguinity of parents existed :— [table]

Thus we find that, in 201 instances of relationship between the parents of mutes, 85 were in the degree of first cousins, 63 in that of second, 32 in that of third, 7 in that of fourth, and in 14 they were more remotely related.

Dr Bondin, at a meeting of the Academy of Sciences, Paris, noticed the following striking result of such unions :—

“Two brothers in perfect health, and well constituted men, had married two sisters, their cousins-german. The elder brother has had several children, one of whom is deaf and dumb. The other brother has had six children, the first, third, and fifth of whom can hear, while the second, fourth, and probably the sixth (an infant) are deaf and dumb.”

The report of Dr S. Μ. Bemiss of Louisville, Kentucky, to the American Medical Association on the subject of the influence of marriages of consanguinity on offspring and records the following results of 833 such marriages :—

Of the 3942 children of those marriages 1134 were defective in one way or another, viz.,—deaf and dumb, 145; blind, 85; idiotic, 308; insane, 38; epileptic, 60; scrofulous, 300; and deformed, 98; 883 died young; and the writer concludes by remarking, “I feel satisfied, however, that my research gave me authority to assume that over 10 per cent, of the deaf and dumb, and over 5 per cent, of the blind, and nearly 15 per cent, of the idiotic, in our State institutions for subjects of those defects, and throughout the country at large, are the offspring of kindred parents, or of parents themselves the descendants of blood intermarriages.’

Another great cause of deafness is hereditary transmission. “It has clearly been ascertained,” says Dr Harvey (On the Ear), “that the most common cause is a strumous and delicate habit of body, generally hereditary.”

The subjoined table from the census returns for Ireland in 1871 proves that deaf-muteism is often transmitted by hereditary taint or family peculiarity. The table is divided into two sections,—the first showing where the disease is transmitted by the father, the second by the mother.

Mute relations on Father's side. [table]

Mute relations on Mother's side. [table]

The Commissioners’ Report is as follows :—

“Although it has been shotvn that muteism is transmitted by hereditary taint, yet it very seldom descends directly from the parent to the offspring, which is manifest from the following results of the inquiry made respecting the marriage state of the congenitally deaf. After a minute investigation of this subject, we find 115 instances, 77 males and 38 females, of the marriages of congenital deaf mutes where either one or both parties were affected. In 81 instances we ascertained that only one of the parties was congenitally deaf, and that 264 children, none of whom were deaf and dumb, resulted from 67 such marriages; in the remaining 14 instances there was no issue. We find four instances of the marriage of a congenital deaf mute with an acquired deaf mute, from three of which 7 children resulted, one of whom was deaf and dumb. There were 13 instances of the intermarriage of persons both of whom were deaf and dumb, and from 12 of these marriages 44 children resulted, of whom only one was deaf and dumb, and another was deaf only. The grand-parents of the former on the mother’s side, and a grand-uncle of the father’s, were also deaf and dumb. Of 315 children resulting from 87 of the afore-mentioned marriages, only two were deaf ahd dumb, and one deaf only. In a case of the intermarriage of congenital deaf mutes, although the husband’s parents were second cousins and the wife’s also related, and her sister deaf and dumb, yet none of the 8 children resulting from the marriage were in any way afflicted. ’

The Principal of the New York Institution says, “We can show that it is much the most common for the children of deaf and dumb parents to possess the faculties of which their parents are deprived; still, although the offspring may not be defective, they may likely inherit that peculiar taint of constitution by which the disease will be transmitted to future generations, which is so often the case.”

Mr Turner, in a paper on Hereditary Deafness, gives the following table :— [table]

From this it appears that in 86 families with one parent a congenital deaf mute there were 218 children, of whom 21 were deaf and dumb, or about one-tenth of the whole. In the 24 families with both parents congenital deaf mutes there were 57 children, of whom 17 were deaf and dumb, or about one-third of the whole. The proportion of deaf-mute children of parents both congenitally deaf is thus more than three times greater than of parents only one of whom is congenitally deaf.

The subjoined table shows the proportion of the families, constituted as above, who had deaf-mute children in them :— [table]

The proportion of families having one congenitally deaf parent, with at least one deaf-mute child, is about one-tenth of the whole, while the proportion of the families having both parents congenitally deaf w ith a deaf-mute child or children is more than one-third of the whole. The above tables show the amount of deafness transmitted by the marriage of one congenitally deaf with one hearing person. The cases of deafness resulting therefrom are only one-tenth of the whole, whereas those from the intermarriage of deaf mutes are about one third. Similar results could be obtained from reports of many of the institutions, but from what has already been stated on this cause of deafness, it appears that, while there is sufficient reason to justify the prohibition of the intermarriage of deaf mutes, the exceptional cases of deaf mute offspring as the result of unions of deaf mutes with hearing persons would not justify interference in such marriages.

History of Instruction.— In early times, it was an opinion maintained, even by philosophers, that the education of the deaf and dumb was not possible. It was then believed that language could only be acquired through the medium of the ear. The couplet of Lucretius is well known—

“To instruct the deaf no art could ever reach, No care improve them, and no wisdom teach.”

Parents, influenced by this belief, allowed their children to grow up without culture. They were abandoned to themselves, and exiled from the community of rational beings. To such a culpable extent was this prejudice carried, that it has been the practice in some countries to destroy children who remained at three years of age incapable of either hearing or speaking, and by the code of Justinian deaf mutes are declared to be incapable of civil acts. In France, the very birth of such children was accounted a sort of disgrace to the family from which they sprang, and the duties of humanity were deemed to extend no further in their behalf than to the maintenance of their animal existence, while they were carefully secluded from the eyes of the world either within the walls of the cloister or in some hidden asylum in the country. Abandoned thus early to their fate, and regarded as little better than idiots, it is not surprising that their future behaviour should have been such as might seem to justify the erroneous views which had prompted this ungenerous treatment. The progress in the art of instructing the deaf and dumb was in consequence greatly retarded; attempts to instruct them were scarcely known, and no school was established till the middle of the 18th century. In the 4th century, St Augustine, influenced by the dictum of Aristotle, expresses his unfavourable opinion respecting their ability to obtain any religious knowledge, remarking, “that deafness from birth makes faith impossible, since he who is born deaf can neither hear the word nor learn to read it.” But in this enlightened age it has been fully proved that the neglect and forgetfulness to which these outcasts were formerly consigned were founded on very mistaken notions of their mental capacities.

The first instance of a deaf mute being instructed is mentioned by Bede in 685. No other case is met with till some centuries afterwards. Rodolphus Agricola, of Heidelberg, who was born in 1442, and died in 1485, makes mention in his De Inventione Dialectica, of an educated deaf mute; but this instance, and probably others, were discredited on the ground of their impossibility. Jerome Cardan, a native of Pavia, born in 1501, took a more philosophical view of the subject, and says, “Writing is associated with speech, and speech with thought, but written characters and ideas may be connected without the intervention of sounds;” from which he further argues that “the instruction of the deaf is difficult, but it is possible.” It was no doubt this enlightened view that gave to the education of the deaf and dumb its first and greatest impulse. A Spanish Benedictine monk of the convent of Sabagun in Spain, named Pedro de Ponce, who was born in Valladolid in 1520 and died in 1584, is the first person who is recorded to have instructed the deaf and dumb and taught them to speak. He was fifty-six years old when Jerome Cardan died, and he had no doubt, from his association with Cardan, imbibed his principles. He has, however, left no work upon the subject, though it is probable that the substance of his method is contained in a book of Bonet, secretary to the constable of Castile, printed at Madrid in 1620 under the title of Reduccion de las letras y artes para enseñar á hdblar á los mudos. In the time of Bonet the teaching of the deaf and dumb was becoming more general and was entered upon by several persons, both in Italy and in England. Dr John Bulwer, an English physician, and Dr Wallis, professor of mathematics in the university of Oxford, were both engaged in the work in England about the same time, though it is not accurately known to whom the honour of being its prime mover is due. The former published a treatise on the education of the deaf and dumb in 1648, several years before Dr Wallis’s valuable and able work had appeared. In the year 1669, some years after Dr Wallis’s writings and practice of instructing the deaf and dumb had been known, Dr W. Holder, rector of Bletchington, published a work entitled Elements of Speech, with an Appendix concerning Persons Deaf and Dumb; in 1670 George Sibscote issued a Treatise concerning those who are Born Deaf and Dumb; and in the year 1680 George Dalgarno, a native of Aberdeen, published an able and philosophical work, under the title of Didascalocophus, or the Deaf and Dumb Man's Tutor, which was reprinted some years ago by the Maitland Club. This last-named work is considered by Professor Porter as “one of the most remarkable and important productions in the whole history of the art.” To an early work of his, entitled Ars Signorum, both Bishop Wilkins and Dr Wallis were indebted, but they never mention his name. This ungenerous silence unfavourably contrasts with Leibnitz’s frequent commendation of the work. Above all others, John Conrad Amman, a Swiss physician living at Amsterdam, distinguished himself by his ingenious and successful method of teaching the deaf and dumb to speak. He reduced the work to a fixed art or method, which he published in his Surdus Loquens, 1692, whereof an English translation was afterwards published by Daniel Foot.

In France the work of teaching the deaf and dumb was late in receiving the attention it deserved, in consequence of the still prevalent doubt as to its practicability, although many instances of success in other countries were generally known. It was not till about the middle of the 17 th century that the subject was taken up with any interest. Vanin, a Father of the Christian Doctrine, made some attempts to alleviate the condition of the deaf and dumb, but his work was cut short by death. After him . came Ernaud, Rodriguez Pereira, the Abbé Deschamps, and the Abbé de l’Épée. In Silesia, at the beginning of the 18th century, W. Kerger established his method on the principles of John C. Amman; and in 1718 George Raphel, a German, and contemporary with Kerger, published the system he had carried out in the education of three deaf mutes in his own family. All this interesting work had been accomplished before any public school for the deaf and dumb had been established; and it was not till 1760 that Abbé de l’Épée started the first school in Paris. About the same time Thomas Braidwood opened a school in Edinburgh; and in 1778 Heinicke in Germany founded another at Leipsic under the patronage of the Government, where he pursued the system of articulation and lip reading which forms the basis of instruction in the German schools of the present day. Thomas Braidwood made himself famous by his remarkable success. He was visited...

Open full article (10,200 words)

9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 7, p. 3
[10,200 words — estimated reading time: 1 hour]

Deaf-mute [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1913

A person who is deaf and dumb; one who, through deprivation or defect of hearing, has either failed the acquire the power of speech, or has lost it.

Deaf-mutism [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1913

The condition of being a deaf-mute.

Deafen [Verb transitive] Webster's Dictionary 1828

1. dee'fn.

2. To make deaf; to deprive of the power of hearing; to impair the organs of hearing, so as to render them unimpressible to sounds.

3. To stun; to render incapable of perceiving sounds distinctly; as deafened with clamor or tumult.

Deafen [Verb transitive] Webster's Dictionary 1913

1. To make deaf; to deprive of the power of hearing; to render incapable of perceiving sounds distinctly.

2. To render impervious to sound, as a partition or floor, by filling the space within with mortar, by lining with paper, etc.

Deafened [Imperfect tense and past participle] Webster's Dictionary 1913

of Deafen

Deafening [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1913

The act or process of rendering impervious to sound, as a floor or wall; also, the material with which the spaces are filled in this process; pugging.

Deafening [Present participle and verbal noun] Webster's Dictionary 1913

of Deafen

Deafly [Adverb] Webster's Dictionary 1828

dee'fly. Without sense of sounds; obscurely heard.

Deafly [Adjective] Webster's Dictionary 1913

Lonely; solitary.

Deafly [Adverb] Webster's Dictionary 1913

Without sense of sounds; obscurely.

Deafness [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1828

1. , dee'fness.

2. Incapacity of perceiving sounds; the state of the organs which prevents the impressions which constitute hearing; as the deafness of the ears: hence, applied to persons, want of the sense of hearing.

3. Unwillingness to hear and regard; voluntary rejection of what is addressed to the ear and to the understanding.

Deafness [Noun] Webster's Dictionary 1913

1. Incapacity of perceiving sounds; the state of the organs which prevents the impression which constitute hearing; want of the sense of hearing.

2. Unwillingness to hear; voluntary rejection of what is addressed to the understanding.

Deafness Encyclopedia Britannica

DEAFNESS. See Ear. < a ∙ la ∙)

9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 7, p. 12
[5 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]

Deafness Roget’s Thesaurus §419

N. deafness, hardness of hearing, surdity|, # inaudibility, inaudibleness

V. be deaf, have no ear, shut one's ears, stop one's ears, close one's ears, turn a deaf ear to, render deaf, stun, deafen

Adj. deaf, earless, surd, hard of hearing, dull of hearing, deaf-mute, stunned, deafened, stone deaf, deaf as a post, deaf as an adder, deaf as a beetle, deaf as a trunkmaker, inaudible, out of hearing

Phr. hear no evil, (6) light (i) light in general

Inattention Roget’s Thesaurus §458

N. inattention, inconsideration, inconsiderateness, oversight, inadvertence, inadvertency, nonobservance, disregard, supineness, etourderie, want of thought, heedlessness, insouciance, abstraction, absence of mind, absorption of mind, preoccupation, distraction, reverie, brown study, deep musing, fit of abstraction

V. be inattentive, overlook, disregard, pass by not observe, think little of, close one's eyes to, shut one's eyes to, pay no attention to, dismiss from one's thoughts, discard from one's thoughts, discharge from one's thoughts, dismiss from one's mind, discard from one's mind, discharge from one's mind, drop the subject, think no more of, set aside, turn aside, put aside, turn away from, turn one's attention from, turn a deaf ear to, turn one's back upon, abstract oneself, dream, indulge in reverie, escape notice, escape attention, come in at one ear and go out at the other, forget, call off the attention, draw off the attention, call away the attention, divert the attention, distract the mind, put out of one's head, disconcert, discompose, put out, confuse, perplex, bewilder, moider, fluster, muddle, dazzle, throw a sop to cerberus

Adj. inattentive, unobservant, unmindful, heedless, unthinking, unheeding, undiscerning, inadvertent, mindless, regardless, respectless, listless, blind, deaf, bird- witted, hand over head, cursory, percursory, giddy-brained, scatter- brained, hare-brained, unreflective, unreflecting, ecervele, offhand, dizzy, muzzy, brainsick, giddy, giddy as a goose, wild, harum-scarum, rantipole, highflying, heedless, careless, inconsiderate, thoughtless, absent, abstracted, distrait, absentminded, lost, lost in thought, wrapped in thought, rapt, in the clouds, bemused, dreaming on other things, musing on other things, preoccupied, engrossed, daydreaming, in a reverie, off one's guard, napping, dreamy, caught napping, disconcerted, distracted, put out

Adv. inattentively, inadvertently, absent-mindedly, per incuriam, sub silentio

Int. stand at ease, stand easy, phr, the attention wanders, one's wits gone a woolgathering, one's wits gone a bird's nesting, it never entered into one's head, the mind running on other things, one's thoughts being elsewhere, had it been a bear it would have bitten you, 129

King James Bible KJV Bible

Berean Standard Bible BSB Bible

15 KJV and 17 BSB verses contain “Deaf”

Exodus 4:11

And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?

And the LORD said to him, “Who gave man his mouth? Or who makes the mute or the deaf, the sighted or the blind? Is it not I, the LORD?

Leviticus 19:14

Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumblingblock before the blind, but shalt fear thy God: I am the LORD.

You must not curse the deaf or place a stumbling block before the blind, but you shall fear your God. I am the LORD.

Psalms 28:1

Unto thee will I cry, O LORD my rock; be not silent to me: lest, if thou be silent to me, I become like them that go down into the pit.

To You, O LORD, I call; be not deaf to me, O my Rock. For if You remain silent, I will be like those descending to the Pit.

Psalms 38:13

But I, as a deaf man, heard not; and I was as a dumb man that openeth not his mouth.

But like a deaf man, I do not hear; and like a mute man, I do not open my mouth.

Psalms 39:12

Hear my prayer, O LORD, and give ear unto my cry; hold not thy peace at my tears: for I am a stranger with thee, and a sojourner, as all my fathers were.

Hear my prayer, O LORD, and give ear to my cry for help; do not be deaf to my weeping. For I am a foreigner dwelling with You, a stranger like all my fathers.

Psalms 58:4

Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;

Their venom is like the venom of a snake, like a cobra that shuts its ears,

Isaiah 6:10

Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.

Make the hearts of this people calloused; deafen their ears and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”

Isaiah 29:18

And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.

On that day the deaf will hear the words of the scroll, and out of the deep darkness the eyes of the blind will see.

Isaiah 35:5

Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.

Then the eyes of the blind will be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped.

Isaiah 42:18

Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see.

Listen, you deaf ones; look, you blind ones, that you may see!

Isaiah 42:19

Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD’S servant?

Who is blind but My servant, or deaf like the messenger I am sending? Who is blind like My covenant partner, or blind like the servant of the LORD?

Isaiah 43:8

Bring forth the blind people that have eyes, and the deaf that have ears.

Bring out a people who have eyes but are blind, and who have ears but are deaf.

Micah 7:16

The nations shall see and be confounded at all their might: they shall lay their hand upon their mouth, their ears shall be deaf.

Nations will see and be ashamed, deprived of all their might. They will put their hands over their mouths, and their ears will become deaf.

Matthew 11:5

The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.

The blind receive sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor.

Mark 7:32

And they bring unto him one that was deaf, and had an impediment in his speech; and they beseech him to put his hand upon him.

Some people brought to Him a man who was deaf and hardly able to speak, and they begged Jesus to place His hand on him.

Mark 7:37

And were beyond measure astonished, saying, He hath done all things well: he maketh both the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak.

The people were utterly astonished and said, “He has done all things well! He makes even the deaf hear and the mute speak!”

Mark 9:25

When Jesus saw that the people came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him.

When Jesus saw that a crowd had come running, He rebuked the unclean spirit. “You deaf and mute spirit,” He said, “I command you to come out and never enter him again.”

Luke 7:22

Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.

So He replied, “Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor.