Philo's Use of the Categories Male and Female

ARBEITEN ZUR LITERATUR U N D G E S C H I C H T E DES H ELLEN I S T I S C H E N J U D E N T U M S HERAUSGEGEBEN K.

H.

VON

R E N G S T O R F

IN V E R B I N D U N G

MIT

J . DANIELOU, G . DELLING, S . JELLICOE, H . R . MOEHRING, B . NOACK, H . M . ORLINSKY, H . RIESENFELD, A . SCHALIT,

H.

SCHRECKENBERG, A.

W . C. VAN

WlKGREN

III R I C H A R D

A.

B A E R

JR.

PHILO'S USE OF T H E

CATEGORIES

MALE AND FEMALE

L E I D E N E . J.

B R I L L

1970

UNNIK,

P H I L O ' S USE OF T H E CATEGORIES MALE A N D FEMALE BY

R I C H A R D A. B A E R ,

L E I D E N

E . J.

BRILL 1970

JR.

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

PREFACE

xi

I. INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS

I

A . Brief Survey of the Literature

i

B . Philo's G o a l and M e t h o d

4

1. Philo's Soteriological Orientation

4

2. Philo as a Philosopher

5

3. Philo as an E x e g e t e of Scripture

6

4. Philo's Use of the T e r m s MuOo; and MocrrYjpiov .

8

I I . THE CATEGORIES MALE AND FEMALE IN RELATIONSHIP TO PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN A. Man's Dual Nature B. Man's

Higher

14 14

N a t u r e : the

R e a l m of the A s e x u a l

1. T h e Oneness and Indivisibility of the

16

Rational

S o u l ; the Male-Female Polarity

16

2. T h e Categories Male and F e m a l e in Reference t o the Man Created after the I m a g e of G o d Referred t o in D e Opificio M u n d i 134

20

a. T h e P r o b l e m

20

b . Philo

Uses

Both

Genesis

1:27

and

2:7

to

E s t a b l i s h the G o d - l i k e N a t u r e of M a n ' s H i g h e r Nous

21

c. T h e Sequence of Creation in D e Opificio M u n d i d. Exegesis of D e Opificio M u n d i 134 ff

26 29

C. M a n ' s L o w e r N a t u r e : the R e a l m of Male and F e m a l e

35

1. T h e IIp6ko<; "Av6poyrco<; ( D e Opificio M u n d i 136 ff.)

35

2. M a n ' s Present Situation a. Man S y m b o l i z e s N o o ; , W o m a n MaQfjmi;

38 . .

38

b . Philo's Use of F e m a l e T e r m i n o l o g y in R e l a t i o n ­ ship t o his E v a l u a t i o n of M a n ' s Irrational S o u l

40

I I I . T H E CATEGORIES MALE AND FEMALE IN RELATIONSHIP TO SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION . . . .

45

A . B e c o m i n g Male

45

B. Becoming One

49

C. B e c o m i n g a Virgin

51

TABLE OF CONTENTS D . A Comparison o f the Contexts in w h i c h the Motifs o f B e c o m i n g Male, B e c o m i n g One, and

Becoming a

Virgin O c c u r

54

E. The Divine Impregnation

o f the Soul

55

I V . CONCLUSION A. Summary

65 of Preceding Discussion

65

B . Correlations w i t h Specific Gnostic T e x t s

66

1. T h e Use o f the Categories Male and F e m a l e

in

Gnostic Writings

66

2. B e c o m i n g Male

69

3. B e c o m i n g One

72

4. B e c o m i n g a Virgin C. Final

Observations

75 and

Suggested

Correlations:

Philo, the Gnostics, the N e w T e s t a m e n t , C o n t e m p o ­ rary Judaism

76

1. T h e Evaluation of the Created W o r l d 2. E s c h a t o l o g y

and

the

Problem

o f the

76 Present

Realization of the Telos of M a n ' s E x i s t e n c e

. .

APPENDIXES Appendix Mundi and

81 A.

The

Relationship

L e g u m Allegoria in

between Reference

De to

Opificio the

Man

Created after the I m a g e o f G o d Appendix

78

B. T h e

Use

of the

81 Term

Androgynous

in

Reference t o the Generic Man of L e g u m Allegoria II : 13 and D e Opificio M u n d i 76 Appendix

83

C. A d d i t i o n a l N o t e s o n Philo's U n d e r s t a n d i n g

of the Soul Appendix

84 D. A d d i t i o n a l N o t e s o n Philo's Use of

A n d r o g y n o u s Man Motif and his A c c o u n t of the

the

Creation

of W o m a n Appendix

87 E. A d d i t i o n a l

Notes

on

Philo's

Attitude

T o w a r d s Man's Irrational Soul and the Created W o r l d .

89

1. Positive Orientation t o w a r d s M a n ' s L o w e r N a t u r e and the Created W o r l d

89

2. N e g a t i v e Orientation t o w a r d s Man's L o w e r N a t u r e and the Created W o r l d

91

IX Appendix

F. A N o t e o n Sexual Intercourse and

Pro­

creation in Philo's Writings Appendix

94

G. T h e E x p o s i t i o n in Contrast t o the A l l e g o r y

and the Questions and Answers in Relationship t o their Evaluation

of the Created W o r l d

Appendix

95

H. T h e Influence of Hellenistic P r o p h e t i s m o n

P h i l o ' s Use of Virgin T e r m i n o l o g y in Connection w i t h the Divine

Impregnation

Motif:

Leisegang's B o o k Pneuma Appendix

I.

A

Critical

Note

on

Hans

Hagion

96

Philo's Description of the T h e r a p e u t a e in

D e Vita C o n t e m p l a t i v a in Reference t o the Categories Male and F e m a l e Appendix

98 J. Sexual Intercourse and Prayer

101

BIBLIOGRAPHY

103

INDEX OF REFERENCES

107

INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND NAMES

113

PREFACE This m o n o g r a p h on Philo w a s originally planned as b a c k g r o u n d material for a s t u d y I i n t e n d e d on Paul's attitude t o w a r d s w o m e n , particularly

as reflected in such passages as Galatians 3:28

I Corinthians

and

1 1 : 1 1 . L i k e the Church of the H o l y Sepulchre in

Jerusalem, m y investigation into Philo grew a n d g r e w until it claimed the space of an entire b o o k rather than the single chapter I h a d p r o j e c t e d . I saw that the categories male and female o c c u p i e d m o r e than an incidental p l a c e in Philo's thinking, a n d that m u c h of his t h e o l o g y c o u l d b e illuminated b y an understanding of his use of these terms. H o p e f u l l y , this investigation also accomplishes s o m e t h i n g of its original intent b y contributing

to the

further

c o m p r e h e n s i o n of a limited area of Paul's thinking. T h e reader will see that in the c o n c l u d i n g chapter an a t t e m p t is m a d e to s h o w such possible relevance. It is indeed unfortunate that a specialized s t u d y such as this gives little feeling for Philo the m a n . B r i d g i n g t w o cultures, t w o w a y s of thinking a b o u t G o d and man, Philo's t h o u g h t u n d o u b t e d l y reflects certain inconsistencies. T h e r e is a c o n s i s t e n c y of p u r p o s e in Philo's life, h o w e v e r , that b e c o m e s clear w h e n o n e takes time to live with his writings o v e r a p e r i o d of years. Making extensive use of the m e t h o d of allegorical interpretation, he d e v o t e s all of his great energy and enthusiasm

to the task of m a k i n g sense of

J u d a i s m a n d the Jewish Scriptures in the Hellenistic milieu of first c e n t u r y A l e x a n d r i a . Quite apart from whether or n o t w e can a c c e p t Philo's m e t h o d or results, w e can o n l y admire his d e e p c o m m i t m e n t to a great cause. I o w e a special debt of gratitude t o Professor Krister of H a r v a r d

Stendahl

University for his c o n t i n u i n g e n c o u r a g e m e n t in this

undertaking. H e has patiently read and criticized m y manuscript a n d offered m a n y helpful suggestions. A l s o I wish t o t h a n k Professor H e l m u t K o e s t e r of H a r v a r d and the late Professor A r t h u r D a r b y N o c k . E a c h in his o w n w a y taught m e to respect the original text of Philo and n o t t o turn t o o q u i c k l y to s e c o n d a r y literature. Particular thanks are d u e H a r v a r d University Press a n d W i l l i a m H . H e i n e m a n n L t d . for permission t o q u o t e extensively from the Greek text and the English translation of the Loeb Classical

Library

PREFACE

XII

edition of Philo. T h e reader s h o u l d note, h o w e v e r , that changes h a v e been m a d e in the L o e b translation w h e r e v e r a m o r e literal rendering

of the Greek w a s considered necessary. I m u s t

also

express appreciation t o H a r p e r a n d R o w Publishers and A . R . Mowbray

& Co. L t d .

for permitting

m e to r e p r o d u c e

passages f r o m the English translation of The Gospel

of

several Philip,

edited b y R . M c L . W i l s o n , a n d to E . J. Brill for letting m e q u o t e from the English translation of The Gospel

of Thomas,

edited b y

A . Guillaumont, et al. R i c h a r d A . BAER, Jr. Richmond,

Indiana

O c t o b e r 18, 1968

CHAPTER

ONE

INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS A. BRIEF SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE I n spite of the i m m e n s e a m o u n t of l a b o r that has b e e n d e v o t e d t o the s t u d y of Philo during the past o n e h u n d r e d years, there is t o d a y n o generally a c c e p t e d interpretation of his writings. A d m i t ­ t e d l y , scholars h a v e c o m e to agree o n m a n y of the details of his thinking, but in reference to his m e t h o d and basic c o n c e r n s there is still little a c c o r d . On the o n e hand, W o l f s o n argues that P h i l o was " a p h i l o s o p h e r in the g r a n d m a n n e r , "

1

who demonstrated

his great

intellectual

ability b o t h in his critical e v a l u a t i o n of the w o r k s of o t h e r p h i l o s ­ ophers and

in his striking out o n a n e w p a t h of his o w n . Philo

demonstrates

his originality

in e v e r y area of his p h i l o s o p h i c a l

inquiry, a n d has left us w i t h a s y s t e m of p h i l o s o p h y " w h i c h is consistent, coherent, a n d free from c o n t r a d i c t i o n s , all of it b e i n g b a s e d o n certain fundamental

principles."

2

I n d e e d , in spite of the

fact that P h i l o left b e h i n d h i m n o official g r o u p of disciples, "his teachings b e c a m e the d o m i n a n t influence in E u r o p e a n p h i l o s o p h y for well-nigh seventeen c e n t u r i e s . "

3

W o l f s o n maintains further that

all the really significant r o o t s of P h i l o ' s thinking are Jewish, a n d w h a t e v e r Hellenistic influence w e find in his writings is " i n language o n l y ; not in religious belief o r c u l t . "

4

A t the o t h e r e x t r e m e from W o l f s o n s t a n d P a s c h e r a n d G o o d e 5

n o u g h . D r a w i n g at m a n y p o i n t s o n the w o r k of P a s c h e r , G o o d e n o u g h sees P h i l o as o n e w h o is little interested in the technical p r o b l e m s of p h i l o s o p h y as such. Philo is c o n v e r s a n t w i t h m u c h of c o n t e m ­ p o r a r y p h i l o s o p h y and, in particular, draws h e a v i l y o n P l a t o n i s m 1

ity,

H a r r y A . W o l f s o n , Philo. and

Islam

2

Wolfson,

3

Wolfson, I, 1 1 5 .

4

Wolfson,

5

Cf. e s p e c i a l l y

Wiedergeburt

ALGHJ, III

Foundations

of Philosophy

in Judaism,

Christian­

(1947), I, 1 1 4 . I,

114-15.

I, 13. und

J o s e p h P a s c h e r , H B A S I A I K N O A O S Der Vergottung

bei Philon

von

Alexandreia

Konigsweg

zu

(1931).

1

2

INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS

and

Neo-Pythagoreanism.

But

his

fundamental

orientation

is

religious rather than philosophical,- his k n o w l e d g e of p h i l o s o p h y serving m a i n l y t o illuminate

and

support

his religious

under­

standing. A c c o r d i n g t o G o o d e n o u g h , Philo is d e e p l y i n d e b t e d t o the Greek m y s t e r y religions of his d a y and was particularly influenced b y O r p h i s m , the cult of Isis and Osiris, and b y the dualism of I r a n . T h e r e is in his writings " a n elaborate transformation

1

of Judaism

i n t o a m y s t i c p h i l o s o p h y , " w h o s e secret teachings were e m b o d i e d in the writings o f the great Moses a n d w h o s e cultic

hierophants

2

were Moses and the H i g h Priest. B u t this transformation is n o t t o b e u n d e r s t o o d as o n l y a " v e n e e r " or " o n e of w o r d s o n l y " ; it resulted in " a J u d a i s m so t h o r o u g h l y paganized t h a t its o b j e c t i v e s were those of Hellenistic m y s t e r i e s . "

3

Indeed, the radical cleft

b e t w e e n the material and immaterial w o r l d s — a t h o r o u g h l y n o n Jewish motif—is the basic presupposition of the Philonic M y s t e r y , a n d thus it is understandable t h a t Philo's m o s t significant departure from n o r m a t i v e J u d a i s m "lies in the fact t h a t h e t o o k t o his heart the pagan idea of s a l v a t i o n ; t h a t is, t h a t the spirit b e released from the

flesh in order t o return t o its spiritual s o u r c e in G o d . "

4

G o o d e n o u g h frequently asserts, h o w e v e r , that Philo never t h o u g h t of himself as breaking a w a y from the religion o f his fathers w i t h its central emphasis o n the T o r a h . In his o w n m i n d he was from first t o last a l o y a l J e w w h o presented t o his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s the true J u d a i s m .

5

Most recent interpretations of Philo h a v e n o t been as a m b i t i o u s as

those

of W o l f s o n

and

Goodenough. Such a b o o k

as

Jean

Danielou's Philon d'A lexandrie (1958), for e x a m p l e , is, as G o o d e n o u g h points o u t , m a i n l y a restatement of the w o r k of earlier scholars a n d thus " c a n n o t b e considered a m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the

1

E r w i n R . G o o d e n o u g h , By

Judaism

Light,

Light:

The Mystic

Gospel

of

Hellenistic

( 1 9 3 5 ) , p . 263. S e e a l s o t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t h e A m e s h a S p e n t a s a n d

the L i g h t - S t r e a m

on pp. 1 2 - 1 5 .

2

Goodenough,

p.

3

Goodenough,

p. 263.

4

Goodenough,

5

Introduction,

An

263. Introduction

to Philo

Judaeus

(2nd

ed.;

1962),

p. 13.

p . 160. S y s t e m a t i c a l l y t o t a k e issue w i t h either W o l f s o n or

G o o d e n o u g h , o r t o s u m m a r i z e a n d c o m m e n t o n o t h e r m a j o r P h i l o s t u d i e s of t h e p a s t o n e h u n d r e d y e a r s lies o u t s i d e t h e s c o p e of t h i s s t u d y . O n l y w h e r e p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t s of t h e s e v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s are i m m e d i a t e l y r e l e v a n t t o t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r of t h i s s t u d y will t h e y b e c o n s i d e r e d c r i t i c a l l y .

BRIEF SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE 1

s t u d y of P h i l o . "

3

A c t u a l l y , m o s t of w h a t is being written o n Philo

t o d a y is in the f o r m of b a c k g r o u n d material for the s t u d y of the N e w T e s t a m e n t a n d the E a r l y Church. It usually appears as

a

chapter or part of a c h a p t e r within a larger w o r k . I n a few cases, such as J a c o b Jervell's s t u d y of Philo's use of etxwv [Imago Gen. i , 26 f. im Spdtjudentum, Briefen,

in der Gnosis und in den

Dei.

paulinischen

i960), this " b a c k g r o u n d " a p p r o a c h has c o n t r i b u t e d signifi­

c a n t l y t o our k n o w l e d g e of Philo, b u t o n the w h o l e these studies h a v e s i m p l y repeated the j u d g m e n t s of earlier scholars. S a n d m e l ' s Philo's Abraham

Place

in Jewish

Literature

Die Lichtterminologie tischen

Schriften

in Judaism.

bei Philon

A

Study

Samuel

of Conceptions

(1956) a n d F r a n z - N o r b e r t von Alexandrien

of

Klein's

und in den

herme-

(1962) are a m o n g the o n l y recent b o o k s t h a t are

m o r e directly centered o n Philo. N o t a few writers h a v e referred t o Philo's use of male a n d female terminology, but

t h e y h a v e t o u c h e d o n this material o n l y in­

cidentally and h a v e n o t tried t o s h o w h o w it functions in relation­ ship t o the totality of his t h o u g h t . T h e three b o o k s that c o m e closest t o this are G o o d e n o u g h ' s By Light, Light, Pascher's Der and H . S t r a t h m a n n ' s Geschichte

der friihchristlichen

Konigsweg,

Askese

(1914).

B u t in each of these v o l u m e s the focus is elsewhere. G o o d e n o u g h a n d Pascher are c o n c e r n e d with the categories male a n d female m a i n l y in terms of h o w t h e y function in the Philonic Mystery, a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y their exegesis of m a n y individual t e x t s stands or falls with

their over-all interpretation of the

Mystery.

Strathmann

t o u c h e s u p o n the male-female t e x t s o n l y insofar as t h e y are related t o the question of asceticism, a n d thus he does n o t deal with m a n y of the m o r e significant passages at all. T h e writings of J a m e s D r u m m o n d (Philo Judaeus; Alexandrian

Philosophy

Emile Brehier d'Alexandrie, und

jiidische

Vollendung (Philo,

in its Development

(Les Idees

philosophiques

or, the

Jewish-

and Completion,

1888),

et religieuses

de

2nded.; 1925), Isaak H e i n e m a n n (Philons Bildung, bei Philo

1932), von

Walther

Alexandrien,

Volker

Philon

griechische

[Fortschritt

1938), a n d

H.

und

Wolfson

1947) h a v e likewise c o n t r i b u t e d indispensably t o m a n y of

the details of this study, although n o n e of t h e m deals with the m a l e female t e r m i n o l o g y as such. Pages 1-47 in V o l k e r ' s m o n o g r a p h c o n t a i n an excellent s u m m a r y of Philo studies u p to the year 1938,

1

Introduction,

p. 19.

INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS

4

a n d H a r t w i g T h y e n ' s article " D i e P r o b l e m e der neueren Philo F o r s c h u n g , " Theologische

Rundschau,

23 (1955), p p . 230-46, c o v e r s

the p e r i o d from 1938-1955. D r u m m o n d ' s b o o k is n o t frequently m e n t i o n e d in the c o n t e m p o r a r y discussion of P h i l o ; nonetheless it remains o n e of the u n d i s p u t e d classics in the field.

B . PHILO'S GOAL AND METHOD 1. Philo's

Soteriological

Orientation

F o r the m o s t part, it is a p p r o p r i a t e t o describe P h i l o ' s basic 1

orientation as s o t e r i o l o g i c a l . B y this is m e a n t t h a t the great b u l k of his literary a c t i v i t y is o r i e n t a t e d t o w a r d s such questions a s : W h o is G o d ? a n d H o w c a n m a n escape the b o n d s of the material w o r l d of c h a n g e a n d c o r r u p t i o n a n d enter i n t o m y s t i c c o m m u n i o n with G o d ? I n the Exposition

of the Laws,

w h i c h consists of an

e x p l a n a t i o n of a n d a p o l o g y for the Jewish L a w , this soteriological orientation is n o t a l w a y s o b v i o u s b u t is nonetheless still present. G o o d e n o u g h claims this writing was designed t o lead Gentiles i n t o Judaism.

2

O p . M u n d . serves as an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o the

Exposition,

and, as such, explains h o w the creation of the w o r l d a n d of m a n w a s in h a r m o n y w i t h the L a w .

3

I n his writings on Moses a n d

the

Patriarchs, P h i l o shows h o w the L a w is e m b o d i e d in these great 01

figures of o l d w h o are d e s c r i b e d as v6jj.ot e ' f i ^ X -

1

4

A l t h o u g h the

N o t a b l e e x c e p t i o n s are V i t . C o n t . a n d H y p o t h e t . , w h i c h are p a r t s of a

l a r g e r a p o l o g y for t h e J e w s a d d r e s s e d t o G e n t i l e r e a d e r s . See G o o d e n o u g h , Introduction,

p p . 31 ff. A l s o in d e f e n s e of t h e J e w s , b u t m o r e in t h e n a t u r e

of p o l i t i c a l t r a c t s , are F l a c c . a n d L e g . G a i . I n A e t . M u n d . F . H . C o l s o n , G . H . W h i t a k e r , e t al., Philo

(See C o l s o n in

[ L . C . L . ] I X [1941], pp.

172-77

re p r o b l e m of a u t h o r s h i p ) , P r o v . , O m n . P r o b . L i b . , a n d A n i m a l . P h i l o d e f e n d s his o w n p o s i t i o n a g a i n s t o t h e r p h i l o s o p h i c a l 2

Introduction,

3

O p . M u n d . 3. Cf. G o o d e n o u g h , Introduction,

4

See

oc

'i\j.^X i-

c u r r e n t s of t h e

day.

p . 33.

G o o d e n o u g h , Light,

p p . 87-90,

p p . 38-39.

196-97,

for a d i s c u s s i o n

of v6y.oq

T h e P a t r i a r c h s w e r e n o t j u s t e m b o d i m e n t s of t h e w r i t t e n L a w , b u t as v6|j,o!. ^IJUJJUX

01

w e r e in t u n e w i t h t h e d i v i n e L o g o s itself. B e f o r e t h e L a w

w a s p u t in w r i t t e n f o r m b y M o s e s , t h e P a t r i a r c h s l i v e d in a c c o r d w i t h Logos,

the

spiritual

reality

after w h i c h

T h u s it is u n d e r s t a n d a b l e t h a t t h e y

the

receive

written

L a w was

the

patterned.

s u c h h i g h p r a i s e a n d are so

c o n s i s t e n t l y p r e s e n t e d as e x a m p l e s o r m o d e l s of t h e g o o d life. P h i l o l i k e w i s e is a b l e t o e x p r e s s o b e d i e n c e t o t h e L a w in t e r m s of c o n f o r m i t y t o

nature

(axoXouOiav cpuaecoi;; A b r . 6 ) , for u l t i m a t e l y t o l i v e x a r a 9110111 o r x a x a v6|j.ov are i d e n t i c a l

for P h i l o .

Goodenough,

Light,

Cf. O p . M u n d .

Chap.

II.

3 ; see t h e e x t e n s i v e

discussion

in

PHILO'S GOAL AND METHOD c o n c l u s i o n t o the Exposition

5

is lost, G o o d e n o u g h h o l d s t h a t

it

p r o b a b l y consisted of a final e x h o r t a t i o n to the Gentile t o enter i n t o the blessings of J u d a i s m and thus b e c o m e " t h e heir of divine 1

things."

T h e Allegory

of the Laws,

o n c e a m u c h longer w o r k t h a n the

2

e x t a n t eighteen titles, m a y well h a v e b e e n written for those w h o , already familiar with the teachings of the Exposition,

wanted to

a d v a n c e into the deeper meanings of the L a w . Beginning with the s e c o n d chapter of Genesis a n d continuing t o t h e e n d of the b o o k , the Allegory

generally follows the Biblical t e x t verse b y verse. N o t

infrequently, h o w e v e r , Philo digresses into related texts a n d i d e a s . In the Questions

and Answers,

3

a verse b y verse c o m m e n t a r y o n

4

Genesis and E x o d u s , P h i l o presents b o t h the literal a n d the deeper allegorical m e a n i n g of each t e x t . T h e allegorical o n the

interpretations,

whole, closely resemble those of the Allegory,

and

are

similarly directed t o the implied q u e s t i o n : H o w can m a n k n o w G o d ? 2. Philo

as a

Philo's

Philosopher

practical,

relationship

to

soteriological c o n c e r n is seen

p h i l o s o p h y and

in his m e t h o d

both

of

in

his

approaching

Scripture. A s a philosopher, h e is rightly called an eclectic, y e t f r o m this it d o e s n o t follow that he treats other philosophies arbitrarily. W h e r e a s his philosophical v o c a b u l a r y and a great n u m b e r of the details of his p h i l o s o p h y were b o r r o w e d from m a n y different sources, "his philosophical p o s i t i o n , " t o q u o t e G o o d e n o u g h , "is, in principle if n o t in details, quite consistent and h o m o g e n e o u s . "

5

Nonetheless,

P h i l o ' s first c o n c e r n is n o t t o create a n e w p h i l o s o p h y . H e is m a i n l y an e x e g e t e of Scripture w h o intends t o present t h e Scriptural truth in terms of the best philosophical t h o u g h t of his d a y . U n d e r l y i n g this p u r p o s e is the a s s u m p t i o n that the truths of Scripture

and

p h i l o s o p h y ultimately c o i n c i d e , for b o t h h a v e their source in G o d and lead o n e t o the k n o w l e d g e of G o d . 1

Introduction,

2

Cf. a n a l y s i s of L e o p o l d

Philos

Goodenough,

4

Presumably

5

Introduction, the

C o h n , Einteilung

duction,

C o h n , Einteilung

und

( 1 8 9 9 ) , p p . 393-402 (reprint f r o m Philologus,

3

See

p. 45.

work und

was

Chronologie

der

Schriften

Supplementband

VII).

p p . 46-49. much

Chronologie,

longer than w h a t we p . 403.

possess

today.

See a l s o G o o d e n o u g h ,

Intro­

p . 49.

Introduction,

metaphysics.

p . 92. See p p . 9 1 - 1 1 1 for G o o d e n o u g h ' s

s u m m a r y of P h i l o ' s

INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS

6

F o r Philo it is the m y s t i c in pursuit of G o d w h o is the true 1

p h i l o s o p h e r . G o d is the first a n d sole K i n g of the universe, a n d the r o y a l r o a d t h a t leads t o h i m is p h i l o s o p h y . T r u e p h i l o s o p h y is the passionate pursuit o f reality and ultimately o f G o d himself. I n d e e d , the royal r o a d of p h i l o s o p h y is in the e n d identical w i t h the L o g o s of G o d .

2

It is within this f r a m e w o r k of the underlying i d e n t i t y of p u r p o s e of Scriptural exegesis and p h i l o s o p h y that o n e is able t o understand P h i l o ' s frequent assertion that the great Greek philosophers were in reality d e p e n d e n t o n Moses for their deepest insights. This c l a i m is n o t s i m p l y an e x a m p l e of religious c h a u v i n i s m b u t rather an illustration of Philo's belief that the Scriptures are the fundamental source of m a n ' s k n o w l e d g e of G o d . 3. Philo

as an Exegete

of

Scripture

Philo's m e t h o d of exegesis is closely related to his understanding of

Scripture

as inspired

(including the

translation

of the

Old

T e s t a m e n t into Greek) and his c o n c e r n for m a n ' s present relation­ ship t o G o d . A i d e d b y the truths of p h i l o s o p h y , he tries t o s h o w in his exegesis of Scripture h o w m a n c a n escape from the

material

w o r l d and c o m e t o a p r o p e r understanding of the o n e true G o d .

3

T h u s , for the m o s t part, Philo is n o t greatly c o n c e r n e d w i t h speculation a b o u t the b e g i n n i n g of the w o r l d or with A d a m as a t y p e of primal m a n figure as such. E v e n in O p . Mund., where h e specifically deals w i t h the origin of the w o r l d a n d the creation of m a n , Philo's m a i n interest

is n o t in the question of origins in

itself b u t in showing h o w such a c o s m o g o n y as Moses presents in the early chapters of Genesis forms a fitting framework for the L a w w h i c h follows. His exordium, as I have said, is one that excites our admiration in the highest degree. It consists of an account of the creation of the 1

T h i s e s s e n t i a l l y religious g o a l of p h i l o s o p h y is n o t u n i q u e t o P h i l o b u t is c o m m o n a m o n g c o n t e m p o r a r y philosophers, especially the Neo-Pythagor e a n s a n d M i d d l e - P l a t o n i s t s . G o d is f r e q u e n t l y s p o k e n of as b o t h t h e s o u r c e a n d t h e o b j e c t of p h i l o s o p h i c a l c o n t e m p l a t i o n . See A b r a h a m J. M a l h e r b e , " T h e SuppHcatio pro Christianis of Athenagoras and Middle Platonism" ( u n p u b l i s h e d T h . D . d i s s e r t a t i o n , H a r v a r d D i v i n i t y S c h o o l , 1 9 6 3 ) , p p . 24,

118. 2

3

of

Post.

C. 1 0 1 - 1 0 2 .

S e e Jervell, Imago Dei, Scripture.

p. 52, n o t e 4 for references o n P h i l o as a n e x e g e t e

PHILO'S GOAL AND METHOD

7

world, implying that the world is in harmony with the Law, and the Law with the world, and that the man who observes the Law is constituted thereby a loyal citizen of the world, regulating his doings b y the purpose and will of nature, in accordance with which the entire world itself also is administered. 1

A t the v e r y e n d of O p . M u n d . , P h i l o states t h a t the o n e w h o learns the t r u t h a b o u t the origin of the w o r l d , a n d e v e n m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y a b o u t the G o d w h o c r e a t e d the w o r l d , " w i l l lead a life of bliss a n d blessedness, b e c a u s e h e has a character m o u l d e d b y the truths t h a t p i e t y a n d holiness e n f o r c e . "

2

N o t o n l y does P h i l o s h o w little interest in p r o t o l o g y , b u t h e is also relatively u n c o n c e r n e d a b o u t history. O n l y o c c a s i o n a l l y does h e focus o n such figures as A d a m , N o a h , the Patriarchs, or Moses, as actual historical persons. T h e literal facts r e p o r t e d b y

Scripture

a b o u t these individuals are for the m o s t p a r t a c c e p t e d as true, b u t it is in the deeper allegorical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of these facts their real significance is t o b e f o u n d .

3

that

P h i l o ' s l a c k of interest in

h i s t o r y as the m e d i u m of G o d ' s self-revelation is further seen in his a l m o s t total disregard for the h i s t o r y of Israel after the t i m e of Moses, w h i c h , as H e i n e m a n n p o i n t s out, is all the m o r e striking in v i e w of the frequent allusions t o the h i s t o r y a n d literature of o t h e r p e o p l e s , especially the

Greeks, that are f o u n d in his

writings.

4

A s Grant writes of the allegorizers in general, b y his r e v e r e n c e for the timeless truths of P h i l o s o p h y , Philo " t e n d e d t o e m p t y h i s t o r y

1

O p . M u n d . 3. H e r e a n d t h r o u g h o u t this s t u d y E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n s

P h i l o are e s s e n t i a l l y t h o s e of C o l s o n , W h i t a k e r , e t al., Philo

of

(L.C.L.), Vols.

I - I X plus S u p p . V o l s . I a n d I I (1929-62). H o w e v e r , changes h a v e been m a d e w h e r e v e r a m o r e e x a c t r e n d e r i n g of t h e G r e e k w a s felt n e c e s s a r y . 2

Op. Mund. 172.

3

P h i l o ' s u s e of a l l e g o r y for t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S c r i p t u r e h a s b e e n w i d e l y

d i s c u s s e d in t h e s e c o n d a r y l i t e r a t u r e . See, in p a r t i c u l a r , W o l f s o n , I , C h a p s . I and

I I ; R . M . G r a n t , The

Letter

and

the Spirit

(1957). G r a n t presents

d e t a i l e d a c c o u n t of t h e origin a n d s i g n i f i c a n c e of a l l e g o r i c a l

a

interpretation

in t h e H e l l e n i s t i c w o r l d , p a r t i c u l a r l y a s it w a s a p p l i e d t o H o m e r a n d H e s i o d . H e s h o w s h o w P h i l o ' s use of a l l e g o r y b o t h r e s e m b l e s a n d differs f r o m t h a t of

other Hellenistic

by

writers.

P a g a n w r i t e r s of t h e H e l l e n i s t i c

n o m e a n s in a g r e e m e n t o n t h e

p o i n t s o u t . I n O r i g e n ' s Contra both

Jews

and

Celsum

C h r i s t i a n s for t h e i r

( 3 . 1 9 , 6.22,

6.42), C e l s u s

(L.C.L.) 1

(Grant, I (igzg),

Bildung,

p.

28).

See discussion

by

of t h e

pp.

p p . 5 2 6 - 2 7 (referred t o b y G o o d e n o u g h in Light,

said,

Biblical

C o l s o n a n d W h i t a k e r in

p . xiii. S e e a l s o H e i n e m a n n , Bildung,

he

denounces

u s e of a l l e g o r y . T h e y w e r e , h e

s i m p l y t r y i n g t o c o v e r u p for t h e i g n o r a n c e a n d n a i v e t e writers

period were

v a l u e of a l l e g o r i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ,

526-27. p. 7 8 ) .

Philo

INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS

8

of meaning. H i s t o r y was at best an imperfect r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of eternal truth."

1

F o r P h i l o , it was s e l d o m a question of the literal v s . the spiritual interpretation of the L a w , b u t of the spiritual in a d d i t i o n t o

the

literal. A l t h o u g h his writings reflect relatively little interest in the literal interpretation of the Scriptures, h e n e v e r w a v e r e d in his l o y a l t y to the T o r a h a n d his o b e d i e n c e t o its literal c o m m a n d m e n t s . T o b e a J e w m e a n t for h i m first of all to o b e y the letter of the L a w . H e h a d little s y m p a t h y for the e x t r e m e allegorists w h o b e l i e v e d that the literal o b s e r v a n c e o f T o r a h w a s unnecessary, in spite o f the fact that h e fully agreed with t h e m that the real intention of 2

the L a w d i d not reside in its literal teachings a n d c o m m a n d m e n t s .

Y e t P h i l o u n d e r s t o o d the o b s e r v a n c e of the literal requirements of the L a w as o n l y a b e g i n n i n g in the life of eucrs(kia. In order t o a p p r e h e n d the deeper m e a n i n g of the L a w it was absolutely n e c e s ­ sary for o n e t o resort t o allegorical interpretation, and o n l y those w h o were thus initiated i n t o the deeper " m y s t e r i e s " of the L a w w e r e able t o press o n to perfection a n d u l t i m a t e l y to the vision of G o d . 4. Philo's

Use of the Terms

3

Mu6o<; and Muo-ajpiov

B o t h of these terms o c c u r in Philo in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h the c a t e ­ gories m a l e and female, a n d his use of t h e m is particularly structive

with

respect

1

Letter

2

For an extensive

and

Spirit,

to

his

relationship

to

paganism.

in­

Philo

p . 107. discussion

of

Philo's

attitude

towards

the

extreme

allegorists, see W o l f s o n , I , 6 6 - 7 1 . P h i l o l i k e w i s e t o o k issue w i t h t h e literalists o r t r a d i t i o n a l i s t s , i.e. t h o s e w h o h e l d o n l y t o t h e literal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e S c r i p t u r e s . H e refers t o t h e m as (xixpo7roXi-rat in c o n t r a s t t o ol . . . [ZEI^OVI EYYpatpEvxe? mxxpiSi.,

TCOSE TCO

" w h o are n o t i n i t i a t e d

x6o|xtp ( S o m . 1 : 3 9 ) , a n d d e s c r i b e s t h e m as t h o s e

into allegory" a n d thus follow the "outward and

o b v i o u s " m e a n i n g of t h e t e x t . N o n e t h e l e s s , h e refrains f r o m c e n s u r i n g s u c h p e r s o n s , " f o r p e r h a p s t h e t r u t h is w i t h t h e m a l s o . " H e r a t h e r e n c o u r a g e s t h e m n o t t o s t o p w i t h t h e literal m e a n i n g of t h e t e x t , " b u t t o press o n t o a l l e g o r ­ ical

interpretations

a n d t o r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e l e t t e r is t o t h e o r a c l e b u t as

t h e s h a d o w to t h e s u b s t a n c e a n d t h a t t h e h i g h e r v a l u e s therein

revealed

are w h a t r e a l l y a n d t r u l y e x i s t " (Conf. L i n g . 1 9 0 ; cf. S o m . 1 : 1 0 2 , Conf. L i n g . 1 4 - 1 5 , F u g . 1 7 9 - 8 2 , D e u s I m m . 1 3 3 ) . See W o l f s o n , I , 5 7 - 6 6 for a d d i t i o n a l references a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 3

A s a l r e a d y n o t e d , t h e Allegory

of the Laws,

t h e f o r m of w h i c h is e x p o s i ­

t i o n of t h e L a w , is a d d r e s s e d t o s u c h a g r o u p as this. T h e r e f o r e , in s p i t e of t h e f a c t t h a t h e l i v e s a n d m o v e s in a w o r l d r a d i c a l l y different f r o m t h a t of the O l d T e s t a m e n t a n d Pharisaic Judaism, according to Philo's o w n under­ s t a n d i n g of his l i t e r a r y t a s k , t h e g r e a t b u l k of his w r i t i n g s a r e little m o r e t h a n a k i n d of M i d r a s h i c c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e T o r a h .

PHILO'S GOAL AND METHOD

9

frequently d e n o u n c e s m y t h o l o g y , in m o s t cases referring t o Greek mythology

1

b u t o c c a s i o n a l l y also E g y p t i a n .

3

4

2

T h e terms u.u0o7TXa-

5

CTTSIV, (j.u0oTcoua, a n d [i.u0oTtXaCTT<xi are used b y P h i l o in a d e r o g a t o r y sense in referring t o m y t h o l o g y a n d m y t h m a k e r s . M y t h s are false, man-made,

deceptive, and

fill

one with

false

opinions.

6

They

7

corrupt the m i n d s of the y o u n g , a n d are the i n v e n t i o n n o t of virtue b u t of pleasure.

8

Philo interprets the s e c o n d c o m m a n d m e n t

not

just as f o r b i d d i n g the actual m a k i n g of idols a n d i m a g e s b u t also "the

acceptance

(npoUaQcti) of m y t h i c a l

inventions

about

the

marriages a n d birth o f g o d s a n d the numberless and v e r y g r a v e 9

scandals associated with b o t h of t h e s e . "

B e c a u s e Scripture is the w o r k of G o d , " y o u will find [in it] n o m y t h i c a l i n v e n t i o n s b u t the firmly established c a n o n s of truth that protect from harm."

1 0

Moses neither i n v e n t e d m y t h s himself nor

a c q u i e s c e d in those c o m p o s e d b y o t h e r s . contrast

11

T h e w o r d s of Scripture, in

t o p a g a n m y t h s , a l w a y s c o n t a i n a deeper m e a n i n g that

"lies b e n e a t h the surface."

1 2

T h u s , e v e n t h o u g h s o m e passages in

Scripture resemble certain p a g a n m y t h s , the r e s e m b l a n c e is c o m ­ pletely superficial, for these p a g a n m y t h s never c o n t a i n an under­ lying m e a n i n g .

13

In reference to the a c c o u n t of the 7tpcoTo<; avSpomcx;

a n d his t e m p t a t i o n

b y w o m a n , for e x a m p l e , Philo w r i t e s : "ECTTI

8s T<xuT<x ou fj.66ou TCAaafiaTa, olq TO •TCOITJTIXOV xai aofpicmxov yevoi;,

aXXi SeiyjAaTa TUTCWV in

yjxipsi

aXXrjyoptav TCapaxaXouvToc xa-ra T«<;

SI'LCTOVCHCOV IXTCOSOCTEM; ( O p . M u n d . 157). Philo is e v e n m o r e specific in A g r i c . 94-97, where h e refers to the a c c o u n t of the

serpent

beguiling E v e a n d that of the serpent of brass w h i c h Moses raised u p in the wilderness ( N u m . 2 1 : 8-9). T a k e n literally, " t h e s e things are like prodigies (cpatxfi.aT<x) a n d marvels ( T s p a x a ) . . . . B u t w h e n w e 1

V i t . C o n t . 63, A e t . M u n d . 55 ff., Spec. L e g . 1 1 1 : 4 3 - 4 5 , et al. D e c . 76, S p e c . L e g . L 7 9 , Migr. A b r . 76. P o s t . C . 5 2 , G i g . 58, Conf. L i n g . 6. L e g . A l l . 1 : 4 3 ; Sacr. A . C . 1 3 , 7 6 ; D e u s I m m . 5 9 ; F u g . 1 2 1 ; Spec. Leg. 1 : 7 9 . Conf. L i n g . 6; A e t . M u n d . , 56, 68. Sacr. A . C . 76. Post. C. 165. Sacr. A . C , 28. D e c . 156. D e t . P o t . I n s . 125. O p . M u n d . 2. O p . Mund. 157. See W o l f s o n , I , 3 5 . T h i s entire s e c t i o n is h e a v i l y d e p e n d e n t o n his concise s u m m a r y of t h e r e l e v a n t t e x t s (I, 1 4 , 32-36). 2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 0

1 1

1 2

1 3

10

INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS

interpret w o r d s b y the m e a n i n g s that lie b e n e a t h the surface, all that Js m y t h i c a l (TO [Au0
W o l f s o n so clearly argues,

1

the p o i n t that P h i l o really is

m a k i n g is n o t that there are n o passages in Scripture t h a t resemble m y t h s , b u t rather t h a t e v e n those passages that d o resemble m y t h s are in a c t u a l i t y not m y t h s precisely b e c a u s e t h e y c o n t a i n an u n d e r ­ lying meaning, a n d b y his o w n definition m y t h s d o n o t

contain

an underlying m e a n i n g . P h i l o starts with the premise that e v e r y ­ thing in Scripture, w h e t h e r literally true or n o t , has an u n d e r l y i n g meaning. W o l f s o n is, of course, aware of the m a n y passages where P h i l o himself m a k e s allusions t o m y t h o l o g y for the p u r p o s e of illustration a n d rightly c o n c l u d e s t h a t this in n o w a y implies that P h i l o g i v e s c r e d e n c e t o a n y of these m y t h s . T h e s e references were s i m p l y part of the literary e q u i p a g e of an e d u c a t e d Hellenistic m a n of letters.

2

Nevertheless, W o l f s o n ' s c o n c l u s i o n that o n the level of ideas P h i l o was n o t at all influenced b y p a g a n m y t h o l o g y appears u n w a r r a n t e d . T h a t P h i l o e x p l i c i t l y denies such influence is clear. B u t whether or n o t he is entirely free from it is another m a t t e r . I n d e e d , there is considerable e v i d e n c e in his writings that h e was influenced b y p a g a n m y t h o l o g y o n a level deeper than that of simple literary allusion. The

3

question of P h i l o ' s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s the m y s t e r y religions

of his d a y is closely related

to his v i e w of m y t h o l o g y , for

the

mysteries usually c e n t e r e d in the cultic r e - e n a c t m e n t of religious m y t h . O n the whole, P h i l o i s c o n s i d e r a b l y m o r e severe in his d e n u n c i ­ ations of the m y s t e r y cults t h a n he is of m y t h o l o g y in a m o r e abstract literary sense. T h i s is u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , of course, insofar as the mysteries were n o t just a m a t t e r of religious belief b u t also of cultic

participation

in

rites,

many

of w h i c h

were

thoroughly

a b h o r r e n t t o Philo as a J e w . In

the

m o s t severe language

P h i l o d e n o u n c e s the

mysteries.

4

T h e y b r e e d licentiousness a n d e f f e m i n a c y , drunkenness, 1

1 ,

36.

2

Wolfson, I,

3

A s an examination

of

the

Rabbis,

38. who

of ( S t r . ) - B i l l . I V , 405-406, m a k e s clear, e v e n c e r t a i n

were

much

more

insulated from

Hellenistic-Oriental

i n f l u e n c e s t h a n P h i l o , m a k e u s e of s u c h a m y t h o l o g i c a l m o t i f as t h e of t h e 4

wanton-

androgynous

man.

Spec. Leg. 1 1 1 : 4 0 .

See

b'Erubin

18a,

GenR

8,

Megillah

doctrine 9a.

PHILO'S GOAL AND METHOD

II

ness, d e b a u c h e r y , n i g h t l o n g carousals, u n s e e m l y pleasures. p a r t i c i p a n t s in the p a g a n feasts

a n d m y s t i c rites,

1

The

according to

Philo, " c l e a n s e their b o d i e s w i t h lustrations b u t t h e y n e i t h e r wish n o r p r a c t i c e t o wash off from their souls the passions b y w h i c h life is defiled."

2

Moses b a n i s h e d f r o m the sacred c o d e of laws " t h e lore

of o c c u l t rites a n d mysteries (TSXETOCI xoct. |i.i>sr/jpia) and all such i m ­ posture a n d b u f f o o n e r y . "

3

T h o s e w h o h a v e g r o w n u p in the c o m ­

m u n i t y of the L a w s h o u l d n o t t a k e part in the orgiastic rites a n d m y t h i c a l delusions of those w h o despise the truth a n d b e l o n g t o the p r o v i n c e of darkness rather t h a n light. N o n e of the followers of Moses s h o u l d "either c o n f e r or r e c e i v e initiation t o such rites," for b o t h of these activities are gross sacrilege (ou [iixpov <xvoa!,oopy7][i.a). B a s e d o n m y t h i c a l delusions, the g o a l of such rites is b u t

4

empty

v a n i t y ; " t h e w h o l e of h u m a n life w o u l d not suffice t o tell in detail of the follies inherent in t h e m . "

5

I n spite of the s e v e r i t y of his language in d e n o u n c i n g the sacred festivals a n d mysteries of the Greeks, h o w e v e r , as in the case of his literary allusions t o p a g a n m y t h o l o g y , P h i l o does n o t hesitate t o employ

the

t e r m i n o l o g y of the

mystery

religions for his

own

p u r p o s e s . T h u s , for e x a m p l e , he uses the t e r m ^uo-Taywyetv t o refer t o M o s e s ' leading of the r e p e n t a n t individual i n t o o b e d i e n c e t o the Law.

6

T h e technical m y s t e r y religion t e r m

Philo in reference to G o d , the High Priest,

10

7

Moses,

and Jeremiah.

11

8

the

cults.

12

kpo? ya(i.o<; m o t i f of p a g a n

1

C h e r . 92. Cher. 95.

3

5

8

(TCC [iixpa [AUG"t7]pi<x, (3p<xxuTepoa TeXeToa),

mysteries

2

4

soul in t e r m s t y p i c a l

m y t h o l o g y a n d the

(T<X (xeydcXa

[i-uo-ajpia),

14

or

Spec. Leg. 1 : 3 1 9 . Spec. Leg. 1 : 3 1 9 . Cher. 9 1 . Vert. 178.

7

Som. 1:164.

8

Spec. Leg. 1 : 4 1 , I I : 2 0 i , I V : 1 7 6 ; Vert. 75, 174.

9

Sobr. . Spec. L e g . 1 1 1 : 1 3 5 . C h e r . 49. See b e l o w , C h a p . I l l , E. S a c r . A . C . 62, A b r . 1 2 2 . L e g . A l l . I l l : 100, C h e r . 49, Sacr. A . C . 62. 5

1 0

1 1

1 2

1 3

1 4

mystery

A s in the Eleusinian mysteries, he distinguishes b e t w e e n the

lesser mysteries greater

9

In a n u m b e r of passages P h i l o

speaks of G o d ' s relationship t o the h u m a n of

iepocpavT7]<; is used b y

the s e v e n t y elders of M o s e s ,

5

perfect

13

a n d the

mysteries

12

INTRODUCTION: PHILO'S METHOD AND BASIC CONCERNS

(TSXSIOU xsXsxal).

1

Finally, just as in the

Greek mysteries,

Philo

enjoins silence u p o n the initiate. H e is n o t t o b l a b or b a b b l e the h o l y mysteries t o a n y of the profane b u t m u s t learn " t o store t h e m u p and g u a r d t h e m in s e c r e c y a n d silence."

2

G o o d e n o u g h finds in P h i l o ' s m y s t e r y religion t e r m i n o l o g y a clue to P h i l o ' s over-all u n d e r s t a n d i n g of J u d a i s m . In spite of the severity of P h i l o ' s d e n u n c i a t i o n of the p a g a n mysteries, it is, a c c o r d i n g t o Goodenough,

precisely in

terms of these mysteries

that

Philo

interprets his o w n religious tradition. In By Light, Light G o o d e n o u g h argues that it is " h i g h l y p r o b a b l e " that the J e w s a c t u a l l y h a d

"a

M y s t e r y of their o w n in contrast to the false mysteries of paganism, a M y s t e r y w i t h secret o b j e c t s 'manifest t o the sight' of the initiates, g o v e r n e d b y a b o d y of laws w i t h its o w n ispoc; Xoyoc;, a n d TCpay^axa tspa, 0£ia 6pyia."

3

T h i s interpretation of G o o d e n o u g h ' s has b e e n severely criticized by

Nock

4

and subsequently b y W o l f s o n .

6

N o c k points to Philo's

description of the Essenes and T h e r a p e u t a e , w h i c h P h i l o regards as ideal forms of Jewish existence. If such a cultus as G o o d e n o u g h posits existed a n y w h e r e , N o c k argues, it is likely that it w o u l d h a v e b e e n a m o n g such g r o u p s as these, y e t

Philo points

to

nothing

a m o n g t h e m that suggests a d e v e l o p e d m y s t e r y cult. " N o esoteric significance is a t t a c h e d to the meal [of the T h e r a p e u t a e ] a n d there is n o w o r d of a rite of a d m i s s i o n ; p e o p l e entered the g r o u p a n d t o o k r a n k b y s e n i o r i t y ; the spirit of the w h o l e , as of early monasticism,

is one of the

individualistic

quest

of

Egyptian

salvation."

6

N o c k also p o i n t s t o P h i l o ' s severe d e n u n c i a t i o n of the mysteries a n d t o the fact that Philo a p p e a r s t o h a v e o n l y a theoretical k n o w l e d g e of the general character of the mysteries and n o n e of the detailed facts w h i c h s o m e o n e such as Clement of A l e x a n d r i a

possessed.

7

P h i l o ' s use of m y s t e r y t e r m i n o l o g y N o c k prefers to explain o n the basis of a c c e p t e d usage a m o n g Greek philosophers, for e x a m p l e , Aristotle, Chrysippus, a n d Seneca. " T h e m e t a p h o r of

initiation,"

he writes, " w a s b y its p h i l o s o p h i c usage r e d e e m e d f r o m a n y u n d u e association w i t h i d o l a t r y ; it w a s particularly appropriate, 1

2

3

Sacr. A . C . 6 o ; see W o l f s o n , S a c r . A . C . 60, Cher. 48. P a g e 262.

4

Arthur

5

I . 44-55-

6

7

Darby

I , 43.

Nock,

r e v i e w of Light,

N o c k , Gnomon,

XIII,

162.

Gnomon,

165.

XIII,

inasmuch

Gnomon,

X I I I

(1937),

156-65.

PHILO'S GOAL AND METHOD

13

as it expressed the passive and receptive attitude of m i n d w h i c h P h i l o held to b e necessary."

1

T o d a y m o s t Philo scholars w o u l d agree w i t h N o c k o v e r against G o o d e n o u g h o n the q u e s t i o n of the existence of a Philonic M y s t e r y w i t h actual cultic rites and associations. I n d e e d , already in 1940, in his b o o k An Introduction

to Philo

Judaeus,

G o o d e n o u g h himself

modifies his earlier p o s i t i o n , stating that " i f m y s t i c J u d a i s m m a d e use of rites, it w o u l d h a v e used Jewish rites, suffused, indeed trans­ f o r m e d , w i t h p a g a n i d e o l o g y , b u t externally as u n c h a n g e d as P h i l o ' s Pentateuch."

2

T h a t m y s t i c J e w s h a d separate rites and

of their o w n t o w h i c h e v e n J e w s h a d t o b e specially

initiations admitted,

G o o d e n o u g h c o n c l u d e s , "there is n o evidence w h a t e v e r t o s u p p o r t . "

3

T h o u g h there almost certainly were n o separate cultic associations of m y s t i c J e w s w i t h rites and initiations of their o w n , h o w e v e r , does n o t m e a n that W o l f s o n is correct in h o l d i n g that the o n l y substantive influence of the mysteries o n Philo w a s in the area of religious t e r m i n o l o g y . A l l that can b e c o n c l u d e d here is that the question of Philo's relationship t o p a g a n religious rites a n d popular p i e t y is far less clear than is his a d o p t i o n of p a g a n p h i l o s o p h y . E a c h case of alleged influence must b e e x a m i n e d o n its o w n merits.

1

2

3

Gnomon,

XIII,

Introduction, Introduction,

165.

p . 206. p . 204.

CHAPTER TWO

THE

CATEGORIES

RELATIONSHIP

MALE A N DFEMALE

IN

TO PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING

THE

NATURE

OF

OFMAN

A . MAN's DUAL NATURE One of the fundamental emphases of P h i l o ' s a n t h r o p o l o g y is the distinction frequently m a d e b e t w e e n a higher a n d a l o w e r part of m a n ' s being. Different terms are used in different texts, a n d there are m a n y nuances of m e a n i n g , y e t the basic distinction constant

throughout

remains

his writings. T h u s in D e t . P o t . Ins. 82-84

•Philo states that " e a c h of us . . . has t u r n e d out t o b e t w o in n u m b e r , an animal a n d a m a n . " T o the animal part G o d has allotted

"the

vital p o w e r (TJ ^WTIXT)), o n the basis of w h i c h w e are a l i v e . " T o the m a n in us he has g i v e n " t h e rational p o w e r (TJ XoyixT)), o n the basis of w h i c h w e are rational b e i n g s . " B l o o d is the essence (ouaia) power

(8uvafxi<;) w h i c h m a n has in c o m m o n

with the

of the

irrational

animals, b u t spirit or b r e a t h (Trveufxa) is associated with the rational p o w e r . In R e r . D i v . Her. 232 TO aXoyov ^u/7J<; \xipoc, is c o n t r a s t e d w i t h TO XoyLxov [^i>x*K S^po?]. In L e g . All. I I : 6, where the s a m e distinction is m a d e , the irrational part of the soul is identified with sense a n d the passions w h i c h are the offspring of sense

(TO 8e

1

aXoyov al'o"67)o"L<; sera xocl Tot TOCUTTJ? exyova TOXOT)).

A l t h o u g h different terms are e m p l o y e d , Philo d r a w s the same c o n t r a s t in L e g . All. I l l : 161 w h e n he states that m a n consists of two

things, <\>vjfi a n d a&na.

T h e crw[xa was c r e a t e d out of earth,

7) Se <]>u-/y] eddipoe, SCTTLV, a7i6aTracr[xa OSLOV. I n this case ^uyi] refers t o the rational soul a n d o-£>[za rather loosely refers to the b o d y a n d the 1

T h e t e r m tyuxq b y itself is a m b i g u o u s . I n R e r . D i v . H e r . 5 5 , P h i l o e x p l a i n s

t h a t it c a n b e u s e d either t o refer t o t h e entire s o u l ( r a t i o n a l p l u s i r r a t i o n a l p a r t s ) or t o T O riYey.o\iiy.bv yepoc, Trj? i^ux*)?. T h i s l a t t e r is t h e

U

<J*X^

'Wi?-

O c c a s i o n a l l y P h i l o also u s e s tyuxh t o s t a n d for t h e i r r a t i o n a l s o u l (see S p e c . Leg. In

I V : 1 2 3 ) , b u t u s u a l l y h e s p e a k s of t h e i r r a t i o n a l part a n u m b e r of p a s s a g e s

Philo even

(fiepot;) of t h e soul.

uses voOs, in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h

m o d i f i e r s as yewS?)? a n d avOpcoTUvoi;, t o refer t o t h e

such

created, mortal part

of m a n in c o n t r a s t t o t h a t in m a n w h i c h is a k i n t o t h e d i v i n e . Cf. L e g . A l l . 1:88,

90, 1 1 1 : 2 9 ; Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 1 1 : 3 ; et al.

MAN'S DUAL NATURE

15

irrational soul, or, m o r e a c c u r a t e l y , to the b o d y w h i c h is a n i m a t e d 1

b y the irrational s o u l . W i t h equal ease P h i l o c a n s p e a k of m a n as mortal

2

or i m m o r t a l ,

3

or as b o t h m o r t a l a n d i m m o r t a l t o g e t h e r .

4

B u t in this he is s i m p l y using the t e r m " m a n " in different senses. It m a y refer to the rational soul, the irrational soul, or the c o m ­ b i n a t i o n of the t w o .

5

Arranging the material in tabular form m a y help t o s u m m a r i z e the discussion. Man's

Higher

Nature

I

1

Cf. O p . M u n d . 1 3 5 .

2

O p . M u n d . 7 7 , V e r t . 205,

3

O m . P r o b . L i b . 46, S p e c . L e g . 1 : 8 1 .

4

O p . M u n d . 135, et

5

R e g a r d i n g the d i v i s i o n s of t h e s o u l r e l a t i v e

A p p e n d i x C, S e c t . 1.

Man's

Lower

Nature

Conf. L i n g . 1 7 6 .

al. t o its f u n c t i o n s , see

below,

i6

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN Man's

Higher

Nature

j

Man's

Lower

Nature

These t e x t s are n o t i n t e n d e d t o present a c o m p l e t e picture of Philo's understanding of the soul. Rather, t h e y reflect his constant emphasis o n the d u a l i t y of m a n ' s being and c o n v e y a clear i m p r e s ­ sion of the fluidity of his t e r m i n o l o g y . Philo can express the same basic distinction b e t w e e n m a n as a creature of earth and m a n as related t o the divine in a great v a r i e t y of w a y s . B . MAN'S HIGHER NATURE: THE REALM OF THE ASEXUAL 1. The Oneness Female

and Indivisibility

of the Rational

Soul;

the

Male-

Polarity

Throughout

his writings Philo

emphasizes the

oneness and

indivisibility of G o d . G o d is b y nature simple, n o t c o m p o u n d .

1

He

2

is free from all m i x t u r e , a n d is himself the sole standard for the m o n a d , " f o r like time, all n u m b e r is subsequent t o the universe, and

G o d is prior t o the universe a n d is its m a k e r . "

1

L e g . A l l . I L 2 - 3 , M u t . N o r n . 183 ff., et al.

2

Rer. D i v . H e r . 183-85.

3

3

Likewise, the

L e g . A l l . 1 1 : 1 3 . I t is b e y o n d t h e s c o p e of t h i s s t u d y t o i n v e s t i g a t e in d e t a i l t h e e x t r e m e l y c o m p l e x issue of t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l ( e s p e c i a l l y N e o P y t h a g o r e a n ) b a c k g r o u n d of P h i l o ' s use of n u m b e r t o d e s c r i b e r e a l i t y . P h i l o n e v e r e q u a t e s r e a l i t y a n d n u m b e r , v i e w i n g all t h a t is as t h e p r o g r e s s i v e e x t e n s i o n of t h e u n i t or p o i n t , b u t s i m p l y uses n u m b e r t o illustrate v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of r e a l i t y . A l t h o u g h c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e m o n a d r a t h e r t h a n the d y a d , G o d h i m s e l f is b e y o n d all n u m b e r a n d d e s c r i p t i o n . H e is " m o r e v e n e r a b l e t h a n the m o n a d , p u r e r t h a n t h e u n i t " ( P r a e m . P o e n . 4 0 ; cf. V i t . C o n t . 2. O n t h e P y t h a g o r e a n d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n o n e a n d t h e m o n a d , see E . Zeller, A History of Greek Philosophy, t r a n s . S. F . A l l e y n e [1881], I , 3 7 3 , 3 9 i f f ) . U l t i m a t e l y , o n l y G o d is a b l e f u l l y t o a p p r e h e n d G o d . M a n c a n o n l y k n o w that G o d is, n o t what h e is. H i s real n a t u r e is h i d d e n f r o m m a n ( P r a e m . P o e n . 40, 4 4 ; F u g . 1 6 5 ) .

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE d i v i n e w i s d o m is p u r e a n d u n m i x e d , forms The

of knowledge cannot

1

17

for " i n c o r p o r e a l a n d d i v i n e

be divided into

warring o p p o s i t e s . "

d i v i n e spirit is s u s c e p t i b l e o f neither s e v e r a n c e

2

nor division,

a n d t h u s , e v e n " t h o u g h it b e s h a r e d w i t h o t h e r s o r a d d e d t o o t h e r s suffers

no

diminution

in

understanding

and

knowledge

and

3

wisdom."

Philo frequently

calls a t t e n t i o n t o t h e similarity

between G o d

a n d t h e r a t i o n a l s o u l o f m a n . T h u s , for e x a m p l e , in O p . M u n d . 146 he s t a t e s t h a t " e v e r y m a n , in r e s p e c t divine

reason,

fragment

having

come

(aiTOo-irao-fxa)

into

o f his m i n d is allied t o t h e

being

o r effulgence

as a c o p y

(dbiauyao-FAA)

(exuayeiov) of that

or

blessed

n a t u r e . " I n M u t . N o m . 223 h e w r i t e s : Xoyio-fib? Se ppoc/u [xev o v o f i a , IU

TeXeiOTOCTuv 8E x a l GEIOTOCTOV e'pyov, TYJC; TOO TravTot; <| X']? but,

aTcooTrao-fza,

4

e v i d e n t l y realizing h o w f o r e i g n s u c h l a n g u a g e w a s t o t h a t o f

Scripture,

immediately

adds

the

qualification,

ELTCELV zoic, xocTa MMUO-YJV
r] orcep

oo-iwrepov

6EIA? ex[j.ayeiov

e[x
c o u l d m a n ' s m i n d , P h i l o asks in D e t . P o t . I n s . 89-90, b e i n g as

s m a l l as it is, e v e r h a v e h a d r o o m f o r all t h e v a s t n e s s o f s k y a n d universe

et [XYJ TYJ<; Geiat; xai, euSaifxovot; (J^X*)? exeivyjt; dcTcoo-TCAAPIA YJV

01!) SiaapeTov; z£y.vezai

y a p ouSev TOU Geiou XOCT' arcapTYjcytv, aXXa [xovov

5

EXTSLVETai..

1

Rer. D i v . Her. 183-85.

2

Rer. D i v . H e r . 132.

3 G

4

i

g

-

2

7

'

T h e p h r a s e rj TOU -KOMTOQ fyux'h is S t o i c . S e e Stoicorum

veterum

ed. J . v o n A r n i m , I I (1903), p . 7 7 4 . T h e e q u i v a l e n t p h r a s e r) is a t t r i b u t e d t o C l e a n t h e s (Stoic,

vet. frag.

ipuxrj

I [1905], p . 5 3 2 ) . S e e n o t e t o L e g .

A l l . L . 9 1 b y C o l s o n a n d W h i t a k e r in P h i l o 5

fragmenla,

TOU XOOJXOU

( L . C . L . ) I (1929), p . 478.

Cf. G i g . 2 5 - 2 7 , w h e r e P h i l o uses t h e a n a l o g y of fire t o e x p r e s s t h e s a m e

thought. Det.

P o t . I n s . 89-90, a s is t r u e o f a l m o s t all s i m i l a r p a s s a g e s in P h i l o ,

falls w i t h i n

a strongly soteriological

context.

E x a c t l y b e c a u s e t h e s o u l is

a f r a g m e n t o f t h e d i v i n e soul, m a n is a b l e t o k n o w n o t o n l y t h e u n i v e r s e but G o d Himself.

B u t s u c h k n o w l e d g e o f G o d is n e v e r a s t r i c t l y

human

possibility b u t can b e acquired only because G o d endowed t h e soul

with

7RVEU(ia 9etov, a n d b e c a u s e t h e s o u l is a7r6a7racrf/.a Getov, exjiayetov a n d a7rauYao"jj.a of t h e d i v i n e n a t u r e (cf. O p . M u n d . 1 4 5 , R e r . D i v . H e r . 2 3 1 , S p e c . L e g . I V : 1 2 3 , et a l . ) . P h i l o ' s p o s i t i o n c l e a r l y h a s affinities w i t h t h e G n o s t i c c o n c e p t of t h e k n o w l ­ e d g e o f G o d . U l t i m a t e l y i t is G o d i n m a n t h a t k n o w s G o d , o r , t o u s e P h i l o ' s w o r d s : dXT)0etav Se jj.ETLaoiv ot TOV 0E6M 0ec5
I

_

p p . 146-47, 166-67, 7 4 7 5 .

2

I

2

pp. 11-79; Goodenough,

. 3 8 2 - 8 3 ; P a s c h e r , Konigsweg,

pp. 160-

260). Y e t P h i l o d r a w s b a c k f r o m t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t m a n c a n r e a l l y k n o w A L G H J , III

2

i8

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN B e c a u s e it is of the same substance as t h e divine nature, m a n ' s

rational soul is, like G o d , o n e a n d indivisible. A s such, it differs significantly from t h e irrational soul, w h i c h is subject t o division. Philo writes in R e r . D i v . Her. 232-33: Our

mind

But

is

indivisible

in

its

nature.

t h e i r r a t i o n a l p a r t of t h e s o u l u n d e r ­

went

a

sixfold

division,

and

thus

Creator f o r m e d seven p a r t s : sight, ing,

taste,

smell,

reproductive

touch,

faculty.

voice,

But

the

hear­

and

the

the

rational

p a r t , w h i c h w a s n a m e d m i n d , he left u n ­ divided,

after t h e

l i k e n e s s of t h e

entire

heaven.

F o r t h e r e , it is said, t h e

outer,

f i x e d s p h e r e is k e p t u n d i v i d e d , the

inner

sphere

division,

thus

underwent

completing

sixfold

the

seven

circles of w h a t a r e c a l l e d t h e stars

or p l a n e t s .

in

man

in

the

as

man

prove And

and and

to

is

what

the

rational

in

complete why

it

the

natures,

other

the

and

says

soul

heaven

Therefore,

the

be

that

wandering

For I regard the

being

universe.

thinking in

whereas

a

the

is two one

universe,

indivisible.

"He

did

not

divide the birds."

Philo concludes the discussion (236): And

thus

it

is

reasonable

that

the

t h i n g s w h i c h a r e like [ G o d ] , n a m e l y

the

mind

us,

in

us

and

the

mind

above

should subsist without parts and indivi­ sible, y e t n o n e t h e l e s s b e s t r o n g a n d c a p a ­ ble

of

existing

dividing

and

distinguishing

all

things.

Philo draws a contrast in this passage b e t w e e n m a n ' s higher vou;, w h i c h is indivisible, a n d TO aXoyov tyuyyic, |xepo<;, w h i c h was d i v i d e d into seven parts. O n e of these parts is the r e p r o d u c t i v e 1

faculty (TO yoviu.ov) . T h e irrational part of the soul thus participates in the categories of male a n d female, the realm of the sexual. B u t n o w h e r e does Philo associate t h e rational soul of m a n w i t h the m a l e t h e n a t u r e of G o d . I n s p i t e of t h e f a c t t h a t m a n ' s r a t i o n a l s o u l is a d i v i n e f r a g m e n t , G o d ' s n a t u r e u l t i m a t e l y r e m a i n s a m y s t e r y t o m a n . Cf. D e t . P o t . Ins. 1

89, O p . M u n d .

69 ff.

S e e also O p . M u n d .

1 1 7 , Leg. All. 1 : 1 1 , Agric.

30.

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE female polarity. Neither G o d , n o r the L o g o s , nor the rational soul of m a n is i n v o l v e d in the sphere of male and female. T h e r e is n o t h i n g in P h i l o analogous t o t h e appsv66Y)Xu<; av6pw7to<; figure or t h e 1

appev667)Xu<; TOXTYJP of the P o i m a n d r e s . T h e male-female p o l a r i t y in P h i l o ' s writings is part o f the mortal sphere of the created w o r l d . I t d o e s n o t function o n a c o s m i c scale, particularly in the d r a m a of creation, as it does in m a n y of the G n o s t i c s y s t e m s .

2

T h a t the male-female p o l a r i t y is associated w i t h the irrational part of t h e soul, n o t w i t h the higher vou?, finds further c o n f i r m a t i o n in R e r . D i v . Her. 133 ff., a description of t h e division of all things i n t o equal parts a n d o p p o s i t e s t h r o u g h the a g e n c y of the

Xoyoc,

Tojxsut;. In R e r . D i v . Her. 138-39, a t e x t deserving close attention, P h i l o p o i n t s out t h a t just as G o d separated the living from

the

lifeless, so he further d i v i d e d the living i n t o rational and irrational

1

P o i m a n d r e s 1. 9. 1 5 .

2

O n e m u s t n o t f o r g e t , h o w e v e r , t h a t in m o s t , if n o t all, of t h e G n o s t i c

s y s t e m s t h e chief p u r p o s e of t h e m y t h of c r e a t i o n as w e l l as t h a t of t h e fall of

m a n is t o p o r t r a y m a n ' s p r e s e n t c o n d i t i o n . T h u s , insofar as this also is

o n e of P h i l o ' s m a i n c o n c e r n s , t h e d i s t i n c t i o n h e r e p o i n t e d t o b e t w e e n and

Philo

t h e G n o s t i c s m u s t n o t b e p u s h e d t o o far. F o r P h i l o , as well as t h e G n o s ­

tics, m a n ' s fall c a n b e p r e s e n t e d in t e r m s of s e x u a l desire (see b e l o w , C h a p . I I , C, 1 ) . P h i l o d o e s differ f r o m m a n y of t h e G n o s t i c s , h o w e v e r , p r e c i s e l y in his refusal t o p o r t r a y t h e c r e a t i o n of t h e c o s m o s itself in metaphors.

T h e w o r l d is n o t

the

result of

v a r i o u s d i v i n e a n d , in s o m e cases, G e r h a r d v o n R a d , Genesis. pp.

demonic,

A Commentary,

4 5 - 6 5 (cf. also B r e v a r d S. C h i l d s , Myth

mythological-sexual

a pre-cosmic struggle

among

powers. trans. John H . M a r k s ( 1 9 6 1 ) ,

and Reality

in the Old

Testament,

i 9 6 0 ) , h o l d s t h a t G e n . 1 a c t u a l l y reflects a k i n d of d e m y t h o l o g i z a t i o n of o l d e r N e a r E a s t e r n c r e a t i o n m y t h s . T h e p r i e s t l y e d i t o r , a l t h o u g h he e

s u c h t e r m s as t hdm,

uses

w h i c h is u n d o u b t e d l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e B a b y l o n i a n

T i a m a t , a n d bohu, w h i c h is p r o b a b l y r e l a t e d t o B a a u , t h e P h o e n i c i a n n o c t u r ­ nal m o t h e r g o d d e s s , r o b s t h e m of their m y t h o l o g i c a l m e a n i n g b y a t t r i b u t i n g t h e full r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for all of c r e a t i o n t o t h e free w i l l of o n e G o d . F o r e

e x a m p l e , t h e t e r m t hdm

in G e n . 1 refers n o t t o t h e p r i m e v a l sea m o n s t e r , e

t h e d r a g o n of c h a o s , b u t s i m p l y t o t h e p r i m e v a l sea. T h6m

is n o l o n g e r a

p e r s o n i f i e d c o s m i c p r i m o r d i a l p r i n c i p l e a n d h a s a b s o l u t e l y n o p o w e r of its own.

T h e p r i e s t l y e d i t o r uses t h e t e r m c o s m o l o g i c a l l y , w e m i g h t e v e n

"scientifically,"

not

mythologically.

As

von

Rad

points

out,

in

say

Gen.

1

"this c a r e f u l d i s t i l l a t i o n of e v e r y t h i n g m y t h o l o g i c a l ( b u t o n l y t h i s ) r e m i n d s o n e of t h e s o b e r reflections of t h e I o n i c n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h e r s "

(p. 6 3 ) .

P h i l o w a s t h e heir of b o t h G e n . 1 a n d t h e w r i t i n g s of t h e G r e e k p h i l o s o p h e r s . L i k e t h e p r i e s t l y a u t h o r , h e also a t t r i b u t e s t h e c r e a t i o n of t h e w o r l d t o G o d a l o n e . G o d c r e a t e s t h r o u g h s u c h i n t e r m e d i a r i e s as t h e L o g o s a n d t h e P o w e r s , but

t h e s e a r e a l w a y s c o m p l e t e l y s u b s e r v i e n t t o his o w n a l l - p o w e r f u l

Furthermore,

as c a n b e seen t h r o u g h o u t O p . M u n d . ,

the j u d g m e n t

will. "and

b e h o l d , it w a s v e r y g o o d " of G e n . 1 1 3 1 w a s e v i d e n t l y of c r u c i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e for

Philo.

20

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

species. T h e rational species he d i v i d e d into m o r t a l and i m m o r t a l , " a n d of the mortal he m a d e t w o portions, o n e of w h i c h he n a m e d m e n and

the

o t h e r w o m e n " (xal TOU OVYJTOU SUO [xoipa? sipya^ETO, d>v TTJV

fiiv avSpwv, TYJV 8k yuvaixwv zm(ff][iiGz).

H e r e it is clear t h a t the m a l e -

female polarity originated f r o m the sphere of the mortal, n o t from that part of m a n w h i c h was created after the i m a g e of G o d .

1

I n O p . M u n d . 1 2 Philo states that " e v e r y o b j e c t that is p e r c e p t i b l e by

the senses is in a state of b e c o m i n g a n d c h a n g e " (rcav yap TO

aio-OYjTov, ev yzviazi

xal [XETaPoXal?). M o s e s " a s c r i b e d

the

' b e c o m i n g ' (yeveeri<;) t o that w h i c h is p e r c e p t i b l e b y t h e

name

senses."

B u t b e c o m i n g and change, p h e n o m e n a w h i c h are closely associated w i t h the r e p r o d u c t i v e process, b e l o n g t o t h e w o r l d of sense-perc e p t i o n , n o t t o the w o r l d of ideas a n d the invisible m i n d . In Leg. All.

1 : 39 w e likewise find a sharp contrast b e t w e e n those parts of

m a n that h a v e t o d o w i t h sense-perception, s p e e c h , a n d r e p r o d u c ­ tion, o n the one h a n d , and, o n the other h a n d , the m i n d , t h a t ruling part of the soul into w h i c h G o d breathed. I n O p . M u n d . 43, a n a c c o u n t of h o w the earth b r o u g h t forth shrubs and trees and countless kinds of fruits, Philo writes that these fruits served n o t o n l y for the nourishment of animals b u t were also " t h e means for the perpetual r e p r o d u c t i o n of their k i n d " (7tapacrxeual -Kpbc, TYJV TWV 6[i.olwv as I yevea-iv). This necessity for continuing the race is a characteristic of living things that b e l o n g t o the w o r l d of sensep e r c e p t i o n , including m a n . B u t m a n ' s rational soul, created after the i m a g e of G o d , has n o c o n n e c t i o n with t h e sphere of b e c o m i n g , change, and r e p r o d u c t i o n . T h e rational soul of each individual m a n is p a t t e r n e d after the eixwv TOU 6eou, i.e. the L o g o s ( O p . M u n d . 69). 2.

The Categories Male and Female after the Image

a. T h e Op.

of God Referred

in Reference

to the Man

to in De Opificio

2

Created

Mundi

134

Problem

M u n d . 134 is a t e x t frequently referred t o in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h

Philo's use of the categories male a n d female. 1

T h e s a m e p a t t e r n is a l s o f o u n d

in A g r i c .

139. O n the

q u e s t i o n of

b i s e x u a l i t y of t h e m a n c r e a t e d after t h e i m a g e of G o d in O p . M u n d . see b e l o w , Sect. 2, 2

1:1),

the 134,

d.

P h i l o a l s o s p e a k s of t h e i d e a of m i n d

(tSea TOU VOU; cf.,

e.g.,

Leg.

All.

b u t u s u a l l y h e refers t o t h e " m i n d in e a c h of u s " as c r e a t e d a c c o r d i n g

to the

etxtov T O U 8EOU. A c t u a l l y ,

whether the

individual mind

is p a t t e r n e d

a f t e r t h e L o g o s or t h e i d e a of m i n d m a k e s a b s o l u t e l y n o difference, for t h e L o g o s is e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e t o t a l i t y of ideas. See W o l f s o n , I , 2 3 1 - 3 6 , 245,

292.

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE

21

After this he says t h a t " G o d f o r m e d m a n by

taking

clay from the earth,

and

he

b r e a t h e d i n t o his f a c e t h e b r e a t h of l i f e . " By

t h i s also h e s h o w s v e r y c l e a r l y t h a t

there man

is

a vast

difference

between

the

now formed and the m a n that came

into existence God.

For

object ready

earlier after t h e i m a g e of

the

man

now

formed

of s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n , of

quality,

consists

is

an

partakes

al­

of b o d y

s o u l , is m a n or w o m a n , a n d b y mortal.

But

the

man

who

and

nature

came

into

e x i s t e n c e after t h e i m a g e of G o d is w h a t o n e m i g h t call a n idea, o r a g e n u s , or a seal,

a n o b j e c t of t h o u g h t ,

neither

male

nor

female,

incorporeal, by

nature

incorruptible.

A . F . Gfrorer, in c o m m e n t i n g o n this t e x t , m a i n t a i n s that the m a n c r e a t e d x a T a TYJV e i x o v a 6eou is asexual

(geschlechtlos). H e

bases

1

this j u d g m e n t o n the expression OUT' appev OUTS OYJAU. This w o u l d s e e m t o b e the m o s t natural interpretation of these w o r d s . N o n e t h e ­ less, in recent times a n u m b e r

of exegetes, i n c l u d i n g J.

Jervell,

h a v e m a i n t a i n e d that here a n d in other related passages the m a n after the i m a g e of G o d is not asexual b u t bisexual or a n d r o g y n o u s . J e r v e l l p o i n t s t o the s a m e expression OUT' appev OUTS 6?jAu in s u p p o r t of this i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .

2

C. H . D o d d , in reference t o L e g . All. I I : 13,

c o m m e n t s : " T h u s it appears that P h i l o u n d e r s t o o d the L X X of Gen. i.e.

1: 27 . . . t o m e a n ' G o d created m a n , like Himself, bisexual,' bisexuality

(or a s e x u a l i t y )

is a part of the i m a g e of G o d . "

D o d d also refers t o the expression OUT' appev OUTC 6?jAu in O p . M u n d . 134 a n d states t h a t " a s e x u a l i t y is e q u i v a l e n t t o b i s e x u a l i t y in this case."

3

B u t this assertion is certainly less t h a n o b v i o u s , a n d n o

e v i d e n c e is offered in s u p p o r t of it. These different interpretations of the same d a t a p o i n t u p the p r o b l e m .

b.

Philo the One

Uses

Both

Genesis

God-like Nature

1:27

of M a n ' s

and

2:7

Higher

to

Establish

Nous

of the m o s t p e r p l e x i n g p r o b l e m s t o b e e n c o u n t e r e d in P h i l o ' s

writings is the identification o f the v a r i o u s " m e n " referred t o . T o

1

Philo und die jiidisch-alexandrinischeTheosophie

2

Imago Dei, p p . 64 ff. The Bible and the Greeks

3

( 1 9 3 5 ) , p. 1 5 1 .

( 2 e d . ; 1 8 3 5 ) , I, 2 6 7 - 6 8 , 4 0 7 .

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

22

n a m e o n l y the m o r e w i d e l y used terms, o n e finds the m a n c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d , the generic m a n , the first m a n , the h e a v e n l y man,

the

L o g o s , a n d the sense-perceptible a n d i n d i v i d u a l

man

(6 attrO/jToi; xal em jiipouc; avOpwrcoi;). T o a considerable e x t e n t

the

issue centers o n Philo's understanding of G e n . 1:27 and 2:7,

the

f o u n d a t i o n t e x t s of his a n t h r o p o l o g y . P r e v i o u s l y , in a n y analysis of P h i l o ' s use of these texts, interpreters h a v e f o c u s s e d o n O p . Mund.

134 a n d L e g . A l l . I : 3 1 f t . , w h e r e P h i l o rather

sharply

differentiates b e t w e e n the m a n c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d in Gen.

1:27 a n d the earthly m a n in Gen. 2:7. T h e m a n of G e n . 1:27

is usually e q u a t e d w i t h the ideal m a n , i.e. the idea of m a n in the technical P l a t o n i c sense, and the m a n of G e n . 2:7 is held t o b e his earthly

counterpart.

1

One of the

difficulties w i t h this p o s i t i o n ,

h o w e v e r , is that it presupposes an interpretation

of G e n .

a n d 2:7 inconsistent w i t h P h i l o ' s interpretations elsewhere.

1:27

of these verses

2

In reality, P h i l o m o s t frequently uses Gen. 1:27 for the p u r p o s e of establishing the close likeness of empirical m a n ' s rational soul with the L o g o s and thus ultimately w i t h G o d , n o t in reference t o the idea of man, a c o n c e p t w h i c h as such does not a p p e a r in Philo's 3

writings at all. T h i s is the case, for e x a m p l e , in R e r . D i v . Her. 230-31, where Philo c o m m e n t s o n the phrase from G e n . 1 5 : 1 0 , " t h e birds he [ G o d ] d i d n o t d i v i d e " : Ei7rwvo5vTd7rp£7rovTa7replTouTcov imX&yei- "TCC Sk opvsa ou SIEIXEV," opvsa xaX
1

S e e , for e x a m p l e , J. J e r e m i a s ,

Oscar

Cullmann,

C. G u t h r i e a n d 2

H a v i n g said w h a t w a s fitting on these matters, M o s e s continues, "the birds he d i d n o t d i v i d e . " H e g i v e s t h e n a m e of

The

art. 'ASdu., T . W . N . T .

Christology

of

Charles A . M . H a l l

B a s i l A . S t e g m a n n , Christ,

The

the (2nd

"Man

New ed. from

I (1933), p.

Testament, rev.;

trans.

1963),

Heaven"

pp.

143;

Shirley 149-51.

(1927), pp. 19-49,

s e r i o u s l y d i s p u t e d t h e u s u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of P h i l o ' s use of G e n . 1 : 2 7 a n d 2 :j. However,

his

book,

a published

doctoral

dissertation

from the

Catholic

U n i v e r s i t y of A m e r i c a , w a s a l m o s t e n t i r e l y i g n o r e d b y t h e s c h o l a r l y w o r l d . My

o w n a n a l y s i s of P h i l o ' s u s e of G e n . 1 : 2 7

and 2:7

is in m a n y

respects

s i m i l a r t o S t e g m a n n ' s . Cf. also J e r v e l l , p p . 5 2 - 5 3 . 3

R a t h e r t h a n referring t o t h e i d e a of m a n , P h i l o s p e a k s of t h e i d e a s of

t h e c o m p o n e n t p a r t s of m a n , i.e. t h e idea of t h e r a t i o n a l soul o r m i n d (ESsa TOU vou) a n d t h e i d e a of t h e i r r a t i o n a l s o u l , w h i c h a l s o i n c l u d e s t h e b o d y (ISIa TY)? ala0TjCTEco?). P h i l o d i v e r g e s f r o m P l a t o a t t h i s p o i n t , for " a c c o r d i n g t o P l a t o , t h e r e w a s n o i d e a of m i n d n o r a n y i d e a of s o u l ; b u t i n s t e a d t h e r e w a s a

universal

m i n d existing

probably from

eternity,

and

a universal

soul

w h i c h w a s c r e a t e d b y G o d p r i o r t o t h e c r e a t i o n of t h e w o r l d " ( W o l f s o n ,

389-90; cf. also 2 1 3 - 1 5 ;

cf. Timaeus

34Bff.).

I,

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE

23

birds t o the t w o winged a n d naturally s o a r i n g f o r m s of r e a s o n ( l o g o i ) , t h e o n e t h e a r c h e t y p e w h i c h is a b o v e us a n d t h e o t h e r t h e c o p y of it w h i c h w e possess. M o s e s calls t h e l o g o s w h i c h is a b o v e us t h e i m a g e of G o d , b u t t h e l o g o s w h i c h w e p o s s e s s t h e c a s t of t h a t i m a g e . F o r G o d , he s a y s , m a d e t h e m a n n o t " t h e i m a g e of G o d " b u t "after t h e i m a g e . " A n d t h u s t h e m i n d w h i c h e a c h of us possesses, w h i c h in t h e t r u e a n d full sense is t h e m a n , is a n i m p r e s s i o n a t t h i r d h a n d f r o m the Maker, while the middle m i n d serves as a m o d e l for o u r m i n d b u t is itself a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e Maker.

It is clear that Philo here e m p l o y s Gen. 1:27

n

° t t o refer t o the

idea of m a n , b u t to the higher n o u s in empirical m a n . T h a t

"the

n o u s in each of u s " w a s created "after the i m a g e o f G o d " m e a n s that man's

higher

nature is essentially

like the

d i v i n e nature.

Similarly, in O p . M u n d . 69, P h i l o interprets G e n . 1:27 t o refer to the higher n o u s in empirical m a n . But

1

after all t h e s e t h i n g s , as w a s said, h e

t e l l s u s t h a t m a n w a s c r e a t e d after

the

i m a g e of G o d a n d after his likeness. T h i s is

well

spoken,

for n o t h i n g

earth-born

r e s e m b l e s G o d m o r e t h a n m a n . B u t let n o

1

C o l s o n a n d W h i t a k e r in Philo

(L.C.L.)

I

(1929), p. 55, indicate

that

O p . M u n d . 69 is b a s e d o n G e n . 1 : 2 6 , b u t t h i s is m i s l e a d i n g . T h e t e r m 6U.OICOO-K; is a d m i t t e d l y

from Gen.

1:26,

but

the

substitution

of t h e

singular

xat

slx6va 0£ou ( G e n . 1 : 2 7 ) for t h e p l u r a l x a V slx6va T)u.£T£pav ( G e n . 1 1 2 6 ) p o i n t s t o P h i l o ' s m a i n use of t h e t e x t a t this p o i n t , n a m e l y as e v i d e n c e for t h e G o d ­ like c h a r a c t e r of m a n ' s h i g h e r n o u s . G e n . 1 : 2 6 is n e v e r u s e d for t h i s p u r p o s e but

is seen as referring t o t h e c r e a t i o n of t h e entire c o m p o s i t e m a n .

Philo

m a k e s t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n m o s t c l e a r l y in F u g . 6 8 - 7 2 : G e n . 1 : 2 6 , h e p o i n t s o u t , s p e a k s of m a n w i t h o u t t h e article. B u t , he c o n t i n u e s , w h e n M o s e s w a n t s t o refer, n o t t o " t h e m a n s o - c a l l e d " man"

(6 XEYOU-EVO? a\i0pco7ras) b u t t o " t h e

true

(6 Trpo? dXr)0£iav &\>Qp<xmoq) h e uses t h e a r t i c l e : ETTOUIO-EV 6 0so<; T O V

a\i0pco7rov. See S t e g m a n n , Christ,

The "Man

from

Heaven,"

p . 25.

A c t u a l l y , P h i l o ' s m a i n interest in G e n . 1 : 2 6 is in reference t o t h e p l u r a l f o r m 7roiT)o-tou.£v, for e a c h t i m e h e refers t o G e n . 1 : 2 6 it is p r i m a r i l y in o r d e r t o clarify t h e m e a n i n g of t h i s t e r m . B e c a u s e m a n is a m i x e d c r e a t u r e , P h i l o e x p l a i n s , c o n t a i n i n g w i t h i n h i m b o t h g o o d a n d b a d , it w a s fitting t h a t G o d s h o u l d c r e a t e o n l y t h e g o o d p a r t of m a n , l e a v i n g t o his P o w e r s t h e c r e a t i o n

of t h e b a d (Fug. 68-70, M u t . N o m . 30-31, Conf. L i n g . 169-80, O p . M u n d . 7 2 - 7 5 ) . I n n o p l a c e in his w r i t i n g s d o e s P h i l o d r a w a d i s t i n c t i o n EEXCOV a n d 6u.oitoo-i? in G e n . 1 : 2 6 Magus

( H i p p o l y t u s , Ref.

between

s u c h as w e f i n d in t h e s y s t e m of

V I , 1 4 , 5 ) . See d i s c u s s i o n in Jervell, p p .

Simon 143-44.

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

24

o n e r e p r e s e n t t h e r e s e m b l a n c e as o n e of b o d i l y f o r m . F o r n e i t h e r is G o d in h u m a n f o r m , n o r is t h e h u m a n b o d y G o d - l i k e . I t is r a t h e r t o t h e m i n d , t h e ruling e l e m e n t of t h e soul, t h a t " i m a g e " refers. F o r a c c o r d i n g t o o n e m i n d as a n a r c h e t y p e , e v e n t h e m i n d of t h e u n i v e r s e , t h e m i n d in e a c h of t h o s e w h o s u c c e s s i v e l y c a m e i n t o being was copied.

T h e association of the creation of m a n after the i m a g e of G o d w i t h the fact that m a n is the bearer of the higher rational soul is u n ­ mistakable.

1

B u t it is n o t Gen. i : 27 alone that P h i l o p o i n t s t o as establishing the essential likeness b e t w e e n m a n ' s rational soul a n d G o d . Gen. 2:7 serves e x a c t l y the s a m e p u r p o s e . In Spec. L e g . I V : 123, for e x a m p l e , he writes that the ouuia of the intelligent and

reasonable

soul is 7ivsG[i.a Oeiov. Moses affirmed this truth, Philo maintains, w h e n in his a c c o u n t of creation he says t h a t G o d b r e a t h e d TCVOYJV Z,u>r]c, u p o n the first m a n , the founder of the race. In Quaest. Gen.

I : 50 Philo refers t o the m i n d as a " d i v i n e i n b r e a t h i n g , "

in 2

a n d in R e r . D i v . Her. 56-57 he writes that G o d " d i d n o t m a k e the s u b s t a n c e of the m i n d d e p e n d o n a n y t h i n g created, b u t it as b r e a t h e d

represented

u p o n b y G o d . " A g a i n , he cites G e n . 2:7

as

his

authority. In D e t . P o t . Ins. 80 Philo q u o t e s G e n . 2:7 with 7iveu(jwt t h a n 7ivorjv

rather

the w o r d i n g of the L X X , a n d t h e n p r o c e e d s t o argue 3

that the passage is clear e v i d e n c e that the essence of life is 1

IU

:

See a l s o S p e c . L e g . I ; 8 1 , w h e r e P h i l o refers t o [TTJV] 4 X ')

v

r

mzu\nx. v

' ) dSdvaTov,

(focui TU7ico87Jvai X A T A TTJV eixova TOU OVTOI;. H e e x p l i c i t l y identifies t h e eixcov 8eou in t h i s p a s s a g e : "koyoq 8 ' E A T I V sixcov 0eou, 81' ou auu-XAI; 6 xoafioi; £8r)u.ioupYELTO. r)V

T h u s a g a i n it is clear t h a t P h i l o is u s i n g G e n . 1 :2j

to establish the

kinship

b e t w e e n m a n ' s r a t i o n a l soul a n d t h e L o g o s . Cf. a l s o S p e c . L e g . 1 1 1 : 2 0 7 , D e c .

134, R e r . D i v . H e r . 56-57, D e t . P o t . I n s . 83, V e r t . 203-205, V i t . M o s . 1 1 : 6 5 . P h i l o a l s o i n t e r p r e t s t h e sv sixovt 8sou of G e n . 9 : 6 in r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e r a t i o n a l soul of m a n , a n d in S o m . 1 : 7 3 - 7 4 h e and

refers b o t h t o G e n .

1:27

9 : 6 as s u p p o r t for m a n ' s likeness t o G o d . See also S p e c . L e g . 1 1 1 : 8 3 - 8 4 .

2

I n G r e e k f r a g m e n t , SLtcpuaTiau;.

3

I n L e g . A l l . I l l : 1 6 1 P h i l o a l s o q u o t e s G e n . 2 : 7 w i t h 7rvsu[i.a £(07)5 r a t h e r

than

7TVOT]V

Ciorji;, a n d in O p . M u n d .

134-35, a l t h o u g h h e u s e s

TCVOTIV

^corji;, in

t h e f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n h e s p e a k s c o n s i s t e n t l y of t h e i n b r e a t h i n g of 7rvsuu.a 8siov. I n v i e w of t h i s r a t h e r free a l t e r n a t i o n b e t w e e n TCVO-J] i^co/j? a n d rcveuu.a i^corji;, it is s o m e w h a t s u r p r i s i n g t o f i n d P h i l o a r g u i n g in L e g . A l l . 1 : 3 3 ,

42

t h a t M o s e s p u r p o s e l y u s e d t h e e x p r e s s i o n 7TVOTJ Ccorji; r a t h e r t h a n 7iv£uu.a A t h e n a g o r a s in t h e Sitpplicatio

pro Chrislianis

( C h a p . 7) s i m i l a r l y c o n t r a s t s

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE

25 1

B u t 7TV£ij(i.a, he maintains, is n o t aspa xivoiifAsvov, aXXa TUTOV TLVOO xal

}(apaxTY]pa Osta? Suvajxeco?, YJV ovofxaTi

xaXel, (xa

SyjXwv

xuplw

Mcoua-%

Eixova

OTI <xp/;sTU7iov (xsv tpucTscoq; Xoytxyj? 6 0E6? SCTTL, fiifi-Y]-

§s x a l a7is(.x6v(.o-fi,a av0pco7io?, ou TO Sitpusq; ^ w o v , aXXa TO TYJ?


83).

T h e presence of the t e r m aTCixovio-fxa s t r o n g l y suggests that Philo h a d G e n . 1:27 in m i n d as well as Gen. 2:7. This is c o n f i r m e d b y a n u m b e r of o t h e r passages w h e r e he specifically refers to the t w o Genesis t e x t s together, using b o t h of t h e m t o s u p p o r t

the

same

thesis. A n e x a m p l e of this is O p . M u n d . 139, where Philo writes in reference t o the soul of the 7ipa>To<; av0pw7io<;: For he [God] employed for its making no pattern taken from among created things, but solely, as I have said, his own Logos. It is on this account that he says that man was made a likeness (aTCLxovLcrfxa) and imitation (fiifi,Y]fi.a) of the Logos, when the breathing into his face took place (efi.7iveuo-0svTa EL? TO 7ip6cTC07iov). Likewise, in R e r . D i v . Her. 56-57 Philo w r i t e s : But he [the lawgiver, i.e. Moses] did not make the substance of the mind depend on anything created, but represented it as breathed upon b y God. For the Maker of all, he says, blew into his face the breath of life (TCVO/JV ^(0%), and man became a living soul; just as we are also told that he was fashioned after the image ( x a T a TYJV s l x o v a ) of his Maker. 2

In s u m m a r y , then, it m a y b e said that Philo generally uses b o t h Gen.

1:27 a n d 2:7 to establish the essential kinship b e t w e e n

the

rational soul of m a n a n d G o d . W i t h respect t o Gen. 1:27 he argues o n the basis of the assertion that m a n was c r e a t e d n a i

eixova TOU

©sou. In G e n . 2:7 he refers to the divine inbreathing of 7IVEU(i.a (or rcvor) a n d

7WEUU.a a n d m a y p o s s i b l y b e d e p e n d e n t o n P h i l o . See M a l h e r b e ,

Supplicatio, ophers,

p p . 7 6 - 7 7 : " A t h e n a g o r a s c o n t r a s t s t h e k n o w l e d g e of t h e p h i l o s ­

which

t h e y a t t a i n w h e n m o v e d a c c o r d i n g t o their s y m p a t h y w i t h

the divine breath

(RCOIRJTAI u.ev ya.p . . . 91X60091x1, . . . x a x a au(X7id0siav

TOU 6EOU 7tvoYJ?) w i t h t h e k n o w l e d g e of C h r i s t i a n s , w h o h a v e t h e as witnesses,

TTJ?

rcapa

prophets

w h o are m o v e d t o s p e a k b y t h e d i v i n e S p i r i t " (rju.eT<; Sk . . .

7TV£uu.aTi £v0lco). I t is clear t h a t 7RVEUU.a h e r e r e p r e s e n t s a closer

relationship

t o G o d t h a n 7TVOYJ, a n d t h i s is a p p a r e n t l y t h e p o i n t t h a t P h i l o is t r y i n g t o m a k e in L e g . A l l . 1 : 3 1 ff. Cf. W o l f s o n , I , 394, n o t e 46. 1

W i t h ref. t o P h i l o ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e soul as m a t e r i a l or i m m a t e r i a l ,

see b e l o w , A p p e n d i x C , S e c t . 2. 2

R e g a r d i n g P h i l o ' s t e a c h i n g o n t h e p r e - e x i s t e n c e of t h e s o u l , see b e l o w ,

A p p e n d i x C, Sect.

3.

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

26 TCVOYJ)

In a n u m b e r of passages he quotes b o t h t e x t s together

as his a u t h o r i t y .

1

O n e question remains to b e answered. Is the m a n c r e a t e d

after

the i m a g e of G o d referred t o in O p . M u n d . 134 and L e g . A l l . 1:31 ff., in line with Philo's general usage, t o b e identified w i t h the rational soul in actual m a n ? If this is so, h o w is the earthly m a n

referred

to in these passages t o b e u n d e r s t o o d ? c. T h e

Sequence

of

Creation

in

De

Opificio

Mundi

T h r o u g h o u t O p . M u n d . P h i l o a c c e p t s the P l a t o n i c principle that the creation of the ideal m u s t p r e c e d e that of the sense-perceptible. G o d realized, writes P h i l o , that n o o b j e c t of sense-perception w o u l d be faultless

(dvuTOxta-iot;) unless m a d e a c c o r d i n g to an

archetypal

a n d intelligible idea. T h u s " w h e n he willed to create this visible w o r l d , he first fully f o r m e d the intelligible w o r l d , in order that he m i g h t h a v e the use of a p a t t e r n w h o l l y G o d - l i k e a n d i n c o r p o r e a l in p r o d u c i n g the material w o r l d , as a later creation, the v e r y image of

an earlier."

2

Philo understands Gen. 1 : 1 - 5 , w h i c h describes

D a y O n e of creation, as referring t o the c r e a t i o n of the w o r l d of ideas. T h a t this ideal creation was c a t e g o r i c a l l y different from that of the sense-perceptible w o r l d , w h i c h t o o k place o n the s e c o n d through

the sixth d a y s , is clearly attested to b y the w o r d s of

Scripture, a c c o r d i n g to Philo, for the first d a y is n o t called "first" (np&zoc,),

lest it be r e c k o n e d w i t h the o t h e r d a y s , but rather " o n e "

(jxta; O p . M u n d . 15), " a n expression due to the oneness (LIOVMCTI?) of the intelligible w o r l d a n d t o its h a v i n g the nature of the m o n a d " (LiovaStxYjv I^OVTO? cpuo-tv; O p . M u n d . 35). Philo clearly states ( O p . M u n d . 36) that the creation of the in­ c o r p o r e a l w o r l d was c o m p l e t e d o n

D a y O n e of c r e a t i o n .

3

The

genera, therefore, w h i c h he refers t o in O p . M u n d . 36-128, are n o t t o b e e q u a t e d with the ideas of the D a y O n e creation but are t o be seen as part of the visible creation of d a y s t w o t h r o u g h six,

1

T h i s a n a l y s i s is n o t m e a n t t o d e n y t h a t in s u c h t e x t s as O p . M u n d . 134

a n d L e g . A l l . 1 : 3 1 ff. P h i l o c o n t r a s t s t h e e a r t h l y m a n of G e n . 2 : 7a w i t h t h e man

c r e a t e d after t h e i m a g e of G o d of G e n . 1 : 2 7 .

R a t h e r it s i m p l y u n d e r ­

scores t h e f a c t t h a t P h i l o uses G e n . 2 : 7 b as w e l l as 1 : 2 7 t o affirm t h e G o d ­ like n a t u r e of m a n ' s r a t i o n a l soul. 2

O p . M u n d . 16.

3

I n Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 : 1 9 P h i l o s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e i n c o r p o r e a l c r e a t i o n m a y

h a v e e x t e n d e d t h r o u g h t h e s i x t h d a y . T h e c o n j e c t u r a l t o n e of t h e p a s s a g e , h o w e v e r , d o e s n o t f a v o r b a s i n g a n y f i r m c o n c l u s i o n s o n it.

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE

27

w h i c h was generic in relation t o the subsequent creation of species (cf.

O p . M u n d . 36, 37, 5 5 ) . i

After explaining w h y the ideal creation takes p r e c e d e n c e o v e r the

sense-perceptible

creation,

P h i l o v e r y briefly refers

to

the

2

particular ideas created o n D a y O n e . H e interprets rcveuLta 6eou of Gen.

1:2 as referring to the i n c o r p o r e a l essence of spirit (ao-w(ia-ro<;

oucrta TuveuLiaTo?), w h i c h is p r o b a b l y equivalent t o w h a t he elsewhere refers t o as the idea of m i n d .

3

A s e c o n d significant factor in the interpretation of O p . M u n d . is the i m p o r t a n t distinction b e t w e e n genera a n d species. G o d does not

create the

particular plants a n d

animals directly after

the

p a t t e r n of the incorporeal ideas, a c c o r d i n g t o Philo, b u t rather first creates the genera, a n d o n l y s u b s e q u e n t l y the species. T h u s o n d a y s two

t h r o u g h six G o d c r e a t e d

^wcmAao-TEtv evexetpet)

the

m o r t a l genera

before—referring

to

(T<X 0VY]T<X yevyj

order,

not

time—he

c r e a t e d the species (cf. O p . M u n d . 62, 76).* 1

See O p . M u n d .

13-14,

where

Philo

argues that

the

n u m b e r six

itself

s h o w s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s of t h e G e n e s i s s c h e m e of c r e a t i o n . A s t h e p r o d u c t of

b o t h o d d (male) and even

( f e m a l e ) n u m b e r s , i.e. t w o t i m e s t h r e e , six is

b o t h m a l e and female. I t w a s therefore appropriate that beings t h a t were t o o r i g i n a t e f r o m a c o u p l i n g t o g e t h e r (xa? ex auvSuaafiou yeveaet?) s h o u l d b e c r e a t e d d u r i n g t h i s t i m e . See also L e g . A l l . 1 : 2 - 4 . 2

O p . M u n d . 29-35.

It i

s

b e y o n d t h e s c o p e of t h i s s t u d y t o a n a l y s e t h i s

p a s s a g e in d e t a i l . S e e t h e e x t e n s i v e d i s c u s s i o n in W o l f s o n , 3

I, 3 0 0 - 3 1 6 .

I n L e g . A l l . 1 : 1 ff. P h i l o refers t o YJ iSea xou vou a n d YJ ISEOC XYJ? ataOYjaeco;,

w h i c h , h e s a y s , are s y m b o l i c a l l y referred t o b y t h e t e r m s " h e a v e n " " e a r t h " in G e n . 2 : 4

and

(cf. L e g . A l l . 1 : 2 1 - 2 2 ) . O n t h e w h o l e , h o w e v e r ,

these

c o n c e p t s o c c u r v e r y r a r e l y in his w r i t i n g s , w h i c h is p r o b a b l y t o b e a c c o u n t e d for

b y t h e p a r t i c u l a r w o r d i n g of his G r e e k O l d T e s t a m e n t a n d his u n d e r ­

s t a n d i n g of t h e L o g o s . G e n . 1 : 2 7 s a y s t h a t m a n w a s c r e a t e d x a x ' elx6va Oeou. But p.

Philo

u s u a l l y i n t e r p r e t s t h e EIXCOV 8eou t o b e t h e L o g o s

(see

Jervell,

5 5 ) . T h u s m a n w a s c r e a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p a t t e r n of t h e L o g o s , w h o in

t u r n is a p a t t e r n of G o d . I t is p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e P h i l o u n d e r s t a n d s t h e L o g o s to be the location

(y_&pa) or p l a c e

(xorro?) of t h e i d e a s t h a t h e c a n

omit

m e n t i o n of t h e p a r t i c u l a r i d e a a n d refer o n l y t o t h e L o g o s p r o p e r ( O p . M u n d . i g - 2 0 ) . If o n e w a n t s t o p u t t h e m a t t e r as s i m p l y as p o s s i b l e , he w r i t e s , ouSev 5v

SxEpov EITTOI xov voYjxov x6au.ov elvai r] 8eou Xoyov YJSYJ xoa(XO7toto0vxog ( O p .

Mund. refer t o 4

24). T h u s it is o n l y o c c a s i o n a l l y t h a t P h i l o finds it a p p r o p r i a t e t o YJ

t 8 e a xou vou or

See S t e g m a n n , Christ,

YJ

tSea

"The

XYJ?

Man

ala8Y)o-ECog as s u c h . from

Heaven,"

pp. 19-32.

P h i l o u n d e r s t a n d s t h e d a y s of c r e a t i o n n o t as referring t o c h r o n o l o g i c a l t i m e b u t r a t h e r as p o i n t i n g t o t h e p r i n c i p l e of o r d e r (xd£i?) in t h e c r e a t e d w o r l d . A c t u a l l y , all t h i n g s t o o k s h a p e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y (ajxa -reavxa o-uvtaxaxo), but

" t h o u g h all t h i n g s t o o k s h a p e t o g e t h e r , t h e f a c t t h a t l i v i n g o r g a n i s m s

w e r e a f t e r w a r d s t o c o m e i n t o e x i s t e n c e o u t of o n e a n o t h e r r e n d e r e d n e c e s s a r y a n a d u m b r a t i o n of t h e p r i n c i p l e of o r d e r in t h e n a r r a t i v e " ( O p . M u n d . cf. a l s o O p . M u n d . 1 3 , 2 6 ; L e g . A l l . 1 1 2 - 4 .

Cf. P l a t o ,

Timaeus

34C,

67;

37D;

28

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN Recalling then w h a t was said a b o v e a b o u t Philo's interpretation

of Gen. 1:27 and 2:7, w e arrive at the following analysis of O p . M u n d . as a w h o l e . (1) In

Op. Mund.

1-35,

after

briefly introducing

the

entire

treatise, Philo i m m e d i a t e l y explains the p r e c e d e n c e of the Day

One creation

ceptible creation

(Gen. 1:1-5)

o v e

r

the subsequent

(Gen. 1 : 6 - 2 : 3 ) . T h e

6.G
OUGIOL

ideal

sense-per­ WEOU-OCTO;;

(Op. M u n d . 29) is p r o b a b l y t o b e u n d e r s t o o d as equivalent t o what Philo elsewhere refers t o as the idea of m i n d . T h e creation of the incorporeal w o r l d of ideas was c o m p l e t e d with the end of D a y O n e . (2) O p . M u n d . 36-128 refers t o the creation of the generic senseperceptible world, beginning with h e a v e n and ending with

man.

In the case of plants a n d animals G o d first forms the genera and o n l y afterwards the species ( O p . M u n d . 62, 64, 76). B e c a u s e m a n is 1

a c o m p o s i t e (o-uvGerov, 0-uyxpiiu.a), h o w e v e r , consisting of b o t h a h e a v e n l y a n d an earthly part, in the case of m a n G o d first forms the genus of each part of m a n , which o n l y " a f t e r w a r d s " t o g e t h e r f o r m the first empirical m a n , the species A d a m . Neither of these " m e n , " the earthly or the h e a v e n l y (i.e. the m a n created after the i m a g e of G o d ) , is t o b e t h o u g h t of as an actually existing m a n b u t o n l y as a generic c o m p o n e n t part of the first empirical m a n . Since in t h e process of creation, o n e thing was n o t created after another c h r o n ­ ologically, the generic earthly m a n and the generic h e a v e n l y m a n c o u l d b e said t o h a v e real existence o n l y in their u n i o n in the first empirical man, w h o is c o m p o s i t e . In themselves, t h e y are p h i l o sophical-exegetical constructs t h a t enable Philo t o deal with

the

given before h i m , i.e. the creation a c c o u n t s of Gen. 1 a n d 2. T h r o u g h o u t O p . M u n d . it is the actual t e x t of Gen. 1 and 2 that determines the d e v e l o p m e n t a n d arrangement of P h i l o ' s exegesis. T h u s , although in terms of the logical order of creation the creation of the rational element in m a n precedes that of the

irrational,

nonetheless Philo m o v e s b a c k a n d forth from o n e t o the other as the text d e m a n d s . F o r e x a m p l e , Gen. 1:26 is taken b y Philo t o refer t o the creation of the entire c o m p o s i t e m a n ( O p . M u n d . 72-75), whereas Gen. 1:27a constitutes an e m p h a t i c reminder that o n l y in reference t o the rational m i n d is m a n really G o d - l i k e ( O p . M u n d . 69-71). Gen. 1:27b, h o w e v e r , refers again t o the entire c o m p o s i t e A r i s t o t l e , Physica

V I I I , 1, 2 5 1 b , 1 0 - 1 2 ; Categoriae

See W o l f s o n , I , 2 1 4 - 1 6 ) . 1

O p . M u n d . 1 3 5 , M u t . N o m . 183 ff.,

et

al.

12, 14b, 4-5;

12, 14a,

27.

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE

29

m a n , w h o s e generic earthly c o m p o n e n t part is p o t e n t i a l l y both m a l e a n d female, b u t w h o in the historical species is either male or female (Op.

M u n d . 76; cf. R e r . D i v . Her. 164, L e g . A l l . I I : 13). It is t o b e

k e p t in m i n d that Philo uses the t e r m av6pco7ro<; t o refer either to the h e a v e n l y part of m a n , the earthly part, o r the entire c o m p o s i t e man.

1

n

(3) P h i l o interprets G e n . 2:4-7

°t

a

s

r e c o r d i n g a n e w creation

b u t rather as a s u m m a r y r e c a p i t u l a t i o n of w h a t has already b e e n d e s c r i b e d in Gen. 1 : 1 - 2:3. T h i s is clearly seen, not o n l y f r o m the actual s u b s t a n c e of his interpretation of these verses, b u t also f r o m two

specific texts,

speaks

of the

(erai 8' 6

G\}{L-KOLC,

is i n t r o d u c e d

O p . M u n d . 89 a n d

whole world having

129. In the former

been brought

y.6a\Loq ETEXEICOGT]), a n d in the latter the

expressis

verbis:

E7UXOYI.£6fj(.Evo<;

Philo

to c o m p l e t i o n

8k TTJV

summary xoGiionodcuv

xetpaXaicoSei iunu> tprjo-lv . . . ( R e c k o n i n g again the c r e a t i o n of the 2

w o r l d in a t y p e of s u m m a r y . . . ) . T h u s Philo takes Gen. 2:4-5

to

refer to the creation of the i n c o r p o r e a l ideas ( O p . M u n d . 129-30), Gen.

2:6 t o the creation of the visible genera b u t n o t i n c l u d i n g m a n

(Op.

M u n d . 131-33), a n d G e n . 2:7 t o the creation of m a n

(Op.

M u n d . 134 f f . ) . (4) O p . M u n d . 136-72 p o r t r a y s the n o b i l i t y a n d original oneness of the first empirical m a n a n d also describes the creation of w o m a n , who

b e c o m e s for h i m the origin of desire a n d the b l a m e w o r t h y life.

This a c c o u n t is s u b s e q u e n t l y allegorized in terms of m i n d a n d senseperception. d. E x e g e s i s o f D e O p i f i c i o

Mundi

134

ff.

I n t e r m s of the p r e c e d i n g analysis of O p . M u n d . as a w h o l e , the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of O p . M u n d . 134-35 that m o s t naturally suggests itself is that the vuv 7TXAO-6ei<; av6p<07RO<; of O p . M u n d . 134 is the generic earthly m a n , a n d the av6p(07ro<; xa-ra TTJV eixova 6eou yeyovox; TrpoTepov is the generic h e a v e n l y m a n , i.e. the rational n o u s in m a n t h a t was p a t t e r n e d after the i m a g e of the L o g o s . T h e aio-6r)To<; xal 1

In

Cf. Conf. L i n g . 6 2 - 6 3 , w h e r e P h i l o uses av8pcoTro<; in r e f e r e n c e t o t h e L o g o s . Conf. L i n g . 1 4 6 t h e L o g o s is e v e n referred t o as 6 x a x ' eixova avQpcoTroi;,

a title t h a t c a n n o t e a s i l y b e r e c o n c i l e d w i t h P h i l o ' s u s u a l u s e of t h e t e r m eixcov t o refer t o t h e L o g o s a n d 6 x a r ' eixova av9pcoTro<; t o refer t o t h e r a t i o n a l vou<; in m a n . See d i s c u s s i o n in Jervell, p p . 6 5 - 6 6 . 2

I n L e g . A l l . P h i l o d e a l s w i t h t h e s e c o n d c r e a t i o n a c c o u n t in a

totally

d i f f e r e n t f a s h i o n , n a m e l y as t h e b a s i s of a n e x t e n s i v e a n d r a t h e r i n v o l v e d a l l e g o r y of t h e soul.

30

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

ITCI uipouc; avOpomoc; of O p . M u n d . 135, w h o is d e s c r i b e d as a CTUVGETOV, is the first empirical m a n , the species A d a m , c o m p o s e d of the t w o c o m p o n e n t " p a r t s " d e s c r i b e d in O p . M u n d . 134, a n d is the same as 1

the 7tptoTo<; avOpomoc of O p . M u n d . 136 ff- Several lines of a r g u m e n t c o n v e r g e t o s u p p o r t these c o n c l u s i o n s . (1) In O p . M u n d . 135 Philo speaks of the individual c o m p o s i t e m a n , a n d in 136 ff. he discusses the nature of the first

empirical

m a n , w h o is clearly the s a m e as the individual c o m p o s i t e m a n of 135 ( e x e l v o ? 8' 6 upcoTo? avOpioTOc). This c o m p o s i t e m a n is m a d e u p of yswSr)? OUAIA a n d 7rv£U[i.a 6sou. TEWST);; ouaia, h o w e v e r , c o r r e s p o n d s e x a c t l y t o the m a n of clay of O p . M u n d . 134, and, as can b e seen f r o m O p . M u n d . 139, the receiving of 7rv£U[i.a 6eou is t o b e e q u a t e d with the creation of m a n after the i m a g e of G o d : cm SE xal TYJV I^xV

APIATOC;

cpavepov'

ouckvl yap

ETspw 7rapaSEiyfi.aTi

xwv EV

ysvscTEi npbc, T/JV xaTacTxeuYjv AUTYJC E'OIXE xP^acrGat, FIOVIO § ' 10c;

sinov

TW SAUTOU Xoyw. §t,6 9Y)CT(,V D7REIX6VIO"(IA xal (ju(i7)fi.a yeyEvrjaOai TOUTOU

TOV av6p<0TOv eu,7IVEUA6EVTA sic, TO Tipoawuov. It is thus clear t h a t the interpretation that has b e e n suggested n o t o n l y fits in m o s t naturally with O p . M u n d . as a w h o l e , b u t also is m o s t e c o n o m i c a l in terms of the i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t . (2) T h e presence of the t e r m s ysvo?, o^paylt;, vorjTo?, a n d dcriofi.aTO<; in O p . M u n d . 134 d o e s n o t as such preclude the possibility t h a t t h e m a n created after the i m a g e of G o d in O p . M u n d . 134 is the rational n o u s in empirical m a n rather than the ideal m a n in the technical P l a t o n i c sense. First of all, d r a w i n g a sharp contrast b e t w e e n the ideal m a n and the rational n o u s in empirical m a n is p r o b a b l y n o t justified, for the L o g o s , the ideal m a n , a n d the rational n o u s in empirical m a n are essentially identical t h r o u g h o u t m o s t of P h i l o ' s writings. T h u s it is not surprising that P h i l o applies s o m e of the same terms t o b o t h the ideal m a n a n d the rational n o u s in empirical man. Furthermore,

it is clear t h a t Philo d o e s n o t a l w a y s use the

t e r m tS£a in the technical P l a t o n i c sense, and t h u s the m e r e o c c u r ­ r e n c e of this t e r m b y itself p r o v e s little. T h a t Philo writes ISEOC TIC; ( " a k i n d of i d e a , " or, " w h a t o n e m i g h t call an i d e a " ) rather t h a n s i m p l y t§£a further suggests that he is p r o b a b l y n o t using the t e r m t e c h n i c a l l y in this p a s s a g e . 1

2

T o describe m a n as a c o m p o s i t e (ouvOexov) is s i m p l y a n o t h e r w a y of g i v i n g e x p r e s s i o n to his d u a l n a t u r e . Cf., especially, M u t . Norn. 184, D e t . P o t . I n s . 1 3 9 . F o r v a r i o u s uses of t h e t e r m iSia. in P h i l o , see Index Leisegang. T h e t e r m YEVGC is discussed in d e t a i l b e l o w . 2

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE

31

(3) A n o t h e r a p p a r e n t difficulty is easily r e s o l v e d w h e n w e recall P h i l o ' s m u l t i p l e usage of the t e r m ^ U / r ) .

1

The

sense-perceptible,

i n d i v i d u a l m a n of O p . M u n d . 135, w h o s e f o r m a t i o n is c o m p o s i t e , consists of crcofi.a a n d if'uXT)- Yu^r) is i m m e d i a t e l y associated

with

7rvEU(jwt 6s1ov, a n d is held t o h a v e originated f r o m n o created thing whatsoever

(am' OUSEVOC; ysvY]T0ii TO rcapd-reav). O n the basis of our

earlier discussion of the dual nature of m a n in Philo, a d u a l i t y that m o s t frequently is expressed in t e r m s of a rational a n d irrational soul, it is clear that w h e n Philo here says t h a t the c o m p o s i t e m a n consists of b o d y and soul, crcou-a s h o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d t o i n c l u d e the irrational soul. This irrational soul, the

p o w e r of sheer

animal

vitality in m a n , exists o n l y in c o n j u n c t i o n with the b o d y a n d t h u s understandably

can also b e referred to s i m p l y as crcou-a.

In O p . M u n d . 134, h o w e v e r , w h e n Philo states that the m a n of clay, the

vuv nXaaQsli; avOpiorcoc;, consists of crtou-a a n d

^uyyi,

a p p a r e n t l y d o e s n o t h a v e in m i n d the d i c h o t o m y of m a n ' s

he

higher

a n d l o w e r natures, b u t rather the t w o aspects of the irrational soul, i.e. b o d y a n d animal vitality. B o d y a n d soul in this case are t o g e t h e r to b e t h o u g h t of as c o m p r i s i n g w h a t Philo elsewhere refers t o either as o-wfi.oc or <\iuyji, i.e. the l o w e r or irrational p a r t of m a n ' s being. T h e m a i n s u p p o r t for this interpretation is, of course, t o be f o u n d in the attributes ascribed b y Philo t o the vuv nXctaQeic, av6pto7roc". H e is ataOrjTcx; TJSTJ (ISTSXMVTCOIOTYJTOC;,EX, ffiofiaToc; xal <^\>yr\c, AUVEATWE;,

avr)p Y) yuvrj, cpuo-EI 0VY]T6C;. B u t n o n e of these attributes of the vuv TzlaaQslc,

avOpomoc; fits the rational soul, that part of m a n that is

i m m o r t a l , a divine fragment, a n d identified with the d i v i n e Spirit. I n e v i t a b l y w e are driven to the c o n c l u s i o n —and this is o n e of the important

k e y s t o the exegesis of this p a s s a g e — t h a t P h i l o uses

<\iuyji in t w o q u i t e distinct senses in O p . M u n d . 134 a n d 135. T h u s , in his s u m m a r y

recapitulation

of the s t o r y of creation,

P h i l o interprets Gen. 2:7, in c o n j u n c t i o n with G e n . 1:27, t o refer to the creation of the generic c o m p o n e n t parts of m a n a n d their c o m b i n a t i o n in the i n d i v i d u a l , sense-perceptible, c o m p o s i t e m a n , i.e. the first empirical m a n , the species A d a m . In his usual fashion he interprets b o t h the creation of m a n

after the i m a g e of G o d

a n d the inbreathing of d i v i n e spirit t o refer to the essential similarity b e t w e e n m a n ' s rational soul a n d the divine L o g o s (cf. especially O p . M u n d . 139, 144, 146).

1

See a b o v e ,

pp. 14-16.

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

32

Earlier in this chapter w e s a w that the irrational soul of m a n participates in the categories m a l e a n d female, whereas the rational soul d o e s n o t share in the realm of the sexual. I n a s m u c h as the m a n created after the i m a g e of G o d o f O p . M u n d . 134 is e q u i v a l e n t to, or, at least, closely related t o the rational soul of m a n , it w o u l d seem t h e n that the OUT' appev OOTE OYJXU

1

w h i c h is p r e d i c a t e d of h i m

s h o u l d b e interpreted as indicating asexuality rather t h a n b i s e x u a l ­ i t y or a n d r o g y n e i t y . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , h o w e v e r , O p . M u n d . 134 has usually b e e n interpreted in terms of the a s s u m p t i o n that the m a n c r e a t e d XATA TYJV eixova 6EOU is e q u i v a l e n t to 6 yevixoc; av6pco7ioc; of

Leg. All. I I : 13 (see also O p . M u n d . 76, R e r . D i v . H e r . 164), w h o is d e s c r i b e d as containing in himself b o t h the male a n d the female genus. How

c o m e s he [ G o d ] , t h e n , t o f o r m o t h e r

wild beasts now, and not to be

satisfied

with those former ones ? F r o m the s t a n d ­ p o i n t of e t h i c s w h a t w e m u s t s a y is t h i s . I n t h e r e a l m of c r e a t e d t h i n g s t h e g e n u s of wickedness

is a b u n d a n t , so t h a t

in

this

r e a l m t h e w o r s t t h i n g s are e v e r b e i n g p r o ­ duced.

B u t f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t of

the

w o r l d of n a t u r e w e m u s t s a y t h a t f o r m e r l y during the s i x - d a y creation G o d w r o u g h t t h e g e n e r a a n d t h e o r i g i n a l s of t h e p a s ­ s i o n s , w h e r e a s n o w h e is f a s h i o n i n g species

as w e l l . T h i s is w h y it s a y s ,

the he

m o u l d e d besides. T h a t w h a t were created in t h e first i n s t a n c e w e r e g e n e r a , is e v i d e n t from the words employed, " L e t the earth bring forth the living soul" not according t o species b u t " a c c o r d i n g t o g e n u s . " A n d w e find h i m in e v e r y i n s t a n c e w o r k i n g in t h i s w a y . B e f o r e t h e species h e c o m p l e t e s t h e g e n e r a , as h e d o e s also in t h e c a s e of man. man,

Having

first

formed

the

generic

in w h i c h S c r i p t u r e s a y s t h a t t h e r e is

t h e m a l e a n d t h e f e m a l e g e n u s , he a f t e r ­ w a r d s b r i n g s to c o m p l e t i o n t h e Adam.

There are

at

least

identifying the ysvixoc; 1

species

2

t w o c o n v i n c i n g reasons, h o w e v e r , for n o t avGpto7roc;

of this passage with the av0pto7ioo;

T h i s e x p r e s s i o n a l s o o c c u r s in S o m . I I : 1 8 4 , a n d OUXE dppYjv . . . OUXE 0Y)X£ia is f o u n d in E b r . 2 1 2 . I n b o t h i n s t a n c e s t h e r e f e r e n c e is to a e u n u c h in c o n t r a s t to a whole m a n or w o m a n , a n d thus o b v i o u s l y asexuality rather t h a n b i s e x u a l i t y is m e a n t . 2

Leg. All. I I : 12-13.

MAN'S HIGHER NATURE

33

xat-a TYJV sixova 6sou of O p . M u n d . 134. These reasons are valid whether

the m a n

after

the i m a g e of G o d is u n d e r s t o o d t o b e

equivalent t o the rational soul in m a n , as maintained a b o v e , or, o n the other hand, is the idea (in the technical P l a t o n i c sense) of m a n ' s rational soul. (1) I n b o t h O p . M u n d . 134 and L e g . A l l . 1 1 : 1 2 - 1 3 the

terms

yevo? a n d iS*ea o c c u r . Usually, in b o t h texts these terms are t a k e n t o m e a n t h a t P h i l o is referring t o the idea of m a n in the technical P l a t o n i c sense. B u t as was seen a b o v e , in a c c o r d a n c e with the c o m ­ mon

practice of his d a y , Philo uses iSsa in a n u m b e r of different

w a y s , a n d thus the m e a n i n g of the t e r m m u s t b e established each t i m e in relation t o its i m m e d i a t e c o n t e x t . T h e same is also true of the term yevoc,, w h i c h has a w i d e v a r i e t y of meanings in Philo's 1

w r i t i n g s . A c t u a l l y , w e h a v e b e e n able t o find n o instance in P h i l o where ysvoc; is u n a m b i g u o u s l y equivalent t o iS*ea in the technical P l a t o n i c sense, and, in at least o n e passage (Spec. Leg. 1:329), yevoc; is used as clearly distinct from iS*ea in this specific sense.

2

(2) In L e g . A l l . I I : 12 Philo ascribes the creation of TA ysvrj TCOV TRA6COV xal TAC. i§£ac. t o the sl;aY)fispoc;, i.e. the S i x - D a y creation. P r o b a b l y this term d o e s n o t include D a y One, h o w e v e r , for, as w a s seen a b o v e , Philo argues in O p . M u n d . 1-35 that b e c a u s e of the uniqueness of the intelligible w o r l d , D a y O n e is n o t r e c k o n e d with the following d a y s . B u t if this is so, t h e n the terms iSea and yevoc; in L e g . A l l . I I : 12 s h o u l d not b e t a k e n t o refer t o the ideal creation of D a y O n e b u t t o the generic sense-perceptible creation of d a y s two

t h r o u g h six, t o w h i c h also the yevixoc. av6pco7ioc. of L e g . A l l .

I I : 13 w o u l d t h e n

belong.

3

Inasmuch

as

the

yevixoc;

avQpcoTcoc.

contains within himself the male a n d the female sexes (yevr)), he is

1

See Index

2

Cf. A m m o n i u s , in Porphyrii

Commentaria

Leisegang, in Aristotelem

according to A m m o n i u s , TCOV

ISea, yevoc;. Isagogen

Graeca

sive V Voces

(ed. A d o l f u s B u s s e , in

I V , 3 [1891]), p. 44, lines 1-2, w h e r e P l a t o ,

is h e l d t o h a v e t a u g h t t h a t 6 Geo? e/et

ev eauxco

yevcov Te x a l elScov Ta exTuncofxaTa. If exTU7Tco!i.a h e r e is t h e e q u i v a l e n t of

ISea in t h e

technical

s i m p l e e q u a t i o n of Group 3

s. v.

of Essays

sense,

then this passage

yevo? a n d

ISea.

See

affords

evidence against

W o l f s o n , Religious

(1961), p . 48, w h e r e t h i s t e x t is referred

Philosophy.

a A

to.

A s e c o n d , a l t h o u g h less l i k e l y a l t e r n a t i v e , w o u l d b e t o i n t e r p r e t e£aT)U.epo<;

as i n c l u d i n g D a y O n e . I n this c a s e iSea w o u l d refer t o t h e c r e a t i o n of

the

i n t e l l i g i b l e w o r l d o n D a y O n e a n d yevoi; t o t h e c r e a t i o n of t h e s e n s e - p e r c e p ­ t i b l e g e n e r a o n d a y s t w o t h r o u g h six. ALGHJ, III

-

^

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

34

p r o b a b l y t o b e identified

w i t h the

generic earthly m a n

M u n d . 76, 134 and R e r . D i v . Her. 164.

of O p .

1

It seems p r o b a b l e , then, that the expression OUT' appsv OUTS 69jAu, w h i c h is p r e d i c a t e d of the m a n c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d of Op.

Mund.

134, s h o u l d b e interpreted

as indicating

asexuality

rather t h a n bisexuality. T h e t e r m " a n d r o g y n o u s , " t h o u g h p e r h a p s technically equivalent

t o " b i s e x u a l , " is e v e n less accurate

when

used d e s c r i p t i v e l y of the m a n c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d , since it is far m o r e m y t h o l o g i c a l l y o r i e n t e d t h a n is the w o r d " b i s e x u a l , " whereas

Philo's basic orientation

is n o t m y t h o l o g i c a l b u t

philo­

2

sophical and e x e g e t i c a l . A d m i t t e d l y , in s o m e of the G n o s t i c s y s t e m s the t e r m " a n d r o g y n o u s " c a n describe t h a t w h i c h is o n l y p o t e n t i a l l y b u t not y e t a c t u a l l y m a l e or female, or, in other instances, neutralization of the male-female p o l a r i t y ,

3

the

b u t P h i l o refuses t o use

the w o r d at all in describing the nature of G o d , the L o g o s ,

and

the rational soul of m a n . P h i l o speaks of " m a l e " and " f e m a l e " b e c a u s e these are the terms 4

he finds in his Scriptural t e x t . H e speaks of " g e n u s " a n d " s p e c i e s " not

only because

of the

frequent

o c c u r r e n c e of the

expression

xaxa yivoc, in Gen. 1, b u t also b e c a u s e these terms are p a r t of the philosophical v o c a b u l a r y w i t h w h i c h he a p p r o a c h e s Scripture (cf. R e r . D i v . H e r . 164). Philo is n o t w o r k i n g within a

predominantly

m y t h o l o g i c a l f r a m e w o r k , b u t within the philosophical of genus a n d species, p o t e n t i a l i t y

framework

(Suvafj.it;) a n d a c t u a l i t y (Ivlpyeia).

T h e generic earthly m a n is said t o c o n t a i n within himself the m a l e a n d the female sexes insofar as h e is p o t e n t i a l l y either m a l e or female. This p a t t e r n is m o s t clearly seen in L e g . A l l . 1 1 : 4 0 ff., where P h i l o allegorizes the a c c o u n t of the creation of w o m a n o u t of the side of man:

1

6 8k [vouc,] 6£ac7dfj.£voc. YJV Tcpoxepov zlyjz Suvafj.iv xai xa6' l^iv

Cf. L e g . A l l . 1 : 3 1 , w h e r e

Philo

specifically

states

that

t h e r e are

two

g e n e r a of m e n , t h e o n e h e a v e n l y a n d t h e o t h e r e a r t h l y . T h e e a r t h l y m a n is generic j u s t as w e l l as t h e h e a v e n l y m a n , a n d t h u s t h e t e r m yevo? b y cannot b e used to decide

w h i c h m a n is

2

See below, A p p e n d i x B .

3

Cf.

According 4

Jervell,

pp. 161-65;

to Thomas

Bertil

itself

meant.

Gartner,

The

Theology

of

the

Gospel

( 1 9 6 1 ) , p p . 2 4 9 - 5 1 . See b e l o w , C h a p . I V , B , 2.

A s in t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p

between

G o d a n d Israel d e s c r i b e d in H o s e a or

t h a t b e t w e e n C h r i s t a n d t h e C h u r c h in E p h e s i a n s , P h i l o t o o uses t h e c a t e g o ­ ries m a l e a n d f e m a l e t o d e s c r i b e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p B u t t h i s is s i m p l y a f u n c t i o n a l - a n a l o g i c a l

between

God and man.

u s e of these c a t e g o r i e s a n d i n d i ­

c a t e s n o t h i n g a b o u t t h e a c t u a l n a t u r e of G o d as s u c h . O n t h e m o t i f of d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n , see b e l o w , C h a p . I l l , E .

MAN'S LOWER NATURE

35

7]p£[i.oijcTav w v dTtOT£A£o-fj.a xal Ivspysiav yEyEVTjLiiv/jv xal xivoufjivrjv, 0au(j.d^£i. t £ xal dva90£yy£Tai 9do"xtL>v OTI OUX SCTTW dXXorpla auroij, dXXd o^oSpa olx£ia. T h u s t o interpret P h i l o ' s use of the categories male a n d female in the passages so far m e n t i o n e d as p r e d o m i n a n t l y m y t h o l o g i c a l in nature is t o d o v i o l e n c e t o the original c o n t e x t . I n d e e d it is possible, a l t h o u g h definite e v i d e n c e is lacking, that the expression oOV

appEv OUT£ OyjXu in O p . M u n d . 134 is written p o l e m i c a l l y w i t h

reference t o those w h o p i c t u r e d the d r a m a of creation in m y t h o l o g ­ ical-sexual t e r m s .

1

Against such P h i l o w o u l d argue that the m a l e -

female p o l a r i t y is p a r t of the m o r t a l , c o r r u p t i b l e w o r l d of o-to[j.a a n d ai
C . MAN'S LOWER NATURE: THE REALM OF MALE AND FEMALE 1. The n p c o T o ?

"Av6pto7roc. (De Opificio

T h e v i t a of the npchToq

136ff.)

Mundi

avOpcoTioc,, the first actual or empirical

man, serves t o e x p l a i n the origin of sin in m a n ' s existence. T h e narrative c o n t a i n s s o m e of the m o s t clearly m y t h o l o g i c a l material in P h i l o ' s writings. It relates h o w m a n , w h o w a s c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d , finds himself s u b j e c t t o d e a t h a n d c o r r u p t i o n a n d all m a n n e r of deceit a n d wickedness. T h a t P h i l o , in his i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the Genesis a c c o u n t of the c r e a t i o n a n d fall of m a n , is n o t s i m p l y speaking a b o u t w h a t h a p p e n e d in the distant past b u t a b o u t m a n as he is t o d a y , is clear from the c o n c l u s i o n of this section of O p . M u n d : " S u c h is the life of those w h o in the b e g i n n i n g are in e n j o y ­ ment

of i n n o c e n c e a n d s i m p l i c i t y of character,

vice to v i r t u e . "

but

later

prefer

e a r t h - b o r n dpx<]y£fY)q of the

entire

2

T h e TCPTOTOC, ixvGptoTroc;, the

race, was m o s t excellent (apurroc.) in each p a r t of his being. In b o t h b o d y a n d soul he greatly e x c e l l e d those w h o c a m e after h i m . H e w a s created b y G o d himself, a n d w a s t h u s truly xaXoc, xal dyaQo?, 3

i.e.

a perfect m a n , or m a n as he was m e a n t t o b e . This first

man

l i v e d a life of virtue a n d u n a l l o y e d bliss, attaining the v e r y limit 1

B r e h i e r , Les Idees,

p . 1 2 5 , refers t o t h e m y t h of t h e a n d r o g y n o u s

heavenly

m a n o c c u r r i n g in P h i l o " s o u s line f o r m e n e g a t i v e . " 2

3

O p . M u n d . 170.

Cf. C o l s o n a n d W h i t a k e r in Pinto

( L . C . L . ) I ( 1 9 2 9 ) , 108, n o t e a.

36

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

of h u m a n

happiness.

1

H e exercised d o m i n i o n o v e r the

created

w o r l d , a n d all things m o r t a l t r e m b l e d before h i m a n d were o b e d i e n t t o h i m . A s was appropriate for a king, for w h o m it is fitting " t o b e s t o w titles o n his several s u b o r d i n a t e s , " the first m a n , A d a m , chose n a m e s for e v e r y representative of the animal k i n g d o m , a task h e was able t o p e r f o r m b e c a u s e G o d h a d g r a n t e d h i m the p o w e r of reason. A l l of the n a m e s he chose were fully apposite, for his p o w e r of reason, being still u n a l l o y e d (AXPATOC), w a s able t o receive the impressions m a d e b y b o d i e s a n d o b j e c t s in their true

reality.

P h i l o clearly attributes n o b i l i t y a n d excellence t o the first

2

man

in the t o t a l i t y of his being a n d not just t o his rational soul. T h u s sense-perception, a c c o r d i n g t o P h i l o , under the rightful rulership of m i n d , a c c u r a t e l y p o r t r a y e d t o the m i n d of the first m a n the o b j e c t s of

trie sense-perceptible w o r l d .

3

Likewise the b o d y , w h i c h G o d

m o u l d e d out of the purest a n d m o s t s u b t l y refined material a v a i l ­ able, was created t o serve as " a sacred d w e l l i n g - p l a c e or t e m p l e 4

of the reasonable s o u l " (olxoc, TIC, TJ vewc, lepoc, ^ « x ^ Aoyixyjc,)- P h i l o thus pictures the first m a n as existing in a state of inner h a r m o n y a n d integrity, s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n a n d b o d y n o t fighting against

the

sovereign m i n d , b u t c o m p l e t e l y subservient t o it. O p . M u n d . 151-52 follows as a direct c o n t i n u a t i o n of this d e s c r i p ­ t i o n of the TipwToc av0p6)7IOC: But

since

no created thing

is

constant,

a n d m o r t a l t h i n g s n e c e s s a r i l y are l i a b l e t o c h a n g e s a n d r e v e r s e s , it c o u l d n o t b u t b e t h a t e v e n t h e first m a n s h o u l d e x p e r i e n c e s o m e ill f o r t u n e . A n d w o m a n b e c o m e s for h i m t h e b e g i n n i n g of

the

blameworthy

life. F o r so l o n g as h e w a s o n e , h e w a s l i k e t h e w o r l d a n d G o d in his singleness

and

r e c e i v e d in his s o u l t h e i m p r e s s i o n s m a d e b y t h e n a t u r e of e a c h , n o t a l l of t h e s e b u t as

many

as o n e

of

mortal

composition

c a n f i n d r o o m for. B u t w h e n w o m a n t o o was formed, beholding

a figure l i k e

his

o w n a n d a kindred form, he was gladdened b y t h e sight, a n d a p p r o a c h e d a n d g r e e t e d her. S h e , seeing n o living t h i n g m o r e like herself t h a n h e , is filled

with

happiness

a n d m o d e s t l y r e t u r n s his g r e e t i n g .

1

O p . M u n d . 144,

150.

2

O p . M u n d . 142, O p . M u n d . 139. O p . M u n d . 137.

148-50.

3

4

Love

MAN'S LOWER NATURE

37

s u p e r v e n e s , b r i n g s t o g e t h e r a n d fits one the divided

halves,

into

as it w e r e , of a

s i n g l e l i v i n g c r e a t u r e , a n d s e t s u p in e a c h of

t h e m a desire for f e l l o w s h i p

with

other with a view to the production t h e i r like. A n d t h i s desire b e g a t

the of

likewise

b o d i l y p l e a s u r e , w h i c h is t h e b e g i n n i n g of w r o n g s a n d v i o l a t i o n of l a w , a n d for t h e s a k e of w h i c h t h e y b r i n g o n

themselves

t h e life of m o r t a l i t y a n d w r e t c h e d n e s s lieu

of

that

of

immortality

and

in

bliss.

P h i l o here uses the t e r m sic. m o r e e x p l i c i t l y t o describe the inner integrity

a n d h a r m o n y of the

TipwToc avOpwTioc. T h e first

man

originally e x i s t e d in a state of u n i t y or oneness, a n d so l o n g as he r e m a i n e d in this state, he was like b o t h the w o r l d a n d G o d in his 1

singleness ((JLOVWO-IC). B u t this original state of oneness o r singleness was interrupted b y the appearance of w o m a n , w h o b e c a m e for the first m a n the ap^v) f?jc UTCOCITIOU £a>vjc. O p . M u n d . 151-52 indicates that the sin of the first m a n w a s the result of sexual desire. Desire (71660c) b e g a t b o d i l y pleasure (?) TWV o-WLidTwv v)Sov/)), a n d pleasure w a s the " b e g i n n i n g of w r o n g s a n d v i o l a t i o n of the l a w . " F o r its sake m a n k i n d e x c h a n g e d a life of i m m o r t a l i t y a n d bliss for one of m o r t a l i t y a n d w r e t c h e d n e s s . In turning t o the w o m a n a n d s u b m i t t i n g t o sexual desire, the

first

m a n b e c a m e i n v o l v e d in the created w o r l d in a n e w w a y , thus c h o o s i n g " t h a t fleeting a n d m o r t a l life, w h i c h is n o t life at all, b u t a p e r i o d of time (xpovoc) full of m i s e r y " ( O p . M u n d . 156). M a n s o u g h t for the fulfillment of his life in terms of the c r e a t e d w o r l d rather t h a n the Creator, a n d thus w a s d o o m e d t o d i e .

2

A p a r t f r o m O p . M u n d . 151-52, h o w e v e r , P h i l o d o e s n o t specifical­ ly m e n t i o n sexual desire as that w h i c h c a u s e d the first m a n t o sin, a n d in O p . M u n d . 156 ff. he treats the fall o f m a n in a m a n n e r m o r e like that of G e n e s i s : the serpent a p p r o a c h e s the w o m a n , d e c e i v e s her, a n d t h r o u g h her, the m a n as well. She is d e s c r i b e d as h a v i n g " a m i n d d e v o i d of steadfastness a n d firm f o u n d a t i o n , " as b e i n g responsible for the sin of the first 1

Cf. Q u a e s t . in G e n .

2

Som. 11:70.

3

Cf. D o d d , Bible

Cf.

3

and thus

man, inasmuch

as

1:42.

R o m . 1. and Greeks,

pp. 65-70, on

T h e basic idea underlying

t h e r o o t of t h i s v e r b ( o f t e n r e n d e r e d 7UO-TSUEIV in G r e e k ) is f i r m n e s s o r f i x i t y .

38

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

t e m p t a t i o n — b u t n o t specifically sexual t e m p t a t i o n — c a m e to h i m through her.

1

In our exegesis of O p . M u n d . 134 it w a s c o n c l u d e d t h a t the avOptoTtoc XOCT' eixova TOU 6eou was n o t bisexual or a n d r o g y n o u s , a n d that the yevixoc av0pw7roc in L e g . A l l . I I : 13 is t o b e u n d e r s t o o d as bisexual in terms of the philosophical f r a m e w o r k of p o t e n t i a l i t y (8ova[xic) a n d actuality (svepyeia), but not a n d r o g y n o u s in a distinct­ ly m y t h o l o g i c a l sense. O p . M u n d . 151-52, h o w e v e r , contains several features w h i c h suggest that in this particular passage Philo is m a k i n g use of a source t h a t definitely contains the m y t h of the androgynous

man.

Particularly

striking

is the

sentence:

sp«c

8' eTuyevofievoc xaOarcep evoc 'C.&ou SLTTO, T[XYj[iaTa Sieo-TYjxoTa cruvayaywv eiC raiiTov apjioTTeTai, TCOOOV eviSpuadfievoc exaTSpw TTJC rcpo? 6<XTepov

xoivwviac sic, TTJV TOU ouoiou yevecriv. T h i s sentence, b o t h in its e n ­ tirety a n d in its details (especially sptoc svoc C4>ou, 8ITTK T[XYj[xaTa), is s t r o n g l y reminiscent of P l a t o ' s m y t h of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n (Symposium

189C-193D), w h i c h Philo speaks of so scornfully in l

Vit. Cont. 63. T h e t e r m eic—[>-sxP ^

Y^P

^v —also suggests the

m y t h of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n . A s long as m a l e a n d female were part of o n e a n d the same being, t h e y were n o t t e m p t e d b y desire for e a c h other. T h e first m a n , a n d r o g y n o u s b y nature, was able t o g i v e himself fully t o G o d and w a s n o t distracted b y the attractions of the material w o r l d , chief of w h i c h is sexual desire (cf. L e g . All. I I : 7 4 , Spec. L e g . I.'9, Quaest. in Gen. Ill'.48). 2. Man's Present

2

Situation

a. M a n S y m b o l i z e s

Nouc, W o m a n

AIO-OYJO-IC.

In a n u m b e r of instances Philo argues that t o insist o n a literal

1

N o n e t h e l e s s , e v e n in O p . M u n d . 1 5 3 ff. t h e r e are a n u m b e r of

references

t h a t s u g g e s t t h a t P h i l o m a y still h a v e b e e n t h i n k i n g of s e x u a l desire as t h a t w h i c h c a u s e d t h e first m a n t o sin. T h u s , for e x a m p l e , his reference t o s e x u a l i n t e r c o u r s e in O p . M u n d .

161 is n o t i c e a b l y a b r u p t , s u g g e s t i n g

that he

had

this t h e m e in m i n d in t h e p r e c e d i n g p a r a g r a p h s as well, a n d t h a t i t is m a i n l y in reference t o t h i s m o t i f t h a t h e i n t e r p r e t s t h e G e n e s i s a c c o u n t of t h e fall. L i k e w i s e in O p . M u n d .

167, although admittedly,

in p a r t a t least,

simply

f o l l o w i n g the o r d e r of t h e G e n e s i s n a r r a t i v e , P h i l o is a g a i n s o m e w h a t a b r u p t in his reference t o t h e b i r t h p a n g s of t h e w o m a n as p a r t of t h e " w a g e s p a i d by

p l e a s u r e . " F u r t h e r m o r e , it w o u l d a p p e a r p r o b a b l e t h a t w h e n h e

t o b e c o m i n g "slaves t o a p a s s i o n g r i e v o u s a n d h a r d t o h e a l " h e h a s

refers sexual

desire in m i n d , for t h i s is t h e m a n n e r in w h i c h h e f r e q u e n t l y refers t o this p a r t i c u l a r p a s s i o n (cf. L e g . A l l . 1 1 : 7 4 , S p e c . L e g . 1 : 9 , Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 1 1 : 4 8 ) . 2

S e e b e l o w , A p p e n d i x D , for f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n

of P h i l o ' s

(a) use of t h e

MAN'S LOWER NATURE

39

interpretation of certain parts of the creation narrative is n o t o n l y t o miss the real p o i n t of the passage in question and t o e x h i b i t c o n s i d e r a b l e intellectual n a i v e t e , b u t m a y e v e n b e an act of great i m p i e t y , insofar as this m a y i n v o l v e attributing certain

unworthy

1

actions to G o d . P h i l o ' s one great interest in the Genesis a c c o u n t of the creation a n d fall of m a n is in terms of w h a t

this material

has t o s a y a b o u t c o n t e m p o r a r y m a n . T h e narratives are SsiyfiaTa TUTCCOV ITC' dXXyjyopiav TcapaxaXoDvTa x a T a T<X? oV UTCOVOIWV

(Op.

OLKOBOGSIC,

M u n d . 1 5 7 ) . I n t e r p r e t e d allegorically, the s t o r y of the

fall

tells not just of the fall of the first m a n b u t of the origin of sin in the life of E v e r y m a n . T h u s in O p . M u n d . 157 Philo explains t h a t the serpent is a s y m b o l of YJSOVY), a n d in 165 he states that the m a n c o r r e s p o n d s t o vouc a n d the w o m a n t o aio-6y)o-i?. In L e g . All. I I : 19, after stating t h a t the a c c o u n t of w o m a n ' s creation o u t of the side of m a n is, w h e n t a k e n literally, of the nature of a m y t h , on

2

Philo goes

to speak of the t w o parts of the soul, vouc and ai
c o n c l u d e s with

the

statement

that

Moses'

"immediate

and

concern

is just this, t o i n d i c a t e the origin of a c t i v e s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n . " was fitting,

P h i l o maintains, " t h a t the creation of m i n d

It

should

be f o l l o w e d i m m e d i a t e l y b y that of sense-perception, t o b e a helper a n d ally t o i t " (Leg. All. 1 1 : 2 4 ) . A g a i n in L e g . A l l . I I : 7 3 w e find the same p a t t e r n : G o d first m a d e the m i n d , i.e. the m a n , t h e n sense-perception, the w o m a n . B u t w e are n o t t o t h i n k of these as h a v i n g b e e n created at different times, for "it is p o t e n t i a l l y only, as o b j e c t s of t h o u g h t , that t h e y differ in a g e ; b u t in actual time t h e y are equal in a g e " (SUVOCLISI S S VC

S'KJVJ

auTwv at YjXixiai. Stdcpopoi vooiifisvai. JIOVOV, XP° !

Sense-perception

)

lo-yjXixe?).

and m i n d are c o m p o n e n t parts of m a n ' s

soul.

O n l y in the sense that vou? was created t o rule o v e r odaQ-qaiq a n d thus in order of i m p o r t a n c e l o g i c a l l y p r e c e d e s aio-UYjcnc c a n it b e said t o b e older. This use of m a n to s y m b o l i z e vouc a n d w o m a n al'o-Orjo-ic is f o u n d throughout

Philo's writings a n d is the m a i n d e v i c e b y w h i c h he

relates the creation narratives t o m a n ' s present s i t u a t i o n .

3

a n d r o g y n o u s m a n motif, a n d (b) u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e c r e a t i o n of woman. Cf. L e g . A l l . 1 : 4 3 . See also O p . M u n d . 1 5 4 . B u t see C h a p . I , B , 4 o n Philo's u s e of t h e t e r m " m y t h . " See, e.g., L e g . A l l . 1 1 1 : 4 9 ; P o s t . C . 1 7 7 ; M i g r . A b r . 1 0 0 ; F u g . 1 8 8 ; S o m . 1 : 2 4 6 ; Q u a e s t . in G e n . L 2 5 , 37, 4 5 - 4 9 , 5 2 ; 1 1 : 4 9 ; 1 1 1 : 3 1

2

3

40

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

b. P h i l o ' s to

Use of F e m a l e

his E v a l u a t i o n

T e r m i n o l o g y in

of Man's

P h i l o ' s use of w o m a n t o s y m b o l i z e creation narratives b u t

Irrational aio-Gyjtnc

Relationship Soul

is n o t l i m i t e d t o the

is f o u n d in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h other

Old

T e s t a m e n t passages as well. Of special interest here, is t h a t a definite, a l t h o u g h b y n o m e a n s uniform, correlation exists b e t w e e n his use of female t e r m i n o l o g y a n d his e v a l u a t i o n of m a n ' s irrational soul, particularly

al'o-Gyjcnc.

T h e relationship m a y b e stated in this w a y :

F e m a l e t e r m i n o l o g y o c c u r s m o r e frequently a n d receives n o t i c e a b l y greater emphasis in those instances where P h i l o describes m a n ' s irrational soul in s t r o n g l y p e j o r a t i v e terms t h a n in passages where, h e evaluates the irrational soul in neutral or positive t e r m s .

1

Indeed,

it is precisely b y e x p l o i t i n g the female t e r m i n o l o g y of the B i b l i c a l text

that

Philo most

clearly expresses his d e p r e c i a t i o n of

the

irrational soul a n d of the perishible realm of creation. This p e j o r a t i v e use of female t e r m i n o l o g y t o describe irrational soul a n d the created w o r l d is f o u n d t h r o u g h o u t

man's Philo's

writings. It is particularly frequent in L e g . A l l . a n d Quaest. in Gen. H i s depreciation of actual w o m a n a n d of female s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n are

frequently

so closely intertwined

that

n o clear

separation

b e t w e e n the t w o can b e m a d e . P h i l o ' s usual practice is t o s p e a k disparagingly of actual w o m a n o n the basis of the literal m e a n i n g of a t e x t a n d then t o allegorize the passage in t e r m s of sensep e r c e p t i o n . I n s o m e instances, h o w e v e r , his p e j o r a t i v e references t o the female are c o n f i n e d t o actual w o m a n , a n d in other cases refer o n l y t o sense-perception. B u t n o w h e r e are these t w o foci really far apart, for it is precisely P h i l o ' s d e p r e c i a t i o n of w o m a n that per­ mits h i m t o use her as a s y m b o l of sense-perception, and, o n the other h a n d ,

his castigation

of female sense-perception a n d

the

material w o r l d w h i c h leads in turn t o a further d e v a l u a t i o n of w o m a n . It is certainly n o t c o i n c i d e n t a l that h e emphasizes

the

female nature of sense-perception p r e d o m i n a n t l y in t h o s e instances where his e v a l u a t i o n

of sense-perception is d e c i d e d l y n e g a t i v e .

T h e natural weakness a n d susceptibility of w o m a n t o t e m p t a t i o n has already b e e n n o t e d in P h i l o ' s a c c o u n t of the fall of the avSpcuTtoc.

1

See

towards 2

Cf.

2

A g a i n a n d again he returns t o this t h e m e

Appendix man's I Tim.

E

for

additional

irrational

2:14,

I Pet.

soul.

3:7.

material

on

Philo's

Ttpcuxoc

throughout

varying

attitude

MAN'S LOWER NATURE

41

his writings. It is the w o m a n ' s nature t o b e d e c e i v e d rather t h a n t o reflect d e e p l y .

1

" I t w a s the m o r e imperfect and i g n o b l e element,

the female, that m a d e a b e g i n n i n g of transgression a n d lawlessness, while the m a l e m a d e the b e g i n n i n g of r e v e r e n c e a n d m o d e s t y a n d 2

all g o o d , since he w a s better a n d m o r e p e r f e c t . "

Sinning results

3

f r o m weakness, a n d it is the female w h o is w e a k . W o m a n was " t h e b e g i n n i n g of e v i l " a n d led the m a n i n t o " a life of v i l e n e s s . "

4

In

answer t o the question w h y it was the w o m a n w h o first ate of the fruit

of the tree a n d o n l y afterwards

the m a n

(Gen. 3:6),

Philo

writes t h a t " a c c o r d i n g t o the literal m e a n i n g the p r i o r i t y (of the w o m a n ) is m e n t i o n e d with emphasis. F o r it was fitting t h a t m a n s h o u l d rule o v e r i m m o r t a l i t y a n d e v e r y t h i n g g o o d , b u t w o m a n o v e r death a n d e v e r y t h i n g v i l e . " W i t h great

5

f r e q u e n c y Philo associates the w o m e n of v a r i o u s

Scriptural t e x t s w i t h particular evils a n d vices. T h u s the t w o w i v e s of L a m e c h (Gen. 4) are allegorized as " t w o ill-judging j u d g m e n t s . "

6

In discussing w h e r e Cain g o t his wife (Gen. 4 : 1 7 ) , P h i l o m a i n t a i n s that the t e r m understanding."

" w i f e " stands for " t h e o p i n i o n h e l d b y a godless 7

T h e wife of P o t i p h a r , w h o bids J o s e p h lie w i t h

her a n d e n j o y her e m b r a c e s (Gen. 39), is allegorized in S o m . I I : 106 as b o d i l y pleasure. T h e r e are a considerable n u m b e r of passages w h e r e P h i l o s i m p l y affirms the inferiority of the female t o the m a l e . T h e m a l e is m o r e 8

c o m p l e t e t h a n the female, the m a n superior t o the w o m a n . I n d e e d , the female is n o t h i n g else t h a n an imperfect m a l e . falls far short masculine.

10

9

T h e feminine

of the p r e - e m i n e n c e w h i c h a l w a y s b e l o n g s t o the

In the case of v o t i v e offerings, w h e n o n e has p l e d g e d

himself as an offering, a m a n is t o b e assessed at 200 a w o m a n at o n l y 1 2 0 .

11

drachmas,

In s u c c e e d i n g t o p r o p e r t y , a m a n is t o t a k e

p r e c e d e n c e o v e r a w o m a n , just as he takes p r e c e d e n c e o v e r her in

1

Quaest.

in G e n .

2

Quaest.

in G e n . 1 : 4 3 .

3

Quaest.

in G e n . 1 1 1 : 3 -

4

Quaest.

in

5

Quaest.

in G e n . 1 : 3 7 .

6

7

Gen. 1:45.

Det. Pot. Ins. Post.

1:46.

50.

C . 34.

8

Spec. L e g . 1:200-201.

9

Q u a e s t . in E x . I : 7, Q u a e s t . in G e n .

1 0

F u g . 5 1 ; see a l s o Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 : 2 7 .

1 1

S p e c . L e g . 1 1 : 3 3 - Cf. L e v . 2 7 : 1 - 8 .

1:25.

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN

42 1

nature.

N o t unreasonably, argues P h i l o , does the L a w d e n y w i v e s

a n d virgins full c o n t r o l o v e r their v o w s a n d permit these t o b e anulled b y h u s b a n d s a n d fathers should t h e y d i s a p p r o v e of t h e m , for

the latter are still y o u n g a n d i n e x p e r i e n c e d a n d the

b e c a u s e of their irresponsibility (soyepzia.), is n o t t o their h u s b a n d ' s

advantage.

former,

frequently swear w h a t

2

T h r o u g h o u t his writings P h i l o associates a great variety of evils with the female, a n d uses female t e r m i n o l o g y in close c o n j u n c t i o n with

such 3

enslaved; 5

slavish;

passions;

highly

sluggish; 7

opinions;

vice, 1 0

pejorative

unmanly, 6

expressions

nerveless

as

lifeless,

diseased,

(xarsayw?), effeminate;

4

mean,

a c c u s t o m e d t o be d e c e i v e d , akin to

passion;

8

injustice

of

the

bestial

multitudes;

9

vain

softness, death, e v e r y t h i n g vile, the m o r e i m p e r f e c t a n d

ignoble element, transgressions a n d lawlessness, beginning of evil, d e p r a v i t y , night, darkness, a m i x e d m a s s ; a knave. As

1 1

takes pleasure in b e i n g

1 2

already n o t e d , P h i l o ' s disparaging c o m m e n t s a b o u t

actual

w o m a n usually serve m a i n l y as a k i n d of preface to his subsequent remarks

a b o u t the female c r e a t e d w o r l d , particularly

sense-per­

c e p t i o n . F o r e x a m p l e , allegorizing o n the basis of the

Genesis

a c c o u n t of the fall of m a n , Philo p o i n t s o u t in O p . M u n d . 165-66 that pleasure (the serpent) is n o t able t o d e c e i v e m i n d (the m a n ) directly,

but

o n l y b y means

of sense-perception

(the

woman).

A l w a y s desiring t o meet w i t h a lover, pleasure seeks for panders (fj.ao-Tpo7to[) t o aid her in this quest. O n c e she has ensnared

the

senses, t h r o u g h their p r o c u r e m e n t she is easily able t o bring the m i n d under her c o n t r o l . W h e n P h i l o states that w o m a n ' s nature is t o b e d e c e i v e d rather than to reflect d e e p l y , he i m m e d i a t e l y adds the " d e e p e r m e a n i n g , " n a m e l y that the senses are d e l u d e d b y the o b j e c t s of sense-per1

2

Spec. L e g . I I : 124. S e e N u m . 2 7 : 8 - 1 1 . S p e c . L e g . 1 1 : 2 4 . Cf. N u m . 3 0 : 4 ff.

3

Leg. All.

4

Gig.

Cf. V i t . M o s . I I :243 ft.

11:97.

4.

5

Agric. 73.

6

Abr.

7

Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 : 3 3 ,

8

Sacr. A . C. 103.

9

Gig.

150. I V : 15.

5. 128.

1 0

Fug.

1 1

Q u a e s t . in G e n . I-.33, 37, 43, 45, 9 2 ;

1 2

Agric. 73.

11:14.

MAN'S LOWER NATURE

43

c e p t i o n a n d then pass on this infection to the sovereign m i n d .

1

W h e r e a s the male element in the soul is directed t o w a r d s G o d , the female p a r t of the soul " c l i n g s to all that is b o r n a n d

perishes,

stretching out its faculties like a h a n d t o c a t c h b l i n d l y at c o m e s its w a y . "

what

2

Therefore, one s h o u l d n o t hearken to the w i c k e d senses, P h i l o argues, for like such evil w o m e n as P o t i p h a r ' s wife (Gen. 3 9 : 1 ff.) a n d the Midianite w o m a n w h o m Phinehas pierced w i t h his spear (Num.

25:7-8), t h e y h a v e b r o u g h t an u n t o l d host of mischiefs

u p o n the m i n d . F u n c t i o n i n g as an unruly m o b , t h e y h a v e set off a great c o n f l a g r a t i o n against the m i n d .

3

W h e n the superior

mind

cleaves t o a n d b e c o m e s o n e with sense-perception, "it resolves itself into the inferior order of the flesh, into sense-perception, the m o v i n g cause of the p a s s i o n s . "

1

Philo closely associates s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n

with the b l o o d - s o u l (rj evai[i,o; tyuxt}), the life principle in animals, and claims that this irrational part of m a n has kinship w i t h m a t e r n a l and female line b u t has n o part in the m a l e l i n e .

5

the No

one w h o desires the life of the b l o o d c a n b e c o m e an heir of d i v i n e things. and

6

Man is to leave b e h i n d feminine, sense-perceptible passion,

to g i v e forth as incense "the

fortitude."

m a n l y reasoning s c h o o l e d

in

7

• Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 : 4 6 . Cf. 1 : 3 3 . 2

S p e c . L e g . l i t : 1 7 S . A l t h o u g h Phik> a r g u e s in a n u m b e r of p a s s a g e s t h a t

k n o w l e d g e is d e p e n d e n t other

instances

he

on sense-perception

rules

out

the

(see b e l o w , A p p e n d i x E ) , in

cooperation

of t h e

senses

in

obtaining

k n o w l e d g e . Cf. e s p e c i a l l y Cher. 4 0 - 4 1 . S e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n is b y n a t u r e b l i n d , b e i n g irrational. I t is t h e m i n d t h a t c o n f e r s s i g h t body's

eyes

survey

only

the

surface

of

things

(Leg. A l l . I l l : 108). T h e and

require the

external

a s s i s t a n c e of light, w h e r e a s t h e m i n d p e n e t r a t e s t o t h e v e r y h e a r t of m a t e r i a l t h i n g s , o b s e r v i n g their i n n e r q u a l i t i e s . M o r e i m p o r t a n t , h o w e v e r , t h e m i n d is a l s o a b l e t o g r a s p t h e n a t u r e of i m m a t e r i a l r e a l i t y , impossible

for

sense-perception

to

do

(Virt.

something

totally

11-12).

A l t h o u g h h e u s u a l l y d o e s n o t e x p l i c i t l y m a k e this d i s t i n c t i o n ,

it is clear

t h a t P h i l o is referring to t w o k i n d s of k n o w l e d g e , t h a t of t h e m a t e r i a l w o r l d and

t h a t of t h e i n c o r p o r a l i d e a s a n d of G o d ( Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 1 1 : 3 ) .

3

L e g . A l l . I l l : 234-43.

4

Leg. All. I I : o .

5

Rer. D i v . H e r . 60-61. R e r . D i v . H e r . 63-64.

5

6

7

L e g . A l l . I l l : 1 1 . T h e c o m b i n a t i o n aia9rjT6v 7rd0o:; is n o t f o u n d e l s e w h e r e

in P h i l o . C o h n , in L . C o h n , e t al., Die deutscher

Ubersetzung,

III

Werke

( 1 9 1 9 ) , p . 89,

von Philos

von Alexandria

in

n o t e 4, c o n j e c t u r e s t h a t cdo-0r|T6v

s h o u l d b e r e p l a c e d b y (X'ICTOTJOIV x a i , a r e a d i n g t h a t w o u l d fit P h i l o ' s g e n e r a l u s a g e far b e t t e r .

44

PHILO'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF MAN It is clear, then, t h a t Philo extensively e x p l o i t s female

termi­

n o l o g y as a v e h i c l e for expressing his wide-spread depreciation of the created w o r l d . A l t h o u g h in s o m e parts of his writings he speaks m o s t a p p r e c i a t i v e l y of the g o o d things of creation, at other times he sees all c o n t a c t with the created w o r l d as a powerful hindrance t o the life of virtue. T h e female, sense-perceptible, created w o r l d stands as a constant threat to m a n ' s existence.

CHAPTER

THE

THREE

CATEGORIES MALE A N D FEMALE IN RELATIONSHIP

TO SOTERIOLOGY

AND PROPHETIC

INSPIRATION

P u t v e r y simply, m a n realizes his true nature b y forsaking the transient, ephemeral, material w o r l d , g i v i n g himself w h o l l y t o the quest for virtue, a n d o p e n i n g himself c o m p l e t e l y t o receive the grace of G o d . T h e nature of this flight from the realm of the c r e a t e d to that of the divine o c c u p i e s a central place in Philo's writings, a n d it is within this c o n t e x t that s o m e of the m o s t striking occurrences of the categories male a n d female are t o b e found. I n d e e d , as will b e seen, Philo uses the categories m a l e and female in describing progress in the pursuit a n d k n o w l e d g e of G o d n o t o n l y frequently but

in a m a n n e r so integrally c o n n e c t e d with the basic structure

o f his t h o u g h t t h a t their e m p l o y m e n t c a n n o t b e accidental or arbitrary.

1

A. BECOMING MALE In v i e w of P h i l o ' s s t r o n g l y disparaging attitude t o w a r d s w o m a n and the female as well as his glorification of the male, b u t m o r e particularly in the light of his identification of the female w i t h sense-perception a n d the material w o r l d , a n d the male with the rational soul, it is n o t surprising t o find that progress in the m o r a l and

religious life i n v o l v e s forsaking the realm of the

female.

A l t h o u g h P h i l o does n o t himself use the e x a c t expression, this process m i g h t well b e described b y the phrase " b e c o m i n g m a l e . "

2

1

T h e r e a d e r is referred e s p e c i a l l y t o V o l k e r , Fortschritt, for a m o r e g e n e r a l s u r v e y of P h i l o ' s t e a c h i n g s o n p r o g r e s s in t h e m o r a l a n d religious life. 2

T h e m a i n d i v i s i o n s in this c h a p t e r d o n o t reflect v a r i o u s s t a g e s or l e v e l s of d e v e l o p m e n t in t h e religious life. T h e y are s i m p l y a f o r m a l m e a n s of d e s c r i b i n g v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of a single p r o c e s s a n d i n e v i t a b l y r e s u l t in a c e r t a i n artificiality. M o s t of w h a t P h i l o s a y s a b o u t m a n ' s g r o w t h in v i r t u e a n d p i e t y is n o t in s y s t e m a t i c f o r m b u t is s c a t t e r e d t h r o u g h o u t his w r i t i n g s , s o m e of w h i c h , h o w e v e r , for e x a m p l e , R e r . D i v . H e r . , d e a l m a i n l y w i t h t h i s s u b j e c t . I t is e a s y t o " d i s c o v e r " a k i n d of u n i t y in P h i l o , or, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , e x a m p l e s of i n c o n s i s t e n c y , t h a t are n o t r e a l l y p r e s e n t in t h e w r i t i n g s t h e m s e l v e s . P h i l o f r e q u e n t l y a d o p t s d i f f e r e n t m e t h o d s of a r g u m e n t a t i o n or

4

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

6

This motif is seen m o s t clearly in Quaest. in E x . 1 : 8 and

in

Quaest. in Gen. I I : 4 9 . In Quaest. in E x . 1 : 8 Philo offers an inter­ pretation of E x . 1 2 : 5 , where G o d c o m m a n d s that a l a m b , a male and a year o l d , b e taken f r o m a m o n g the sheep or goats for the Passover meal. W h y is a sheep chosen ? Symbolically, as I have said, it indicates perfect progress, and at the same time the male. For progress is indeed nothing else than the giving up of the female gender b y changing into the male, since the female gender is material, passive, corporeal and sense-perceptible, while the male is active, rational, incorporeal and more akin to mind and thought. This passage m u s t b e interpreted in terms of the usual m e a n i n g Philo gives t o the Passover. T h r o u g h o u t his writings, wherever he takes time to explain the deeper, underlying, i.e. the allegorical, meaning of this feast, he interprets it as a "crossing o v e r " from the realm of the material, sense-perceptible w o r l d t o that of m i n d and ultimately to G o d himself. It especially signifies the forsaking of the b o d y and the passions, w h i c h are s y m b o l i z e d b y the land of E g y p t .

1

This is the interpretation of the Passover w h i c h is also found in the c o n t e x t of Quaest. in E x . 1 : 8 ;

2

it p r o v i d e s one of the

main

clues for the exegesis of the passage. Quaest. in E x . l:y

sheds further light o n the m e a n i n g of what I

h a v e called b e c o m i n g male. In answer t o the question w h y Moses c o m m a n d s a "perfect male sheep of one y e a r " to be taken for the Passover, Philo asserts that a c c o r d i n g t o "the deeper

meaning,

progress t o w a r d p i e t y and w o r t h y holiness ought to be b o t h male and of a year's ( d u r a t i o n ) . " A s in 1 : 8 , so also here, the sheep is taken t o s y m b o l i z e progress, an interpretation w h i c h Philo

elsewhere

3

holds is suggested b y the term Ttp6(3ocTov itself. " A year's ( d u r a t i o n ) " sets of a r g u m e n t s for d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s a m e o r s i m i l a r p r o b l e m s . T h e d e t a i l s of a n y o n e set of a r g u m e n t s , a l t h o u g h n o t a l w a y s c o m p l e t e l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h o s e of a n o t h e r , n o n e t h e l e s s i n t e r n a l l y u s u a l l y fit t o g e t h e r quite convincingly. 1

Cf. e s p e c i a l l y C o n g r . 106. See also S p e c . L e g . 1 1 : 1 4 7 ; S a c r . A . C . 6 3 ; M i g r . A b r . 25 ; V i t . M o s . I I : 2 2 4 ; L e g . A l l . I l l : 94, 165 ; R e r . D i v . H e r . 1 9 2 , 255. 2

Cf. e s p e c i a l l y Q u a e s t . in E x . 1 : 2 , 4. I n 1 : 4 P h i l o w r i t e s t h a t t h e d e e p e r s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e P a s s o v e r is r e a l i z e d w h e n s o u l s " b e g i n t o g i v e u p t h e p u r s u i t s of y o u t h a n d t h e i r terrible disorder a n d . . . c h a n g e to a b e t t e r a n d o l d e r s t a t e , " a n d also w h e n there is a " p a s s i n g o v e r " f r o m t h e b o d y , t h e senses, a n d e v e n f r o m one's o w n t h o u g h t s . 3

See Sacr. A . C . 1 1 2 , C o n g r . 106, L e g . A l l . I l l : 1 6 5 , Q u a e s t . in E x . 1 : 3 . P h i l o a p p a r e n t l y ( a n d p r o b a b l y c o r r e c t l y ) d e r i v e s rcp6(3aTOv f r o m npoficdveiv,

BECOMING MALE

47

signifies completeness, for " t h e year . . . holds e v e r y t h i n g c o n t a i n e d within itself"

(1:8), a fact, P h i l o argues in Spec. L e g . I V : 2 3 5 ,

w h i c h is clear from the v e r y t e r m eviauroc.

1

It is quite clear, then, especially in v i e w of Philo's

invariable

interpretation of the " d e e p e r m e a n i n g " of the Passover, that t o b e c o m e male m e a n s essentially t o forsake the material, sense-per­ ceptible realm of the female in favor of the sphere of the m i n d a n d that w h i c h is divine. This interpretation is borne o u t b y Quaest. in Gen. 1 1 : 4 9 ,

the

s e c o n d m a i n passage where the m o t i f of b e c o m i n g male o c c u r s . Philo here c o m m e n t s o n the manner in which N o a h and his wife, a n d his sons and his son's wives, went in and out of the ark. After a c c o u n t i n g for the literal w o r d i n g of the text (Gen. 8:18), particular­ ly w h y it w a s that o n entering the ark m e n went in with m e n and women

with

together,

2

women, but

o n leaving it m e n

and

w o m e n were

P h i l o p r o c e e d s to explain the deeper meaning,

which

pertains t o the soul's washing off a n d cleansing its sins. W h e n the time for such cleansing arrives, " m a n should join w i t h m a n , (that is) the sovereign m i n d like a father s h o u l d j o i n with its

particular

t h e b a s i c m e a n i n g of w h i c h — t o s t e p f o r w a r d , t o a d v a n c e — i s n o t far f r o m t h a t of npoxonrj.

llpoPorrov w a s o r i g i n a l l y u s e d of " s m a l l c a t t l e , s h e e p

g o a t s , w h i c h in p r i m i t i v e m i x e d h e r d s walk in front animals" 'O by

(Liddell-Scott,

and

(TTpo^aivei) of t h e larger

s.v.).

7ipox6irTcov, t h e m a n w h o is m a k i n g p r o g r e s s , is f r e q u e n t l y

contrasted

P h i l o w i t h 6 tpauXoc or 6 (piXrjSovoc, o n the o n e h a n d , a n d 6 TEXEIO? or 0

oof6q,

o n t h e o t h e r . T h e g o a l of 6 rcpoxoreTcov (also 6 daxrjTrji;) is u s u a l l y d e ­

s c r i b e d as u.ETpLco7ra0Eicc in c o n t r a s t to t h e p e r f e c t m a n ' s g o a l of f r e e d o m f r o m the p a s s i o n s exemplified

by

(dirdOEia). T h e m a n of p r o g r e s s , as

Abraham and

Jacob,

has

need

of

complete frequently

daxvjcH!; a n d

u.d6rjaic;,

w h e r e a s t h e p e r f e c t m a n , as e x e m p l i f i e d b y I s a a c a n d also M o s e s , is TEXEIOI; cpiicJEo. I t is n o t p o s s i b l e to reconcile c o m p l e t e l y t h e v a r i o u s w a y s in

which

P h i l o allegorizes t h e P a t r i a r c h s . T h u s , for e x a m p l e , w h e r e a s ao-xvjatc;, u.d6rjo-!.c;, and

cpuCTt?, r e p r e s e n t e d

respectively

by Jacob, Abraham,

and Isaac,

often

refer to t h r e e d i f f e r e n t t y p e s of m e n , in o t h e r i n s t a n c e s t h e y are p r e s e n t e d as t h r e e c h a r a c t e r traits of e v e r y m a n . Cf. t h e e x t e n s i v e references

to the Greek philosophical

discussion,

with

b a c k g r o u n d as well as t o P h i l o ,

in

1

Cf. P l a t o , Cratylus

2

T h e s e a c t i o n s m a d e it clear t h a t it w a s r i g h t for h u s b a n d s a n d w i v e s

to

V o l k e r , Fortschritt,

pp.

154-350. 410 D .

a b s t a i n f r o m s e x u a l i n t e r c o u r s e w h i l e in t h e a r k b u t w e r e t o c o m e t o g e t h e r again

and

"sow

s e e d in a c c o r d a n c e

" A f t e r so g r e a t a d e s t r u c t i o n

with

nature" upon leaving

the

of all t h o s e w h o w e r e o n e a r t h " it w a s

ark. not

fitting o r l a w f u l to i n d u l g e in l u x u r y , b u t w a s o n t h e c o n t r a r y a p p r o p r i a t e "to s y m p a t h i z e w i t h w r e t c h e d h u m a n i t y , as b e i n g kin to it" ( Q u a e s t . in G e n . II: 9). 4

8

4

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

t h o u g h t s as w i t h its sons, but

(not j o i n ) a n y of the female sex,

(that is) w h a t b e l o n g s to sense." T h i s t i m e of cleansing is a time of war, P h i l o claims, " i n w h i c h o n e m u s t separate o n e ' s ranks a n d w a t c h out lest t h e y b e m i x e d u p a n d bring a b o u t defeat instead of v i c t o r y . " Philo c o n c l u d e s : But when just the right time has come for the cleansing and there is a drying up of all ignorance and of all that which is able to d o harm, then it is fitting and proper for it [the soul] to bring together those (elements) which have been divided and separated, not that the masculine thoughts may be made womanish, and relaxed b y softness, but that the female element, the senses, m a y be made manly b y following masculine thoughts and b y receiving from them seed for procreation, that it m a y perceive (things) with wisdom, prudence, justice and courage, in sum, with virtue. T h e r e c a n b e little d o u b t , then, a b o u t the meaning of b e c o m i n g m a l e in P h i l o ' s writings. This m o t i f is directly related t o P h i l o ' s practice of associating the sense-perceptible sphere w i t h w o m a n a n d the female, whereas the realm of the rational soul is m a l e a n d is s y m b o l i z e d b y the m a n . T o forsake the former sphere a n d turn t o the latter is t o b e c o m e male, a n d this is perfect p r o g r e s s . In

Chapter

II

it was c o n c l u d e d that

1

Philo understands

the

higher nature of m a n t o b e asexual, whereas m a n ' s l o w e r nature is i n v o l v e d in the male-female p o l a r i t y . T h e description of the m a n c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d as OUT' appev OUTS OrjAu was thus seen to constitute a denial of his participation in the sphere of sexuality. W h e n Philo refers t o the sense-perceptible w o r l d as female a n d the realm of m i n d as male, h o w e v e r , it is clear that he is using the categories m a l e a n d female quite differently. A c c o r d i n g t o this second

1

usage,

female

refers

to

the material,

Cf. a l s o Q u a e s t . in G e n . I I : 1 2 , D e t .

On

the

whole

Philo's

statements

Pot.

about

Ins.

sense-perceptible

28.

becoming

male

and

his

more

g e n e r a l u s e of w h a t w e m i g h t call m a l e t e r m i n o l o g y w o u l d a p p e a r t o fit in p a r t i c u l a r l y well w i t h t h o s e p a s s a g e s in his w r i t i n g s w h e r e h e p o r t r a y s t h e ao

J

m i n d as a7r6aTC<xa|j.a Oetov, TCveijjj.a Octov, or dmauY "( -

a

T

[ ° u Xoyou Gelou], for in

t h e s e i n s t a n c e s t h e m i n d is u n a m b i g u o u s l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e d i v i n e ,

and

t h u s t o m o v e f r o m t h e s p h e r e of f e m a l e od'aGrjaii; t o t h a t of m a l e voo? w o u l d m o s t c l e a r l y refer t o t h e t r a n s i t i o n f r o m t h a t w h i c h is h u m a n t o t h a t is

divine.

An

actual

examination

of

Philo's

writings,

however,

which reveals

n o p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n his use of m a l e t e r m i n o l o g y or t h e m o t i f of b e c o m i n g m a l e a n d t h o s e p a s s a g e s w h e r e h e d e s c r i b e s t h e m i n d as fX7t6cmao-u.a Geiov or TCveOu,a GELOV. I n d e e d , it is s o m e w h a t of a surprise t o d i s c o v e r o n t h e w h o l e , m a l e t e r m i n o l o g y is n o t i c e a b l y

absent from these

that,

passages.

BECOMING ONE realm,

w h i c h includes the

male-female

49 polarity,

whereas

male

refers t o that realm w h i c h is intrinsically asexual, i.e. the sphere of nous, the L o g o s , a n d u l t i m a t e l y G o d himself. It is in a c c o r d w i t h this s e c o n d usage that Philo is able t o describe G o d as m a l e in F u g . 51.

B . BECOMING ONE A s e c o n d w a y in w h i c h Philo describes the forsaking of the sphere of sense-perception, pleasure, a n d the b o d y , the r e a l m of the female, is in terms of changing f r o m d u a l i t y to unity. This is a m o v e m e n t w h i c h Philo d o e s n o t n a m e as such, b u t w h i c h w e m i g h t

aptly

refer to as " b e c o m i n g o n e . " W e h a v e already n o t e d P h i l o ' s emphasis 1

o n the oneness of G o d a n d the indivisibility of the rational s o u l . God

knows no mixture but

is in his isolation a u n i t y

(;j.6vac).

Similarly the rational soul is o n e . I n d e e d , in several passages, w e saw

that P h i l o describes the m i n d of m a n as a divine

fragment

(a7r6CT7raCTiu.a Osiov). " F o r n o part of that w h i c h is d i v i n e cuts itself off a n d b e c o m e s separate," itself."

2

he maintains,

" b u t does b u t

extend

W e also saw that the TipwToc avOpwTioc w a s originally o n e

(sic), b u t that he s u b s e q u e n t l y t u r n e d t o w a r d s the sense-perceptible w o r l d , thus i n v o l v i n g himself in d u a l i t y a n d division. It w a s the w o m a n w h o b e c a m e for h i m the b e g i n n i n g of the b l a m e w o r t h y l i f e . To

Philo it is clear that those w h o l o o k t o w a r d s the

3

created

w o r l d rather than t o w a r d s G o d the Creator find o n l y misery a n d travail.

4

T h e d i v i n e spirit does not d w e l l in those " w h o h a v e set

before t h e m m a n y ends (TSXY]) in l i f e " b u t o n l y in those w h o h a v e disengaged

themselves

created w o r l d .

from

the

multiplicity

of things

of

the

5

I n describing the translation of Moses, P h i l o writes that w h e n the time c a m e for h i m " t o m a k e his p i l g r i m a g e from earth to h e a v e n " a n d e x c h a n g e m o r t a l i t y for i m m o r t a l i t y , G o d " r e s o l v e d his t w o f o l d nature of soul a n d b o d y i n t o a single unity, transforming his w h o l e being into m i n d pure as s u n l i g h t . " 1

See

2

Det. Pot. Ins.

3

4

6

C h a p . I I , B , 1.

90.

O p . M u n d . 1 5 1 . See a b o v e , Deus

Imm.

14, S o m .

Chap. I I , C.

II170, O p . M u n d .

156, and

often.

53.

5

Gig.

6

V i t . M o s . 1 1 : 2 8 8 . I t is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t i c e t h a t P h i l o here d e s c r i b e s

l e v e l of b e i n g

t h a t is, w i t h i n his f r a m e w o r k of t h o u g h t ,

quite superior

a to

t h a t of t h e repcoToi; avGpccmot; of O p . M u n d . 1 3 6 ff. T h e o n e n e s s of t h e Ttpcoxot; A L G H J , III

4

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

5o

I n Quaest. in E x . 11:29 d i v i n e inspiration.

P h i l o speaks of the p r o p h e t i c m i n d u n d e r

" I t b e c o m e s like the m o n a d , " he writes,

"not

b e i n g at all m i x e d w i t h a n y of t h o s e things associated w i t h d u a l i t y . " I n d e e d , the o n e " w h o is resolved i n t o the nature of u n i t y , " h a v i n g left b e h i n d all m o r t a l genera

(YEVRJ), "is c h a n g e d i n t o the divine,

so t h a t such m e n b e c o m e kin t o G o d a n d t r u l y d i v i n e . "

1

Likewise in Mut. N o m . 33-34 P h i l o maintains that those w h o h a v e disciplined the b o d y t o serve the soul "are resolved into a single form, that of soul, and b e c o m e u n b o d i e d m i n d s (sic, ev elSoc TO TT]C, 4>i>Xrjc, avocAoOevTec, XAL ao-COFXATOI Siavoiat, YEYOVOTEC,). W h e n

man's

m i n d is fully intent o n pleasing G o d , the influence of the b o d y is negated,

"the

earthly

element

is

destroyed

and

dissolved."

2

T h e reverse of this is seen in the transgression of A d a m : oi>x OPQCC, OTT. 6 yrjivoc, OYXOC,, 'ASajx, orav #if>Y]TAT, TOO StSiifxou £uAoo, Ovfjo-XEI., SuaSa TT,[X7jo"ac, rcpo jxovaSoc, XAL TO yevojxevov rcpo TOO TTETCOIYJXOTOC, £x6aufxa(TAC,; ( S o m . 11:70). P h i l o sees the n u m b e r seven as b e i n g m o s t closely related t o the m o n a d , the beginning of all t h i n g s .

3

It is t h u s interesting t o n o t e

s o m e of the epithets he applies t o this n u m b e r . Seven is "the virgin a m o n g the n u m b e r s , " " t h e essentially m o t h e r l e s s , "

4

"begotten b y

the father of the universe a l o n e , " " t h e ideal f o r m of the m a l e sex w i t h n o t h i n g of the f e m a l e , " " t h e manliest a n d b r a v e s t of the n u m ­ b e r s , " " w e l l - g i f t e d b y nature for s o v e r e i g n t y a n d l e a d e r s h i p , "

dvOptoTToc c o n s i s t e d

"the

in a s t a t e of o r i g i n a l h a r m o n y in w h i c h t h e b o d y

was

c o m p l e t e l y s u b s e r v i e n t t o t h e s o v e r e i g n m i n d . B u t M o s e s w a s q u i t of

the

b o d y a l t o g e t h e r . H i s t w o f o l d n a t u r e of s o u l a n d b o d y w a s t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o t h e u n i t y of p u r e m i n d . H e w a s n o l o n g e r p a r t of t h e c r e a t e d m a t e r i a l w o r l d a t all. M o s e s ' final s t a t e t h u s c o r r e s p o n d s n o t t o t h e Ttptoxoi; avOptoTro^ b u t t o t h e avSpcoTTo? xax' eixova xou 9eou, i.e. t h e r a t i o n a l s o u l of m a n in its i s o l a t i o n and 1

p u r i t y . T h i s is 6 xax' aXrjOstav a v 9 p t G 7 r o £ ; . F e w passages

reflect

m o r e d r a m a t i c a l l y t h e gulf t h a t s e p a r a t e s

Philo

f r o m first c e n t u r y R a b b i n i c J u d a i s m . F o r t h e R a b b i s , t h e c a t e g o r i c a l q u a l i ­ t a t i v e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t G o d a n d finite m a n is c o n s t a n t l y p r e s u p p o s e d , a d i s t i n c t i o n n o t d e p e n d e n t o n t h e i n h e r e n t e v i l of t h e m a t e r i a l w o r l d , as is t h e c a s e in G n o s t i c i s m , b u t r a t h e r o n t h e d i f f e r e n c e

between

creature a n d creator. 2

Cf. S p e c . L e g . 1 1 1 : 1 7 9 , L e g . A l l . II: 50.

3

Dec.

102.

4

Dec.

102.

Cf. G .

Delling,

art.

Tra 6£voc, P

T.W.N.T.

V

(1954),

P-

8

*7-

D e l l i n g refers t o t h e c o n c e p t of t h e a s e x u a l origin of t h e v i r g i n A t h e n a , a n d a d d s " N u r ist sie nicht finden bei

ist

vaterlos,

bezeichnenderweise

der E n t s t e h u n g

wichtig,

sondern m u t t e r l o s (dem griechischen die A u s s c h a l t u n g nicht

die d e s

des

weiblichen

tnannlichen)."

Emp-

Elementes

BECOMING A VIRGIN opportune moment" perfection of m i n d . " At

(6 xoupoc),

1

"the

51

s y m b o l of k n o w l e d g e a n d

2

least s o m e of these epithets h a v e b e e n b o r r o w e d from

Pythagoreans,

3

yet

t h e y are

t h o r o u g h l y consistent

with

the

Philo's

o t h e r s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t the n u m b e r s o n e a n d seven. T h e y reflect a p a t t e r n strikingly similar t o w h a t w e h a v e already described in this section.

C. BECOMING A VIRGIN A third w a y in w h i c h P h i l o describes the forsaking of the c o r ­ ruptible sphere of sense-perception a n d the b o d y , the realm of the female, is in terms of changing from a w o m a n i n t o a virgin. T h i s process m i g h t

well b e referred

Quaest. in E x . 1 1 : 3 ,

M

r

to

as

"becoming a virgin."

In

e x a m p l e , he explains that w h e n a m a n

c o m e s in c o n t a c t w i t h a virgin he c h a n g e s her i n t o a w o m a n . B u t in contrast

t o this, " w h e n souls b e c o m e d i v i n e l y inspired,

from

(being) w o m e n t h e y b e c o m e virgins, t h r o w i n g off the w o m a n l y c o r r u p t i o n s w h i c h are

(found) in sense-perception a n d

passion."

This t e x t , like those c o n s i d e r e d in the p r e c e d i n g t w o sections, deals w i t h the progress of the soul t o w a r d s G o d . Such progress it w a s seen c a n b e described in t e r m s of the female b e c o m i n g m a l e or in t e r m s of changing from d u a l i t y t o u n i t y . H e r e , h o w e v e r , it is said t h a t the w o m a n b e c o m e s a virgin. B u t this e x a c t l y confirms our p r e v i o u s interpretation, n a m e l y that maleness in those t e x t s referred n o t t o that w h i c h stands o p p o s i t e female in the m a l e - f e m a l e polarity, b u t rather t o a realm b e y o n d sexuality, for " v i r g i n " in this t e x t c o r ­ r e s p o n d s t o " m a l e " in the others. This j u d g m e n t finds further c o n f i r m a t i o n f r o m Cher. 50: The union of human beings that is made for the procreation of children, turns virgins into women. But when God begins to consort with the soul, He makes what before was a woman into a virgin again, for he takes away the degenerate and emasculate passions which made it womanish (eOrjAuveTo) and plants instead the native growth of unpolluted virtues. Thus He [God] will not talk with Sarah till she has ceased from all that is after the manner of women (Gen. 1 8 : 1 1 ) , and is ranked once more as a pure virgin. 1

Spec. Leg. 1 1 : 5 6 .

2

S p e c . L e g . I I -.64.

3

See

references a n d

discussion b y

C o l s o n in

Philo

p. 609 ( n o t e o n V i t . M o s . I L 2 1 0 ) ; V I I ( 1 9 3 7 ) , PIL56).

S e e a l s o O p . M u n d . 100, L e g . A l l . L 1 5 .

D 2

4

(L.C.L.)

VI

(1935),

(note o n S p e c . L e g .

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

52

In c o m m e n t i n g o n G e n . 1 8 : 1 1 ("Sarah was quit of her e x p e r i e n c e x

of w h a t b e l o n g s to w o m e n " ) in another place, Philo writes: " T h e passions are b y nature feminine, a n d w e m u s t practice the quitting of these for the masculine traits that m a r k the n o b l e a f f e c t i o n s " (Det.

P o t . Ins. 28).

In terms of c o n t e n t , this passage d i r e c t l y

parallels Cher. 50, e x c e p t that the expression " m a s c u l i n e traits" occurs instead of " p u r e v i r g i n . " It is clear t h a t in b o t h cases Philo is not speaking a b o u t actual m e n a n d w o m e n b u t rather a b o u t the material realm of the b o d y , pleasure, a n d sense-per­ c e p t i o n , o n the one hand, a n d the realm of the rational soul o n the other.

2

Further s u p p o r t for these conlusions is found in a n u m b e r of passages in Quaest. in Gen. W h e r e a s usually P h i l o associates m a n ' s reason with the m a l e a n d sense-perception with the female, in Quaest. in G e n . I V : 117 he uses R e b e k a h the virgin t o stand for the rational soul, a n d in I V : 242 he refers t o the " h e a v e n l y a n d e v e r virginal u n d e r s t a n d i n g . " In I V : 119 he n o t e s that Scripture " r e p o r t s a v e r y great difference b e t w e e n the m i n d of the virgin, w h i c h m a k e s use of n o t h i n g sense-perceptible, a n d the class or the t y p e w h i c h receives the s e n s e - p e r c e p t i b l e . " The

t e r m " v i r g i n " also appears significantly in P r a e m . P o e n .

158-60, where P h i l o c o m m e n t s o n the t e x t from Isaiah 5 4 : 1 : " F o r m o r e are the children of the desolate than the children of the o n e w h o has a h u s b a n d . " T h i s text, P h i l o states, is an allegory of the soul. For when the soul is " m a n y , " full that is of passions and vices with her children, pleasures, desires, folly, incontinence, injustice, gathered around her, she is feeble and sick and dangerously near to

1

D i d P h i l o b e l i e v e t h a t a w o m a n ' s s e x u a l desire o r s u i t a b i l i t y for s e x u a l

r e l a t i o n s c e a s e d w i t h t h e c o m p l e t i o n of t h e m e n o p a u s e ? I t is p o s s i b l e he did, although

his f r e q u e n t

u s e of G e n .

1 8 : 1 1 m o r e likely

p e c u l i a r d e m a n d s of his allegorical m e t h o d t h a n his ical 2

Som.

understanding

of

that

reflects

the

psychological-physiolog­

woman.

T e r m s s u c h as a p a x o i ; , <xnoLk6q, veo;, av9oi;, a n d YjfSav ( R e r . D i v .

Her.

1 : 1 9 9 ) , w h i c h o c c u r in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n

38,

motif,

b o t h s t r e n g t h e n a n d a m p l i f y t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n h e r e p r e s e n t e d of b e c o m i n g a v i r g i n . T h e s o u l t h a t is r e a d y t o r e c e i v e t h e d i v i n e s e e d is p u r e a n d c h a s t e , in t h e v e r y p r i m e a n d v i g o r of y o u t h , y o u n g a n d t e n d e r a n d fresh. T h e s e are all t e r m s t h a t c o u l d b e u s e d in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h TtapOevo?, a n d ,

significantly,

P h i l o uses t h e e x p r e s s i o n ^ux^) paOeia, euyeio?, TtapOevo? in S o m . 1 : 2 0 0 as a d i r e c t parallel t o al £xi veai x a l arraXal ^uxal a p x i rjpcoaai x a l a v 9 e i xco tyj? axu.9)i; 6)pai'C6u.Evat ( S o m . 1 : 1 9 9 ) .

BECOMING A VIRGIN

53

death. But when she has become barren and ceases to produce these children or indeed has cast them out bodily she is transformed into a pure virgin. It is in this state of the pure virgin that the soul receives the d i v i n e seed from G o d a n d thus brings forth n e w life in the form of w i s d o m , c o u r a g e , t e m p e r a n c e , justice, a n d the o t h e r v i r t u e s . It w o u l d appear that the term xh?^

c

a

n

1

b e used b y P h i l o in

a p p r o x i m a t e l y the same w a y as 7rap8evoc. T h u s T a m a r , w h o is m e n t i o n e d in a n u m b e r of passages as the recipient of the d i v i n e seed (Mut. N o m . 134, D e u s I m m . 136-37), is described as a w i d o w after the fashion of the w i d o w of Z e r e p h a t h (I K i n g s 17:8-24), i.e. n o t just as o n e w h o has lost her h u s b a n d , " b u t because she is w i d o w ­ ed of the passions w h i c h c o r r u p t a n d maltreat the m i n d " ( D e u s I m m . 136). It is as o n e w h o has "left forever the intercourse a n d society of mortals, a n d remained desolate and w i d o w e d of h u m a n pleasures" that she is fit t o receive the 0eia yovv) and b e filled with the o-TcepLtaTa TTJC apeTTJc. B u t , as has b e e n seen, the o n e w h o receives the d i v i n e seed usually is described as a virgin, and the t e r m " v i r g i n " is defined v e r y m u c h after the fashion of the t e r m " w i d o w " in this t e x t . T h i s functional i d e n t i t y of the t w o terms, i.e. as t h e y o c c u r in certain individual texts, is further substantiated b y Quaest. in E x . 1 1 : 3 . In this passage, as was n o t e d a b o v e , P h i l o asserts that when souls b e c o m e d i v i n e l y inspired t h e y c h a n g e from w o m e n i n t o virgins. B u t d i r e c t l y following this he w r i t e s : " M o r e o v e r , they follow

after

a n d pursue the genuine a n d u n m a t e d virgin, the

veritable W i s d o m

of G o d . " P h i l o adds that

such m i n d s —the

Greek fragment has " s o u l s " — " r i g h t l y . . . b e c o m e w i d o w s a n d are o r p h a n e d of m o r t a l things a n d acquire for themselves a n d h a v e as h u s b a n d the right l a w of nature, w i t h w h i c h t h e y l i v e . " W e thus h a v e the parallel: souls b e c o m e v i r g i n s — m i n d s (souls) widows. 1

become

2

T h e s e p a s s a g e s c o n f i r m t h e c o n c l u s i o n r e a c h e d in C h a p . I I , B t h a t

the

m a n after t h e i m a g e of G o d , w h o is t o b e e q u a t e d w i t h t h e r a t i o n a l s o u l of m a n , is b a s i c a l l y a s e x u a l . I n r e t u r n i n g t o G o d m a n l e a v e s b e h i n d t h e m a t e r i a l w o r l d of c h a n g e a n d c o r r u p t i o n , t h e s p h e r e of t h e f e m a l e , a n d the

rightful

ruler

of

A l t h o u g h associated

his

compound

namely

w i t h m a l e n e s s in m a n y p a s s a g e s ,

d o e s n o t p a r t i c i p a t e in s e x u a l i t y .

the

acknowledges

sovereign

the sovereign

mind. mind

T o b e c o m e m a l e or t o b e c o m e a v i r g i n is

t o m o v e b e y o n d t h e s p h e r e of s e x u a l 2

being,

polarity.

See a l s o S o m . 1 1 : 2 7 3 , D e u s I m m . 1 3 8 . I n S p e c . L e g . 1 : 1 2 9 P h i l o

refers

t o t h e childless w i d o w as b e i n g in a c e r t a i n s e n s e " v i r t u a l l y a v i r g i n " (TPOTTOM yap xiva x a l vuv

ECTTI

Suvdu.ei. TtapOevo?). B u t cf. S p e c . L e g . 1 : 1 0 5 - 1 0 7 ,

where,

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

54

D . A COMPARISON OF THE CONTEXTS IN WHICH THE MOTIFS OF BECOMING MALE, BECOMING ONE, AND BECOMING A VIRGIN OCCUR T h e s e m o t i f s , b e c o m i n g male, b e c o m i n g o n e , a n d b e c o m i n g a virgin, all o c c u r in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the t h e m e of m a n ' s m o r a l a n d spiritual

development.

Y e t they

T h e r e are several i m p o r t a n t

are

not

used

indiscriminately.

differences in the w a y t h e y are used

a n d in the c o n t e x t s in w h i c h t h e y appear. F o r e x a m p l e , n o t o n l y in t h o s e passages w h e r e P h i l o speaks a b o u t b e c o m i n g male, b u t also w h e r e v e r he emphasizes the male qualities of the m i n d , the f o c u s of a t t e n t i o n is n o t u p o n G o d ' s a c t i v i t y a n d gifts of g r a c e b u t u p o n m a n ' s o w n effort. M a n is t o forsake c o r r u p t w a y s of the female a n d discipline himself in the

the

struggle

t o live v i r t u o u s l y . "Ao-xvjo-ic is a k e y w o r d in these t e x t s , w h i c h m o s t l y refer t o the m a n w h o is m a k i n g progress (6 TcpoxoTCTWv) in t h e g o o d life. I n this struggle p a s s i v i t y is seen as a v i c e a n d is identified w i t h female sense-perception. T h e i n d i v i d u a l is t o flee f r o m w e a k , c o w a r d l y , effeminate sense-perception a n d is t o e m ­ phasize the p o w e r s of the a c t i v e , d o m i n a n t , m a l e m i n d . H e is n o t t o wait p a s s i v e l y for G o d ' s help b u t is rather t o enter i n t o

the

struggle w i t h all of the e n e r g y a n d discipline he c a n muster. G o d ' s g r a c e is n o t e x c l u d e d in these passages, b u t the m a i n e m p h a s i s is n o t o n the c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n G o d a n d m a n b u t rather o n the c o n ­ trast b e t w e e n the earthly part of m a n ' s b e i n g a n d the

heavenly

f o l l o w i n g L e v . 2 1 : 1 0 - 1 5 , P h i l o s e t s t h e w i d o w , t h e o n e d i v o r c e d , etc., o v e r a g a i n s t t h e v i r g i n . L i k e w i s e , s u c h p a s s a g e s as D e t . P o t . I n s . 1 4 7 - 4 9 ; E b r . 5 ; S p e c . L e g . 1 1 : 3 0 - 3 1 ; P o s t . C . 6, 6 8 ; M u t . N o m . 1 4 9 m a k e i t clear t h a t t h e p a r a l l e l v i r g i n - w i d o w is n o t r e l e v a n t w i t h r e s p e c t t o m o s t of t h e o c c u r r e n c e s Y

of

a

r

e

X )P ' X ) P ^

e t v

i

n

Philo. T

a<

P h i l o c a n also m a k e u s e of t h e t e r m Y JP ? in T

u s e of x i P

a

j

u s

a

fashion analogous to the

t c o n s i d e r e d . See, for e x a m p l e , M i g r . A b r . 1 4 1 : S a r a h b o r e a

s o n in h e r o l d a g e ( G e n . 2 1 : 7 ) , " a t a t i m e , t h a t is, w h e n all t h i n g s t h a t are m o r t a l a n d o b j e c t s of s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n h a v e d e c a y e d , w h i l e t h i n g s i m m o r t a l and with

intellectually the

waning

discerned h a v e grown y o u n g again." T h u s , of

passion

and

involvement

in

the

concomitant

sense-perceptible,

m a t e r i a l w o r l d t h a t o l d a g e b r i n g s , t h e r e is, a c c o r d i n g t o P h i l o , t h e r e t u r n to a state

analogous t o t h a t which he elsewhere

describes

b y the

terms

" v i r g i n " a n d " w i d o w . " B u t , as is f r e q u e n t l y t h e c a s e in his w r i t i n g s , i t is difficult t o d e c i d e w h e t h e r P h i l o i n t e n d s s u c h a s t a t e m e n t as t h i s in M i g r . Abr.

1 4 1 as a n a c t u a l d e s c r i p t i o n of o l d a g e , or w h e t h e r t h e e x p r e s s i o n " o l d

age"

f u n c t i o n s s i m p l y as t h e o c c a s i o n for his a l l e g o r i z i n g in a m o r e or less

a r b i t r a r y f a s h i o n . P r o b a b l y , in t h i s c a s e , t h e t r u t h lies s o m e w h e r e these

two

alternatives.

between

THE DIVINE IMPREGNATION OF THE SOUL

55

p a r t . Spiritual progress consists in forsaking the o n e a n d e m p h a s i z ­ ing the o t h e r .

1

I n t h o s e passages w h e r e P h i l o speaks of b e c o m i n g o n e , h o w e v e r , a n d e v e n m o r e clearly w h e r e he refers t o b e c o m i n g a virgin, the emphasis is u p o n G o d ' s a c t i v i t y a n d n o t m a n ' s effort. M a n is t o cease f r o m striving a n d rest f r o m his l a b o r s in the k n o w l e d g e that u l t i m a t e l y all true virtue is a gift of G o d ' s grace. O n l y the o n e w h o realizes the c o m p l e t e inability of m a n t o a c h i e v e virtue o n his own

will be g r a n t e d t o share in that greatest

vision of G o d .

g o o d of m a n ,

the

2

E . THE DIVINE IMPREGNATION OF THE SOUL The

passages in w h i c h P h i l o refers t o b e c o m i n g a virgin

further

distinct

in that

they

occur

within

the

very

are

particular

c o n t e x t of the d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n of the soul, a m o t i f that falls within the larger f r a m e w o r k of d i v i n e inspiration

a n d is closely

3

related t o the t h e m e of p r o p h e t i c e c s t a s y . In this c o n t e x t it is G o d or an agent of G o d such as S o p h i a or the L o g o s that p l a y s the a c t i v e , d o m i n a n t , male role, a n d m a n w h o is r e c e p t i v e a n d passive, i.e. female. In these passages the w h o l e of m a n ' s being, i n c l u d i n g the rational soul, is set in sharp contrast w i t h the indescribable p o w e r a n d g l o r y of G o d . I n

R e r . D i v . Her. 22-39,

ror

example, Philo

describes w i t h great p a t h o s m a n ' s sense of utter insignificance a n d worthlessness as he c o m e s near t o G o d . A s he l o o k s t o G o d , m a n

1

A l t h o u g h P h i l o ' s use of m a l e t e r m i n o l o g y t o d e s c r i b e t h e m i n d u s u a l l y

is f o u n d w i t h i n t h i s c o n t e x t of m a n ' s o w n e f f o r t in t h e m o r a l a n d s p i r i t u a l life, t h i s l a t t e r m o t i f f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r s w h e n n o m a l e t e r m i n o l o g y is p r e s e n t . Cf.

Q u a e s t . in E x . 1 1 : 5 1 , Q u a e s t . in G e n . I V : 4 9 . S e e also S o m . 1 1 : 1 7 6 - 7 7 ,

Abr.

1 1 6 . Cf. G o o d e n o u g h , Light,

Fortschritt,

p . 1 4 0 ; W o l f s o n , Philo,

I, 5 3 - 5 5 ; V o l k e r ,

p. 1 1 5 .

2

Q u a e s t . I n E x . 1 1 : 5 1 . Cf. O p . M u n d . 7 1 . S e e Jervell, p . 6 1 .

3

I n m o s t c a s e s P h i l o a r g u e s for t h e v i r g i n i t y of t h e s o u l as a p r e r e q u i s i t e

for t h e d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n , b u t in a t l e a s t t w o p a s s a g e s ( C h e r . 50, Q u a e s t . in E x . 1 1 : 3 ; cf. P r a e m . P o e n . 1 5 8 - 1 6 0 ) t h e s o u l a p p a r e n t l y b e c o m e s a v i r g i n in t h e p r o c e s s of r e c e i v i n g t h e d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n . S u c h v a r i a t i o n s p r o b a b l y i n d i c a t e t h a t P h i l o is n o t m o v i n g w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s of a f i x e d f r a m e w o r k , w h e t h e r p h i l o s o p h i c a l , t h e o l o g i c a l , m y t h o l o g i c a l , or c u l t i c . H e is a p p a r e n t l y u n c o n c e r n e d w i t h w h a t a t t i m e s m a y a p p e a r t o us as i n c o n s i s t e n t v a r i a t i o n s in d e t a i l . H e is n o t p r e s c r i b i n g a p a t t e r n t h a t m u s t b e r i g i d l y a d h e r e d t o b y all if t h e y are t o f i n d G o d , b u t is r a t h e r d e s c r i b i n g b y m e a n s of v a r i o u s m e t a p h o r s a n d a l l e g o r i e s w h a t it m e a n s w h e n t h e s o u l f o r s a k e s itself

and

e x p e r i e n c e s t h e m y s t e r i o u s a n d u n e x p l a i n a b l e g r a c e of G o d (cf. M i g r . A b r .

31-33)-

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

56

is " h u m b l e d , cast d o w n to the c l a y , r e d u c e d t o such an elemental state, as seems n o t e v e n to e x i s t . " J u s t as A b r a h a m declared himself t o b e earth and ashes w h e n he b e g a n t o speak t o the L o r d (Gen. 18:27), so it is precisely w h e n he b e c o m e s aware of his o w n n o t h i n g ­ ness (OU8EVSI«) that the creature is able t o c o m e i n t o the presence of his M a k e r .

1

T h e soul that yearns after the things of G o d , writes Philo, n o t o n l y s h o u l d leave the b o d y , the senses, and speech, b u t also s h o u l d b e c o m e a fugitive from itself. from itself.

3

2

T h e m i n d is to quit itself, t o d e p a r t

" E c s t a s y . . . is n o t h i n g else t h a n the departing

g o i n g o u t of the u n d e r s t a n d i n g , " 111:9.

" F o r w h e n the

and

Philo asserts in Quaest. in G e n .

m i n d is d i v i n e l y possessed and b e c o m e s

filled with G o d , it is n o longer within itself, for it receives the d i v i n e spirit to dwell within it."

4

Philo's clearest s t a t e m e n t of the relationship b e t w e e n the m i n d a n d the divine spirit in the c o n t e x t of ecstasy a n d divine possession is f o u n d in R e r . D i v . Her. 264-65: So while the radiance of the mind is still all around us, when it pours as it were a noonday beam into the whole soul, we are selfcontained, not possessed. But when it comes to its setting, naturally ecstasy and divine possession and madness fall upon us. For when the light of God shines, the human light sets; when the divine light sets, the human dawns and rises. This is what regularly befalls the fellowship of the prophets. The mind is evicted at the arrival of the divine Spirit, but when that departs the mind returns to its tenancy. Mortal and immortal m a y not share the same home. A n d therefore the setting of reason and the darkness which surrounds it produce ecstasy and inspired frenzy. S u c h a passage as this, where the m i n d is described as m o r t a l , a n d as surrounded b y darkness, a n d is set in sharpest contrast w i t h the divine reality, reflects an understanding of VOUC. that c a n n o t easily be r e c o n c i l e d w i t h P h i l o ' s description of VOUC as «Tr6ffTcaff(i.a 0EIOV or TivEufxa 6EIOV. H e r e P h i l o argues that m a n c o m e s t o k n o w G o d n o t b y e m p h a s i z i n g that part of himself w h i c h is G o d - l i k e b u t 1

This emphasis on man's nothingness occurs with considerable frequency

in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e t h e m e of d i v i n e i n s p i r a t i o n . Cf. e s p e c i a l l y M i g r . A b r . 1 3 4 - 4 2 , 3 4 - 3 5 , t h e l a t t e r b e i n g o n e of t h e f e w p a s s a g e s w h e r e P h i l o c a l l y refers t o his o w n religious 2

Rer. Div. Her.

3

Rer. Div. Her.

4

specifi­

experience.

69. 74.

See a l s o L e g . A l l . 1 : 8 2 ; I I I : 2 g , 4 1 , 4 3 ; S o m . 1 1 : 2 3 2 ; S p e c . L e g . I V : 49.

THE DIVINE IMPREGNATION OF THE SOUL

57

rather b y turning a w a y from himself, i n c l u d i n g the m i n d . " H e w h o has sincerely believed in G o d has learned t o disbelieve in all else, all that is c r e a t e d o n l y t o perish," i n c l u d i n g reasoning as well as sense1

p e r c e p t i o n . It is w h e n m a n k n o w s himself best that he m o s t despairs of himself. " A n d the m a n that has despaired of himself is b e g i n n i n g t o k n o w h i m that i s . "

2

It is m a n ' s high regard for himself, his self-

c o n c e i t (o?7)ffi<;), t h a t is " t h e w o r s t evil of the s o u l " and that w h i c h 3

keeps h i m from k n o w i n g the O n e w h o is (Cher. 57 f f . ) . T h e k n o w l ­ edge

of G o d is n e v e r in a n y sense a m e r e l y h u m a n possibility.

" T h e seekers for truth are those w h o envisage G o d t h r o u g h G o d , light t h r o u g h l i g h t " ( P r a e m . P o e n . 46). " T o G o d alone is it p e r m i t t e d t o a p p r e h e n d G o d " (Praem. P o e n . 40; see 28-46). It is in this awareness of his utter nothingness and the futility of all his o w n striving that m a n is able t o receive G o d ' s gifts of grace, 4

especially the d i v i n e seeds of v i r t u e . W i t h i n the f r a m e w o r k of the intercourse of G o d w i t h the soul, G o d (or, in m a n y cases such 5

agents of G o d as S o p h i a or A r e t e ) takes the d o m i n a n t , a c t i v e , m a l e role. H e sows the seed, i m p r e g n a t e s the soul. Man c o r r e s p o n d ­ ingly, receives the seed, thus taking the passive part of the f e m a l e . 1

P r a e m . P o e n . 28.

2

S o m . 1:6o.

3

Jervell, pp.

52-70,

a n a l y s e s t h e u s e of t h e t e r m

6

in P h i l o ' s w r i t i n g s

EIXCOV

and reaches conclusions similar t o the a b o v e regarding Philo's dual

attitude

t o w a r d s vou?. T h u s , o n t h e o n e h a n d , " E i k o n ist als A b b i l d eine a b g e s c h w a c h te,

gleichnisartige

kiindet

Darstellung

und vermittelt

die

der

'ewige

Urwirklichkeit.

Wahrheit,' ohne

Die sie

'eixcov

z u sein.

TOU 0eou' Eikon

ist

i m m e r — i m G e g e n s a t z zu der gnostischen V o r s t e l l u n g v o m 'Bilde' — 'nur' B i l d , sie t r a g t in sich d a s M o m e n t d e s U n g e f a . h r " (p. 5 6 ) . B u t P h i l o ' s w r i t i n g s , according

to

Jervell,

reflect

"noch

ein

anderes

das v o n gnostichen und mysterien-religiosen

Verstandnis

des

d a s B i l d n i c h t m e h r u n z u l a n g l i c h e s A b b i l d s o n d e r n ein A u s f l u s s d e s [j.a, d a s d i e v o i l e W i r k l i c h k e i t s u b s t a n z a r t i g in sich t r a g t " nur

ist d e r L o g o s als E i k o n g o t t l i c h , " P h i l o c o n c l u d e s ,

innere

Gottebenbildlichkeit

des

Menschen

'Bildes,'

G e d a n k e n g e p r a g t ist. H i e r ist

ist

aus

7rapdSetY-

(p. 5 6 ) .

"Nicht

"sondern a u d i

gottlicher

die

Substanz,

s e l b s t ein T e i l d e s h i m m l i s c h e n S e i n s " (p. 60). 4

Cf.

5

I n t e r m s of t h e p u r p o s e s of this s t u d y it w o u l d n o t a p p e a r t o b e n e c e s s a r y

Migr.

to m a k e

a sharp distinction

impregnates equivalent plays

A b r . 3 1 ff. between

the soul a n d those

in m o s t

of t h e s e

where

texts)

those

instances

where

Sophia or A r e t e

or t h e L o g o s , a c t i n g

God

himself

( w h i c h are as G o d ' s

t h e m a l e role. I n b o t h c a s e s t h e u n d e r l y i n g e m p h a s i s

is t h e

really agents, same,

n a m e l y t h a t all g o o d n e s s a n d v i r t u e is t h e gift of G o d ' s g r a c e . 6

it

Cf. A b r . 102, w h e r e P h i l o m a i n t a i n s t h a t V i r t u e r e a l l y is m a l e , causes

movement

and

suggests

w o r d s . " T h e p a s s a g e c o n t i n u e s : 0rjXu

noble

conceptions

8k 6 Xoyin\xb(;

of

noble

XIVOUJAEVO?

"since

deeds

and

x a l 7Toa8eu6|ji£voc;

x a l cocpeXoujAEVoc; x a l auvoXco? ev T U 7tdaxEiv i%ziOC^OJAEVOC;, x a l T O naQot; auxto

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

58

A s c a n b e seen from the following chart, Philo describes the intercourse of G o d w i t h the soul in a bewildering v a r i e t y of d e t a i l . Text C h e r . 44

Female

Male 6 TOJV OVXCOV

Seed

apexal

xa xaXa

apexYj

xa 6eia

1

Offspring

7nx-uv)p, 6 aY£VY]TO(; §zoq C h e r . 46

xo atxiov (i.e.

C h e r . 47

aTtepfxaxa

Oso?)

ouSev 6v7)xov

2£7T9Cdpa (r) 7rxy)VY) x a l [AsxapCTioc dpexYj)

C h e r . 49

ao
euSaifxovia

aXrjGetav TrapGlvo?)

al au6iy^£t?

C h e r . 50

xal axYjpaxoi dpexai xouxo fxovav eaxl awxrjpiov. P h i l o , h o w e v e r , d o e s n o t g l o r i f y p a s s i v i t y as s u c h , but

o n l y in m a n ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o G o d , a n d , specifically, as h e r e , in t h e c o n ­

t e x t of t h e d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n of t h e soul. I n t e r m s of m a n ' s o w n p a s s i v i t y is u s u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n ,

self,

the weak and female

e l e m e n t of t h e s o u l , a n d is c o n t r a s t e d w i t h t h e a c t i v i t y of t h e m i n d , t h e s t r o n g m a l e p a r t of t h e soul (cf. S p e c . L e g . 1 : 2 0 0 - 2 0 1 , L e g . A l l . 1 1 : 3 8 , al.).

I n r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e soul as a w h o l e t h e m i n d is t o b e a c t i v e

et

and

s o v e r e i g n , j u s t t h e o p p o s i t e of p a s s i v e . P a r t i c u l a r l y a b h o r r e n t t o P h i l o w a s t h e p a s s i v e e f f e m i n a t e a t t i t u d e of t h e m a l e h o m o s e x u a l . A s l a v e t o i r r a t i o n a l passion a n d infected b y the "female disease," he was a blatant contradiction of m a n as h e s h o u l d b e , i.e. m a n g u i d e d b y t h e s o v e r e i g n , a c t i v e , m a s c u l i n e m i n d (cf. S p e c . L e g . 1 : 3 2 5 , 1 1 1 : 3 7 - 4 2 ; S o m . I : i z 6 ; V i t . C o n t . 60; R e r . D i v . Her.

2 7 4 ) . T h u s , in s p i t e of t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s o u l or m i n d of m a n m u s t b e c o m e

f e m a l e - p a s s i v e in r e l a t i o n s h i p t o G o d , for a m a n t o b e c o m e e f f e m i n a t e or w o m a n i s h in his r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h i n s o c i e t y ,

and particularly within

the

s e x u a l s p h e r e , is t o t a l l y r e j e c t e d . 1

T h e c h a r t is d e s i g n e d t o p r o v i d e a q u i c k s u m m a r y of t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t

texts.

I t c l e a r l y illustrates t h e f a c t t h a t t h e d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n m o t i f

is

b o t h f r e q u e n t a n d rich in v a r i a t i o n s in P h i l o ' s w r i t i n g s , b u t it p r o v i d e s t h e r e a d e r w i t h f e w clues as t o t h e c o n t e x t s in w h i c h t h e v a r i o u s t e r m s a p p e a r , and

t h u s m a y well o b s c u r e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s e are b y no m e a n s h o m o g e n e o u s .

Nor

d o e s t h e c h a r t r e a l l y i n d i c a t e h o w t h e m o t i f f u n c t i o n s in a n y g i v e n c a s e .

W h a t it d e s i g n a t e s " m a l e " or " f e m a l e " is u s u a l l y n o t e x p l i c i t l y so d e s i g n a t e d by In

P h i l o b u t is n e c e s s a r i l y

inferred f r o m t h e role o r f u n c t i o n

portrayed.

m a n y of t h e p a s s a g e s listed P h i l o s t a r t s w i t h a c e r t a i n g i v e n , n a m e l y a

B i b l i c a l t e x t t h a t m e n t i o n s p h y s i c a l i m p r e g n a t i o n or c o n c e p t i o n . T h u s ,

in

t h o s e cases w h e r e his o v e r a l l p u r p o s e is t o c l a r i f y t h e G o d - m a n r e l a t i o n s h i p , it is n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t h e m a k e s use of t h e t h e m e of d i v i n e i m p r e g n a t i o n or

G o d ' s i n t e r c o u r s e w i t h t h e soul. Y e t , in o t h e r i n s t a n c e s , P h i l o p r o b a b l y

c h o s e t o use t h e p a r t i c u l a r t e x t in q u e s t i o n imagery

m a d e it

so e a s i l y

a d a p t a b l e t o his

precisely purposes.

because the

sexual

THE DIVINE IMPREGNATION OF THE SOUL Text M i g r . A b r . 31

Male

Female

Seed

0e6<;

59

Offspring XaptTEi;, ai 7rap0evoi [0eoO] GuyaTEpei;

Migr. A b r . 6 civ, 7rap'

34-35

8v Ta<;

Siavoia

a7rep(xa dvco0ev

epfiTjveia, eupeait;,

TY)?

(pcoTOi;

a7r6>.auaii;, dvoiyvua0ai TE x o d

o^uSepxeaTdTT]

auyxXsieaGai

TCOV

o<\i\.q, s v d p y a a 7rpay(idTcov

dpiSyjXoxdTTi M i g r . A b r . 140

[8e6q]

IJJUXY) apexdiCTY)

V i t . C o n t . 68

aotpia

yyjpaiat roxpOevot

V i t . C o n t . 68

Beoc;, 6 7ra-rYjp

7) 0£O.y)(;

yevvTjfia dppev, (BXdaxy)(ia 0etov exyovoi dOdvaxoi at? SuvYjaeTai. 0ECdp£lV T(X

exyovoi d0dva-roi

CTocptai;86y(iaTa M u t . N o m . 132

0e
M u t . N o m . 134

0e6<;

©dfxap (dpeTYj)

M u t . N o m . 137

9e6c

ippovyjaii;

Y)
M u t . N o m . 138

T a xaXd TO yev/]T6v

Geo?

M u t . N o m . 142

apexYj

A b r . 100-101

XoyiCTfAOc;

PouXal dyaSal xai Xoyot a7rou8atof at iepo7rpe7TeT? Kai. Getat

ai 2TI veai xai

dopaTo; dTtopd

dya06v

O7T0pai Som. I: igg

-reXeioi

tppovYjaeco?

Aoyot

Soyfidxcov Som.

1:200

Som.

1:200

TeAeiai

sucpueti; i^iu/at

apeTat 01 aotptac; 6p6oi Aoyoi

euyetoi;,

TtdvTa daxeia, yeved appyjv

7rap0£vot; Deus Imm.

[6e6q]

©dfxap

136-37 dv0pco7uvcov yjSovcov x a l TOW 90eip6vTcov [xevcov mxGcov T/iv Siavotav)

a7rep(iaTa dpexyji; (0eta yov/j)

x a A a i Trpd^en;

60

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION Male

Text Praem.

Poen.

^uy_7) (ayvf)

[9E6Q]

159-60

Seed

Female GEIO?

airopo?

Offspring tppovyjai?, dvSpsta,

7tap6£Vo?)

a(09poauvT), Sixatoauvyj, X.T.X.

P o s t . C . 134-36 Geo?

7] £XTO? TOM 7ta0cov Acta

L e g . AIL I I I :

Ta cppovyjaEW? | arapLtaTa apsTat

GEO?

xaXal x a l d^tat Evvotat T<X xaXd

180-81 Leg. All. I l l :

ouSst? y s v ^ T o ?

180-81

(GEO?,

Leg. All. I l l :

6 xupto?

at ^u^ai

EijSat(j.ovta

•f) TsXsta 9 u a t ?

[God]

the soul

a p o r t i o n of

holy things

A c t a (xpzzri)

xaAai Trpd^Et?, dpETri

xupto?)

210 Q u a c s t . in

Gen. 1 1 1 : 5 4

the divine a n d incorruptible virtue

Q u a e s t . in Gen.

IV:

the

Father

[man]

99

the

unadulter­

a t e d s e e d s of ] divinity (in­ corporeal a n d intelligible)

Fug.

109

Geo?, 6 Tcax-rjp

Mcouar]?, 6

aocpta

dp/tEpEiic, Xoyo? 0 £ t o ? Fug.

50

1

Geo?

a o 9 t a (0uyaTr;p GEOU)

Fug-

51-52

0091a

Spec. L e g .

6 T7)? tpuaeco?

11:29-31

6pG6? Xoyo?

<\>i>yrx.L

^dGrjd?,

(xaGyjat?,

rcatSEta,

rratSsta,

ETTlCJTTj U.Tj,

kmcni]y.7),

X.T.X.

X.T.X.

! 6 dpETCOV arcopo?

jJouXai dyixGai x a i 7rpd<;si? xaXal x a i a7tou8atat

Spec. L e g .

do-TEio? Xoyo?

IL29-31

6 K I T ' apeTriv

Det. Pot. Ins.

6 opOo? Xoyo?

Stivota

i svvotat aptCTat

<Jju r] x

149 Post. C. 171

Geo?

O U S E V dTsXE?,

dXX'

xatptat

x a l TEXEiat [artopat] Deus Imm. 5

[GEO?]

Xa(j.oor)X, 6

"Avva, T5)? T O U G E O U ScopTj^xa

ao9ta?

j Gsta yovr)

T£Tay(J.EVO? EV

T > } T O U GEOU

Tdt^Et TpQ7TO?' T£Tay|J.£VO? 0£U Leg. All. I l l ;

150

6 Gyt?)? x a i y)ye(xct)V Xoyo?,

i 1

9p6vy]ot?, Sixaioauv?),

THE DIVINE IMPREGNATION OF THE SOUL Male

Text

Female

Seed

Offspring

6 anzpy.ot.Tiy.6i; xai yevvrjTixo!; T £ > V xaXwv X O Y O ? op96? Leg.

All. I l l :

6l

aujiTrdaY) dpSTY]

1

BEO?

40

TYjXauYY) x a i Xa(j.7tpd x a i Si'

Leg.

All.

Rer.

Div.

1:79

1 oXcov vospa cpp6vY,ai<;, dpETY]

9E6? 6 7taTT)p

Her.

62

Ttdvxoiv, 6

Det.

Pot. Ins.

9E6?

Pot.

6 Y£vvY)oai; TOV XOaLlOV

OEO?

|

d|J.Y)Tcop d p y YJ dpETY)

I T a aitEppLaTa E5 oupavou

60 Det. Ins. Leg.

54 All. I I :

49 Cher. 49 Ebr.

30

6 7taTT)p TCOV

Det.

Pot.

147

ootpta dpETT),

aocpia

T a 6Xa, T a au(j.7ravTa

9EO?

aocpia, a p E T / j

Sr)u.ioupYd(;,

Y] TOU TTEJTOIYJKOTO? £7ttOTTJU.r)

9E6

?

'laadx 6 x6au.o?, T O icdv

i

1

oXcov 6 S 6 ?

6 naTYJp

Ins.

1 Sdppa, YI d p S T Y ] , Y)

1

j 6 Y'lYEvy)?

Ta TO'J 0EOU a7tEp(xaTa

T<X a u p i T t a V T a 6 (iovoc; x a i dYa7TY]T0? aia0Y)Toi; uio?, 6 xoauo^

Ta oXa

anopa x a i

i a 6Xa

YEVECTl? droxVTCov

In all of these texts, G o d is shown to be the source of all g o o d n e s s and

virtue. Man is as nothing before G o d . T h e attitude of soul 1

required of m a n is one of humility, receptivity, p a s s i v i t y . T h e male-female t e r m i n o l o g y , with G o d as male a n d the h u m a n soul as female, appears to b e particularly apt for expressing this k i n d of relationship between G o d a n d m a n .

2

1

Cf. CJuaest. in E x . I I .3. H e r e P h i l o in effect a r g u e s t h a t it is s o u l s w h o are filled w i t h s e l f - l o v e t h a t a t t r i b u t e a n a c t i v e , initiating, m a s c u l i n e role to t h e m i n d . T h o s e souls, h o w e v e r , t h a t are free of s e l f - l o v e are willing t o p l a y a p a s s i v e , r e c e p t i v e , f e m i n i n e role in r e l a t i o n s h i p t o G o d , w h o is " f a t h e r " and "husband." 2

M a n y of t h e d e t a i l s of t h e v a r i o u s p a s s a g e s t h a t d e a l w i t h d i v i n e i m p r e g ­ n a t i o n c a n s a f e l y b e o m i t t e d in t e r m s of t h e p u r p o s e s of t h i s s t u d y . P h i l o p a r t i c u l a r l y c a p i t a l i z e s o n t h e stories f r o m G e n e s i s t h a t tell of t h e b i r t h of children t o t h e P a t r i a r c h s a n d their w i v e s . T h u s G o d " o p e n e d t h e w o m b " of L e a h a n d i m p l a n t e d w i t h i n h e r t h e seed of w i s d o m (Cher. 46, P o s t . C . 1 3 5 , Leg. A l l . I I I : i 8 o ) . S i m i l a r l y in t h e c a s e of S a r a h (Cher. 45, 5 0 ; M u t . N o m . 138; L e g . A l l . 1 1 1 : 2 1 7 - 1 9 ) , a n d also w i t h Z i p p o r a h , w h o m M o s e s f o u n d " p r e g n a n t t h r o u g h n o m o r t a l a g e n c y " ( C h e r . 4 7 ) , it is G o d w h o s o w s t h e

6z

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION It is m o s t likely this a c t i v e - p a s s i v e p o l a r i t y a n d n o t the influence

of s o m e m y t h o l o g i c a l a n d r o g y n o u s figure that is chiefly responsible for the alternation b e t w e e n m a l e a n d female that w e find in S o p h i a 1

a n d A r e t e . S o p h i a a n d Arete" are never p o r t r a y e d as b i s e x u a l , i.e. b o t h m a l e a n d female at the s a m e t i m e . T h e y are represented as female-passive in relationship t o G o d a n d m a l e - a c t i v e in relation­ ship t o m a n . S o p h i a a n d A r e t e e x h i b i t the deeds a n d p o w e r s of truly perfect m e n (ivSpwv TsXeioriTcov), b u t b e c a u s e t h e y o c c u p y a s e c o n d place in relationship to G o d t h e y h a v e feminine n a m e s . " L e t us, t h e n , " P h i l o concludes, " p a y i n g n o h e e d t o the d i s c r e p a n c y in the gender of the w o r d s , say t h a t the daughter of G o d , e v e n W i s d o m , is n o t o n l y masculine b u t father, s o w i n g a n d b e g e t t i n g in souls aptness to learn, discipline, k n o w l e d g e , s o u n d sense, g o o d a n d laudable actions"

(Fug. 51-52). T h e maleness or femaleness of

Sophia a n d A r e t e is n o t t o be u n d e r s t o o d in terms of actual s e x u a l i t y at all b u t rather in terms of the m o r e or less a d h o c d e m a n d s of each i n d i v i d u a l passage. L i k e G o d , the L o g o s , a n d the rational soul of m a n , S o p h i a a n d A r e t e are asexual. T h e real

issue in

these

d i v i n e seed. P h i l o d o e s n o t c o n f i n e his e x a m p l e s t o t h e w i v e s of t h e P a t r i a r c h s b u t a l s o refers t o s u c h figures as T a m a r ( M u t . N o m . 1 3 4 , D e u s I m m . 1 3 6 - 3 7 ) a n d H a n n a h , t h e m o t h e r of S a m u e l ( D e u s I m m . 5 ) . In

Cher.

4 4 - 4 6 P h i l o is c a r e f u l t o p o i n t o u t t h a t

a l t h o u g h G o d is

h u s b a n d of S a r a h a n d of L e a h , for h e o p e n e d t h e i r w o m b s , n o n e t h e l e s s

the they

bring forth n o t t o G o d b u t t o A b r a h a m , " w h o seeks t o win w i s d o m , " a n d t o J a c o b , " w h o e n d u r e s toil t o gain t h e g o o d . " G o d " b e g e t s n o t h i n g for himself, for h e is in w a n t of n o t h i n g "

( C h e r . 44, 46. O n t h e c o m p l e t e n e s s of G o d ,

see D r u m m o n d , I I , 4 9 - 5 0 ) . P h i l o is n o t i n t e r e s t e d in t h e a c t u a l h i s t o r i c a l l i v e s of t h e P a t r i a r c h s as reflected in t h e s e argued that

p a s s a g e s , a n d , as far as I k n o w , n o r e c e n t s c h o l a r

Philo really believed

J. G r e s h a m M a c h e n , The

Virgin

in a v i r g i n b i r t h of t h e P a t r i a r c h s Birth

of Christ

[1930],

p.

303).

His

has (cf. sole

c o n c e r n is t o i n d i c a t e t h e origin of v i r t u e a n d w i s d o m a n d t h e a t t i t u d e of soul in w h i c h m a n m u s t b e if h e is t o r e c e i v e t h e s e gifts of G o d ' s g r a c e . P h i l o w a s w e l l a w a r e of t h e d a n g e r of b e i n g m i s u n d e r s t o o d in h i s t e a c h i n g a b o u t G o d ' s i n t e r c o u r s e w i t h t h e soul. A f t e r m e n t i o n i n g t h e d i v i n e b e g e t t i n g of I s a a c , h e w a r n s t h e r e a d e r t h a t "this s a y i n g is n o t for all t o h e a r , s t r o n g l y d o e s t h e e v i l t i d e of s u p e r s t i t i o n

so

(SstaiSai[xovia) f l o w in o u r m i n d s

and drown u n m a n l y and degenerate souls"

( M u t . N o m . 1 3 8 ) . L i k e w i s e in

Cher. 48 h e c a u t i o n s t h o s e w h o h a v e b e e n i n i t i a t e d i n t o t h e s e " h o l y m y s t e r ­ ies" n o t t o b a b b l e of t h e s e s a c r e d t h i n g s t o a n y of t h e u n i n i t i a t e d

(01 anurjToi).

See also L e g . A l l . 1 1 1 : 2 1 9 . A p p a r e n t l y h e felt t h a t t h e i g n o r a n t a n d

un-

i n s t r u c t e d c o u l d e a s i l y c o n f u s e his a l l e g o r i z i n g w i t h p a g a n m y t h s t h a t t o l d of t h e g o d s m a t i n g w i t h m o r t a l b e i n g s . 1

G o o d e n o u g h in p a r t i c u l a r (Light,

b i s e x u a l i t y of S o p h i a in P h i l o ' s

p p . 1 9 , 2 0 1 - 2 0 2 , 248-49) stresses

writings.

the

THE DIVINE IMPREGNATION OF THE SOUL texts

is the

contrast

63

b e t w e e n a c t i v e a n d passive, p r i m a r y

and

s e c o n d a r y , G o d a n d m a n . T h e male-female t e r m i n o l o g y is s i m p l y a v e r y v i v i d m e a n s of concretizing o r g i v i n g expression t o these contrasts. and

To

stress o n l y

characteristics

the

sexual-mythological

of this l a n g u a g e

background

is t o misunderstand

Philo

completely. Likewise, m a n y of the o t h e r attributes of Sophia a n d A r e t e as P h i l o p o r t r a y s t h e m are t o a large e x t e n t t o b e e x p l a i n e d in terms of the d e m a n d s of the particular

s u b j e c t being dealt with,

and

p r o b a b l y n o t in terms of a n y fixed understanding of these figures that P h i l o inherited from paganism. T h u s , for e x a m p l e , A r e t e c a n function not o n l y as the male figure w h o sows g o o d seed in the h u m a n soul, or as the female figure w h o receives the seed f r o m G o d , b u t A r e t e c a n also b e the seed that is s o w n in the h u m a n soul (Leg.

All. I I I : I 8 O - 8 I ,

D e u s I m m . 137, et al.) or the offspring of

G o d ' s intercourse w i t h the soul (Praem. P o e n . 159-60, F u g . 50-52, et a l . ) .

1

P h i l o presents n o c o n n e c t e d a c c o u n t , n o " b i o g r a p h y " or

" v i t a " of S o p h i a a n d A r e t e such as is f o u n d for S o p h i a in V a l e n t i n 2

ianism or for E n n o i a in O p h i t e G n o s t i c i s m . H e finds n o need to explain the origin of m a n a n d the w o r l d b y m e a n s of a s e x u a l m y t h i c a l d r a m a of creation. H i s m a i n c o n c e r n is n o t t o explain the origin of things b u t t o s h o w h o w the one G o d , the origin of all that is, is related t o the w o r l d of created being a n d

particularly

3

t o m a n . O n a c o s m i c - p h i l o s o p h i c a l level the L o g o s , Sophia, and the P o w e r s (Suvdcfxetc) function as intermediaries b e t w e e n G o d a n d the created w o r l d . T h e y are t o b e v i e w e d f r o m within the c o n t e x t of the

i m m a n e n c e v s . the

transcendence

of G o d . On a

personal-

1

T h e s e are o n l y a f e w of t h e p o s s i b l e v a r i a t i o n s . I n C o n g r . 23 A b r a h a m ' s m a t i n g w i t h S a r a h is i n t e r p r e t e d as "the m i n d w h i c h aspires t o s t u d y a n d t o g a i n k n o w l e d g e " m a t i n g w i t h A r e t e . H a g a r , t h e c o n c u b i n e , in t h i s c a s e is e q u i v a l e n t t o " t h e e n t i r e e n c y c l i c a l e d u c a t i o n . " Still a n o t h e r p a t t e r n is f o u n d in s u c h t e x t s a s L e g . A l l . I I 4 9 a n d C h e r . 49, w h e r e A r e t 6 is e m p l o y e d within the divine impregnation context on a cosmic scale: G o d m a t e s with A r e t 6 o r S o p h i a a n d p r o d u c e s b y t h i s u n i o n t h e u n i v e r s e (xa oXa, xa o-i>u.7tavxa; see L e i s e g a n g , Pneuma Hagion, p. 52). 2

See H a n s J o n a s , The Gnostic

the Beginnings 3

of Christianity

Religion.

The Message

of the Alien

God

and

(1958), p p . 1 7 4 - 2 0 5 .

T h i s is n o t t o i m p l y t h a t t h e m a i n c o n c e r n of t h e G n o s t i c s is p r o t o l o g i c a l . L i k e Philo, t h e y t o o are soteriologically oriented. S e x u a l - m y t h i c a l d r a m a , h o w e v e r , p l a y s a d e c i s i v e role in m o s t G n o s t i c s y s t e m s in d e s c r i b i n g t h e origin of m a n , w h i c h is n o t t h e c a s e in P h i l o .

6

SOTERIOLOGY AND PROPHETIC INSPIRATION

4

religious level the L o g o s , Sophia, a n d A r e t e likewise serve as i n t e r ­ 1

m e d i a r i e s , a l t h o u g h n o t in such a w a y as t o e x c l u d e the p o s s i b i l i t y of a direct relationship b e t w e e n G o d a n d m a n .

1

F o r e x a m p l e , n o t e h o w e a s i l y P h i l o is a b l e t o c a p i t a l i z e o n t h e p a r t i c u l a r

w o r d i n g of G e n . 1 : 2 6 - 2 7 . M a n w a s p a t t e r n e d n o t xa-ra 8e6v b u t x a x ' ebcova (i.e. t h e L o g o s ) TOU 8EOU. F o r a l e n g t h y d i s c u s s i o n of t h i s u s a g e , s e e

especially pp. 52-70.

Jervell,

CHAPTER

FOUR

CONCLUSION A. SUMMARY OF PRECEDING DISCUSSION Our e x a m i n a t i o n of P h i l o ' s use of the categories m a l e a n d female has c o n t r i b u t e d to a n e w u n d e r s t a n d i n g of a n u m b e r of i m p o r t a n t passages in his writings. It is n o w t i m e briefly t o s u m m a r i z e

the

results so far o b t a i n e d a n d indicate those areas where this m o n o g r a p h m a y e n h a n c e further s t u d y of the writings of the Gnostics, the N e w Testament, and Contemporary Judaism. In o p p o s i t i o n to m a n y older writings o n Philo, this s t u d y

has

s h o w n that the avOpco-rcoc; created xoc-u-a -rijv zixova Osou m e n t i o n e d in O p . M u n d . 134 is p r o b a b l y to b e identified w i t h the rational soul of m a n , the n o u s , a n d is n o t a n d r o g y n o u s — e v e n in the sense of a pre-differentiated

c o m b i n a t i o n of m a l e

and

female —but

rather

asexual. T h e identification of the avOpcoTOc; xa-ra -rijv sbcova Osou of Op.

M u n d . 134 w i t h the " a n d r o g y n o u s " yzviy.bc, avOpcoTOc; of L e g .

All. I I : i 3 , w h i c h has usually b e e n p r e s u p p o s e d in the discussion of this issue, has b e e n s h o w n t o b e w r o n g . T h e rational soul of m a n , w h i c h is o n e a n d indivisible a n d closely related t o the L o g o s a n d G o d himself, in n o w a y participates in sexuality. It is rather m a n ' s irrational soul, w h i c h includes the b o d y , that participates in the male-female p o l a r i t y . T h e categories m a l e a n d female thus a p p l y t o m a n ' s m o r t a l nature, n o t t o that

immortal

part of m a n c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d . H o w e v e r , P h i l o also uses the categories male a n d female in a n ­ other sense. A c c o r d i n g t o this s e c o n d usage m a n ' s rational soul is t h o u g h t of as male, his irrational soul as female. B u t male in this c o n t e x t indicates asexuality, whereas female p o i n t s t o the realm, the sphere of the male-female polarity. second

usage

female

terminology

is

always

sexual

I n terms of this used

with

highly

p e j o r a t i v e c o n n o t a t i o n s , m a l e t e r m i n o l o g y in a t h o r o u g h l y p o s i t i v e fashion. T h i s p e j o r a t i v e usage of female t e r m i n o l o g y is seen m o s t clearly in those passages where Philo takes w o m a n t o refer allegoric a l l y to alaQfjaic, a n d m a n t o refer t o vou?. P h i l o ' s l o w estimate of the female is also frequently seen, h o w e v e r , in his d e s c r i p t i o n of actual w o m a n .

ALGHJ, I I I

5

66

CONCLUSION In Chapter I I I the male-female t e r m i n o l o g y w a s s h o w n t o play a

significant role in Philo's description of progress in the m o r a l and religious life. T h e themes of b e c o m i n g male, b e c o m i n g o n e , and b e c o m i n g a virgin, although

b y no means dominant

m o t i f s in

Philo's writings, were seen t o b e t h o r o u g h l y consistent with his wider usage of the categories male and female. T h e earlier assertion that Philo frequently associates maleness with the realm of the asexual, was g i v e n n e w support in Chapter I I I , insofar as it w a s s h o w n that b e c o m i n g male is r o u g h l y equivalent t o b e c o m i n g a virgin. Our s t u d y of the divine i m p r e g n a t i o n m o t i f indicated that P h i l o ' s use of the categories male and female in reference t o Arete, Sophia, and the L o g o s is purely functional, n e v e r o n t o l o g i c a l . These figures in n o sense participate in t h e male-female polarity. R a t h e r , t h e y are t h o u g h t of as male or female o n l y in terms of their functioning as a c t i v e and d o m i n a n t , in w h i c h case t h e y are considered male, or passive a n d r e c e p t i v e , in w h i c h case t h e y are described as female. Therefore t o speak of S o p h i a or A r e t e in Philo as a n d r o g y n o u s is misleading. A t this p o i n t Philo differs substantially f r o m m o s t of the Gnostics. P h i l o is also distinct from m o s t of the Gnostics insofar as he never uses s e x u a l - m y t h i c a l m e t a p h o r s in describing the creation of the w o r l d and of the rational soul of m a n . F o r Philo, the categories male and female function within

the realm of creation a n d are n o t

used, as t h e y are, for e x a m p l e , in Valentinianism, t o describe the fallible, erring part of the G o d h e a d . F o r Philo, G o d is asexual, i.e. c o m p l e t e l y b e y o n d or outside of the male-female polarity.

B . CORRELATIONS WITH SPECIFIC GNOSTIC TEXTS I . The Use of the Categories Male

and Female

in Gnostic

Writings

A s Jervell p o i n t s o u t , it is possible t o distinguish b e t w e e n those G n o s t i c writings that m a k e use of the categories male and female in a radically dualistic fashion and those that use these categories 1

t o describe the divine in its i n v o l v e m e n t in the w o r l d . T h e best e x a m p l e of the former, i.e. a radically dualistic s y s t e m w i t h refer­ ence t o the categories male a n d female, is found in the P s e u d o -

1

Pages

161-65.

CORRELATIONS WITH SPECIFIC GNOSTIC TEXTS

67

1

C l e m e n t i n e literature. H e r e the female is identified w i t h all t h a t is evil and sinful a n d is that from w h i c h o n e s h o u l d try t o free himself. "The

m a l e is w h o l l y truth, the female w h o l l y f a l s e h o o d . "

2

The

present w o r l d is 7tp6axaipo<;, 8?jXu<;; it is ayvota. T h e w o r l d t o c o m e is 3

atSio?, app7]v; it is yvwo-u;. T h e female p o l l u t e s those w h o t o u c h her. She stirs u p wars. She d e c e i v e s those w h o believe her.

4

A s Jervell

p o i n t s out, s a l v a t i o n in the P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e s is precisely t h e b r e a k i n g loose f r o m the p o w e r of the female, the separation of the m a l e from the f e m a l e .

5

B u t in such G n o s t i c writings as those of the Naassenes a n d the Valentinians, Jervell maintains,

the female element, rather t h a n

b e i n g s i m p l y identified with evil a n d sin, is that p a r t of the d i v i n e 6

that b e c o m e s i n v o l v e d in the c r e a t e d w o r l d . T h e c o m b i n a t i o n of b o d y and spirit

(or m i n d ) in m a n was e x p l a i n e d b y m a n y of the

Gnostics as the result of desire o n the p a r t of s o m e aspect of the divine

(frequently

the

Primal

M a n ) for the

earthly,

i.e. l i b i d o

7

directed t o w a r d s n a t u r e . I t is this l o v e of nature that is the cause of

all m a n ' s

troubles a n d finally of death

itself.

8

O n l y as

man

recognizes his true origin is he able t o o v e r c o m e the p o w e r of the earthly

a n d return t o his real h o m e , i.e. the transcendent

realm

b e y o n d nature. W i t h reference t o the s y s t e m of S i m o n Magus, Jervell

writes:

" D a s W e i b l i c h e ist . . . n i c h t anderes als das p n e u m a t i s c h e E l e m e n t als M o g l i c h k e i t (8uvafi.i<;) in der W e l t . D a s W e i b l i c h e ist d e m n a c h nicht das B o s e , sondern das ' G e w a g t e ' . . . . D a s Mannliche b l e i b t i m H i m m e l , w a h r e n d das W e i b l i c h e eine irdische G e s c h i c h t e h a t . "

9

T h e female element, if it is t o b e s a v e d , m u s t reunite w i t h the m a l e 1

O n t h e c o m p l e x s o u r c e p r o b l e m in t h e P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e w r i t i n g s , see

Georg

Strecker,

Das

Judenchristentum

in

den

Pseudokletnentinen

(1958),

especially p p . 35-96. 2

Horn. I I I . 27.

3

Horn. I I . 1 5 .

4

Horn. I I I . 24.

5

P a g e 1 6 5 . I n t e r m s of m a r r i a g e a n d t h e s e x u a l life, h o w e v e r , t h e P s e u d o -

Clementines

are s o m e w h a t

ambiguous.

O n the

one

hand

we

have

such

s t a t e m e n t s as t h o s e j u s t referred t o , y e t t h e r e are also p a s s a g e s t h a t e n c o u r a g e m a r r i a g e — a l t h o u g h as a n a n e c d o t e a g a i n s t a d u l t e r y !

(Horn.

III.

d e c l a r e t h a t "desire is n o t e v i l w i t h r e s p e c t t o m a r r i a g e " (Horn. cf. a l s o X I X . 2 1 , X I I I . 6

Pages

16).

161-63.

7

J e r v e l l , p . 1 4 1 . Cf. also J o n a s , Gnostic

8

Jervell,

p. 141.

9

Jervell,

p. 162.

Religion,

p. 152.

68)—and X I X . 18;

68

CONCLUSION

element. " B l e i b e n die b e i d e n getrennt, geht das W e i b l i c h e mit der Welt verloren."

1

Similarly, in Valentinianism, a c c o r d i n g to Jervell, particularly as reflected

in

Clement of A l e x a n d r i a ' s Excerpta

ex Theodoto,

the

female element is seen as the p n e u m a t i c in its i n v o l v e m e n t in the w o r l d . It is the earthly part of the h e a v e n l y Sophia. T h e female is that part of the G o d h e a d w h i c h is fallible or c a p a b l e of error.

2

T h u s , just as in the s y s t e m of S i m o n Magus, and in sharp contrast to the G n o s t i c i s m of the P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e s or of the Manichaeans, salvation i n v o l v e s the reuniting of the female V a l e n t i n i a n s w i t h the 3

m a l e S a v i o r . T h i s reunion takes place in an a n t i c i p a t o r y fashion in the s a c r a m e n t of the bridal c h a m b e r .

4

A t this point it should b e n o t e d —although such a c o m p a r i s o n m a y b e s o m e w h a t misleading —that in relationship to his use of the categories m a l e a n d female P h i l o stands closer to J o n a s ' " I r a n i a n " t y p e of G n o s t i c i s m t h a n t o his " S y r i a n - A l e x a n d r i a n " t y p e . B y this is m e a n t that for P h i l o there is n o m e n t i o n of the r e d e m p t i o n of the female a n d the return t o an original a n d r o g y n o u s state. Man progresses in the m o r a l a n d spiritual life b y fleeing f r o m that w h i c h is female. This is similar to w h a t w e find in the P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e s , where a n d r o g y n e i t y is a perversity, not the goal t o w a r d s w h i c h o n e strives. Salvation in the P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e s consists of the separation

of the m a l e from

the female, n o t in their

reunion.

5

1

Jervell, p . 1 6 2 .

2

Jervell, p . 1 6 2 . S e e J o n a s , p . 1 7 6 , w h o refers t o t h e f e m a l e T h o u g h t o f

G o d , u s u a l l y u n d e r t h e n a m e of W i s d o m , as p e r s o n i f y i n g " t h e fallible a s p e c t of G o d . " 3

T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n of Jervell's b e t w e e n t h e t y p e of G n o s t i c i s m r e p r e s e n t e d

b y t h e P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e s a n d t h a t of V a l e n t i n i a n i s m is e s s e n t i a l l y

the

s a m e a s t h a t m a d e b y J o n a s b e t w e e n t h e " I r a n i a n " t y p e of G n o s t i c i s m a n d the

"Syrian-Alexandrian" type

(cf.

Jonas, pp. 57, 105,

4

See d i s c u s s i o n a n d references in Jervell, p p . 1 6 1 - 6 3 .

5

Cf. Jervell,

236-37).

p. 165.

A s w a s seen in C h a p . I I , C , O p . M u n d . 1 5 1 ff. i n c o r p o r a t e s s o m e f e a t u r e s of t h e m y t h of t h e a n d r o g y n o u s P r i m a l M a n . B u t O p . M u n d . 1 5 1 ff. c a n n o t easily b e r e c o n c i l e d w i t h t h e m a i n b o d y of P h i l o ' s w r i t i n g s , a n d , f u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e is n o " c o r r e s p o n d i n g " p a s s a g e in P h i l o w h e r e he d e s c r i b e s

salvation

as a r e t u r n t o t h e a n d r o g y n o u s s t a t e of t h e Trpcoxoc; av9pco7ioc;. I n a n u m b e r of p a s s a g e s , h o w e v e r , P h i l o d o e s s p e a k of t h e wise m a n or t h e p e r f e c t m a n in a f a s h i o n r e m i n i s c e n t of his d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e np&roq

avSporeoi;, b u t w i t h

n o m e n t i o n of a n d r o g y n e i t y . See d i s c u s s i o n a n d references in V o l k e r , schritt,

p p . 2 6 0 - 7 9 . G o o d e n o u g h , Light,

Fort-

p p . 1 3 4 , 1 4 9 - 5 0 , 1 7 9 , 207, refers t o

t h e t h e m e of t h e " r e d e m p t i o n of t h e b o d y " in P h i l o ' s w r i t i n g s , a n d , i n d e e d , a n u m b e r of p a s s a g e s a t l e a s t p o i n t in t h i s d i r e c t i o n (see e s p e c i a l l y Q u a e s t . in

CORRELATIONS WITH SPECIFIC GNOSTIC TEXTS F o r the m o s t part, h o w e v e r , it is in the

6

9

"Syrian-Alexandrian"

t y p e of Gnosticism, not in the " I r a n i a n " t y p e , that o n e finds significant parallels to s o m e of the Philonic t e r m i n o l o g y that has been investigated in this thesis. 2. Becoming

Male

As w e saw in the preceding chapter, w h e n Philo uses the m o t i f of b e c o m i n g male, he refers to m a n ' s forsaking the realm of female sense-perception, i.e. the realm of the male-female p o l a r i t y , a n d granting to the rational soul its rightful sovereignty. Likewise w e saw that his description of the rational soul as male points t o the asexuality, not the sexuality, of this part of m a n ' s being. In light of this use of the categories m a l e and female in Philo, it is interesting t o n o t e a saying f o u n d in the Stromateis

( I I I . 9. 63) of Clement of

Alexandria. But those who set themselves against God's creation because of continence, which has a fair-sounding name, recount the words which were spoken to Salome, which I mentioned earlier. They are handed down, I believe, in the Gospel According to the Egyptians. For they say that the Saviour himself said: " I am come to undo (or: destroy; xaxaXucrat ) the works of the female," b y female meaning lust, and b y works, birth and decay. J

T h e evaluation of the female in this o f t - q u o t e d a p o c r y p h a l saying of Jesus as well as in Clement's interpretive c o m m e n t is similar to w h a t w e h a v e seen in Philo, b u t it is difficult to g i v e an accurate assessment of this logion because w e k n o w almost n o t h i n g of the G o s p e l of the E g y p t i a n s , f r o m w h i c h Clement believes it to h a v e c o m e . O n the surface, at least, the saying appears t o c o m e from a milieu such as that of the P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e s . Salvation i n v o l v e s the destruction of all that is female. In Stromateis

I I I . 13. 92, h o w e v e r , Clement q u o t e s another passage

from the Gospel of the E g y p t i a n s , w h i c h represents an evaluation of male a n d female t y p i c a l of Valentinian Gnosticism. When Salome asked when the things she had inquired about would be known, the Lord said: " W h e n you have trampled on the garment of shame and when the two become one and the male with the female (is) neither male nor female." G e n . I I : 1 1 , 1 2 ) . H o w e v e r , in n o i n s t a n c e d o e s P h i l o , like P a u l (cf. I C o r . 1 5 , II

Cor. 1

See

5 ) , s p e a k of a n y discussion

below.

k i n d of b o d i l y e x i s t e n c e after

death.

CONCLUSION

70

H e r e there is n o m e n t i o n of the destruction of the female. T h e saying rather points t o the neutralization of the female in the u n i t y of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n . Nonetheless, these t w o logia p r o b a b l y are c o m p a t i b l e w i t h each other, for

xocTaAueiv

can m e a n " t o dissolve, break u p , annul," as well

1

as " t o d e s t r o y . " T o annul or dissolve the w o r k s of the female can be taken, then, t o refer t o the neutralization of the female t h r o u g h its union w i t h the male, rather than t o the absolute destruction of the female. It is precisely this n u m b i n g or neutralizing o f the female t h a t constitutes its r e d e m p t i o n . B o t h sayings, then, are represent­ a t i v e of J o n a s ' " S y r i a n - A l e x a n d r i a n " t y p e of G n o s t i c i s m . L o g i o n 114 of the Gospel of T h o m a s also makes use of the m o t i f of b e c o m i n g male. Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go out from among us, because women are not worthy of the Life. Jesus said: See, I shall lead her, so that I will make her male, that (iva) she too m a y become a living spirit (7rveij(j.a), resembling y o u males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. 2

Interpreted from the s t a n d p o i n t of the P s e u d o - C l e m e n t i n e s , this logion w o u l d refer t o the denial of the corruptible present world, w h i c h is female, in order that o n e m i g h t participate in the w o r l d t o c o m e , w h i c h is male (Cf. Horn. I I . 15. 3). This w o u l d b e similar to the m e a n i n g of b e c o m i n g male in Philo, e x c e p t that P h i l o w o r k s within the dualistic framework of aitrOYjaic. vs. vouc rather than within the eschatological schema of present w o r l d v s . w o r l d t o c o m e of the P s e u d o - C l e m e n tines. As

Gartner

3

p o i n t s out, h o w e v e r ,

reflected in the Excerpta

4

ex Theodoto

the Valentinian G n o s t i c i s m of Clement of A l e x a n d r i a

presents a n o t h e r possibility of interpretation.

In this c o n t e x t the

male element is associated w i t h the Saviour, the angels, a n d the higher w o r l d . T h e female element, o n the other hand, is that part of m a n that can b e saved. T h e Valentinians themselves, as the pneumatics

or those

of the

enlightenment,

are referred

to

as

" w o m e n , " and " f e m a l e . " T h i s p a t t e r n is reflected in such a passage

as Excerpta

ex Theodoto

21:1-3.

1

Cf. u s e of xaxapystv in R o m . 3 : 3 . T h i s a n d f o l l o w i n g t r a n s l a t i o n s f r o m t h e G o s p e l of T h o m a s A . G u i l l a u m o n t , et al., The Gospel According to Thomas (1959). 2

3

4

Cf. G a r t n e r , Thomas, p. 254. G a r t n e r , Thomas, p p . 2 5 4 - 5 5 . S e e also J e r v e l l , p p .

162-63.

are

by

CORRELATIONS WITH SPECIFIC GNOSTIC TEXTS

To

"XOCT' elxova 6EOU kiioL-qaev auTOix;,

auTOu?"

TY)V 7rpoPoXy]v r/]v

aperev xal

71

69)Xu e7roi7]erev

apl(7TY]v cpaerlv 01 OuaXevTiviavoij TT]<;

Socpia? Xeye
xal

TOO jiiv appevixa ayyeXixa xaXouai,

TO Siacpepov 7tveufi.a. OUTWI; xal

era

TOO 6Y]XUXOO Se

TOU 'ASOOJI. TO jxev

appevixov Ifxewev a u T W , 7rav Se TO OYJXUXOV cntlpfia a p a arc' a u T o u Euoo yeyovev, acp' ^

al 6v)Xeiai,

OOT' exewou o l appevet;. TOO OUV

a p p e v i x a jxeTa TOU Xoyou auvearaXy), evouTai TOI<; dyyeXoo-t; xal ei? avSpa

TOO 6T)XUXOO 8k a x a v S p w O e v T a

eic 7rXy)pw|i.a /wpet. 8100 TOUTO yj yuvv]

XeyeTai xal 7) £VTau6a exxXYjala zlc, ayyeXout;.

Here it is clear that T h e o d o t u s is n o t talking a b o u t individual m e n a n d w o m e n b u t rather a b o u t the r e d e m p t i o n of the through

their union

with

appevixa — 7) exXoyy]) a n d

the

angels.

1

The male

the f e m a l e (drfku =

Valentinians (apaev

= TOO

TOO 07]Xuxa — Y] XXYJO-U;),

w h i c h were originally o n e in the h e a v e n l y S o p h i a , are reunited

as

2

the female is c h a n g e d o n t o the m a l e . A s Irenaeus p o i n t s o u t , this c o n j u g a t i o n takes place p r o l e p t i c a l l y in the sacrament of the bridal chamber.

3

S u c h a s c h e m e is possible b e c a u s e the Valentinians d i d

n o t identify the female with a n y absolute principle of evil b u t rather w i t h the fallible part of G o d , w h i c h b e c a m e i n v o l v e d in the material w o r l d . T h r o u g h o u t the A p o c r y p h a l N e w T e s t a m e n t a n d o t h e r writings from the s e c o n d a n d third centuries w e find n o t o n l y a

strong

preference for the m a l e sex as o v e r against the female, b u t

also

n u m e r o u s instances where the m a l e is closely identified w i t h

the

d i v i n e Spirit a n d the h e a v e n l y life, a n d the female with the present corruptible w o r l d . In the A c t s of T h o m a s 27, for e x a m p l e , T h o m a s p r a y s that the " c o m m u n i o n of the m a l e " (Y) xoivwvia TOU appevot;) m a y c o m e u p o n three m e n w h o h a d n e w l y b e e n c o n v e r t e d t o his teaching. T h e expression o c c u r s in c o n j u n c t i o n with such

other

phrases as "highest gift of g r a c e , " " h o l y n a m e of Christ that is a b o v e e v e r y n a m e , " " H o l y Spirit," a n d " p o w e r of the Most H i g h . " It is thus clear that " m a l e " in this t e x t refers to the realm o f G o d , Christ, a n d the Spirit.

1

heavenly

4

Cf. Excerpta ex Theodolo 6 7 - 6 8 , 79-80. Cf. Jervell, p . 1 6 2 . Adversus haereses I . 2 1 . 3 = H a r v e y I . 1 4 . 2. Cf. Jervell, p p . 1 6 2 - 6 3 . Cf. t h e reference t o " m a l e a t t i r e " in A c t s of P h i l i p 44. N o t e also T e r t u l lian, De cultu feminarum I . 2. 2

3

4

CONCLUSION

72 3. Becoming

One

I n Chapter I I I w e s a w t h a t O p . M u n d . 151 ff. reflects

certain

aspects of the m y t h of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n . W e also saw, h o w e v e r , t h a t P h i l o elsewhere specifically rejects the P l a t o n i c f o r m of this m y t h and that, apart f r o m O p . M u n d . 151 ff., h e n o w h e r e adheres t o or m a k e s use of the m y t h of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n . Philo n o w h e r e speaks of a return t o the a n d r o g y n o u s state of the Ttpw-roc av0pwTtoc as the goal t o w a r d w h i c h o n e is t o strive. In respect t o the m o t i f of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n , O p . M u n d . 151 ff. remains m o r e or less isolated from the rest of Philo's writings. I n various Gnostic writings, h o w e v e r , especially in s o m e of the treatises from N a g H a m a d i , the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n m o t i f plays a significant

role. T h e s e writings reflect the v i e w t h a t m a n

was

originally one, a c o m b i n a t i o n of male and female. A s l o n g as m a n remained a single being, the male and female elements of his being were in effect n o n - o p e r a t i v e or in a neutralized state. B i s e x u a l i t y in this case is functionally equivalent t o asexuality. It w a s the dis­ solution of this original a n d r o g y n o u s u n i t y

i n t o the

male

and

female sexes that w a s the beginning of m a n ' s trouble. Man thus b e c a m e aware of himself as a sexual being. H e b e c a m e aware of sexual desire and f o u n d himself t o b e d i v i d e d and also subject t o death. O n l y w h e n m a l e and female are reunited c h a m b e r will death b e o v e r c o m e . B u t , as in the of the Excerpta

ex Theodoto,

in the

bridal

Valentinianism

this reuniting of male and

female

primarily refers n o t t o individual m e n and w o m e n b u t t o the " f e ­ m a l e " Christians and the " m a l e " Saviour, i.e. Christ. L o g i o n 71 in the G o s p e l of Philip clearly reflects such a pattern. When Eve was in Adam, there was no death; but when she was sep­ arated from him death came into being. Again if < s h e > go in, and he take < h e r > to himself, death will no longer exist. 1

A s Grant points o u t , this passage u n d o u b t e d l y reflects a n u m b e r of t e x t s in Gen. 1 and 2. Gen. 1:26 — " m a l e and female created

he

t h e m " — c o u l d easily b e t a k e n as p o i n t i n g t o the creation of m a n as one 1

a n d r o g y n o u s being, especially since it is n o t until Gen. 2:22

T h e t r a n s l a t i o n here a n d o n t h e f o l l o w i n g p a g e s is t h a t of R . M c L . W i l s o n , The Gospel of Philip. Translated from the Coptic text, with an Intro­ duction and Commentary ( 1 9 6 2 ) . T h e b r a c k e t e d p r o n o u n s are m a s c u l i n e in t h e o r i g i n a l , b u t t h i s e m e n d a t i o n of S c h e n k e (so also W i l s o n ) a p p e a r s necessary to the meaning.

CORRELATIONS WITH SPECIFIC GNOSTIC TEXTS

73

t h a t there is a n y reference t o E v e being separated f r o m A d a m .

1

T h e union of m a n a n d w o m a n in marriage is a representation of the original a n d r o g y n o u s u n i t y of m a n a n d also an a r c h e t y p e of salva­ tion. P r o t o l o g y a n d e s c h a t o l o g y here coalesce. L o g i o n 78 in the

G o s p e l of Philip reflects a similar

pattern.

If the woman had not separated from the man, she would not die with the man. His separation became the beginning of death. Because of this Christ came, in order that he might remove the separation which was from the beginning, and again unite the t w o ; and that he might give life to those who died in the separation, and unite them. T h i s saying, h o w e v e r , g o e s b e y o n d L o g i o n 71 insofar as it points t o the role that Christ p l a y s in the restoration of the original a n d r o g ­ ynous unity.

2

L o g i o n 73 indicates t h a t the possibility of salvation is n o t o p e n t o e v e r y o n e : " A bridal c h a m b e r is not for the beasts, n o r is it for the slaves, nor for the w o m e n defiled; but it is for t h e free m e n a n d v i r g i n s . " Grant interprets " b e a s t s " t o refer t o " m e n c o n t r o l l e d b y material s o u l s , " a n d " s l a v e s " t o refer t o " t h o s e w h o h a v e n o part in G n o s t i c f r e e d o m . "

3

T h e i m p o r t a n c e of this t h e m e of the bridal c h a m b e r in the G o s p e l of Philip is seen not o n l y f r o m its f r e q u e n c y t h r o u g h o u t the G o s p e l b u t also b y the fact that it is e m p l o y e d in the final l o g i o n of the G o s p e l (127), w h i c h p r o b a b l y functions as a kind of s u m m a r y of the w h o l e . If anyone becomes a son of the bridal chamber he will receive the light. If anyone does not receive it while he is in this world, he will not receive it in the other place. He who has received that light will not be seen, nor can he be detained; and none shall be able to torment one of this kind even if he dwell in the world. A n d again when he goes out of the world he has already received the truth in images. . . . I n Philo w e saw that a l t h o u g h aspects of the sexual relationship can b e used as an allegory of G o d ' s dealings w i t h the soul, n o n e t h e 1

Chr.

R . M . G r a n t , " T h e M y s t e r y of M a r r i a g e in t h e G o s p e l of P h i l i p , " 1 5 ( 1 9 6 1 ) , p . 1 3 4 . Cf. also W i l s o n , Philip, p. 134.

2

Vig.

A s W i l s o n , Philip, p . 1 4 2 , p o i n t s o u t in reference t o t h e first p a r t of L o g i o n 7 9 , in t h e G o s p e l of P h i l i p it is f r e q u e n t l y d i f f i c u l t t o t e l l w h e t h e r t h e reference is " t o o r d i n a r y h u m a n m a r r i a g e o r t o t h e u n i o n in t h e final c o n ­ s u m m a t i o n , of w h i c h e a r t h l y m a r r i a g e is t h e ' i m a g e . ' " 3

G r a n t , Vig. Chr. 1 5 ( 1 9 6 1 ) , p . 138.

CONCLUSION

74

less actual sexual relationships b e t w e e n m e n a n d w o m e n are prin­ cipally regulated b y the L a w . B u t as Gartner p o i n t s out, " i n the G n o s t i c s y s t e m s the m a n - w o m a n relationship is m o t i v a t e d basically b y the

structure of the h e a v e n l y w o r l d , the m a l e a n d

p o w e r s w h i c h are striving after u n i t y . " The motif

female

1

of b e c o m i n g o n e b y o v e r c o m i n g the

male-female

p o l a r i t y is also seen in L o g i o n 22 of the Gospel of T h o m a s . Jesus, seeing s o m e children b e i n g suckled, says t o his disciples: " T h e s e children . . . are like t h o s e w h o enter the K i n g d o m . " T h e disciples t h e r e u p o n ask Jesus:

"Shall w e then, being children, enter

the

K i n g d o m ? " Jesus replies: When you make the two one, and when you make the inner as the outer and the outer as the inner and the above as the below, and when you make the male and the female into a single one, so that the male will not be male and the female (not) be female, . . . then shall you enter [the Kingdom]. Jesus here spells o u t the necessary c o n d i t i o n s for entrance i n t o the K i n g d o m . O n e of these is t h a t m a l e a n d female b e m a d e i n t o a single o n e . T h e r e is n o m e n t i o n here of an a n d r o g y n o u s u n i t y as in the G o s p e l of Philip, b u t the t h o u g h t seems t o b e basically the same. T h e little children represent a k i n d of pre-sexual i n n o c e n c e that functions a n a l o g o u s l y t o the sexual i n n o c e n c e of the original a n d r o g y n o u s m a n (cf. Gospel of Philip, L o g i a 71 a n d 78). T h e sexual p o l a r i t y is established o n l y w h e n E v e separates

herself from

Adam.

That

salvation i n v o l v e s such a neutralization of the sexual life is c o m ­ p a t i b l e w i t h the interpretation

presented a b o v e of L o g i o n 114 in

the Gospel of T h o m a s . This neutralization of the sexual life can b e d e s c r i b e d in terms of b e c o m i n g male or in terms of m a l e a n d female b e c o m i n g a single o n e . 1

G a r t n e r , Thomas,

2

p. 253.

2

T h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n f i n d s f u r t h e r c o n f i r m a t i o n in L o g i o n 37 of t h e G o s p e l of T h o m a s . H i s d i s c i p l e s s a i d : W h e n w i l t T h o u b e r e v e a l e d t o u s a n d w h e n will w e see T h e e ? J e s u s s a i d : W h e n y o u t a k e off y o u r c l o t h i n g w i t h o u t b e i n g a s h a m e d , a n d t a k e y o u r c l o t h e s a n d p u t t h e m u n d e r y o u r feet as t h e little c h i l d r e n a n d t r e a d o n t h e m , t h e n [shall y o u b e h o l d ] t h e S o n of t h e L i v i n g ( O n e ) a n d y o u shall n o t fear. Gartner" (Thomas, p . 250) p o i n t s o u t t h a t this l o g i o n is a g o o d e x a m p l e of t h e s u p p r e s s i o n of t h e e s c h a t o l o g i c a l q u e s t i o n in f a v o r of a k i n d of p s y c h o ­ l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e v i c t o r y of t h e " i n n e r " m a n o v e r his p h y s i c a l i m p u l s e s . T h e disciples a s k a b o u t J e s u s ' p a r o u s i a , b u t t h e y are t o l d , in effect, t h a t t h i s is n o t t h e i m p o r t a n t issue. J e s u s ' c o m i n g is n o t t o b e t h o u g h t of in

CORRELATIONS WITH SPECIFIC GNOSTIC TEXTS 4. Becoming

a

75

Virgin

I n Chapter I I I w e c o n c l u d e d that w h e n Philo speaks of G o d m a k i n g a w o m a n into a virgin he is referring allegorically t o the state of m a n ' s soul. W h e n G o d " b e g i n s t o c o n s o r t w i t h the s o u l , " he enables m a n t o forsake the t y r a n n y

1

of w o m a n l y sense-per­

c e p t i o n and grant t o t h e m i n d its place of rightful s o v e r e i g n t y . This t y p e of m o v e m e n t from the realm of sense-perception and

the

c r e a t e d w o r l d t o that of the transcendent sphere of nous or p n e u m a is c o m m o n in almost all of the G n o s t i c writings, b u t so far this s t u d y has u n c o v e r e d n o instances in the G n o s t i c writings where the m o t i f of b e c o m i n g a virgin is used in the allegorical sense in w h i c h it o c c u r s in Philo. Perhaps o n e reason for this is that the t h e m e of b e c o m i n g a virgin is f o u n d t o o frequently in the G n o s t i c writings in a near-literal sense t o permit its allegorical use w i t h o u t

con­

siderable confusion. In a n u m b e r of the A p o c r y p h a l A c t s , for e x ­ a m p l e , w e find great

emphasis p l a c e d o n h u s b a n d s

and w i v e s

forsaking sexual relations w i t h each other and returning t o a state 2

of chastity and p u r i t y . This m o v e m e n t f r o m sexual l o v e t o chastity is, in effect, a return t o the state of the pure virgin, n o t n o w under­ s t o o d spiritually b u t p h y s i c a l l y . I n V i t . Cont., in his description of the Therapeutae, Philo shows considerable admiration

for the

ideal of sexual abstinence

and

perpetual virginity. B u t this ideal always m o r e or less remains for h i m s o m e t h i n g t o b e a d m i r e d f r o m a distance. H e w a s far t o o m u c h a J e w not t o t a k e seriously the divine c o m m a n d t o b e fruitful

and

m u l t i p l y . T h u s there is n o t h i n g in Philo really c o m p a r a b l e t o the passages in s o m e of the A p o c r y p h a l A c t s where all sexual inter­ course is rejected as absolutely c o n t r a r y t o the will of G o d . In these writings the desired goal is t o return t o the state of the pure virgin, n o t just allegorically in terms of the relationship b e t w e e n sensep e r c e p t i o n and m i n d , b u t as a repudiation of all manifestations of actual sexuality.

t e r m s of a d e f i n i t e f u t u r e p o i n t in t i m e b u t in t e r m s of p r e s e n t e x p e r i e n c e . I t is m a n i f e s t in t h e o v e r c o m i n g o r n e u t r a l i z a t i o n of t h e s e x u a l d i f f e r e n c e s between

male

and

female,

which

is

clothing without being ashamed and

here s y m b o l i z e d

by

t a k i n g off

b e i n g as l i t t l e c h i l d r e n , i.e.

one's

sexually

innocent.

et

1

Cher.

2

Cf. A c t s of T h o m a s 1 4 , 5 1 , 6 1 , 9 8 - 1 0 3 ; A c t s of J o h n 6 3 ; A c t s of P e t e r 3 4 ; al.

50.

7

6

CONCLUSION C . FINAL

OBSERVATIONS

AND SUGGESTED

CORRELATIONS:

PHILO, THE GNOSTICS, THE N E W TESTAMENT,

CONTEMPORARY JUDAISM The

p r e v i o u s discussion has illustrated the value of this s t u d y

for the understanding

of specific G n o s t i c texts. Of e v e n greater

significance, h o w e v e r , m a y b e the possibility that is suggested b y this thesis of using the categories male a n d female as a k i n d of p r o b e or test case for e x a m i n i n g certain i m p o r t a n t similarities a n d differences in the writings of Philo, the Gnostics, the N e w T e s t a ­ ment, and

C o n t e m p o r a r y J u d a i s m . T h i s possibility m o s t clearly

suggests itself in t w o specific areas.

i . The Evaluation

of the Created

World

W e h a v e seen that the basic orientation of Philo a n d the Gnostics t o w a r d s the created w o r l d is clearly reflected in their use of the categories male and female. T h e Gnostics v i e w creation either as inherently evil ( " I r a n i a n " t y p e ) or as the result of divine fal­ libility and error ( " S y r i a n - A l e x a n d r i a n " t y p e ) . In b o t h instances creation is p l a c e d in sharp antithesis t o the transcendent

world

of the divine. Philo, b y contrast, o n the basis of the T o r a h theoreti­ cally affirms the g o o d n e s s of creation, yet t h r o u g h o u t m o s t of his writings speaks of the created w o r l d as sharply o p p o s e d t o the transcendent gaining

realm of the divine. Salvation, for h i m , consists of

freedom from

the

imperious d e m a n d s

of the

created

w o r l d a n d learning t o live in the sphere of n o u s , that part of m a n w h i c h is like G o d himself. On the whole, the N e w T e s t a m e n t writers also affirm the g o o d n e s s 1

of c r e a t i o n , yet even a c u r s o r y e x a m i n a t i o n of the N e w T e s t a m e n t in reference t o the categories male and female suggests that m o r e actual n e g a t i v i t y t o w a r d s the created w o r l d and, in

particular,

t o w a r d s m a n ' s sexuality, is present in these writings than is usually admitted. I Cor. 7 is a g o o d e x a m p l e . Paul's preference for the

1

Col. New

Cf. R o m . i : 2 0 , 8 : 1 8 - 2 4 , 1:16;

Rev.

T

4

;

r

4.

2

0

; A c t s 4 : 2 4 , 1 4 : 1 5 , 1 7 : 24; E p h . 3 : 9 ;

Actually, the

writers t o w a r d s

p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e of

c r e a t i o n is

inferred

lack from

g o o d n e s s of

from

various a

specific p a s s a g e s e x p l i c i t l y a s s e r t i n g t h e

sooner

the

of n e g a t i v e s t a t e m e n t s a n d f r o m t h e e m p h a s i s o n G o d as C r e a t o r t h a n any

Testament

4 : 1 1 , 10:6.

unmarried

creation.

FINAL OBSERVATIONS AND SUGGESTED CORRELATIONS

77

state w h i c h is reflected in this c h a p t e r is f r e q u e n t l y e x p l a i n e d in 1

t e r m s of his belief in the i m m i n e n c e of the p a r o u s i a . T h e s e v e r i t y o f the e s c h a t o l o g i c a l w o e s that are t o p r e c e d e Christ's return m a k e s it e x p e d i e n t n o t t o m a r r y , for the u n m a r r i e d will n o t b e

further

b u r d e n e d d o w n b y his c o n c e r n for his spouse (cf. v v . 25-35). Cross uses the a d j e c t i v e s " a p o c a l y p t i c " a n d " e s c h a t o l o g i c a l " t o refer t o the asceticism reflected in I Cor. 7 a n d in the writings of the Qumran sect. In

2

reference t o

I

Cor. 7:25-31,

the

term

"apocalyptic (or:

e s c h a t o l o g i c a l ) a s c e t i c i s m " is quite suitable, for P a u l here i n d e e d speaks of the t i m e of distress that will a c c o m p a n y the

passing

a w a y of the f o r m of this present age a n d the return of the L o r d in g l o r y . B u t in the following verses, this e s c h a t o l o g i c a l orientation is n o t q u i t e so clear. In v v . 32 ff. the contrast Paul m a k e s is n o t o n l y b e t w e e n the married a n d the unmarried b u t also b e t w e e n the L o r d a n d the w o r l d . B e i n g filled w i t h the cares of the w o r l d , the married person is m o r e i n t i m a t e l y tied t o the w o r l d t h a n the

unmarried,

a n d this closer b o n d w i t h the w o r l d m e a n s that he is d i v i d e d ([Asjiipio-Tou) in his interests.

3

Paul adds (v. 35) t h a t he says these

things n o t in order t o p l a c e a n y restraint u p o n the

Corinthians,

dXXa npbc, TO sua^Tjfxov xal suTtdpeSpov TW xuplco aTcepiaTcaaTWi;. A p ­

p a r e n t l y P a u l v i e w e d the marriage relationship, w i t h its a t t e n d a n t focus u p o n the things of the w o r l d , as m a k i n g it m o r e difficult t o serve the L o r d w i t h o u t inner division a n d d i s t r a c t i o n .

4

It w o u l d

appear, at least in part, that this is the reason for Paul's counsel that "it is well for a m a n n o t t o t o u c h a w o m a n " (v. 1). H e wishes

1

F o r e x a m p l e , see D o n a l d J. S e l b y , Toward the Understanding of St. Paul (1962), p. 266; H o w a r d C. K e e , Franklin W . Y o u n g , and Karlfried Froehlich,

Understanding 2

the New Testament

F r a n k M . C r o s s , Jr., The Ancient

Studies

(2nd e d . ; 1 9 6 5 ) , p p . 185-86. Library

of Qumran

and Modern

Biblical

( 1 9 5 8 ) , p p . 7 4 , 180.

3

A l t h o u g h P h i l o u s u a l l y c o n t r a s t s vouq a n d ataBrjais r a t h e r t h a n t h e L o r d a n d t h e w o r l d , n o n e t h e l e s s t h e r e is a c e r t a i n f u n c t i o n a l s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e t h o u g h t of P a u l a n d P h i l o a t t h i s p o i n t . P h i l o also s p e a k s of t h e e v i l of b e i n g d i v i d e d . M a n is t o b e c o m e o n e b y m o v i n g f r o m t h e d u a l i t y of voo? a n d a'ia9rj
Thomas, 4

pp. 175-76.

S e e A p p e n d i x J.

7

CONCLUSION

8

t h a t all m e n were as he himself is, i.e. unmarried, y e t he recognizes that

not

all

2. Eschatology of Man's

have

this

special

l(7

x*P !

jta

^

x

s

® °v

and the Problem of the Present Realization

v

(-

7)-

1

of the Telos

Existence

It is possible t o c o m p a r e the N e w T e s t a m e n t with the writings of Philo and the Gnostics in terms of the eschatological orientation of these writings. W h e n e s c h a t o l o g y is u n d e r s t o o d as pertaining to the "last things," for e x a m p l e in the sense of Paul's e x p e c t a t i o n of the parousia or his c o n c e r n a b o u t w h a t will h a p p e n t o m a n after death, then the t e r m " e s c h a t o l o g y " points t o s o m e of the funda­ mental

differences b e t w e e n P h i l o , the

Gnostics, and

the

New

T e s t a m e n t . Philo, for instance, in sharp contrast t o m u c h of the N e w T e s t a m e n t , not o n l y d o e s n o t focus o n such c o n c e p t s as messiah, k i n g d o m of G o d , and n e w creation, b u t he also says v e r y little a b o u t death and what lies b e y o n d death. B u t e s c h a t o l o g y c a n also b e u n d e r s t o o d in terms of questions such as these: T o w h a t e x t e n t is the final goal of m a n realizable in his present e x i s t e n c e ? H o w m u c h of " h e a v e n " can b e e x p e r i e n c e d already in this life? I n terms of such c o n c e r n s of "realized escha­ t o l o g y " it is n o t difficult to see that Philo, the Gnostics, and m a n y of the N e w T e s t a m e n t writers address themselves t o v e r y similar problems. B u t our s t u d y of Philo and, m o r e briefly, of a limited n u m b e r of G n o s t i c texts, has indicated that the categories male and female in these writings are intimately related t o this question

of

escha­

tological realization. Such motifs in Philo as b e c o m i n g male, b e ­ c o m i n g o n e , and b e c o m i n g a virgin were seen t o b e directly associat­ ed w i t h progress in the m o r a l a n d religious life. Our s t u d y of these motifs shed n e w light o n Philo's understanding

of the degree t o

w h i c h the goal of m a n ' s life is already realizable in his present existence. 1

Other

2

New

T e s t a m e n t passages that should be

M a t t . 1 9 : 3 - 1 2 , 22:23-33 (and parallels); Gal. 3:28.

n o t e d are

Rev.

14:4;

M a t t . 22:30 m o s t likely

r e f l e c t s t h e belief t h a t t h e r e w i l l b e n o n e e d for p r o c r e a t i o n in t h e r e s u r r e c t i o n existence and thus no marriage

(so L u k e 2 0 : 3 6 ; cf.

Enoch

15:3-7);

t h e l e s s it is a t l e a s t p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t i n f o r m s that

existence

without

the

sexual

relationship,

or

even

none­

this t e x t

without

is

sexual

d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , is q u a l i t a t i v e l y s u p e r i o r t o m a n ' s p r e s e n t c o n d i t i o n a n d t h u s m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e r e s u r r e c t i o n s t a t e . W e are r e m i n d e d of P a u l ' s oux EVI apaev x a l 0vjXu in G a l . 2

3:28.

I t is t o b e n o t e d , h o w e v e r , t h a t in a g r e a t m a n y p a s s a g e s w h e r e he refers

FINAL OBSERVATIONS AND SUGGESTED CORRELATIONS

79

One passage in particular, Gal. 3:26-28, suggests that in the N e w Testament

the

categories male a n d female m a y also b e closely

related t o the question of eschatological realization. IlavTec yap yap

uiol

6eou

eo"re Side ttjc tuo-tewc ev

XpicrTW T ^ a o u - o a o i

e i c X p i t T T O v e(3aTCTio-07)Te, X p i a T o v eveSuaatrOe. o u x evi T o u S a i o c

ouSe " E A A t j v , o u x

evi

SouXoc ouSe eAeuOepoc, oux

evi

apaev

xal

6yjXu- 7ravT£C y a p ufjieic e i c eo"re ev X p i a x w Tyjctou.

It is possible t o interpret the phrase oux stands in such sharp c o n t r a s t relationship coram

between

men

and

evi apcrev

xal OyjAu, w h i c h

t o m o s t of Paul's sayings o n the w o m e n , as

descriptive

deo or in the life t o c o m e , a n d thus w i t h o u t

of

man

immediate

practical i m p l i c a t i o n s in the Church. In this sense it c o u l d b e c o n ­ sidered a k i n d of t h e o l o g i c a l anticipation of the future w h e n Christ returns a n d the n e w age is fully ushered in. Gal. 3:28, h o w e v e r , n o t o n l y m e n t i o n s m a l e a n d female b u t also J e w a n d Gentile, slave a n d free. In these instances it is clear that a radical c h a n g e already has b e e n effected, n o t just in principle a n d in anticipation of the future w h e n r e d e m p t i o n shall b e fully realized, b u t right here a n d n o w . J e w a n d Gentile are still distinct, b u t their u n i t y is manifested in the Church. L i k e w i s e , a l t h o u g h Paul k n e w that slave and free were n o t the same, he r e c o g n i z e d that in the Church t h e y h a d b e c o m e one in Christ.

Presumably they

were

b a p t i z e d with the same b a p t i s m and p a r t o o k of the same b r e a d a n d wine at the L o r d ' s Supper. B u t b o t h J e w a n d Gentile a n d slave a n d free are m e n t i o n e d in Gal. 3:28 in direct c o n j u n c t i o n with m a l e

t o g r o w t h in t h e m o r a l a n d s p i r i t u a l life, P h i l o m a k e s little, if a n y , use of t h e c a t e g o r i e s m a l e a n d f e m a l e . A s V S l k e r , Fortschritt,

pp. 279-317, points out,

a l t h o u g h P h i l o v i e w s t h e v i s i o n of G o d (9ecopta 9eou or opaaic; 6eou) as t h e u l t i m a t e g o a l of m a n ' s m o r a l a n d religious s t r i v i n g , n o n e t h e l e s s h e u s u a l l y d e a l s w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n of p r e s e n t r e a l i z a t i o n in t e r m s of s u c h rubrics as u . £ T p i c o 7 r a 6 £ i a a n d a7ta0eia. H e is n o t c o m p l e t e l y c o n s i s t e n t in his u s e of t h e s e t e r m s , h o w e v e r . I n a n u m b e r of t e x t s h e a r g u e s t h a t t h e g o a l of t h e man

is c o m p l e t e f r e e d o m f r o m p a s s i o n

(dbrdOeia). M o s e s , for e x a m p l e ,

n o t satisfied w i t h t h e m e r e m o d e r a t i o n of p a s s i o n

wise was

(|j.Expi(i>7Ta0£ia) b u t o n l y

w i t h c o m p l e t e f r e e d o m f r o m p a s s i o n ( L e g . A l l . I l l : 1 2 9 ) . T h i s is a l w a y s t h e g o a l of t h e w i s e m a n , t h e p e r f e c t m a n ( L e g . A l l . I l l : 1 3 1 , V i t . M o s . I I : 6 8 - 6 9 ; see V o l k e r , p p . 1 2 6 - 3 4 , 262 f f . ) . B u t P h i l o also f r e q u e n t l y e x t o l s t h e v a l u e of u.£Tpico7rd6eia

(See references in V o l k e r , p p .

134

ff.,

266-68),

a n d in A b r .

257

h e e v e n a r g u e s for its s u p e r i o r i t y o v e r d 7 r d 6 s i a . A b r a h a m is p r a i s e d for s h o w ­ ing n e i t h e r e x c e s s i v e grief n o r , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i n d i f f e r e n c e t h e d e a t h of his wife

(see V o l k e r , p p . 1 3 1 ff.,

for a d i s c u s s i o n

p a s s a g e s in t h e w r i t i n g s of t h e G r e e k p h i l o s o p h e r s ) .

( a 7 i d 6 £ i a ) at of p a r a l l e l

CONCLUSION

8o 1

a n d f e m a l e . T h i s fact alone suggests c a u t i o n in maintaining

too

q u i c k l y that the male-female clause is v a l i d o n l y coram deo o r in the age t o c o m e a n d is t h u s of n o practical significance for the present. Gal. 3:28, h o w e v e r , is o n l y o n e of a n u m b e r of N e w T e s t a m e n t passages in w h i c h the categories m a l e a n d female are related t o the p r o b l e m of e s c h a t o l o g i c a l realization. If this s t u d y were t o b e p u s h e d further, not o n l y w o u l d Gal. 3:28 h a v e t o b e e x a m i n e d m o r e care­ fully, b u t such t e x t s as I Cor. 1 1 : 1 1 ; Matt. 19:3-12, 22:30 (and p a r a l l e l s ) ; a n d I Cor. 7 w o u l d also n e e d t o b e t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r ­ ation. I n e a c h of these instances a closer s t u d y o f the male-female t e r m i n o l o g y c o u l d v e r y well p r o v i d e n e w insight into the p r o b l e m of e s c h a t o l o g i c a l realization. I n c o n c l u s i o n , then, it w o u l d seem that the presence or absence of a futurist e s c h a t o l o g y m a y b e of less significance in c o m i n g t o grips with the real c o n c e r n s of Philo, the Gnostics, C o n t e m p o r a r y J u d a i s m , a n d the N e w T e s t a m e n t t h a n the t w o o t h e r factors w e h a v e just considered, n a m e l y the evaluation of the c r e a t e d w o r l d reflected in these writings a n d the degree t o w h i c h the TEXO? of m a n ' s existence is realizable already in this present life. In b o t h instances further s t u d y of the use of the categories m a l e a n d female seems likely t o b e m o s t rewarding. 1

In I Cor. 1 2 : 1 3 ,

male-female

a

clause.

p a s s a g e r o u g h l y p a r a l l e l t o G a l . 3:28, But

p r o b l e m s h e f a c e d in t h e I

Cor. 14:34-36).

we

find

good

reason

Corinthian church

Likewise,

for

(cf.

this in

esp.

Paul omits the the

particular

I Cor. 1 1 : 2 - 1 6

Col. 3 : 1 1 constitutes a parallel to G a l .

a n d here t o o t h e m a l e - f e m a l e

clause

is o m i t t e d

in t h e

best

and 3:28,

manuscripts.

B u t it m a y w e l l b e t h a t in his o p p o s i t i o n t o c e r t a i n h e r e t i c a l i d e a s in

the

C o l o s s i a n c h u r c h , P a u l (or t h e P a u l i n i s t a u t h o r ) felt it wise t o o m i t t h e m a l e f e m a l e c l a u s e , k n o w i n g h o w this m o t i f c o u l d b e e x p l o i t e d a m o n g t h o s e " G n o s t i c " tendencies.

For background

material

relative

to this

see G . B o r n k a m m , " D i e H a r e s i e d e s K o l o s s e r b r i e f e s , " Das Ende

pp. 139-56-

des

with

question, Gesetzes,

APPENDIXES APPENDIX A THE

RELATIONSHIP

AND

MAN One

BETWEEN

DE

O P I F I C I O MTJNDI

LEGUM A L L E G O R I A IN R E F E R E N C E TO T H E C R E A T E D A F T E R T H E IMAGE OF G O D

of the c o m p l i c a t i n g factors in a n y analysis of O p . M u n d .

stems from the difficulties i n v o l v e d in relating this writing t o L e g . All.

B e c a u s e of the c o m p l e x and frequently s o m e w h a t o b s c u r e

allegorizing

in

L e g . A l l . , where incongruities h a v e

shown

up,

whether apparent or real, it has s e e m e d m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y c o r r e c t to g i v e preference t o O p . M u n d . a n d other of P h i l o ' s less allegorical writings. Leg. A l l . 1131 ff. a n d I I : 4, in particular, are n o t o r i o u s l y difficult to h a r m o n i z e with the rest of P h i l o ' s writings. I n L e g . A l l .

1:32,

for e x a m p l e , Philo refers t o G o d ' s breathing i n t o the earthly m a n , i.e.

the vouc; fzutSriQ. It w o u l d appear that this act of d i v i n e in­

spiration is e q u i v a l e n t t o w h a t P h i l o elsewhere describes as m a n ' s creation after the i m a g e of G o d . T h i s is the p a t t e r n w e n o t e d in O p . M u n d . B u t in Leg. All. 1:33

P h i l o contrasts the earthly m i n d

w i t h the m i n d c r e a t e d after the i m a g e of G o d in such a w a y that it is e x t r e m e l y difficult t o m a k e such an identification. Likewise, in Leg. A l l . I I : 4 ff. P h i l o speaks of s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n a n d the passions as b e i n g helpers of a n d also y o u n g e r t h a n

(vewTepoi) the ruling

p a r t of the soul. B u t this ruling p a r t of the soul appears t o b e e q u a t ­ ed n o t with the m a n after the i m a g e of G o d b u t rather with the m o u l d e d earthly m i n d ! 1

As

"men"

has in

already

been

Philo—the

1

noted,

m a n after

the the

problem image

of

correlating

the

of G o d , t h e e a r t h l y

various

man,

the

g e n e r i c m a n , etc.—is e x t r e m e l y c o m p l e x . L e g . A l l . 1 : 3 1 ff. a n d I I : 4 ff.

are

b y n o m e a n s t h e o n l y o b s c u r e p a s s a g e s . I n Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 : 9 3 , for e x a m p l e , Philo writes fragment)

that

even

"the heavenly

is a m i x t u r e c o n s i s t i n g

man

(6 oupaviot; avGpcoreo; in G r e e k

of s o u l a n d b o d y ; a n d

f r o m his

birth

u n t i l h i s e n d h e is n o t h i n g else t h a n a c o r p s e - b e a r e r . " T h i s c a n s c a r c e l y be reconciled

with

what

Philo

elsewhere

says

about

t a k e a n o t h e r e x a m p l e , i n Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1:8,

the

heavenly

man!

14 Philo m a i n t a i n s that

To it

w a s t h e m o u l d e d m a n w h o w a s p l a c e d in P a r a d i s e t o w o r k a n d g u a r d it," w h e r e a s in L e g . A l l . 1 : 5 3 , a l t h o u g h b o t h m e n are s a i d t o h a v e b e e n p l a c e d in

A L G H J , III

6

APPENDIXES

82

Nonetheless, in o p p o s i t i o n t o m a j o r interpreters of P h i l o w h o e q u a t e the m a n after the i m a g e of G o d in L e g . A l l . 1:31 ff. with the idea of m a n ,

1

a n d in spite of the specific difficulties already

m e n t i o n e d , the possibility s h o u l d b e left o p e n that in L e g . A l l . the m a n after the i m a g e of G o d is equivalent t o the higher n o u s in m a n . V a r i o u s t e x t s t h r o u g h o u t L e g . A l l . offer c o n s i d e r a b l e s u p p o r t for such an interpretation. 1. T h e h e a v e n l y m a n in Leg. A l l . is frequently referred to as nous. N o t e , for e x a m p l e , in 1142, the e x p r e s s i o n : 6 . . . xa-ra TTJV eixova yeyovwc; xal TTJV t8£av voug. See also 1:33, 88, 90. A l t h o u g h it is p r o b a b l e that ELXWV a n d ISsa are e q u i v a l e n t terms in 1:42, it is at least possible that Philo m e a n s elxwv to refer t o the L o g o s , a c c o r d i n g to

his usual practice, a n d [Sea to the idea of m a n . W h e n Philo

w a n t s to refer to the L o g o s b y m e a n s of the t e r m ISea, he usually a d d s a modifier, for e x a m p l e , [81a [Slcov ZU7Z0C

M u n d . 25] ) or Y) ipx^

>

^

a

(Migr. A b r . 103, [ O p .

(Spec. L e g . 111:207, M u t . N o m . 125,

et a l . ) . 2. In L e g . A l l . 111:95-96 P h i l o refers to " a f o r m w h i c h G o d has s t a m p e d o n the soul as o n a tested c o i n . " This f o r m

(ayri\La.) or

impression (xapax-7]p) is the L o g o s , w h i c h is b o t h the i m a g e of G o d a n d the pattern for further creations. B u t P h i l o ' s p r o o f t e x t is precisely G e n . 1:27! T h u s it is clear that in at least o n e passage in Leg.

A l l . the m a n created after the i m a g e of G o d is part of the soul

of m a n . 3. In v i e w of P h i l o ' s soteriological orientation, it is impossible to understand w h y he should write so e x t e n s i v e l y a b o u t the h e a v e n l y m a n w h o was created after the i m a g e of G o d if this figure is s i m p l y the formal c o n c e p t of the idea of m a n a n d n o t s o m e h o w part of P a r a d i s e , he a r g u e s t h a t it is o n l y t h e m a n m a d e after t h e i m a g e of G o d w h o w a s a p p o i n t e d tiller a n d g u a r d i a n . O r a g a i n , in L e g . A l l . I :go et al. A d a m s y m b o l i z e s " t h e e a r t h l y a n d p e r i s h a b l e m i n d , " w h e r e a s in O p . M u n d . 1 3 6 ff. A d a m is t h e first a c t u a l m a n , a c o m p o s i t e c r e a t u r e of b o d y a n d r a t i o n a l s o u l ( I n L e g . A l l . 1 1 : 1 3 , h o w e v e r , A d a m is also a p p a r e n t l y i n t e r p r e t e d as t h e first a c t u a l m a n ) . I n v i e w of s u c h v a r i a t i o n s as t h e s e , it w o u l d s e e m q u i t e u n w a r r a n t e d t o b a s e a n y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of P h i l o o n o n e o r t w o o b s c u r e p a s s a g e s t h a t c o n t r a d i c t w h a t h e a p p a r e n t l y s a y s in e v e r y o t h e r i n s t a n c e . 1

S e e , for e x a m p l e , D r u m m o n d , 307, n o t e 6 4 ; Jervell, p p . 6 2 - 6 3 , pp. 128 ff., w h e r e t h e m a n after i n t e r p r e t e d in a G n o s t i c - m y s t e r y w i t h t h e i d e a of m a n .

Philo Judaeus, I I , 2 3 4 ; W o l f s o n , Philo, I , n o t e 1 3 6 . See also P a s c h e r , Konigsweg, t h e i m a g e of G o d in L e g . A l l . 1 : 3 1 ff. is religion f r a m e w o r k a n d is n o t e q u a t e d

APPENDIX B

83

actual empirical m a n . T h i s is especially true of L e g . All., where the soteriological emphasis is far m o r e o b v i o u s than in such a writing as O p . M u n d .

APPENDIX B T H E USE OF T H E T E R M A N D R O G Y N O U S IN R E F E R E N C E T O T H E G E N E R I C M A N O F L E G U M A L L E G O R I A I I : 13 AND The

term

D E O P I F I C I O M U N D I 76

ivSpoyuvoc; can

hermaphrodite

mean:

(1)

a

man-woman,

(2) a w o m a n i s h or effeminate m a n

i.e.

a

(3) o n e w h o

s u b m i t s t o unnatural lusts (4) o n e w h o practices s o d o m y , or allows it to b e p r a c t i c e d o n h i m , a s o d o m i t e ( L i d d e l l - S c o t t , s.v.). T h e best k n o w n o c c u r r e n c e of the w o r d in ancient literature is in P l a t o ' s Symposium

(189C-193D), the passage where Aristophanes tries t o

explain the m e a n i n g of epcoc; b y m e a n s of the m y t h of the

an­

d r o g y n o u s m a n . After describing the m y t h in considerable detail, Aristophanes explains that this third genus of m a n , the a n d r o g ­ y n o u s (the other t w o are the pure m a l e and the pure female), n o longer exists b u t

remains

o n l y as a n a m e of r e p r o a c h

(6vei8ei

ovocfia). In V i t . Cont. 57-63 Philo refers specifically to P l a t o ' s m y t h of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n . H e c o n c l u d e s his discussion t h u s : eOTocpdcycoya yap TauTaTCOCVTOC,Suvafieva TTJ

xoavoTYjxi. xrjc; £7uvoioc^

xcx dixa SeXEa^eiv

wv zy. TOXXOU TOU TCpiovro^ ot Mcouffsco^ yvwpijxoi, [i.e[xa0y)xoT£^ iv. 7tpd>Tr)c;

yjXixtac; Ipav aXTjBetai;, xaxacppovoijo'i.v

dcve£<x7t<xT7]T0i SL-OCTEXOUVTEI;.

There are eight passages in Philo where the term dvSpoyuvoc; is u s e d ; appev60Y)Xuc; does n o t appear at all (Index

Leisegang,

s.v.).

A s in the L X X , where civSpoyuvog occurs t w i c e ( P r o v e r b s 18:8 and 19:15), wherever the term is f o u n d in Philo, it is used in a d e c i d e d l y p e j o r a t i v e sense. In each instance Philo is sharply critical of the person or practice that is d e s c r i b e d b y the term dvSpoywog related w o r d yuvavSpoc; o c c u r s in three passages—Virt.

(the

21, R e r .

D i v . Her. 274, Sacr. A . C. 100 —and in each case is also used in a p e j o r a t i v e sense). In m o s t of the instances where Philo uses dvSpoyuvoc;, h e is c o n d e m n i n g effeminacy and various t y p e s of h o m o ­ sexuality. T h e a b o v e e v i d e n c e is largely irrelevant to the question of the b i s e x u a l i t y of the m a n created after the i m a g e of G o d . A negative

8

APPENDIXES

4

result o n this issue was arrived at a b o v e o n quite different g r o u n d s . What

this e v i d e n c e d o e s indicate,

h o w e v e r , is that

the

term

" a n d r o g y n o u s " —especially w h e n scholars simultaneously use it in such a c o n t e x t as that of the a n d r o g y n o u s A n t h r o p o s figure of the Poimandres—is n o t e v e n well applied t o the generic m a n of Leg. All.

I I : 13 and O p . M u n d . 76. It is unsuitable, n o t o n l y because it

carries with it far t o o m a n y p u r e l y m y t h o l o g i c a l c o n n o t a t i o n s b u t also because of the universally p e j o i a t i v e usage of its Greek e q u i v ­ alent in Philo's writings.

APPENDIX C ADDITIONAL NOTES ON

PHILO'S

U N D E R S T A N D I N G OF T H E

SOUL

1. W h e r e v e r Philo has in m i n d the c o m p o s i t i o n of the soul, he adheres consistently to a t w o - f o l d division. B u t he usually presents a tri-partite division w h e n he refers to the soul's functions.

For

e x a m p l e , in Leg. A l l . I l l : 115 he lists the three parts of the soul as the reasoning part (Xoyi.o-Ti.x6v), the high-spirited part (0uu.tx6v), and the seat of desire (ETUGUU^TIXOV), a s c h e m a w h i c h is t a k e n from Plato Leg.

(Phaedrus

246 ft.; Timaeus

69C; Republic

439D. See also

A l l . 1:70, Conf. L i n g . 21, Migr. A b r . 66-67, Spec. Leg. I V : 9 2 ,

Virt. 13). In R e r . D i v . H e r . 225 Philo again m e n t i o n s that the soul is tri-partite, but this time adds that each of the three parts is d i v i d e d into t w o , thus m a k i n g six parts in all. H e does n o t specify what these six parts are. In o n e passage he introduces an Aristotelian division, listing the three parts of the soul as the nutritive (0pe7mx6v) the

sense-perceptive

(ato-6rrux6v),

and

the

rational

(Xoytxov).

D r u m m o n d , I, 318-20, in a clear a n d concise discussion of the w h o l e p r o b l e m , refers

to the

"strange c o n f u s i o n " into which Philo is

driven a n d c o n c l u d e s that these references " s e r v e t o illustrate the character of Philo's eclecticism, which readily appropriates

what­

ever seems a d a p t e d t o the subject i m m e d i a t e l y under discussion, w i t h o u t always pausing t o consider whether it can b e w o v e n i n t o the t e x t u r e of a consistent philosophical s y s t e m . " In Plant. 45 Philo refers t o 6 uicroc vouc, and in Mut. N o m . 30-32 he speaks of the soul of the b a d m a n (yj '\>uyr\ TOU cpauXou), the m i d d l e soul (yj (iio-y)
([at

^u}(al TWV] dyaOwv xal crocpcov). These expressions, w h i c h o c c u r

APPENDIX C within

a c o n t e x t of ethical

85

discussion, are likewise difficult

to

correlate w i t h P h i l o ' s m o r e usual division of the soul into rational a n d irrational parts (see also L e g . A l l . 1:95). 2. There is s o m e a m b i g u i t y in Philo's writings as t o

whether

m a n ' s m i n d or rational soul is material or immaterial.

Interpreters

of P h i l o h a v e t a k e n o p p o s i t e positions o n this p o i n t ;

nonetheless

the weight o f e v i d e n c e supports the v i e w that Philo b e l i e v e d the rational soul to b e immaterial. T h u s , in S o m . 1130 he clearly states t h a t w e m u s t h o l d the d o m i n a n t m i n d in m a n t o b e n o b o d y b u t i n c o r p o r e a l (00 trtofxa, aawjia-rov). T h e phrase oux depa xwoufjisvov, used t o qualify 7rveu(i.a in D e t . P o t . Ins. 83, w o u l d also appear t o b e u n a m b i g u o u s l y in favor of an immaterial

v i e w of the soul.

In

Plant. 18 Philo specifically repudiates a material v i e w of the soul w h e n he writes: N o w while others, b y asserting that our human mind is a particle ((xotpa) of the ethereal substance, have claimed for man a kinship with the upper air; our great Moses likened the fahion of the reason­ able soul to no created thing (ou&vi. TUV yeyovo-rcov), but averred it to be a genuine coinage of that divine and invisible spirit, signed and impressed bv the seal of God, the stamp of which is the eternal Logos. F o r an extensive discussion of P h i l o ' s views o n the nature of the soul, see D r u m m o n d , I, 326-35. D r u m m o n d specifically deals with those passages that h a v e b e e n taken t o support the interpretation that P h i l o held the rational soul t o b e material. M u c h of the c o n ­ fusion stems from the fact t h a t m a n y interpreters h a v e failed t o understand

Philo's

different

usages

of

the

terms

vou<;

and

3. A l t h o u g h in m o s t cases Philo speaks as if the h u m a n soul c o m e s into existence w h e n G o d breathes into each individual

the

breath of life, there is a s e c o n d strand in his thinking that emphasizes the earlier creation or pre-existence of the soul. " T h e

universe,"

P h i l o argues, " m u s t needs b e filled t h r o u g h a n d t h r o u g h w i t h life," a n d each part of the universe has those forms of life w h i c h are appropriate t o it. Just as the earth has creatures of the land, and the sea a n d rivers those that live in water, so also there are creatures of the air, the invisible souls that can b e a p p r e h e n d e d o n l y b y the m i n d (Gig. 6-7, 9). T h e s e souls w h i c h fly a n d h o v e r in the air are called angels b y Moses b u t d e m o n s or spirits b y the p h i l o s o p h e r s (Gig. 6). T h e y are equal t o the stars in n u m b e r

( S o m . 11138).

APPENDIXES

86

Of this great multitude of souls s o m e descended i n t o b o d i e s while others never left the h e a v e n l y region, their native land (Conf. L i n g . 77-82, 176-77; Gig. 1 2 - 1 3 ; Plant. 14; S o m . 1:133 ff., 180).

Philo

explains the reason for this in several slightly different w a y s . In o n e case the souls that d e s c e n d e d are said t o h a v e h a d

"earthward

tendencies and material t a s t e s " ( S o m . 1:138) a n d t o have felt a c r a v i n g after the things of the earth ( S o m . 1:140). In

another

passage it w o u l d appear that the descent into the b o d y w a s s i m p l y for the sake of gaining a certain k n o w l e d g e of the material w o r l d . These souls are represented b y such figures as A b r a h a m , J a c o b , and Moses. " T h e i r w a y is t o visit earthly nature as m e n w h o travel a b r o a d t o see a n d learn. . . . W h e n t h e y h a v e s t a y e d awhile in their bodies, and beheld t h r o u g h t h e m all that sense and m o r t a l i t y has t o s h o w , t h e y m a k e their w a y b a c k to the place from w h i c h t h e y set o u t at the first" (Conf. Ling. 77-82). A s t o the souls that never d e s c e n d e d i n t o bodies, Philo s i m p l y says that these were of such p u r i t y and excellence that t h e y never felt a craving after the things of the earth ( S o m . 1:140), or that because t h e y were e n d o w e d with a "diviner c o n s t i t u t i o n " t h e y h a d n o regard for a n y earthly quarter (Plant. 14). Of the souls that d e s c e n d e d into b o d i e s s o m e c a m e t o be in­ creasingly swallowed u p b y the cares a n d c o n c e r n s of the material w o r l d a n d thus a b a n d o n e d themselves t o " t h e unstable things of c h a n c e " (Gig. 13-16) and the sphere of "endless calamities" (Conf. Ling. 176-77). B u t others, n a m e l y the souls of those w h o sought wisdom

and

gave

themselves

to

genuine

philosophy,

"soared

u p w a r d s b a c k t o the place from w h e n c e t h e y c a m e " (Gig. 13). These souls of the wise were b u t sojourners a n d strangers in a foreign c o u n t r y , i.e. the b o d y . T h e h e a v e n l y region is their native land

(Conf. Ling. 77-82; S o m . I : i 8 o f f . ; Quaest. in Gen. I l l : 10,

45; I V : 74). Philo sees J a c o b ' s vision of the ladder reaching u p t o h e a v e n with the angels of G o d ascending and descending o n it as a picture of the descent a n d ascent of souls ( S o m . 1:133 f f . ) . P h i l o ' s references t o the pre-existence of souls appear t o c o n ­ stitute a s e c o n d strand in his thinking w h i c h has

never

been

h a r m o n i z e d with the far m o r e usual Genesis a c c o u n t of

man's

creation.

Philo

As Drummond

points

out

(II,

277),

although

a c c e p t s the P l a t o n i c d o c t r i n e of the pre-existence of the soul, this doctrine " t o t a l l y disappears . . . w h e n he speaks of the creation of m a n , and the c o m m u n i c a t i o n t o h i m of the divine Spirit." In this

8

APPENDIX D

7

latter case Philo " p r o c e e d s as t h o u g h each m a n b e g a n his mental history w i t h his b i r t h . " 4. A l t h o u g h Philo writes e x t e n s i v e l y a b o u t the soul and the t w o ­ fold nature of man, he is not unaware of the difficulty of the subject. In several passages he professes an inability truly t o k n o w the nature of m a n ' s soul. Thus, for e x a m p l e , in Mut. N o m . 10 he writes: " A n d w h y s h o u l d w e w o n d e r that the E x i s t e n t

(TO 6V)

c a n n o t b e a p p r e h e n d e d b y m e n w h e n e v e n the m i n d in each of us is u n k n o w n t o us ? F o r w h o k n o w s the essential nature of the soul, t h a t u n c e r t a i n t y that has b r e d numberless c o n t e n t i o n s a m o n g the sophists w h o p r o p o u n d opinions c o n t r a r y t o each other or e v e n t o t a l l y and generically o p p o s e d ? " In Cher. 65 Philo chides the m i n d , filled with pride, t h a t fails t o recognize its

dependence

on G o d , for the m i n d " c a n n o t possess even itself securely, or e v e n k n o w w h a t its o w n real being i s . " See also Leg. A l l . 1:91, S o m . 1:30.

APPENDIX D A D D I T I O N A L NOTES ON PHILO'S USE OF A N D R O G Y N O U S M A N MOTIF A N D HIS

THE

ACCOUNT

OF T H E C R E A T I O N OF W O M A N 1. Several

factors

may

help

explain

Philo's

use

of

the

a n d r o g y n o u s m a n m o t i f in O p . Mund. 151-52 in spite of his scornful ridicule in Vit. Cont. 63 of P l a t o ' s m y t h of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n . In the first place, the interpretation of the Genesis creation nar­ ratives in terms of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n m o t i f w a s

apparently

widespread in Philo's d a y , b o t h a m o n g the r a b b i s and in various 1

G n o s t i c circles. T h u s Philo m a y well h a v e m a d e use of a source t h a t c o n t a i n e d the m o t i f of the a n d r o g y n o u s primal m a n w i t h o u t directly associating this t h e m e with the m y t h of the a n d r o g y n o u s 2

m a n as f o u n d in P l a t o ' s Symposium.

In the s e c o n d place, the ele­

m e n t s of the m y t h w h i c h are f o u n d in O p . M u n d . 151-52 are quite c o m p a t i b l e with P h i l o ' s o w n favorite t h e m e of u n i t y vs. duality and m a k e it possible for Philo t o relate this t h e m e t o t h e Genesis creation narrative. Finally, this entire section of O p . Mund. (136-70) contains a n u m b e r of motifs that c a n o n l y with difficulty b e related 1

2

See references a n d d i s c u s s i o n in J e r v e l l , p p .

S e e D o d d , Bible and Greeks, p p . 1 5 8 - 5 9 , b e t w e e n O p . M u n d . 1 5 1 ff. a n d P o i m a n d r e s .

for

107-12,

161-65.

a d i s c u s s i o n of

parallels

APPENDIXES

88

t o the rest of Philo's w r i t i n g s .

1

It w o u l d thus appear that he has

m a d e use of certain c o n t e m p o r a r y interpretations of the creation a n d fall of m a n w i t h o u t in e v e r y case recognizing the i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y of s o m e of this material w i t h his writings as a w h o l e . B u t Philo is m a i n l y interested in the Genesis a c c o u n t o f the creation and fall of m a n because of w h a t it has t o say a b o u t c o n t e m p o r a r y m a n . T h u s to require that O p . M u n d . 151-52 b e c o m p l e t e l y c o m p a t i b l e with w h a t Philo elsewhere says a b o u t the origin of actual empirical m a n is to misunderstand his purpose. 2. Philo gives n o one answer as t o h o w a n d w h e n the first w o m a n was created, n o r d o e s he appear t o be particularly interested in this question. If O p . M u n d . 151-52 is interpreted in terms of the an­ d r o g y n o u s m a n motif, then w o m a n c a m e into existence w h e n the original bisexual m a n , w h o was o n e , b e c a m e t w o , a m a l e and a female. I n L e g . A l l . 11:19-52 Philo allegorizes the a c c o u n t of the creation of w o m a n in such a w a y that w o u l d b e consistent with the a n d r o g y n o u s primal m a n m o t i f (cf. especially 24, 40, 44), b u t makes it quite clear in I I : 19 that he considers the narrative in its literal form m y t h i c a l . O p . M u n d . 76, L e g . A l l . I I : 13, and Rer. D i v . Her. 164 h a v e frequently been interpreted in terms of the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n motif, b u t as w a s seen in Chapter I I , these passages are best u n d e r s t o o d in reference t o the philosophical c o n c e p t of p o t e n t i a l i t y a n d actuality. Thus in o n e instance the generic earthly m a n unites with the generic h e a v e n l y m a n t o form m a n , in a n o t h e r instance t o f o r m w o m a n . F u r t h e r m o r e , Philo repeatedly insists that expressions of t i m e in the creation narrative i m p l y order, n o t c h r o n o l o g i c a l sequence, since all things c a m e into existence s i m u l t a n e o u s l y .

2

Thus

logically it is difficult to see h o w the a n d r o g y n o u s m a n motif, if u n d e r s t o o d literally, c o u l d fit into Philo's s c h e m a in O p . M u n d . , w h i c h , it must b e r e m e m b e r e d , is the o n e writing that deals systemati­ cally with the creation of the w o r l d . M u c h of the confusion in inter­ preting Philo w o u l d appear t o stem from the failure to distinguish b e t w e e n his basic t h e o l o g i c a l - p h i l o s o p h i c a l analysis of creation a n d the

m y t h o l o g i c a l - a l l e g o r i c a l framework

he

frequently

uses

for

explaining these c o n c e p t s . One m u s t n o t lose sight of the fact t h a t Philo is an exegete of Scripture, and the Genesis narratives are t h e g i v e n w h i c h is his starting p o i n t .

1

See

above,

Chap. II,

C,

1.

2

See

above,

Chap. II,

B,

2, c.

APPENDIX E

8

9

APPENDIX E ADDITIONAL

NOTES ON PHILO'S A T T I T U D E

T O W A R D S MAN'S I R R A T I O N A L SOUL AND 1. Positive

THE CREATED

Orientation

towards Man's

WORLD

Lower Nature

and the

Created

World A l t h o u g h the categorical qualitative distinction between G o d and the c r e a t e d w o r l d is p r e s u p p o s e d t h r o u g h o u t his writings, n o n e t h e ­ less P h i l o n o t infrequently emphasizes that the w o r l d was m a d e b y G o d and therefore is g o o d and beautiful. Such a positive e v a l u a t i o n of the

created w o r l d is seen particularly

in O p . Mund., where

P h i l o ' s descriptions of the h a n d i w o r k o f nature and o f the h a r m o n y , s y m m e t r y , and b e a u t y of the created w o r l d are almost p o e t i c in q u a l i t y a n d are reminiscent of s o m e of the O l d T e s t a m e n t P s a l m s .

1

Similarly in Spec. L e g . Philo shows particular sensitivity t o the b e a u t y of the created w o r l d . Such a phrase as " t h e artist nature in 2

her creative w o r k " is n o t atypical of this treatise. I n d e e d , in Spec. Leg. 1:97 Philo emphasizes that the high priest of the Jews does not offer prayers and sacrifices just for his o w n kinsmen and fellow3

c o u n t r y m e n as d o the priests of other n a t i o n s , b u t also gives thanks for the w h o l e h u m a n race a n d for the various parts of creation. " F o r he holds the w o r l d t o b e , as in v e r y truth it is, his n a t i v e c o u n t r y . " As was n o t e d in Chapter I I , the Trpw-o? av0pco7ro<; of O p . M u n d . 136 ff. is described as beautiful and g o o d in each part of his being, in b o t h soul and b o d y . F u r t h e r m o r e ,

it w o u l d appear from O p .

M u n d . 72-75 that G o d did n o t e m p l o y his p o w e r s (Suvafzsii;) and fellow-workers

((rvvspyoi) in the creation of m a n s i m p l y because

m a n has a b o d y , for G o d created the animals and all other parts of the material w o r l d b y himself. Possessing n o rational

faculty,

animals partake of neither virtue n o r v i c e , for as Philo p o i n t s out in O p . M u n d . 73, &

KOLXICCC,

8k

xat aps-riji; a>? av olxot; vouc; xoci Aoyo?,

7T£
1

For example,

Mund. 2

3

77-78,

compare

114-16, 133.

Spec. Leg. I l l : i o 8 . Cf. H e b . 5.

Op. Mund.

136-50 with Psalm

8.

See

also O p .

APPENDIXES

go

sin n o t just t o his s o m a t i c nature but t o a d i s t o r t e d b e t w e e n the higher a n d l o w e r parts of his b e i n g .

relationship

1

P h i l o likewise c a n s p e a k p o s i t i v e l y of aio-0Y)o-ic, h o l d i n g it t o b e a f a c u l t y t h a t is neither g o o d n o r b a d in itself b u t g o o d or b a d o n l y as it is f o u n d in the wise m a n or the fool, i.e. o n l y as it is e m p l o y e d 2

for g o o d or b a d p u r p o s e s . Sense-perception is indispensable in the acquisition of k n o w l e d g e of b o d i l y o b j e c t s . I n d e e d , apart from its help, Philo maintains, the vouc is TU9A0C, . . . aSuvorroc ovtcoc,

r)iuau

3

tyi>yr\c, TeAeiac. Just as A d a m was i n c o m p l e t e apart from E v e , so the m i n d , if it were to gain k n o w l e d g e of the material w o r l d , required sense-perception.

4

Such k n o w l e d g e is a k i n d of g a t e w a y or pass

(toiAy) tic) t o the intelligible w o r l d .

5

Philo thus

understandably

refers t o the senses as Stopeal 0e!ai for w h i c h m a n o u g h t t o g i v e thanks.

6

A l t h o u g h he usually uses h i g h l y p e j o r a t i v e language in reference to 7iaOoc, particularly v]8ovy], there are a n u m b e r of passages w h e r e P h i l o speaks m o r e m o d e r a t e l y , a n d o c c a s i o n a l l y he e v e n writes in 7

praise of p a s s i o n . In a c c o r d with w h a t was p r o b a b l y a traditional usage of his d a y , he m a k e s use of P l a t o ' s parable of the charioteer to e x p l a i n health of soul as b e i n g present w h e n 6uu.6c a n d emOufiia, two

restive horses, are p r o p e r l y c o n t r o l l e d b y Aoyoc, the c h a r i o t e e r .

8

Circumcision is a s y m b o l of the excision of " e x c e s s i v e a n d super­ fluous pleasure,"

1

9

nonetheless pleasure in s o m e measure is necessary

T h a t G o d c r e a t e d t h e b o d y as w e l l as t h e r a t i o n a l soul is a m o t i f t h a t

is p r o m i n e n t in O p . M u n d . b u t is n o t c o n f i n e d t o t h a t w r i t i n g . Cf. R e r . D i v .

H e r . 7 3 , L e g . A l l . 111:70. 2

Leg. A l l . 1 1 1 : 6 7 .

3

Cher. 59.

4

Cher.

6

S o m . I : i 8 8 . P h i l o p r a i s e s t h e sense of s i g h t in p a r t i c u l a r , h o l d i n g it t o

be

57-64.

Cf.

Rer.

Div.

H e r . 53,

Congr.

155.

m o s t c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e r a t i o n a l s o u l a n d t h e s o u r c e of p h i l o s o p h y .

S e e Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 1 : 3 4 ; ° p . M u n d . 5 3 , 54, 7 7 . 6

C o n g r . 96. I n L e g . A l l . 1 1 1 : 4 9 P h i l o g o e s so far as t o s a y t h a t

vouq,

w i t h o u t its p o w e r s , o n e of w h i c h is aXadrjaiQ, is f o u n d to b e n a k e d a n d n o t even existent

(yuu.v6<; xal ouSi cov eopiaxErai). See also L e g . A l l . 1 : 2 5 , 1 1 : 7 .

I t is h a r d t o see h o w t h e m i n d referred t o in t h e s e p a s s a g e s c o u l d b e t h e s a m e as t h a t w h i c h P h i l o e l s e w h e r e d e s c r i b e s as d^oaTtaajia 9ETOV. Cf. Q u a e s t . in

Gen.

111:3.

7

Cf. R e r . D i v . H e r . 1 9 ; M i g r . A b r . 1 1 9 ; V i r t . 7 5 , 1 4 4 .

8

V i r t . 1 3 . Cf. I V M a c c a b e e s 1:6 a n d 2:6 for a s i m i l a r d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e

p r o p e r r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n r e a s o n a n d t h e p a s s i o n s . R e a s o n is n o t t o t r y t o e x t i r p a t e t h e p a s s i o n s b u t is t o b e m a s t e r o v e r t h e m . See also L e g . A l l . I :

72-739

S p e c . L e g . I :g.

APPENDIX E

91

for the p r o p e r interaction of m i n d and s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n .

1

In O p .

M u n d . i6o-63a Philo d e m o n s t r a t e s that pleasure is integral t o life itself, and in L e g . AH. 1 1 : 8 he speaks of the i m p o r t a n t role of the passions, particularly

YJSOVY], £7ii0u|i.ia, Xumr), a n d

tributing t o the p e r m a n e n c e of the r a c e .

cp6(3o<;, in

con­

2

I n the texts just e x a m i n e d m a n ' s irrational soul and the material w o r l d are seen as p o t e n t i a l l y b u t not a b s o l u t e l y evil. M a n b e c o m e s i n v o l v e d in m o r a l evil n o t s i m p l y because he is aw|i.a a n d aia67]o-(.<; as well as vou<; b u t because of a distorted relationship b e t w e e n the l o w e r a n d higher parts of his being. This attitude t o w a r d s m a n and the created w o r l d is also seen in s u c h a passage as L e g . A l l . I I : i 7 , where Philo states t h a t it is necessary for a c r e a t e d b e i n g t o m a k e use of pleasure. Xcopli; ydp y]8ovv]<; ouSev ylveTai xwv Iv TW 6VY]TW yevei. T h e b a d m a n (6 (pauXoc), h o w e v e r , will use pleasure "as a perfect g o o d , " whereas the g o o d m a n (6 CT7iou8aio<;) " s i m p l y as a n e c e s s i t y . " G o d d e e m e d it proper, Philo maintains in D e t . P o t . Ins. 170-71, that the reasoning faculty in m a n s h o u l d find all of m a n ' s irrational parts clean for its use. T h e wise m a n (6 o-o<po<;) should h a v e the various senses p u r g e d and cleansed a n d under the c o n t r o l of r e a s o n .

3

T h u s it is clear that sense-perception, the b o d y , and e v e n passion, w h e n under the rightful d o m i n i o n of the m i n d , c o n t r i b u t e to m a n ' s total w e l l - b e i n g and are n o t m o r a l l y b l a m e w o r t h y . Y e t , w h e n n o t fully

subject t o m i n d , t h e y can c o m p l e t e l y thwart

the

higher

aspirations of the soul. T h e parable of the charioteer a p t l y expresses these relationships. 2. Negative Created

Orientation

towards

Man's

Lower

Nature

and

the

World

In sharp contrast t o the texts e x a m i n e d in the first section of this a p p e n d i x and far m o r e t y p i c a l of P h i l o ' s writings as a w h o l e are those passages where the created w o r l d is p o r t r a y e d as hostile a n d antithetic to the g o o d life. N o longer is a relationship of m o d e r ­ ation t o w a r d s sense-perception, pleasure, and t h e b o d y appropriate, since these are realities evil in themselves a n d therefore t o b e shun­ ned entirely. T h e perfect m a n radically repudiates the 1

L e g . All. I I 7 1 - 7 2 .

2

See

3

Cf. Sacr. A . C. 1 0 5 - 1 0 6 , R e r . D i v . H e r . 42.

Appendix

F

for

Philo's

views

on

sexual

desire

and

material

procreation.

9

APPENDIXES

2

w o r l d as a sphere at e n m i t y with G o d , the place of death, c h a n g e , a n d c o r r u p t i o n . T o turn to G o d is t o flee from the w o r l d . T h a t w h i c h is in the w o r l d is n o t just a potential hindrance t o the g o o d life b u t is inherently and a c t i v e l y o p p o s e d t o all that is of G o d . G o d a n d creation are natures m u t u a l l y a n t a g o n i s t i c .

1

Man is p o r t r a y e d as a sinner n o t because he is w r o n g l y related t o the created w o r l d b u t s i m p l y b e c a u s e he is a part of that w o r l d . In a detailed description of the tabernacle and its appurtenances, Philo writes that Moses d e c i d e d t o offer a calf for the forgiveness of sins, aiviTTO[i,evo(; oti tcocvti yev7]Tcp, xolv tJ7iouSaiov f), rrapocrov 9)X6ev zlc, yevemv, tju[i,cpusi; to ajiapTaveiv ecjtlv.

2

A n essentially similar motif is present in the a c c o u n t of the fall of the 7Tpo>Toc; mQpomoq, w h i c h Philo introduces with the s t a t e m e n t : 'Etoi

8'

ouSev twv ev yeveoxi. pe(ia(.ov, V

Ta 6vY)Ta Se^eTai, £XP^) xaxo7rpayla£;

x a > L

T

°

v

Se xal

TpQ7rdt;

^P^fov

[i,£Ta[3oXat;

avayxalw?

av6pa>7tov drroXaijcrai tlvo?

( O p . M u n d . 151). This emphasis o n the

necessary

relationship b e t w e e n m a n as created a n d m o r t a l and m a n as a sinner, a l t h o u g h it p r o b a b l y can n o t b e reconciled with the preceding a c c o u n t of the n o b i l i t y of the

7rp«T0t;

avOpomoc; ( O p . M u n d . 136-50),

is nonetheless a c o m m o n motif in Philo's writings. In contrast t o God, w h o is unchangeable, e v e r y created thing must u n d e r g o change, I'Siov ydp ecrri touto auTou (Leg. A l l . I I 1 3 3 ) . Philo is particularly crwfxa,

3

severe in his denunciation of YJSOVY) and

w h i c h in a n u m b e r of passages are described as evil b y

nature. A'iab-f\c\.c, is frequently

referred

t o in highly

pejorative

terms, b u t it is never held to b e inherently or absolutely evil. Pleasure, h o w e v e r , is b a d in itself (Leg. All. I l l : 68). It is the passion par excellence ( I I I : 107); worse than the others, for t h e y all d e p e n d on pleasure ( I I I : 113). Pleasure is a harlot that appears in e x t r a v ­ agant

guise for the sake of enticing the souls of the y o u n g . B y

her witchcrafts and sorceries she tries t o take c a p t i v e and enslave the m i n d (Sacr. A . C. 20 f f . ) . Pleasure is a foe t o sense and deserves o n l y cursing (Leg. A l l . I l l : 182, 107). It is n o t f o u n d at all in the good man (III:68).

4

T h a t Philo speaks of the b o d y in almost the same terms he uses 1

Leg. All. I l l : .

2

Vit. Mos.

Cf. P l a n t . 5 3 .

7

II:

I

4

7

.

3

S e e also L e g . A l l . I I : i 6 .

4

Cf. L e g . A l l . 11:17.

Philo speaks

of desire

(£7u9u|zia) in

t h e s a m e w a y as he d o e s of p l e a s u r e . Cf. Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1:47,

substantially 48.

APPENDIX E

93

to refer t o pleasure is n o t surprising, for the b o d y is so c l o s e l y associated with pleasure in his thinking that he c a n s w i t c h from a discussion of one to the o t h e r a n d b a c k again a l m o s t i m p e r c e p t i b l y . T h u s , in L e g . All. I l l : 6 1 - 6 8 he writes a b o u t the evil influence of pleasure, the serpent of Gen. 3. B e c a u s e the serpent is t h o r o u g h l y b a d G o d gives h i m n o o p p o r t u n i t y t o defend himself; he is " a l w a y s a n d e v e r y w h e r e g u i l t y a n d f o u l . " W i t h o u t a b r e a k (note the Sta. TOUTO) P n i l o c o n t i n u e s his a r g u m e n t in L e g . A l l . 111:69 b y referring to Gen. 38:7, where it is r e c o r d e d that G o d slew E r b e c a u s e of his wickedness. B u t Philo interprets E r as referring n o t to pleasure b u t to the b o d y , w h i c h he describes as w i c k e d , soul, a n d hostile to the m i n d ( I I I : 7 1 ) . The

1

a p l o t t e r against

the

2

sphere of m o r t a l i t y a n d c h a n g e , the sphere of the c r e a t e d

w o r l d , is for Philo the realm of avayxy), a n d is as such sharply c o n ­ 3

trasted with G o d , w h o is a b e i n g of free will. O n l y the m i n d of m a n has r e c e i v e d from G o d the f a c u l t y of v o l u n t a r y m o v e m e n t , for it alone was j u d g e d w o r t h y of f r e e d o m .

4

T h e b o d y a n d the irrational

soul, b e i n g subject t o the p o w e r of avayxy), are t o t a l l y outside the r e a l m of freedom. O n l y as m a n forsakes w h a t is created, m o r t a l , a n d perishable will he k n o w the p r o f o u n d p e a c e a n d c a l m of the wise m a n , the o n e w h o s e m i n d is fiaxapioc, euS'aiji.tov, 6.\iiTojoQ 1

xaxcov.

5

T h e t e r m 7rovr]p6i; is p r o b a b l y t a k e n d i r e c t l y f r o m G e n . 3 8 : 7 , w h e r e it

is u s e d in reference t o E r . Cf. d i s c u s s i o n in V o l k e r , Fortschritt, All.

p. 75. Leg.

I l l : 6 9 - 7 6 c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e s t h e a m b i g u i t y of P h i l o ' s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s

t h e b o d y a n d t h e m a t e r i a l w o r l d , for r i g h t in t h e m i d d l e of this

passage

w h e r e h e refers t o t h e b o d y as w i c k e d , h o s t i l e , a c o r p s e , a n d t h a t God

which

in his g o o d n e s s a n d k i n d n e s s will d e s t r o y , h e s t a t e s t h a t G o d c r e a t e d

t h e b o d y . W h i t a k e r ' s t r a n s l a t i o n of L e g . A l l . 1 1 1 : 7 0

("Nay,

b u t the b o d y

which H e m a d e and which E r represents was a corpse to begin w i t h . " See Philo

[ L . C . L . ] I [ 1 9 2 9 ] , p . 347) d o e s n o t reflect t h e t h e o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m in its

full i n t e n s i t y .

T h e G r e e k is m o r e a c c u r a t e l y r e n d e r e d : " B u t f r o m t h e b e ­

ginning he [ G o d ] m a d e the b o d y a corpse." 2

T h i s discussion

a b o u t t h e b o d y in L e g . A l l . 1 1 1 : 6 9 - 7 6 is in all essentials

identical with the preceding discussion a b o u t pleasure. I n d e e d , Philo con­ c l u d e s this section o n t h e e v i l i n f l u e n c e of t h e b o d y w i t h t h e

statement,

" W h a t a s e r p e n t d o e s to a m a n , t h a t p l e a s u r e d o e s t o t h e s o u l , a n d t h e r e f o r e the

serpent was

taken

t o represent pleasure,"

thus

indicating

that

even

w h i l e d e s c r i b i n g t h e evil effects of t h e b o d y h e still w a s t h i n k i n g in t e r m s of t h e m e a n i n g of p l e a s u r e . T h e first w o r d s of t h e s e c t i o n i m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w ­ i n g — " E x a c t l y , t h e n , as G o d h a s h a t e d . . . p l e a s u r e a n d t h e b o d y " — l i k e w i s e p o i n t t o t h i s s a m e close a s s o c i a t i o n writings.

:253.

3

Som. II

4

D e u s I m m . 47-48.

5

Som. 11:253,

229-30.

of p l e a s u r e a n d t h e b o d y in

Philo's

APPENDIXES

94

APPENDIX F A NOTE ON SEXUAL INTERCOURSE A N D PROCREATION IN PHILO'S W R I T I N G S E v e n t h o u g h P h i l o considers the m o s t i m p e r i o u s ((3toco-T»«oTaT7]) of

all pleasures

t o b e that

associated with sexual

intercourse,

1

nonetheless the d i v i n e c o m m a n d t o procreate is assumed t h r o u g h o u t his writings a n d marriage c a n b e described as blameless a n d w o r t h y of the highest praise. If the goal of h u s b a n d a n d wife is the p r o ­ creation o f legitimate children a n d the p e r p e t u a t i o n

of the race,

then

unpolluted.

2

N a t u r e f o r m e d the u n i o n of m a n a n d wife for the birth of c h i l d r e n ,

3

their association is pure

and

their marriage

a n d e v e n the priest, since h e is primarily a m a n a n d o n l y s e c o n d a r i l y a priest,

necessarily o u g h t

t o feel sexual desire.

4

The

blessings

of health a n d p r o s p e r i t y w h i c h the L a w promises t o the righteous w o u l d b e of little value, Philo argues, if a m a n left b e h i n d h i m n o heirs a n d successors. T h e r e f o r e roxvTec, vofxov exuXyjpcocroutTi cpuaetoc. TOV e m

. . . o l 0epa7reuT<xl 6sou yv^tTioi

7iat,So7roiia.

5

It is clear, h o w e v e r , that P h i l o v i e w s the sexual relationship as justified o n l y w h e n there is the h o p e of legitimate offspring. H e describes as mere " p l e a s u r e - l o v e r s "

those w h o m a t e with

their

w i v e s n o t t o b e g e t children " b u t like pigs or g o a t s in quest of the e n j o y m e n t w h i c h such intercourse g i v e s . " mate for

8

Likewise, those w h o

(eruvepxeoSoci) w i t h barren w o m e n are w o r t h y of r e p r o a c h ,

in their seeking after

m e r e pleasure

creative germs w i t h deliberate p u r p o s e . " Philo

s h o w s genuine

sympathy,

"they

d e s t r o y the

pro-

7

h o w e v e r , for the

man

who

marries a w o m a n n o t k n o w i n g that she is sterile a n d later refuses t o dismiss her b e c a u s e of her childlessness. S u c h m e n deserve o u r pardon,

1

2

3

4

he writes

"for they

are

overcome b y habitual

sexual

L e g . A l l . 1 1 : 7 4 , S p e c . L e g . 1 : 9 , Q u a e s t . in G e n . 1 1 1 : 4 8 . Q u a e s t . in G e n . I V : 8 6 . A b r . 248. Spec. Leg. L.101.

5

P r a e m . P o e n . 108. Cf. E x . 2 3 : 2 6 , t h e s e c o n d p a r t of w h i c h is q u o t e d in a s l i g h t l y a l t e r e d f o r m in P r a e m . P o e n . i n . 6

Spec. Leg. I l l : i i 3 -

7

S p e c . L e g . I I I : 3 4 3 6 . A s C o l s o n p o i n t s o u t in Philo ( L . C . L . ) V I I ( 1 9 3 7 ) , p . 497, n o t e a, " P h i l o h a s n o t , n o r d o e s h e c l a i m t o h a v e , a n y b i b l i c a l a u t h o r ­ i t y for t h e s e t h r e e s e c t i o n s . " :

APPENDIX G

95

i n t i m a c y , that m o s t imperious affair, and are unable t o free t h e m ­ selves from the c h a r m of o l d affection t h a t has b e e n imprinted o n their souls b y l o n g c o m p a n i o n s h i p . "

1

APPENDIX G T H E E X P O S I T I O N IN C O N T R A S T TO T H E A L L E G O R Y A N D THE

QUESTIONS A N D A N S W E R S IN

RELATIONSHIP

TO T H E I R E V A L U A T I O N OF T H E C R E A T E D W O R L D In reviewing those passages in P h i l o that reflect his attitude t o w a r d s the created w o r l d , it is striking t o note that, o n the w h o l e , the Exposition

reflects a far m o r e consistently positive orientation

t o w a r d s creation t h a n d o e s the Allegory and Answers.

of the Laws or the

Questions

Especially w h e n L e g . A l l . is c o m p a r e d with O p . M u n d .

a n d S p e c . L e g . is this contrast apparent. T h e r e is little d o u b t t h a t particularly throughout

the Exposition

in Spec. Leg., b u t

also

as a whole, the actual c o n t e n t of the

Old Testament exercised greater influence o n P h i l o ' s thinking than w a s the case in Leg. A l l . a n d t h r o u g h o u t Questions

and Answers,

the Allegory.

In

the

although Philo usually includes a literal

interpretation o f each t e x t , the real thrust of the writing is f o u n d in the allegorical amplifications. In n o place in his writings, h o w e v e r , d o e s Philo c o m p l e t e l y ignore the fact that this w o r l d , including m a n ' s b o d y , is G o d ' s creation, and thus although such a writing as S p e c . Leg. shows a far m o r e appreciative awareness of the created w o r l d than d o e s Leg. A l l . , there are also in the latter writing not a few statements that are m o r e p o s i t i v e l y oriented. In those cases where Philo is interpreting specific c o m m a n d m e n t s of the L a w , his writings m o s t clearly reflect the actual c o n t e n t of the O l d Testament itself, w h i c h is certainly n o t surprising in v i e w of his insistence o n the literal v a l i d i t y of the L a w . Thus, as c a n b e seen from A p p e n d i x F, Philo's a t t i t u d e t o w a r d s marriage and sexual intercourse for the p u r p o s e of begetting legitimate children is one of a c c e p t a n c e in Spec. Leg. This stands in sharp contrast t o m u c h of w h a t w e find in Leg. All. Cf. V o l k e r , Fortschritt, 1

Spec. L e g . 1 1 1 : 3 5 .

p p . 87-89.

9

6

APPENDIXES APPENDIX H

THE

INFLUENCE

OF

HELLENISTIC

PROPHETISM

ON

PHILO'S USE OF V I R G I N T E R M I N O L O G Y IN CONNECTION WITH THE DIVINE IMPREGNATION MOTIF: A CRITICAL NOTE ON HANS LEISEGANG'S BOOK PNEUMA HAGION H a n s Leisegang, in his b o o k Pneuma

Hagion

(1922), argues that

P h i l o ' s insistence that the o n e w h o receives the divine impregnation be a virgin stems from the influence of Hellenistic

prophetism.

1

Leisegang points to the P y t h i a n oracle at Delphi, for e x a m p l e , w h o was always a virgin. A Tcvzu\j.a fxavrixov or evOouaiaaTixov issued forth from the r o c k fissure o v e r w h i c h she sat o n her tripod. T h e n as she was filled with the presence of the g o d through this 7rvsuu.a, she b e g a n t o prophesy. T h a t the basic m o t i f here is that of divine impregnation,

Leisegang maintains, is s u p p o r t e d b y Strabo's

of the w o r d SiyzoQai

in c o n n e c t i o n with this o c c u r r e n c e and

use by

Origen and J o h n C h r y s o s t o m ' s scornfully explicit descriptions of h o w the prophetess of A p o l l o sits o n her tripod a n d opens her thighs so that she is able to receive the revsufxa into her w o m b (pp. 32-34)T h e oracle of D i o n y s u s at Delphi also was a virgin, as were the maenads

of the

D i o n y s i a c religion, w h o were k n o w n for their

experiences of ecstatic frenzy w h e n filled with the presence of the g o d (p. 47). Again, argues Leisegang, all of this points t o the close relationship

between

p r o p h e t i c inspiration a n d

virginity, a n d

it

is against this b a c k g r o u n d that we must try t o u n d e r s t a n d Philo's emphasis o n the virginity of the soul that G o d impregnates. This also explains, Leisegang maintains, w h y in such a passage as

Cher.

43-52 Philo quite

unexpectedly

quotes

Jer.

3:4.

He

w a n t e d t o introduce the t e r m " v i r g i n i t y " into the discussion, a n d the reason for this " k a n n aber w o h l nur der sein, dass eben gottliche Z e u g u n g u n d Jungfraulichkeit

i m hellenistischen Vorstellen so eng

miteinander zusammengehorten, dass auch Philon in seiner Allegorie diesen Z u s a m m e n h a n g irgendwie herstellen m u s s t e " (p. 45). Leisegang's interpretation m a y be challenged at several points, h o w e v e r . First of all, it is necessary t o distinguish m o r e sharply than 1

See e s p e c i a l l y p p . 3 1 - 7 2 .

APPENDIX H

97

he does b e t w e e n the motif of divine impregnation and the m o r e inclusive c a t e g o r y of divine inspiration, which also includes the special cases of prophetic inspiration a n d prophetic ecstasy. Leise­ gang tends to l u m p all these together, w h i c h is o n e of the weaknesses of his analysis, for b o t h in Philo a n d in the Classical Greek a n d Hellenistic literature the divine impregnation motif is treated as a rather special instance of the m o r e general t h e m e of divine in­ spiration. If the divine i m p r e g n a t i o n motif is dealt with as a special case, then there is n o significant correlation between divine inspiration and virginity either in the Classical a n d Hellenistic literature or in Philo. Leisegang cites o n l y a few examples, a n d m a n y

counter­

e x a m p l e s of cases where the virginity motif is entirely absent can 1

b e p o i n t e d t o . In m o s t of the passages where Philo explicitly a n d at s o m e length speaks of p r o p h e t i c inspiration or of divine possession a n d ecstasy

(e.g. in R e r . D i v . Her. 69-70, 258-66; Spec. L e g .

I V : 49; Gig. 60-64), there is n o m e n t i o n of virginity. But

even the correlation b e t w e e n the special case of divine

i m p r e g n a t i o n and virginity in Philo's writings is far less consistent than Leisegang indicates. T o b e sure, m a n y of the passages that refer t o divine i m p r e g n a t i o n also refer t o virginity (e.g. Cher. 44-49, Praem.

P o e n . 159-60,

Rer.

D i v . Her.

36-39, P o s t .

C.

134-35,

Spec. Leg. 11:29-31), b u t , o n the other hand, just a b o u t as m a n y do

not

(e.g. Mut.

N o m . 132-38,

142-51; L e g . All. I l l : 180-81,

217-18; D e u s I m m . 5; D e t . P o t . Ins. 60; Migr. A b r . 140). On the basis of such e v i d e n c e as this, t o argue that the o n e d e m a n d s the other is certainly to overstate the case. Finally, although the c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n virginity a n d divine impregnation m a y i n d e e d h a v e been suggested t o Philo b y cultic practices

and

m y s t i c a l speculation

of the

Classical

the and

Hellenistic w o r l d , nonetheless b y emphasizing this consideration alone, Leisegang fails to see the w a y in w h i c h the virginity m o t i f functions in Philo's o w n writings, precisely within the c o n t e x t of divine impregnation. A s was seen a b o v e , t o b e c o m e a virgin means, a c c o r d i n g t o Philo, t o forsake the realm of pleasure, the

body,

change, a n d m o r t a l i t y and t o grant t o the rational soul its rightful p l a c e of sovereignty. G o d will n o t consort with t h e soul till she has forsaken the realm of the female " a n d is ranked o n c e m o r e as a 1

Cf. G r a n t , Letter

ALGHJ, III

and

Spirit,

pp.

2-6.

APPENDIXES

9« 1

pure v i r g i n " (Cher. 50). W h a t e v e r the origin of this allegorization —a p r o b l e m that has not been dealt w i t h in this thesis—its signifi­ c a n c e in a n y g i v e n t e x t in Philo m u s t first of all b e e x p l a i n e d in terms of h o w it functions elsewhere in his writings.

APPENDIX I PHILO'S D E S C R I P T I O N OF T H E T H E R A P E U T A E IN DE

VITA CONTEMPLATIVA IN R E F E R E N C E TO THE

CATEGORIES MALE A N D FEMALE

I n sharp contrast t o the m a n y p e j o r a t i v e remarks a b o u t w o m e n elsewhere in his writings, for the w o m e n a m o n g t h e Philo has n o t h i n g b u t praise.

2

Therapeutae

" T h i n k i n g their m o r t a l life already

e n d e d , " the Therapeutae, a c c o r d i n g t o P h i l o , in their a t t e m p t t o attain t o the vision of G o d , r e n o u n c e d all private p r o p e r t y a n d led a rigorously ascetic life (Vit. C o n t . 13 f f . ) . Their houses, f o o d , a n d c l o t h i n g were all e x t r e m e l y plain and planned in such a w a y as to h e l p o n e d e v e l o p self-control (tynpixsict.) a n d gain f r e e d o m from the imperious d e m a n d s of the sense-perceptible w o r l d (18-29). For

six d a y s e a c h w e e k the Therapeutae s t u d y a n d

meditate

each o n e b y himself, b u t on the seventh d a y all m e e t t o g e t h e r t o hear a discourse b y the senior m e m b e r of the g r o u p . Philo notes that " w o m e n t o o regularly m a k e part of the audience w i t h the same a r d o u r and the same sense of their calling as the m e n " (32). F o l l o w i n g a l e n g t h y d e n u n c i a t i o n of the c o n v i v i a l meals of the Greeks, and particularly of the e f f e m i n a c y a n d p e d e r a s t y that w a s often associated w i t h these meals (40-64), P h i l o refers t o the c o m ­ m o n meals of the T h e r a p e u t a e a n d p r o c e e d s t o describe the m o s t i m p o r t a n t of t h e s e — p r o b a b l y the feast of P e n t e c o s t — i n consider -

1

In Rer.

D i v . H e r . 259 P h i l o s t a t e s t h a t " t h e w i c k e d m a y n e v e r b e

the

i n t e r p r e t e r of G o d , so t h a t n o w o r t h l e s s p e r s o n is G o d - i n s p i r e d in t h e p r o p e r s e n s e . " T h i s is n e a r l y e q u i v a l e n t t o w h a t P h i l o is g e t t i n g a t in e m p h a s i z i n g the

v i r g i n i t y of

the

one

who

receives the

divine impregnation.

God

i n t e r c o u r s e o n l y w i t h t h e s o u l t h a t h a s f o r s a k e n t h e e v i l w a y s of t h e

has

female

a n d has b e c o m e a true virgin. 2

M o s t s c h o l a r s a g r e e t h a t w h e t h e r or n o t s u c h a g r o u p as t h e T h e r a p e u t a e

e v e r a c t u a l l y e x i s t e d , in a n y

c a s e P h i l o ' s p o r t r a y a l of t h e m in V i t .

Cont.

p r o b a b l y t o a large e x t e n t is a p r o j e c t i o n of his o w n i d e a l s r a t h e r t h a n

an

a c c u r a t e d e s c r i p t i o n of a r e a l c o m m u n i t y . F o r t h e p u r p o s e s of t h i s s t u d y , h o w e v e r , t h i s m a k e s t h e w r i t i n g n o less v a l u a b l e .

APPENDIX I

99

1

able d e t a i l . T h e T h e r a p e u t a e assemble w h i t e - r o b e d a n d with faces that reflect b o t h cheerfulness a n d u t m o s t seriousness (66). Before reclining at table t h e y s t a n d

in an o r d e r l y fashion, w i t h

arms

lifted u p a n d eyes gazing t o w a r d s h e a v e n , a n d p r a y that

their

feasting m a y b e a c c e p t a b l e t o G o d (66). Since " t h e y consider the o w n e r s h i p of servants entirely against n a t u r e " (70), the T h e r a p e u t a e k e e p n o slaves t o wait o n t h e m at these sacred meals. R a t h e r , t h e y are a t t e n d e d b y y o u n g e r m e m b e r s of the c o m m u n i t y , w h o serve p r o u d l y a n d with genuine cheerfulness (71-72). N o w i n e is served, b u t o n l y bright clear water, specially w a r m e d " f o r such of the older ones w h o live d e l i c a t e l y . " Likewise, " t h e table is kept pure f r o m the flesh of a n i m a l s . " T h e f o o d is l i m i t e d t o l o a v e s of b r e a d seasoned w i t h salt a n d " s o m e t i m e s also flavored w i t h h y s s o p as a relish for the daintier a p p e t i t e s "

(73).

After a p e r i o d of general silence the presiding officer (upoeSpo?) of the T h e r a p e u t a e discusses v a r i o u s questions suggested b y his or the c o m m u n i t y ' s s t u d y of the H o l y Scriptures. H e p r o c e e d s in a leisurely manner, not m a k i n g a s h o w of his o w n cleverness b u t rather s i m p l y desiring t o share w i t h the entire c o m m u n i t y w h a t he has learned. I n particular he is intent o n m a k i n g clear t o his hearers the inner allegorical m e a n i n g of the Scriptures (78). W o m e n regularly t a k e part in the feast along w i t h the m e n , a l t h o u g h m e n a n d w o m e n are seated separately. Most of these w o m e n , P h i l o notes, "are a g e d virgins (yyjpaial 7tap6evoi), w h o h a v e k e p t their c h a s t i t y n o t u n d e r c o m p u l s i o n , like s o m e of the G r e e k priestesses, b u t of their o w n free will in their ardent y e a r n i n g for w i s d o m . " I n their eagerness t o live t o g e t h e r (aufijitouv) w i t h W i s d o m these a g e d virgins h a v e " s p u r n e d the pleasures of the b o d y a n d desire n o m o r t a l offspring b u t those i m m o r t a l children w h i c h o n l y the soul that is dear t o G o d c a n bring t o the birth u n a i d e d , b e c a u s e t h e F a t h e r has s o w n in her spiritual r a y s enabling her t o b e h o l d the verities of W i s d o m "

(68).

W h e n the presiding officer has finished his e x p o s i t i o n of Scripture, he rises a n d sings a h y m n . H e is followed b y others in turn, " w h i l e all the rest listen in c o m p l e t e silence e x c e p t w h e n t h e y h a v e to

1

V i t . C o n t . 65 ff. T h e p a s s a g e is difficult, for P h i l o d o e s n o t tell us f r o m w h a t t i m e t h e s e v e n w e e k s referred t o w e r e c a l c u l a t e d . W e n d l a n d a r g u e s t h a t P h i l o refers t o a f e a s t h e l d e v e r y s e v e n w e e k s t h r o u g h o u t t h e y e a r . S e e t h e e x t e n s i v e d i s c u s s i o n w i t h references b y C o l s o n in Philo ( L . C . L . ) I X ( 1 9 4 1 ) , p . 1 5 2 , n o t e s a a n d b ; a l s o p p . 5 2 2 - 2 3 , n o t e o n V i t . C o n t . 65.

APPENDIXES

100

c h a n t the closing lines or refrains, voices, men and w o m e n alike"

for then t h e y all lift u p their

(80).

Of particular interest for this s t u d y is P h i l o ' s description of the sacred vigil

(rj Espa

w h i c h is

KOLVW/IQ)

held

after

the

common

m e a l . T h e g r o u p rises a n d all f o r m themselves i n t o t w o choirs, o n e of m e n and the other of w o m e n . T h e r e u p o n t h e y sing h y m n s of praise to G o d , s o m e t i m e s t o g e t h e r a n d s o m e t i m e s

antiphonally.

" T h e n w h e n each c h o i r has separately d o n e its o w n part in the feast, h a v i n g drunk as in the B a c c h i c rites of the strong wine of God's love,

1

t h e y m i x a n d b o t h t o g e t h e r b e c o m e a single choir,

a c o p y of the choir set u p of o l d beside the R e d Sea in h o n o r of the w o n d e r s there w r o u g h t " (85). It is after this m o d e l of the choir that sang b y the R e d Sea t h a t " t h e T h e r a p e u t a e of either sex, n o t e in response t o n o t e and v o i c e to v o i c e , the treble of the w o m e n b l e n d i n g w i t h t h e bass of the m e n , create an h a r m o n i o u s c o n c e n t , m u s i c in the truest sense" (88). " T h u s t h e y c o n t i n u e till d a w n , " writes Philo, " d r u n k w i t h this beautiful d r u n k e n n e s s " (89). S u c h m e n a n d w o m e n as these " h a v e l i v e d in the soul a l o n e " and h a v e a t t a i n e d " t r u e e x c e l l e n c e of life, rising t o the v e r y s u m m i t of f e l i c i t y " (90). P h i l o is able t o a c c e p t a k i n d of e q u a l i t y a m o n g the m e n a n d w o m e n of the T h e r a p e u t a e

precisely b e c a u s e these w o m e n either

are virgins or live as virgins and thus in o n e sense are w o m e n in name only.

2

In a sense t h e y h a v e progressed b e y o n d the sphere of

sexual polarity, and thus their femininity is n o t a barrier t o p a r t i c ­ i p a t i o n in the w o r s h i p a n d other rites of the c o m m u n i t y . B o t h m e n and w o m e n h a v e left b e h i n d their sexuality a n d h a v e attained to a higher u n i t y of the spirit.

3

It is no w o n d e r that this g r o u p h a d

146.

1

Cf. E b r .

2

C h e r . 50. O n t h e u s e of TzcupdlvoQ in reference t o m e n as well as w o m e n ,

see M a t t h e w B l a c k , The Scrolls

Background 3

of the New

and Christian

Testament

Origins.

Studies

in the

Jewish

( 1 9 6 1 ) , p p . 83-88.

Philo recognized, however, t h a t even a m o n g the T h e r a p e u t a e the m a l e -

f e m a l e p o l a r i t y h a d n o t b e e n c o m p l e t e l y o v e r c o m e . T h i s is p e r h a p s s e e n in t h e d o u b l e e n c l o s u r e of t h e s a n c t u a r y , o n e p a r t of w h i c h w a s

best set

a p a r t for t h e m e n , t h e o t h e r for t h e w o m e n . C o n c e i v a b l y , t h i s t y p e of a r r a n g e ­ m e n t w a s a c c e p t e d b y t h e T h e r a p e u t a e s i m p l y b e c a u s e of f a m i l i a r u s a g e , for w o m e n w e r e s e p a r a t e d f r o m m e n b o t h in t h e J e w i s h T e m p l e a n d in t h e synagogues; nonetheless

P h i l o ' s o w n e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e p r a c t i c e w a s t h a t

it w a s for t h e s a k e of p r e s e r v i n g " t h e m o d e s t y b e c o m i n g t o t h e f e m a l e s e x " (Vit.

C o n t . 3 2 - 3 3 ) . I n t e r e s t i n g l y e n o u g h , it is in t h e c o m m u n a l s i n g i n g a n d

d a n c i n g , w h i c h a p p e a r t o r e p r e s e n t t h e h i g h p o i n t of religious i n t e n s i t y , t h a t the distinctions between m a l e a n d female m o s t completely disappear.

The

APPENDIX J great attractiveness

101

for P h i l o , for in m a n y w a y s t h e y

illustrated

w h a t Philo describes in another c o n t e x t as the forsaking of "all t h a t is after the m a n n e r of w o m e n " and the attaining to the state of the " p u r e v i r g i n . "

1

APPENDIX J SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND

PRAYER

Just as prayer and fasting are often s p o k e n of together in the Gospels, so Paul in I Cor. 7 : 5 associates refraining from

sexual

intercourse—also a kind of f a s t i n g ? — a n d prayer. This same c o r ­ relation is f o u n d in Test. N a p h . 8 : 8 " F o r there is a season for a m a n to e m b r a c e his wife, a n d a season t o abstain therefrom for his p r a y e r . " T h e i m p l i c a t i o n of these passages is that abstinence from sexual relations better fits o n e for prayer. O n e is in a " p u r e r " state, just as the soldiers w h o participated in the H o l y W a r purified t h e m ­ selves b y refraining from sexual intercourse. Cross, Ancient

Library,

p . 72, refers t o the "priestly distinctions [in the Old T e s t a m e n t ] b e t w e e n ritual p u r i t y and pollution, 'physical' holiness and ' p h y s i c a l ' sin." "Certain sexual a c t s , " he writes, "render o n e unclean so that he m a y n o t a p p r o a c h h o l y things." A l t h o u g h w e c a n n o t here e x p l o r e the origin and s c o p e of the H o l y W a r tradition, it is quite possible that w e h a v e in this motif s o m e t h i n g parallel to w h a t can b e o b s e r v e d in early Greek religion, n a m e l y the belief that sexual intercourse m a k e s o n e liable t o a kind of d e m o n i c infection and thus cultically unclean. It is p r o b a b l y such a sentiment,

for e x a m p l e , that is reflected in

(De Abstinentia

Porphyrry's

statement, ra

a9poSitria

m a n n , Askese,

p p . 201-13, argues, this i m p u r i t y is n o t t o b e u n d e r ­

jxiaivei

I V . 20). A s Strath-

s t o o d ethically, for intercourse with a prostitute does n o t sooner m a k e o n e unclean than intercourse w i t h o n e ' s wife, and an ejacula­ tion during sleep also m a k e s o n e unclean. N o t e also C D 1 2 : 1 - 2 : " L e t n o m a n lie with a w o m a n in the c i t y of the sanctuary for fear of defiling the c i t y of the sanctuary with their d e f i l e m e n t . "

r e l e v a n c e of t h i s for t h e s t u d y immediately apparent.

of s u c h a p a s s a g e

as

Gal.

3:28

2

These

should

be

1

Cher. 50. Cf. D e t . P o t . I n s . 28. T r a n s l a t i o n of A . D u p o n t - S o m m e r , trans. G. V e r m e s (1961), p. 154. 2

The

Essene

Writings

from

Qumran,

102

APPENDIXES

passages o n sexual intercourse in relationship t o prayer, the p r a c t i c e of the H o l y W a r , or w i t h i n the limits of Jerusalem are all cultically oriented, h o w e v e r , a n d thus o n e m a y n o t b e justified in using t h e m as e v i d e n c e for the overall v i e w of Q u m r a n a n d the E a r l y C h u r c h t o w a r d s sexuality.

BIBLIOGRAPHY TEXTS Biblia

Hebraica,

ed.

Eissfeldt). Plato.

With (The

The

by

R . Kittel.

Stuttgart,

an English

Translation,

of Aristotle,

ed. b y

I-XII,

L o e b Classical L i b r a r y ) .

Works

(7th

P. Kahle,

A . Alt, and O.

1958. t r a n s , b y H . N . F o w l e r , e t al.

Cambridge, Mass.,

1914 et

sequens.

I - X I I , e d . b y J. A . S m i t h a n d W . D . R o s s . O x f o r d ,

1908-52. Septuaginta. I:

Stoicorum The

Scientiarum

Gottingensis

auctoritate

edidit

A. Rahlfs

S t u t t g a r t , 1926.

veterum fragmenta,

Apocrypha by

The

Societatis

Genesis.

I - I V , e d . b y J. v o n A r n i m . S t u t t g a r t , 1 9 0 5 - 1 4 .

and Pseudepigrapha

of the Old Testament

in English,

I - I I , ed.

R . H . Charles. O x f o r d , 1 9 1 3 .

Greek

Versions

of the Testaments

of the Twelve

Patriarchs,

ed. b y R . H .

C h a r l e s . O x f o r d , 1908. The

Essene

Writings

from

Qumran,

ed.

by

translation b y G. V e r m e s ) . N e w Y o r k , Philonis

Alexandrini

Opera

quae

A. Dupont-Sommer

(English

1962.

supersunt,

I-VII.

I - V I : Text,

ed.

by

L . C o h n a n d P . W e n d l a n d ; V I I : I n d i c e s , e d . b y J. L e i s e g a n g . B e r l i n ,

1896-1930. Philo.

With an English G.

H.

Whitaker,

Translation,

I - X , s u p p . I - I I , ed. b y F . H . Colson,

et

Loeb

al.

(The

Classical

Library).

Cambridge,

Mass., 1929-62. Die

Werke

Philos

von

Alexandria

in

deutscher

Vbersetzung,

L. Cohn, I. H e i n e m a n n , a n d M . Adler. Breslau, Josephus,

with anEnglish

R. Marcus Novum

Testamentum

K. Aland. Midrash

Graece,

Translated

Library).

London,

1926-43.

ed. b y E b e r h a r d Nestle, E r w i n Nestle, into

by

I - V I I , ed. b y H . St. J T h a c k e r a y and

Classical

25th ed. Stuttgart,

Rabba.

ed.

Translation,

(The L o e b

I - V I , ed.

1909-38.

and

1963. and

Indices,

b y H . Freedman and M . Simon. I - I X : Texts; X : Index

English

with

Notes,

Glossary

Volume.

L o n d o n , 1939. Mishnah

Megillah,

The

Mishnah,

The

Babylonian

e d . a n d t r a n s , b y J. R a b b i n o w i t z . O x f o r d , 1 9 3 1 .

trans, b y H . D a n b y . L o n d o n , 1933. Talmud

(English translation), ed. b y I. Epstein. L o n d o n ,

8

i93 -52. The

Gospel by

The

Gospel and

Acta

According of Philip.

Commentary,

Apostolorum Leipzig,

New

to Thomas Translated ed. b y

Apocrypha,

Testament

Apocrypha,

Apocrypha,

II:

lesungen Irenaei,

1857-

from

the Coptic

R. M c L . Wilson. I - I I , ed. b y

Text, New

with an York,

Introduction

1962.

R . A . Lipsius and M . Bonnet.

1891-1903. I, ed. b y E . H e n n e c k e a n d W . Schneemelcher

(English translation

Sancti

(Coptic text with E n g l i s h translation), ed.

A . G u i l l a u m o n t , e t al. N e w Y o r k , 1 9 5 9 .

ed.

Evangelien,

und

Ubungen,

Adversus

by

R. McL. Wilson).

Philadelphia,

e d . b y E . K l o s t e r m a n n (Kleine 8). 3 r d

Haereses,

ed. Berlin,

1963.

Texte fur

Vor-

1929.

I - I I , ed. b y W . W . H a r v e y . C a m b r i d g e ,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

104 Die

Pseudoklementinen, lichen

The Clementine and

ed. b y B . R e h m

and

(DieGriechischenChrist-

42). Leipzig, 1953.

Homilies,

in The Ante-Nicene

J. D o n a l d s o n . B u f f a l o ,

Recognitions Corpus

I:Homilien,

Schriftsteller,

of Clement,

Fathers,

V I I I , ed. b y A . R o b e r t s

Fathers,

V I I , ed. b y A . R o b e r t s

1886.

in The Ante-Nicene

J. D o n a l d s o n . B u f f a l o , 1886.

Hermeticum,

I - I V , ed. b y A . D . N o c k a n d A . - J . Festugiere (Collection

d e s Universite-s d e F r a n c e ) . P a r i s , 1 9 4 5 - 5 4 . T e r t u l l i a n , On the Apparel

of Women,

in The Ante-Nicene

A . R o b e r t s a n d J. D o n a l d s o n . B u f f a l o , The

Excerpta London,

ex Theodoto

of Clement

Fathers,

I V , ed. b y

1886.

of Alexandria,

ed. b y

R.

P.

Casey.

1934.

De Abstinentia,

inPorphyrii

A m m o n i u s , I n Porphyrii

Opuscula,

Isagogen

taria in Aristotelem

e d . b y A . N a u c k . 2 n d e d . L e i p z i g , 1886.

sive V Voces, e d . b y A . B u s s e , in

Graeca,

Commen-

I V , 3. B e r l i n , 1 8 9 1 .

LITERATURE Arndt,

W . F.

Testament from

and Gingrich, F. W . , A

Greek-English

and other Early

Literature

W . Bauer,

Christian

Worterbuch,

B a u e r , W . , Griechisch-Deutsches ments

und

der ubrigen

ed.).

urchristlichen

B i l l i n g s , T . H . , The Platonism B l a c k , M . , The Scrolls

4th

Worterbuch

Chicago,

Judaeus.

Origins.

Christian

Literature,

the

des Neuen

5th ed. Berlin,

New

Testa­ 1958.

Chicago, 1919.

N e w Y o r k , 1961.

B l a s s , F . a n d D e b r u n n e r , A . , A Greek Grammar other Early

of

1957.

zu den Schriften

Literatur.

of Philo

and Christian

Lexicon

(Translated and adapted

of the New

Testament

and

trans, and rev. b y R . W . F u n k . Chicago,

1961. B o r n k a m m , G . , " D i e H a r e s i e d e s K o l o s s e r b r i e f e s , " in Das Ende Paulus-Studien, B o u g h t o n , F . S., The Bousset,

2nd

of Progress

Christos.

des Christentums

Brandenburger, Brehier,

Idea

W . , Kyrios

fdngen

E . , Adam

E . , Les

idies

in Philo

Geschichte bis Irenaeus.

und

Christus.

philosophiques

Judaeus.

the Old

Testament.

C h i l d s , B . , Myth Philologus,

Oxford,

Reality und

York,

in

Neukirchen,

1962.

de Philon

im Urchristentum.

the Old

d'Alexandrie.

and English

Lexicon

Library

T u b i n g e n , 1949.

Testament.

der

London,

Schriften

S u p p l e m e n t b a n d V I I [1899],

Philos.

387-435).

ofQumran

i960. (reprint

Leipzig,

and Modern

from

1899.

Biblical

Studies.

1958.

C u l l m a n n , O . , The Christology

of the New

Testament,

t r a n s , b y S. C . G u t h r i e

C . A . M . H a l l . 2 n d e d . rev. P h i l a d e l p h i a , 1 9 6 3 .

D a n i e l o u , J., Philon D a u b e , D . , The New D a v i e s , W . D . , Paul D e l l i n g , G . , Paulus'

d'Alexandrie. Testament

Paris, 1958. and Rabbinic

and Rabbinic Slellung

Judaism.

zu Frau

, A r t . Trap6lvoi;. Theologisches §

An-

3rd e d . G o t t i n g e n , 1 9 2 6 .

et religieuses

Chronologie

C r o s s , F . M . , Jr., The Ancient

and

1932.

den

1957.

v o n , Die Askese

and

L . , Einteilung

New

von

ed. Paris, 1925.

Campenhausen, H . Cohn,

Gesetzes.

New York,

des Christusglaubens

B r o w n , F . , D r i v e r , S. R . , a n d B r i g g s , C . A . , A Hebrew of

des

pp. 139-56. Miinchen, 1952.

Judaism.

L o n d o n , 1956.

2nd e d . L o n d o n , 1 9 5 8 .

und Ehe.

Worterbuch

Stuttgart, 1931.

zum Neuen

Testament.

24-35-

D o d d , C . H . , The

Bible

and

the Greeks.

London,

1935.

V (1954),

BIBLIOGRAPHY

D r u m m o n d , J . , Philo development

Stockholm,

L . M . , Marriage kultische

B . , The

Laws

A . F . , Philo

Stuttgart,

hdnsyn

in

the Bible

and

by

im Altertum.

of the Gospel

York,

in

its

till hans

eskatologiska

the Talmud.

Cambridge,

G i e s s e n , 1910.

According

to

Thomas,

trans,

Theosophie.

2nd

by

1961.

und die

judisch-alexandrinische

ed.

1835.

G i n z b e r g , L . , The Legends script

med sdrskild

philosophy

1939.

Keuschheit

Theology

E . J. S h a r p e . N e w Gfrorer,

1888.

1942.

F e h r l e , E . , Die Gartner,

I-II. London,

av Alexandria

forestallningar. Mass.,

or, the Jewish-Alexandrian

completion,

E l m g r e n , H . , Philon Epstein,

Judaeus;

and

105

of the Jews,

H . Szold and

I - V I I , trans, from the G e r m a n m a n u ­ by

B. Cohen).

G i v e r s e n , S., " N a g H a m m a d i B i b l i o g r a p h y 1948-1963." Studia

Theologica

Philadelphia, 17

(1963),

( V o l . V I I , Index,

1909-38.

I39-87-

G o o d e n o u g h , E . R . , By Light, New Haven, , An

P. R a d i n

Light.

The MysticGospel

of Hellenistic

Judaism.

1935.

Introduction

to Philo

Judaeus.

2nd e d . O x f o r d ,

1962.

, " A N e o - P y t h a g o r e a n S o u r c e in P h i l o J u d a e u s . " Yale Classical 3 (1932), 117-64, The Politics of Philo Judaeus. Practice and Theory, with a Bibliography

of

New Haven,

1938.

Grant,

Philo

R . M . , Gnosticism

, The Letter

by

H . L. Goodhart

and Early

and the Spirit.

, " N o t e s on t h e G o s p e l

and

Christianity.

London,

Studies General

E . R. Goodenough.

N e w York,

1959.

1957.

of T h o m a s . "

Vigiliae

Christianae

13

(1959),

170-80. , " T w o G n o s t i c G o s p e l s . " Journal G r o s s , J., Philons Tubingen,

von Alexandreia

of Biblical

Anschauungen

Literature

79 ( i 9 6 0 ) ,

iiber die Natur

des

1-11.

Menschen.

1930.

H e i n e m a n n , I . , Philons Untersuchungen

griechische

zu Philons

und jiidische Darstellung

Bildung.

Kulturvergleichende

der jiidischen

Gesetze.

Breslau,

1932. H o r o v i t z , J., Untersuchungen schopfung. Jeremias,

Marburg,

iiber Philons

J., A r t . 'ASdcjj.. Theologisches

I (1933). I4I-43, A r t . "AvGpwTTO?.

und Platons

Lehre

von der

Welt-

1900.

Theologisches

Worterbuch

Worterbuch

zum

zum

Neuen

Neuen

Testament.

Testament.

I

(1933). 365-67J e r v e l l , J., Imago Dei. Gen 1126 f. im Spdtjudentum, in der Gnosis und in den paulinischen Brief en. G o t t i n g e n , i960. J o n a s , H . The Gnostic Religion. The Message of the Alien God and the Beginnings of Christianity. B o s t o n , 1958. K a h l e r , E . , Die Frau in den paulinischen Briefen. Ziirich, i 9 6 0 . K e e , H . C , Y o u n g , F . W . , a n d F r o e h l i c h , K . , Understanding the New Testa­ ment. 2 n d ed. E n g l e w o o d Cliffs, N . J . , 1965. K l e i n , F . - N . , Die Lichtterminologie hermetischen Schriften. Leiden,

bei Philon 1962.

von Alexandrien

und

in

den

K l i j n , A . F . J., " T h e 'Single O n e ' i n t h e G o s p e l of T h o m a s . " Journal Biblical Literature Si (1962), 271-78.

of

K r a e l i n g , C . H . , Anthropos and Son of Man. A Study in the Religious cretism of the Hellenistic Orient. N e w Y o r k , 1927.

Syn­

io6

BIBLIOGRAPHY

L e i p o l d t , J., Die Frau

in der antiken

L e i s e g a n g , H . , Der heiligeGeist. Erkenntnis

in

Das

Welt und im Urchristentum. Wesen und Werden

der Philosophie

und

Religion

der

Leipzig, 1955. mystisch-intuitiven

der Griechen.

Leipzig and

Berlin, 1919. , Pneuma

Hagion:

Evangelien

aus

Der

Ursprung

der griechischen

Liddell, H . G. and Scott,

des

M a c h e n , J. G . , The Virgin

Birth

Lexicon,

New York,

pro Christianis

(Unpublished

Th.

School). Cambridge, Mass.,

der

synoptischen

1922. r e v . e d . b y I I . S.

1925-40.

of Christ.

M a l h e r b e , A . J,, " T h e Supplicatio

Oepke,

Leipzig,

R . , A Greek-English

Jones and R . McKenzie. Oxford,

Platonism"

Geistbegriffs

Mystih.

D.

1930.

of Athenagoras

dissertation,

and Middle

Harvard

Divinity

1963.

A . , A r t . yoviq. Theologisches

Worterbuch

zum

Neuen

Testament.

I

(1933). 776-90. Pascher,

J.,

H

Vergottung Rad,

BASIAIKH bei Philon

G . v o n . Genesis.

O M ) E . Der

von

Konigsweg

Alexandreia.

A Commentary,

zu

Wiedergeburt

und

Paderborn, 1931.

t r a n s , b y J. H . M a r k s . P h i l a d e l p h i a ,

1961. R e i t z e n s t e i n , R . , Poimandres: christlichen R i n g g r e n , II.,

Literatur. The Faith

Studien

Leipzig,

zur

griechisch-agyptischen

und

friih-

1904.

of Qumran,

trans, b y E . T . Sander. Philadelphia,

1963. S a n d m e l , S., Philo's in Jewish

Place

Literature.

S c h l i e r . H , Der Brief S c h m i d t , H . , Die

in Judaism.

A Study

of Conceptions

of

Abraham

Cincinnati, 1956.

an die Epheser,

Anthropologic

2nd ed. Diisseldorf,

Philons

S c h w e i z e r , E . , A r t . irvs3|i.a. Theologisches

von Alexandreia. Worterbuch

1958. Leipzig, 1933.

zum

Neuen

Testament.

V I ( 1 9 5 9 ) . 330-453. S e g e l b e r g , E . , " T h e C o p t i c - G n o s t i c G o s p e l A c c o r d i n g t o P h i l i p a n d its S a c r a m e n t a l S y s t e m . " Numen 7 ( i 9 6 0 ) , 189-200. S e l b y , D . J., Toward the Understanding of St. Paul. E n g l e w o o d Cliffs, N . J.,

1962. Stauffer,

E . , A r t . ytxpioi.

Theologisches

Worterbuch

zum

Neuen

Testament.

I (1933). 646-55. S t e g m a n n , B . A . , Christ, "The Man from Heaven". A Study of I Cor. 15 '.45-47 in the Light of the Anthropology of Philo Judaeus. "Washington, 1927. S t r a c k , H . L . , a n d B i l l e r b e c k , P . , Kommentar zum Talmud und Midrasch, I - V I . Munchen, 1926-61.

Neuen

S t r a t h m a n n , H . , Geschichte der fruhchristlichen Monchtums. Leipzig, 1914.

bis zur Entstehung

S t r e c k e r , G . , Das Judentum suchungen, 70). Berlin,

in den 1958.

Pseudoklementinen.

T h y e n , H . , " D i e P r o b l e m s der neueren Rundschau 23 ( 1 9 5 5 ) , 230-46. V o l k e r , W . , Fortschritt

und

Askese

Vollendung

Testament

(Texte

und

Philo-Forschung."

bei Philo

von

aus des Unter­

Theologische

Alexandrien.

Leipzig,

1938. W o l f s o n , H . A . , Philo. Foundations of Religious Philosophy Christianity, and Islam, I - H . Cambridge, Mass., 1947.

in

Judaism,

, Religious Philosophy. A Group of Essays. Cambridge, Mass., 1961. Zeller, E . , A History of Greek Philosophy, I-II, t r a n s , b y S . F . A l l e y n e . London, 1881. , Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy trans, b y L. R . P a l m e r . L o n d o n , 1 9 3 1 .

(13th ed. rev. b y W . Nestle),

INDEX OF REFERENCES

I.

De

A b r a h a m o (Abr.)

6 102 "6 122

4 57 55

ISO

248

42 94

257

79

De

II

Agriculture

(Agric.)

30 73 94-97 139 De

18 42 9 20

Aeternitate Mundi

(Aet.

Mund.)

55 H68

9 9

D e Conf usione L i n g u a -

Quod Deterius

rum

insidiari s o l e t ( D e t .

De

C h e r u b i m (Cher.)

43 96 62 62 97 61 6 1 , 62 61 12, 62 63 5 1 , 52, 5 5 , 6 1 , 7 5 , 98, 100, I O I 57 57 57-64 90 59 90 65 87 91 11 92 11 95 l i

1

1

(Conf. L i n g . )

6 14-15 21 62-63 77-82 146 169 ff. 176 176-77 190

9 8

84 29 86 29 23 15 86 8

Congressu

quaerendae Eruditi­ o n is g r a t i a ( C o n g r . )

23 96 106 155

63 90 46 9o Decalogo (Dec.)

76 102

9 50

134 156

2

4 9

Q u o d Deterius Potiori insidiari s o l e t ( D e t . Pot. Ins.)

28 50 60 80 82 82-84 83 84 89 89-90 90 125

48, 52, I O I 41 97 24 15, 16 4 1 5 , 2 4 , 2 5 , 85 15 18 17 49 9 J

Potiori

P o t . Ins.)

139

30

147-49 170-71

54 91

Quod Deus immutabilis sit ( D e u s I m m . )

5 14 46 47"4 59 133 136-37 137 138 8

De

De

40-41 43-52 44 44-46 44-49 45 46 47 48 49 50

PHILO

De

62, 9 7 49 16 93 9 8 5 3 . 62 3 53 6

Ebrietate (Ebr.)

5 146 212

54 100 32

D e F u g a et I n v e n t i o n e (Fug-)

50-52 51 51-52 68 ff. 71 121 128 165 179-82 188 De

4 5 6-7 9

63 4 i . 49 62 23 15 9 42 16 8 39

G i g a n t i b u s (Gig.)

42 485 5 8

INDEX OF REFERENCES

io8

12-13 13-16 25-27

86 86 17

53 58 60-64

49 9 97

(Leg.

!

All.)

IL44 IL49 11:50 IL71-72 11:73

38,94 42

:Q7

De

20 27 27 18

iff.

I : a ff.

I:11

1

5 27 90

I:15

L21-22 I:25

1:3! 1 : 3 1 ff. 1:32 1.: 33 1:39 1:42 1:43 1=53

1:70 1:72-73 1:82 1:88 1:90 T :gi

i

J

5 , 34 22, 25, 26, 81-82 1 5 , 1 6 , 81 24, 81-82 20 24, 82 9, 39 8i ' 84 90 6 14,82 1 4 . 1 5 . 82 1 7 , 87 5

9 43 1 4 , 56 56

"1:43 I I I :4Q in.61-68 111:67 111:68

56 39, 90 93 90 92

1II:6Q

1:95 IL2-3 I I : 4 ff. 11:6 11:7 11:8

8 15 16 81 15 90 91

lT:i2

33

5

11:12-13 32,33 I I : 13 r6, 2 1 , 32, 33, 38, 6 5 , 82, 83, 84, 88 I I : 16 g2 I I : 17 9 1 , 92 II:19 39 IL19-52 88 11:24 39, 88 IL38 ' 16 11:40 88 I I : 40 ff. 34

! i

Mutatione

10 30-31 30-32 33-34 5 132-38

87 23 84 5o 82 97

I 2

6

93 90, 93 93 46 82

T83

ff.

223 Quod

Omnis

Probus

L i b e r sit ( O m . P r o b .

III:ioo

11

I I I : 107

92

Ill:io8

43

46

IIL113

92

De Opificio Mundi

III:ii5

84

111:129 111:131

79 79 14,

15,

24

111:165

46

III:178

43

I I I : 180 III:i8o-i8i III:i82

92

111:217-18 111:217-19 111:219 "1:234-43

97 61 62 43

De

Lib.)

' 35

;

2

j i

3

i

Migratione

A b r a h a m i (Migr. A b r . )

25 3i f f

T

46 57

[

3 "33

55

I

34-35 66-67 76 100

56 84 <) 39

'5

(Op. Mund.) '

6r 63, 9 7

2

53. 6 1 , 62 97 54 30 1 6 , 28 17

'31

138 142-51 149 184

93

111:69-76 111:70 I I I 171 111:94 111:95-96

I I I : I 6 I

11:2

2

111:7 I I I : n 111:29 111:41

82 90 56 97 54

N o m i n u m (Mut. Norn.)

All.)

I :T I :

II

103 119 134-42 140 141

88 63 43 91 39

11:74 L e g u m Allegoria (Leg.

De Migratione A b r a h a m i (Migr. A b r . )

L e g u m Allegoria

D e Gigantibus (Gig.)

|

12 13 13-H

15 16 19-20 24 25 26 29 29 ff. 35 36 36 ff. 36-128 37 43 53 54

28, 33 9 4. 7 20 27 27 26 26 27 27 82 27 28 27 26 27 26 28 27 20 90 90

109

INDEX OF REFERENCES D e Opificio

Mundi

De

{Op. Mund.)

55 62 64 66 69 69 ff.

20, 23 18

71 72-75 72 ff.

55 89 23, 28

73 76 77 77-78 89 100 114-16 117 129 129-30 131 ff. 133

27 27, 28 28 i

5

" 5«> 56ff157 i6o-63a 161 165-66 167 '70 172 T

38 39 49 37,38 9, 39 91 38 42 38 35 7

86 85 84 92 Posteritate

Caini

4 1 , 42 41,42 39 4 1 , 43 92 92 24

1:43

1:45 1:45 ff. I: 6 I: 7 4

( P o s t . C.)

6 34 52 68 101-102

54 4i 9 54 6

134-35 135 165 177

97 61 9 39

1:48 D50 1:52

39 42 81

I:92

1:93 I I : 11-12 I I : 12 11 * I ^

11:34 I I : 49

De

Soluti-

(Quaest. in Gen.)

4

De

89 27, 28, 29, 32, 34, 83, 84, 88 1 5 , 90 89 29 51 89 18 29 29 29 89

1 6 , 20-26, 29-35, 38. 65 135 >5, 1 6 , 28, 30, 31 *3<5 ff29, 30, 35ff., 49, 82, 89 136-50 89, 92 136-70 87 i37 36 i39 25. 30, 3 1 . 36 142 36 144 3 1 , 36 145 17 146 1 5 , 1 7 , 31 148 ff. 36 150 36 151 49. 92 151-52 37, 87, 88 1 5 1 ff. 36ft., 68, 72 i"54

Quaestiones et ones in Genesin

14 18 45 53

Praemiis et

68, 69 48 ^2 90 39, 46 ff.

Poenis

(Praem. Poen.)

HI: 3

28-46 40 46 108

134

153 ff-

Plantatione

(Plant.)

57 1 6 , 57 17, 57 94 94 63 52 97

i n

156-60 158-60 159-60

14,39,41, 43, 90

IIDg III:xo

56 86

111=45 I I I : 48

86 38, 94

I V : 15

42 55 86

I V : 49 I V = 74

Quaestiones et

IV:86

94

Exodum

I V : 117

52

(Quaest. in E x . )

IV:ng

52

I V : 242

52

o n e s in

1:2 I:

3

1:4 I:j

1:8 IT: 3 (F: .'.•)

! :

Soluti-

46 46 46 4 1 , 46 46,47 5i,53.6i 50

II:5i Quaestiones et

55 Soluti-

ones in Genesin {Quaest. in Gen.)

81 81 26

1:8

1:14 l:ig

1:25 1:27 1:33 1:37 1:42

1

39, 4 41 4 ,43 4 1 , 42 37 2

Quis

Rerura

Divinarum (Rer.

19 22-39 3 -39 38 42 53 55 56-57 60-61 63-64 69 69-70 6

73 74 132

Heres

Div. Her.)

90 55 97 52 91 90 1 4 , 15 24, 25 43 43 56 97 90 56 17

INDEX OF REFERENCES

no Quis R e r a m Divinarum

D e Somniis Heres

(Rer. D i v . Her.)

!

133 ff,

19

138-39 164 183-85 192 225 230-31 231 232 232-33

19 29, 32, 34, 88 16, 17 46 84 22, 23 17 14, 15, 16 18

255 258-66 259 264-65 274

46 97 98 56 1 5 , 58, 83

D e Sacrificiis A b e l i s e t C a i n i (Sacr. A . C . )

13 20 ff. 28 60 62 63 76 100 103 105-106 112

9 92 9 12 11 46 9 83 42 91 46

D e Sobrietate

(Sobr.)

55

11

D e Somniis

I: o 1:39 3

1:6o 1:73-74 1:102

1:126 1 : 1 3 3 ff. 1:138 1:140 1:164

I:i8off. I:188

D e Specialibus

(Som.)

52

L e g i b u s (Spec. L e g . )

I:200

52

IV: 9

1:246 11:70

39 37.49.5°

1:199

II:106

41

ID176-77

55

II:i8

32

4

11:229-30 11:232

93 56

H:253 11:273

93 53

D e Specialibus L e g i b u s (Spec. Leg.)

1:9 1:41 1:79 I:8i 1:97

38,90,94 11 9 1 5 , 24 89

I:IOI

94

1:105-107 I:i29 1:200-201 1:319 1:325 1:329

53 53 41 11 58 33

11:24 11:29-31 11:30-31

42 97 54

11:33 11:56

41 51 51

11:64 11:124

42

11:147

46

II:20i

11

111:34-36

94

111:35 III :37- 2

95 58

111:40 111:43-45

10 9

111:83-84 I I I : 108

(Sam.)

85,87 8 57 24

8 58 86 85,86 86 11 86 90

4

56, 97

4

I V : 92

176

84 14, 1 7 , 24 11

IV:235

47

I V : 123 I V :

!

De

Virtutibus

11-12 13 21 75 144 174 178 203 ff. 205

(Virt.)

43 84, 90 83 1 1 , 90 90 11 11 24 15

D e Vita Contemplativa (Vit. Cont.)

2 13 ff. 18-29 32 32-33 40-64 57-63 60 63 65 ff.

16 98 98 98 100 98 83 58 9, 38, 87 99

66 68 70 71-72 73 78 80 85 88 89 90

99 99 99 99 99 99 100 100 100 100 100

D e Vita Mosis (Vit. Mos.)

11:65

24

24 89

II:68-69

79

II:i47

92

III:ii3 III:i35 III:i79

94 11 50

II:2io

51

11:224

46

I I : 2 4 3 ff.

42

111:207

24, 82

IL288

49

INDEX

III

OF REFERENCES

II. O L D T E S T A M E N T

Genesis

Genesis (Gen.)

(Gen.)

1 9 , 34 1-2 28 f. 1 : 1 ff. 26 1:1-2:3 29 1:26 23, 28, 72 1: 26 f. 3 1:26-27 64 1:27 21-26, 27, 28, 3 1 , 82

9:6 15:10 18:11 18:27 21:7 38:7 39 39: iff-

1:31 19 2-50 5 2:4 27 2:4-5 29 2:4-7 9 2:6 29 2 : 7 2 1 - 2 6 , 22, 29, 31 2:22 72-73 3 93 4 4 4:17 41 8:18 47

Exodus

i

Numbers

24 22 51-52 5<> 54 93 41 43

(Num.)

27:8-11 3 0 : 4 ff. I

42 42

Kings

17:8-24

53

Psalms

8

89

(Ex.) Proverbs

12:5 23:26

46 94

(Prov.)

18:8 19:15

83 83

2

Leviticus

(Lev.) Isaiah

21:10-15 27:1-8 Numbers

1

54 41 (Num.)

(Is.)

54:1

52

Jeremiah

21:8-9

(Jer.)

9

f

25: 7 -

43

3:4

96

III. N E W T E S T A M E N T

Matthew

19:3-12 22:23-33 22:30

(Matt.)

78, 80 78 78, 80

Luke

20:36

78

Acts

4:24 14:15 17:24

76 76 76

!

I Corinthians (I Cor.)

Ephesians

7 7:5 7:25-31 7:25-35 7:32ft. 11:2-16 11:11 12:13 14:34-36 15

3:9

76, 80 101 77 77 77 80 80 80 80 69

(Rom.)

1 1:20

37 76

3:3 8:18-24 14:14 14:20

7° 76 76 76

76

Colossians

(Col.)

1:16 3:11

76 80

I Timothy

(I T i m . )

2:14

40

Hebrews

(Heb.)

5 I I Corinthians (IICor.)

Romans

(Eph.)

6

5 Galatians

3:26-28 3:28

9

(Gal.)

I Peter

89 (I

3:7 Revelation

79 78, 79, 80, 101

Pet.)

4:11 10:6 14:4

4° (Rev.) 6

7 76 7 s

INDEX OF

112

REFERENCES

IV. I N T E R T E S T A M E N T A L A N D R A B B I N I C Damascus

Enoch :

i5 3-7

7

8

Document

(CD)

Genesis R a b b a h

(Gen

R)

12:1-2 IV

WRITINGS

IOI

8

10

Maccabees

1:6 2:6

90 90

b'Erubin 18a

Testament tali ( T e s t .

of

10

Naph-

Naph.) Megillah

8:8

101

9a

10

V. A P O C R Y P H A E N E W T E S T A M E N T W R I T I N G S A N D N A G H A M A D I Acts

of

Acts

John

63

75

of

H 27 5 61 89-103

75 71 75 75 75

1

Acts

of

Peter

34

75

Gospel of Philip

Thomas

G o s p e l of P h i l i p Acts

of

Philip

7

44

71

1

72,

73

73

\T . O T H E R Plato

73

8

7 79 127

73.

Gospel

of

74

37 61b 114

74 77 74

70,

LITERATURI Terlullian

V I I I , 1, 2 5 1 b . 1 0 - 1 2

410D

28

Hermetic Poimandres

246 ff.

I, 9.

Ive-naeus 84

Adversus

71 Porphyry

15

Republic

2

Writings

Phaedrus

439D

De Cultu F e m i n a r u m I,

47

84

Haereses

De

Abstinentia

IV,

20

38

189C-193 D

83

1, 21, 3 ( H a r v e y 1 4 , 2) Clement

Timaeas 3 4 B ff.

22

34C

27

3?I>

27

69C

84

of

E x c e r p t a ex 21:1-3 67-68 79-80

Writings

I, 71

12, 12,

14a, 14b,

27 4-5

II,

15

II,

15, 3

Theodoto

III,

24

67

III,

27

67

III,

68

7° 71 71

Stromateis 28 28

III,

g,

III,

1 3 , 92

63

Homilies

Alexandria

A ristotle Catcgoriae

101

Pseudo-Clementine

Symposium i«9Cff.

Thomas

22

Physica

Cratylus

74 73 73

69 69

67 70

67

XIII,

16

67

XIX,

18

67

XIX,

21

67

I N D E X Adam 74,

6,

22,

30,

O F S U B J E C T S

31,

32,

73,

94, Mundi,

De

4

Allegorical interpretation Allegorists, the extreme Allegory

of

Amesha

the

Laws

Spentas

Ammonius Apollo

7

8 95

of

not

por­ met­

Created

2

21, 34, 38, 62, 65, 66, 84 man 88 man

39,

70,

72,

73,

motif,

use

oE

72

69,

Delling, G.

101

72,

73,

78,

96

Desire,

esp.

sexual

desire

38, 52, 67, 72, 92,

Dionysus

96

Discipline

47, 50,

Divine

19,

29,

94

54

impregnation

96,

92

50

Delphi 37,

77,

51-53,

55-64,

97

Divine possession Division

56

17, 4 8 , 4 9 , 6 8 , 7 2 ,

D o d d , C. H .

77

21,37,87 J.

3, 4, 6 2 , 8 2 , 8 4 , 85,

86

Becoming

Duality,

20 bisexuality 62,

M.

72,

20,

21,

70,

32,

83

dualism

Dupont-Sommer,

100

2, 49, 50, 66, 67,

87

Dyad

A.

101

16

14

Body

36, 46, 51, 52, 56, 89, 90, 91,

Ecstasy

Ennoia

Bridal

Error

chamber

55, 56, 96,

Egyptians,

92, 9 3 , 9 5 , 9 9 Bornkamm, G. 80 Brehier, E. 3, 35

Charioteer,

93

Plato's parable

Chastity

99

Children

74, 75 B . S.

63 68 70, 7 3 , 74, 77, 78, 79,

80 of

90

Eschatological asceticism Essenes Eve

19

,

7

ex

Theodoto

12, 6 8 ,

69

68, 70, 7 1 ,

2

Exodus 5 Exposition of the

Chrysostom 96 Cleanthes 17

77

12

9, 7 2 , 7 3 , 7 4

Excerpta

Christ 71, 72, 73 Chrysippus 12

Clement of Alexandria Cohn, L. 5, 4 3 -

the

69

68, 71, 72, 73

20, 36, 53, 92,

97

Gospel according to

Eschatology Change

Childs,

drama of

2

67,

Drummond,

Blood

19 95

22

D a n i e l o u , J.

19

38,

89-93,

sexual-mythical

Cullmann, O .

Death

34. 4 9 , 5L 5 3 . 6 2 , 6 5 , 6 6 , 69, Athena 50 Athenagoras 6, 2 5

34,

76,

63

a m o n g the R a b b i s 1o A n d r o g y n o u s man, m y t h of 38, 72 A r e t e (see Virtue) Aristophanes 83 Aristotle 12 A r n i m , J, v o n 17 Asexual, asexuality 16, 18, 2 1 , 3 2 ,

Black,

cosmos,

Cross, F. M . Jr.

4

Bisexual,

the

world

Creation,

96

68, 73, 8 3 . Androgynous , 83, 8 7 , Androgynous

5J,

t r a y e d in m y t h o l o g i c a l - s e x u a l a p h o r s in P h i l o ' s w r i t i n g s

5, 8,

33

Androgynous

Baau

4 , 7, 1 7 , 2 3 , 3 5 ,

99

Creation 5,

N A M E S

Colson, F, H ,

82

Aetemitate

7

72,

A N D

Laws

4 , 5,

Female, d e s t r u c t i o n of the 70 F e m a l e , as the fallible p a r t of G o d

95

71

INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND NAMES

H4

F e m a l e , i n f e r i o r i t y of t h e

Klein,

41 ff.

F e m a l e , n e u t r a l i z a t i o n of t h e

Female terminology, pejorative

Flesh

L e g u m Allegoria

(see M a n , first)

Freedom

93,

98

Froehlich, K .

77

Gartner, B .

34,

4,

70, 7 4 ,

Genesis

Liddell-Scott

83

Light-Stream

2

Logos

26, 27, 32, 33, 34 21

communion with as c r e a t o r

God,

k n o w l e d g e of

4

5, 6, 1,

16, 17

2,

3,

4,

5,

1 2 , 1 3 , 1 7 . 5 5 . 6 2 , 68 7, 8, 7 2 , 7 3 , 97

Guillaumont, A .

Machen,

J. G .

Maenad

96

62

becoming

4 5 - 4 9 , 70,

Male-female polarity,

neutralization

3. 7

c r e a t e d a f t e r t h e i m a g e of G o d

20-35, 38, 48, 64, 6 5 , 8 1 , 82, 83

Hierophant

11

Man,

c r e a t i o n of

H i g h Priest

2

Man,

different

Hippolytus

23

Spirit

Holy W a r

Philo

71

Man,

101-102

individual

58

Man,

composite

4

Man,

the

(iSitx)

26,

(stxoiv)

Innocence

27,

29, 30,

divine

53,

Inspiration, prophetic

Isis

82

56,

97

74, 75

Inspiration, Iran

33,

3, 20, 24, 5 7 55,

96-97

2

sense-percep­

first

23, 28, 31 empirical

or

M a n , d u a l n a t u r e of

1 4 ff.

Man,

the earthly

22, 26, 28, 81

Man,

the generic

22,

32,

Man,

2

t h e generic e a r t h l y

33,

38,

29, 34, 88

M a n , t h e generic h e a v e n l y J e r e m i a s , J.

Man, the heavenly

22 27,

Man,

higher

Man,

i d e a of (or ideal)

3, 6, 1 7 , 2 1 , 22, 23,

nature

of

Man,

l o w e r n a t u r e of

Man,

Philo's

Judaism

Man,

t h e so-called

Man,

the

Judaism, Rabbinic K e e , H . C . 77

50

K i n g d o m of G o d ( H e a v e n )

Marriage 70, 7 4 ,

14 ff. 20, 22,

23,

30, 82

Jesus 69, 70, 74, 7 7 Jonas, H . 63, 67, 68, 70

2,4,5,12,13

29, 88

22,28,34,81,82

29, 34. 5 5 . 5 7 . 64. 6 6 . 67, 68, 70, 7 1 , 82, 87

78

actual

9, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 3 1 , 35. 36. 37. 39, 4 ° , 49, 68, 7 2 , 82, 83. 89, 92

65, 8 1 , 83, 84

( a n d Osiris)

J e r v e l l , J.

in

22, 30, 31

Homosexual

Image

term

15

the

tible

6, 35

uses of t h e

Hypothetica Idea

74

18-20

man)

70

I.

25,

Male-female polarity

Man, Heinemann,

8

1 9 , 20, 22, 23, 24,

of 34 Malherbe, A . J. 6, 25 M a n , a n d r o g y n o u s (see A n d r o g y n o u s

5 5 , 5 7 , 62

Grant, R . M .

4, 6,

Male,

7

Goodenough, E . R . Grace of G o d

5

(or t r a d i t i o n a l i s t s )

1 9 , 34, 50, 5 7 ,

63, 66-75, 7 6 , 7 8 , 80 God,

97

27. 29, 30. 3 i . 34. 3 5 . 4 9 , 5 5 , 5 7 . 62, 64, 65, 66, 82

5, 6

Gfrbrer, A , F .

4

63, 83, 96,

Literalists

Gnostic, Gnosticism

Holy

81-83

L e i s e g a n g , J.

Literal interpretation

77

5

Genus, genera

God,

29, 40,

Legatione ad G a i u m , D e

2

Gentile

90

2, 4-8, 9 5

Law

First m a n

3, 17 2 5 , 43,

use

40 ff,

of

F.-N.

Knowledge

70

Marriage,

true 67,

29

23

23 73,

sacred

Manichaeans

1 4 ff.

u s e of t h e t e r m

68

77, 11

78,

94,

95

INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND NAMES

115

Philo,

as S c r i p t u r a l e x e g e t e

Philo,

as l o y a l

1 7 , 1 8 , 36, 38, 39, 42, 43, 5 1 -

Philo,

hermeneutics

58, 6 1 , 63, 65, 70, 75, 82, 85, 90, 91

Philo,

soteriological

Messiah

78

Middle-Platonists Mind Mind,

6

man's higher

Mind, rational

Philosophy

20, 27, 28

Piety

above man

18

Mind,

t h e r u l i n g p a r t of t h e s o u l

M i n d of t h e u n i v e r s e M i n d , indivisible Mind,

Modesty

2, 1 7

Moses,

inspiration

philosophers Mystery,

the

Greek

Powers

1 9 , 23, 6 3 , 89

Prayer

101-102

Progress

6,

8-13,

62

Protology

7,

73

8-13,

34-35,

63,

Purity

67 72

Qumran

5, 40, 5 2 , 95

77

4, 7

Necessity

93

Rad,

Neo-Pythagoreans Neutralization

of

Creation

Number,

sex

74,

Salvation

of m a n

56, 5 7 ,

61

16

54 1

2, 69, S.

Schenke,

H.-M,

single)

1 6 , 26,

29,

Ophite Gnosticism

63

Opificio M u n d i , D e

4, 6, 1 9 , 8 1 - 8 3 ,

89, 90

Seneca

7,

96 2

Parousia

74, 7 7 ,

Passion(s)

8

Sense-perception,

1, 3, 1 7 , 82 54, 5 5 , 5 7 , 58, 6 1 , 62,

Passover

46

63

4

Philo, attitude toward history P h i l o , e c l e c t i c i s m of as p h i l o s o p h e r

i d e a of

84 5

7, 8

27

73

9 50-51 32,

48,

Sexual abstinence

46, 5 1 , 5 2 , 5 4 , 8 1 , 90, 91

20, 26, 27,

8

36, 3 - 39, 4 ° , 42, 43, 46, 4 , 49, 5 i , 5 2 , 5 4 . 5 6 , 5 7 . 58, 6 5 , 69, 70, 7 5 , 7 7 , 8 1 , 90, 9 1 , 92

Serpent

Passivity Patriarchs

77

12

Sexuality P a s c h e r , J.

72

Senses, sense-perception

Seven 79

76

6, 7, 9, 10

Separation

Orphism

70, 7 3 ,

3

S e l b y , D , J.

(unity,

36. 3 7 . 38. 4 9 , 50, 5 L 54- 67, 68, 70-74, 7 7 , 7 9 , 87, 88, 100 O n e , b e c o m i n g 4 9 - 5 1 , 72-74

Origen

78

Sandmel, Scripture

Oneness

20

Resurrection

75

12

P h i l o ' s u s e of

Old age

19

G. von

Reproduction

2, 6, 1 6

78

A. D.

Nothingness

Philo,

51

Questions and Answers

Hamad 1

66-70

101

Pythagoreans

Nock,

67

45-4S, 5 1 , 5 4 , 5 5 , 66, 68,

Pseudo-Clementine literature

mythology

Nature

New

84, 87 101

8

3,

83

Nag

1, 22, 38

7 - 79 2,

6

Naassenes

6

3 7 , 39, 42, 5 2 , 90-93, 9 9

Pollution

6

mysteries

Mysticism

Plato, Platonism

Primal M a n for

of

6, 90

Poimandres 85

100

Moses

5

orientation

8

Pleasure

18

16

Myth,

20

24

material or immaterial

Monad

of

Philosophers, Greek

Mind,

5

3

4, 5, 82

1 8 , 1 9 , 21

28, 29, 30

M i n d , idea of

Jew

Sexual

desire

Sexual

intercourse

53,

62,

100

(see 38,

47,

78, 94, 9 5 , 101 Shame 74-75 Simon Magus Sin 92

65,

75

23,

67,

68

Sin, o r i g i n of 3 5 , 39, S o p h i a (see W i s d o m )

90

74,

75,

n6

INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND NAMES

S o u l 1 4 , 84-87

Virgin, v i r g i n i t y

S o u l , fragment of t h e d i v i n e s o u l 17 Soul, irrational 1 4 , 1 8 , 1 9 , 22, 3 1 ,

Virgin,

32, 40-44, 6 5 , 89-93 Soul, Soul, Soul,

2

3 1 - 3 6 , 4 5 , 4 - 49, 5 , 5 3 . 55- 62, 65, 69, 85, 90

67

Superstition

62

Theodotus Tiamat

P.

term

93 used

1

7 -

as

parallel

to

53 7 2 , 73

1 7 , 5 5 , 5 7 , 62-64, 66, 68,

99

Wolfson,

H.

1, 3, 8, 9, 1 0 , 1 2 , 1 3 ,

20, 22, 25, 27, 28, 3 3 , 5 5 , 82 Woman,

c r e a t i o n of

87-88

W o m a n , t h e o c c a s i o n for m a n ' s sin 37 6

12, 7 5 , 98-101

World,

b e g i n n i n g of

World,

c a r e s of

Young, Zeller,

4

Valentinians,

75

99

Whitaker, G. H .

F. W .

19

Thyen, H.

66-72

Wondland,

77

71

Therapeutae

4,

95

Wisdom

10

75

3, 45, 47, 55, 68, 79, 93,

Wilson, R. Mcl.

3, 101

Supplicatio pro Christianis

Volker, \ V .

virgin

S t r a c k , H . L . a n d B i l l e r b e c k , P. Strecker, G .

51-55,

57, 62-64, 66

Widow,

Specialibus Legibus, D e 89 S p e c i e s (elSoq) 2 7 - 3 2 , 34 Spirit 2, 1 4 , 17 Stegmann, B. 22, 23, 27 Stoic 17 Strabo 96 Strathmann, H .

Virtue

Vita Contemplativa, De

m a t e r i a l or i m m a t e r i a l 85 pre-existenee of 85-86 rational 1 7 - 2 0 , 22, 24, 26, 8

5 1 - 5 5 , 7 3 , 96-101

becoming a

Valentinianism

63,

E.

16

77

6, 1 9