Cambridge Forecast Group Blog: Backup

PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA

November 27, 2006 on 2:43 am | In Books, History, Israel, Judaica, Philosophy, Research | No Comments

PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA

(20 B.C.E.-50 C.E.)

Philo of Alexandria, a Hellenized Jew, is a figure that spans two cultures, the Greek and the Hebrew. When Hebrew mythical thought met Greek philosophical thought in the first century B.C.E. it was only natural that someone would try to develop speculative and philosophical justification for Judaism in terms of Greek philosophy. Thus Philo produced a synthesis of both traditions developing concepts for future Hellenistic interpretation of messianic Hebrew thought, especially by Clement of Alexandria, Christian Apologists like Athenagoras, Theophilus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and by Origen. He may have influenced Paul, his contemporary, and perhaps the authors of the Gospel of John (C. H. Dodd) and the Epistle to the Hebrews (R. Williamson and H. W. Attridge). In the process, he laid the foundations for the development of Christianity in the West and in the East, as we know it today. Philo’s primary importance is in the development of the philosophical and theological foundations of Christianity. The church preserved the Philonic writings because Eusebius of Caesarea labeled the monastic ascetic group of Therapeutae and Therapeutrides, described in Philo’s The Contemplative Life, as Christians, which is highly unlikely. Eusebius also promoted the legend that Philo met Peter in Rome. Jerome (345-420 C.E.) even lists him as a church Father. Jewish tradition was uninterested in philosophical speculation and did not preserve Philo’s thought. According to H. A. Wolfson, Philo was a founder of religious philosophy, a new habit of practicing philosophy. Philo was thoroughly educated in Greek philosophy and culture as can be seen from his superb knowledge of classical Greek literature. He had a deep reverence for Plato and referred to him as “the most holy Plato” (Prob. 13). Philo’s philosophy represented contemporary Platonism which was its revised version incorporating Stoic doctrine and terminology via Antiochus of Ascalon (ca 90 B.C.E.) and Eudorus of Alexandria, as well as elements of Aristotelian logic and ethics and Pythagorean ideas. Clement of Alexandria even called Philo “the Pythagorean.” But it seems that Philo also picked up his ancestral tradition, though as an adult, and once having discovered it, he put forward the teachings of the Jewish prophet, Moses, as “the summit of philosophy” (Op. 8), and considered Moses the teacher of Pythagoras (b. ca 570 B.C.E.) and of all Greek philosophers and lawgivers (Hesiod, Heraclitus, Lycurgus, to mention a few). For Philo, Greek philosophy was a natural development of the revelatory teachings of Moses. He was no innovator in this matter because already before him Jewish scholars attempted the same. Artapanus in the second century B.C.E identified Moses with Musaeus and with Orpheus. According to Aristobulus of Paneas (first half of the second century B.C.E.), Homer and Hesiod drew from the books of Moses which were translated into Greek long before the Septuagint.

——————————————————————————–

Table of Contents (Clicking on the links below will take you to those parts of this article)

1. Life

2. Philo’s Works and Their Classification

3. Technique of Exposition

4. Emphasis on Contemplative Life and Philosophy

5. Philosophy and Wisdom: a Path to Ethical Life

6. Philo’s Ethical Doctrine

7. Philo’s Mysticism and Transcendence of God

8. Source of Intuition of the Infinite Reality

9. Philo’s Doctrine of Creation

a. Philo’s Model of Creation

b. Eternal Creation

10. Doctrine of Miracles: Naturalism and Comprehension

11. Doctrine of the Logos in Philo’s Writings

a. The Utterance of God

b. The Divine Mind

c. God’s Transcendent Power

d. First-born Son of God

e. Universal Bond: in the Physical World and in the Human Soul

f. Immanent Reason

g. Immanent Mediator of the Physical Universe

h. The Angel of the Lord, Revealer of God

i. Multi-Named Archetype

j. Soul-Nourishing Manna and Wisdom

k. Intermediary Power

l. God”

m. Summary of Philo’s Concept of the Logos

12. List of abbreviations to Philo’s works

13. Editions of Philo’s works and their translations

14. Major Works on Philo

——————————————————————————–

1. Life

Very little is known about the life of Philo. He lived in Alexandria, which at that
time counted, according to some estimates, about one million people and included largest
Jewish community outside of Palestine. He came from a wealthy and the prominent family and
appears to be a leader in his community. Once he visited Jerusalem and the temple, as he
himself stated in Prov. 2.64. Philo’s brother, Alexander, was a wealthy, prominent Roman
government official, a custom agent responsible for collecting dues on all goods imported
into Egypt from the East. He donated money to plate the gates of the temple in Jerusalem
with gold and silver. He also made a loan to Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great.
Alexander’s two sons, Marcus and Tiberius Julius Alexander were involved in Roman affairs.
Marcus married Bernice, the daughter of Herod Agrippa I, who is mentioned in Acts (25:13,
23; 26:30). The other son, Tiberius Julius Alexander, described by Josephus as “not
remaining true to his ancestral practices” became procurator of the province of Judea
(46-48 C.E.) and prefect of Egypt (66-70 C.E.). Philo was involved in the affairs of his
community which interrupted his contemplative life (Spec. leg. 3.1-6), especially during
the crisis relating to the pogrom which was initiated in 38 C.E. by the prefect Flaccus,
during the reign of emperor Gaius Caligula. He was elected to head the Jewish delegation,
which apparently included his brother Alexander and nephew Tiberius Julius Alexander, and
was sent to Rome in 39-40 B.C.E. to see the emperor. He reported the events in his
writings Against Flaccus and The Embassy to Gaius.

Back to Table of Contents

2. Philo’s Works and Their Classification

The major part of Philo’s writings consists of philosophical essays dealing with the
main themes of biblical thought that present a systematic and precise exposition of his
views. One has the impression that he attempted to show that the philosophical Platonic or
Stoic ideas were nothing but the deductions made from the biblical verses of Moses. Philo
was not an original thinker, but he was well acquainted with the entire range of Greek
philosophical traditions through the original texts. If there are gaps in his knowledge,
they are rather in his Jewish tradition as evidenced by his relying on the Greek
translation of the Hebrew Bible. In his attempt to reconcile the Greek way of thinking
with his Hebrew tradition he had antecedents such as Pseudo-Aristeas and Aristobulus.

Philo’s works are divided into three categories:

1. The first group comprises writings that paraphrase the biblical texts of Moses: On
Abraham, On the Decalogue, On Joseph, The Life of Moses, On the Creation of the World, On
Rewards and Punishments, On the Special Laws, On the Virtues. A series of works include
allegorical explanations of Genesis 2-41: On Husbandry, On the Cherubim, On the Confusion
of Tongues, On the Preliminary Studies, The Worse Attacks the Better, On Drunkenness, On
Flight and Finding, On the Giants, Allegorical Interpretation (Allegory of the Law), On
the Migration of Abraham, On the Change of Names, On Noah’s Work as a Planter, On the
Posterity and Exile of Cain, Who is the Heir, On the Unchangeableness of God, On the
Sacrifices of Abel and Cain, On Sobriety, On Dreams. Here belong also: Questions and
Answers on Genesis and Questions and Answers on Exodus (aside from fragments preserved
only in Armenian).

2. A series of works classified as philosophical treatises: Every Good Man is Free (a
sequel of which had the theme that every bad man is a slave, which did not survive); On
the Eternity of the World; On Providence (except for lengthy fragments preserved in
Armenian); Alexander or On Whether Brute Animals Possess Reason (preserved only in
Armenian) and called in Latin De Animalibus (On the Animals); a brief fragment De
Deo (On God), preserved only in Armenian is an exegesis of Genesis 18, and belongs to the
Allegory of the Law.

3. The third group includes historical-apologetic writings: Hypothetica or Apologia Pro
Judaeos which survives only in two Greek extracts quoted by Eusebius. The first extract is
a rationalistic version of Exodus giving a eulogic account of Moses and a summary of
Mosaic constitution contrasting its severity with the laxity of the gentile laws; the
second extract describes the Essenes. The other apologetic essays include Against Flaccus,
The Embassy to Gaius, and On the Contemplative Life. But all these works are related to
Philo’s explanations of the texts of Moses.

Back to Table of Contents

3. Technique of Exposition

Philo uses an allegorical technique for interpretation of the Hebrew myth and in this
he follows the Greek tradition of Theagenes of Rhegium (second half of the sixth century
B.C.E.). Theagenes used this approach in defense of Homer’s theology against the
detractors. He said that the myths of gods struggling with each other referred to the
opposition between the elements; the names of gods were made to refer to various
dispositions of the soul, e.g., Athena was reflection, Aphrodite, desire, Hermes,
elocution. Anaxagoras, too, explained the Homeric poems as discussions of virtue and
justice. The Sophist Prodicus of Ceos (b. 470 B.C.E.), contemporary of Socrates,
interpreted the gods of Homeric stories as personifications of those natural substances
that are useful to human life [e.g., bread and Demeter, wine and Dionysus, water and
Poseidon, fire and Hephaestus]. He also employed ethical allegory. His treatise, The
Seasons, contains a Parable of Heracles, paraphrased in Xenophon’s Memorabilia
(2.1.21-34), which tells the story of Heracles who, at crossroad, was attracted by Virtue
and Vice in the form of two women of great stature (Sacr. 20-44). The allegory was used by
the cynic Antisthenes (contemporary of Plato) and Diogenes the Cynic. Stoics expanded the
Cynics’ use of Homeric allegory in the interest of their philosophical system. Using this
allegorical method, Philo seeks out the hidden message beneath the surface of any
particular text and tries to read back a new doctrine into the work of the past. In a
similar way Plutarch allegorized the ancient Egyptian mythology giving it a new meaning.
But in some aspects of Jewish life Philo defends the literal interpretation of his
tradition as in the debate on circumcision or the Sabbath (Mig. 89-93; Spec. leg. 1.1-11).
Though he acknowledges the symbolic meaning of these rituals, he insists on their literal
interpretation.

Back to Table of Contents

4. Emphasis on Contemplative Life and Philosophy

The key emphasis in Philo’s philosophy is contrasting the spiritual life, understood as
intellectual contemplation, with the mundane preoccupation with earthly concerns, either
as an active life or as a search for pleasure. Philo disdained the material world and
physical body (Spec. leg. 3.1-6). The body was for Philo as for Plato, “an evil and a
dead thing” (LA 3.72-74; Gig. 15), wicked by nature and a plotter against the soul
(LA 3.69). But it was a necessary evil, hence Philo does not advocate a complete
abnegation from life. On the contrary he advocates fulfilling first the practical
obligations toward men and the use of mundane possessions for the accomplishment of
praiseworthy works (Fug. 23-28; Plant. 167-168). Similarly he considers pleasure
indispensable and wealth useful, but for a virtuous man they are not a perfect good (LA
3.69-72). He believed that men should steer themselves away from the physical aspect of
things gradually. Some people, like philosophers, may succeed in focusing their minds on
the eternal realities. Philo believed that man’s final goal and ultimate bliss is in the
“knowledge of the true and living God” (Decal. 81; Abr. 58; Praem. 14);
“such knowledge is the boundary of happiness and blessedness” (Det. 86). To him,
mystic vision allows our soul to see the Divine Logos (Ebr. 152) and achieve a union with
God (Deut. 30:19-20; Post. 12). In a desire to validate the scripture as an inspired
writing, he often compares it to prophetic ecstasy (Her. 69-70). His praise of the
contemplative life of the monastic Therapeutae in Alexandria attests to his preference of
bios theoreticos over bios practicos. He adheres to the Platonic picture of the souls
descending into the material realm and that only the souls of philosophers are able to
come to the surface and return to their realm in heaven (Gig. 12-15). Philo adopted the
Platonic concept of the soul with its tripartite division. The rational part of the soul,
however, is breathed into man as a part of God’s substance. Philo speaks figuratively
“Now, when we are alive, we are so though our soul is dead and buried in our body, as
if in a tomb. But if it were to die, then our soul would live according to its proper life
being released from the evil and dead body to which it is bound” (Op. 67-69; LA
1.108).

Back to Table of Contents

5. Philosophy and Wisdom: a Path to Ethical Life

Philo differentiated between philosophy and wisdom. To him philosophy is “the
greatest good thing to men” (Op. 53-54), which they acquired because of a gift of
reason from God (Op. 77). It is a devotion to wisdom, and a way to acquire the highest
knowledge, “an attentive study of wisdom.” Wisdom in turn is “the knowledge
of all divine and human things, and of the respective causes of them” that is,
according to Philo, contained in the Torah (Congr. 79). Hence it follows that Moses, as
the author of the Torah, “had reached the very summit of philosophy” and
“had learnt from the oracles of God the most numerous and important of the principles
of nature” (Op. 8). Moses was also the interpreter of nature (Her. 213). By saying
this Philo wanted to indicate that human wisdom has two origins: one is divine, the other
is natural (Her. 182). Moreover, that Mosaic Law is not inconsistent with nature. A single
law, the Logos of nature governs the entire world (Jos. 28-31) and its law is imprinted on
the human mind (Prob. 46-47). Because of this we have a conscience that affects even
wicked persons (QG 4.62). Wisdom is a consummated philosophy and as such has to be in
agreement with the principles of nature (Mos. 2.48; Abr. 16; Op. 143; Spec. leg. 2.13;
3.46-47, 112, 137; Virt. 18). The study of philosophy has as its end “life in
accordance with nature” and following the “path of right reason” (Mig.
128). Philosophy prepares us to a moral life, i.e., “to live in conformity with
nature” (Prob. 160). From this follows that life in accordance with nature hastens us
towards virtues (Mos. 2. 181; Abr. 60, Spec. leg. 1.155), and an unjust man is the one
“who transgresses the ordinances of nature” (Spec. leg. 4.204; Cf. Decal. 132;
Virt. 131-132; Plant. 49; Ebr. 142; Agr. 66). Thus Philo does not discount human reason,
but contrasts only the true doctrine which is trust in God with uncertain, plausible, and
unreliable reasoning (LA 3.228-229).

Back to Table of Contents

6. Philo’s Ethical Doctrine

Philo’s ethical doctrine is Stoic in its essence and includes the active effort to
achieve virtue, the model of a sage to be followed, and practical advice concerning the
achievement of the proper right reason and a proper emotional state of rational emotions
(eupatheia). To Philo man is basically passive and it is God who sows noble qualities in
the soul, thus we are instruments of God (LA 2.31-32; Cher. 127-128). Still man is the
only creature endowed with freedom to act though his freedom is limited by the
constitution of his mind. As such he is responsible for his action and “very properly
receives blame for the offences which he designedly commits.” This is so because he
received a faculty of voluntary motion and is free from the dominion of necessity (Deus
47-48). Philo advocates the practice of virtue in both the divine and the human spheres.
Lovers only of God and lovers only of men are both incomplete in virtue. Philo advocates a
middle harmonious way (Decal. 106-110; Spec. leg. 4. 102). He differentiates four virtues:
wisdom, self-control, courage, and justice (LA 1.63-64). Human dispositions Philo divides
into three groups