that of (divine) " Reason." In Greek philosophy, again, Philo, as we have seen, chiefly follows the Platonic doctrines of Ideas and the Soul of the World, and the Stoic doctrine of God as the hofyos or Reason operative in the world. In its Stoic form the latter doctrine was pantheistic, but Philo could adapt it to his purpose simply by drawing a sharper distinction between the Logos and the world.
Like his doctrine of God, Philo's doctrine of the world and creation rests on the presupposition of an absolute metaphysical contrast between God and the world. The world can be ascribed to God only in so far as it is a cosmos or orderly world, its material substratum is not even indirectly referable to God. llatter (UM, or, as the Stoics said, oiioia) is a second principle, but in itself an empty one, its essence being a mere negation of all true being It is a lifeless, unmoved, shapeless mass, out of which God formed the actual world by means of the Logos and divine Forces. Strictly speaking, the world is only formed, not created, since matter did not originate with God.
Philo's doctrine of man is also strictly dualistic, and is mainly derived from Plato. Man is a twofold being, with a higher and a loer origin Of the pure souls which fill airy space, those nearest the earth are attracted by the sensible and descend into sensible bodies, these souls are the Godward side of man. But on his other side man is a creature of sense, and so has in him a fountain of sin and all evil. The body, therefore, is a prison, a coffin, or a grave for the soul which seeks to rise again to God. From this anthropology the principles of Philo's ethics are derived, its highest maxim necessarily being deliverance from the world of sense and the mortification of all the impulses of sense In carrying out this thought, as in many other details of his ethical teaching, Philo closely follows the Stoics. But he is separated from Stoical ethics by his strong religious interests, which carry him to very different views of the means and aim of ethical development. The Stoics cast man upon his own resources; Philo points him to the assistance of God, without from man, a captive to sense, could never raise himself to walk in the ways of true wisdom and virtue. And as moral effort can bear fruit only with God's help, so too God Himself is the goal of that effort. Even in this life the truly wise and virtuous is lifted above his sensible existence, and enjoys in ecstasy the son of God, his own consciousness sinking and disappearing in the divine right. Beyond this ecstasy there lies but one further step, viz. entire liberation from the body of sense and the return of the soul to its original condition; it came from God and must rise to Him again. But natural death brings this consummation only to those who, while they lived on earth, kept themselves free from attachment to the things of sense; all others must at death pass into another body; transmigration of souls is in fact the necessary consequence of Philo's premises, though he seldom speaks of it expressly.
Philo's literary labours have a twofold object, being directed either to expound the true sense of the Mosaic law, 1 e. the philosophy 11lLh we have just described, to his Jewish brethren, or to convince heathen readers of the excellence, the supreme purity and truth, of the jewish religion, whose holy records contain the deepest and most perfect philosophy, the best and most humane legislation. Thus as a literary figure Philo, in conformity with his education and es of life, stands between the Greeks and the Jews, seeking to gain the Jews for Hellenism and the Greeks for judaism, yet always taking it for granted that his standpoint really ls Jewish, and Just on that account truly philosophical and cosmopolitan.
The titles of the numerous extant writings of Philo present at first sight a most confusing multiplicity. More than three-fourths of them, however, are really mere sections of a small number of larger orks. Three such great works on the Pentateuch can be distinguished.
1. The smallest of these is the Znrlyaara:cal Meer: (Quaeslzones el solutzones), a short exposition of Genesis and Exodus, in the form of question and answer. The work IS cited under this title by Eusebius (H. E ii. 18, 1, 5; Praep E11 vii 13), and by later wrlters, but the Greek text 1S now almost wholly lost, and only about one-half preserved in an Armenian translation. Genesis seems to have occ11p1ed six books[1] Eusebius tells us that Exodus fillefl fue books In the Armenian translation, first published by the learned Mechitarist, j Bapt Aucher, in 1826, are preserved four books on Genesis and two on Exodus, but with lacunae. A Latin fragment, about half of the fourth books on Genesis (Phzl Jud CII. guaesll. . . super Gen), was first prlnted at Paris 1n 1520 Of the Greek we have numerous but short fragments in various Florilegia[2] The interpretations in this work are partly literal and partly allegorical.
ll. Philo's most important work is the Nopwv ifpdw ahxnvapfal (Euseb H. E. 11. 18, 1, Phot. Bzbl. Cod. 103), a vast and copious allegorical commentary on Genesis, dealing with chaps. 11.-IV., verse by verse, and with select passages in the later chapters. The readers in view are mainly Jews, for the form 1S modelled on the rabbinic Midrash. The main idea is that the characters which appear in Genesis are properly allegories of states of the soul (1-pbvrel 1-is tbuxis). All persons and actions being interpreted in this sense, the work as a whole is a very extensive body of psychology and ethics. It begins with Gen. ii. 1, for the De mundz opzfcw, which treats of the creation according to Gen i, ii., does not belong to this series of allegorical commentaries, but deals with the actual history of creation, and that under a quite different literary form. With this exception, however, the Nbawv dkknvoplat includes all the treatises in the first volume of Mangey's edition, viz-N6/J.wv Zepibv &}}'r1'yo/afar 1rp&.Ta¢ Tal/ nerd Tm/ éianpepov (Legum allegoMa1um, 11b. i., M. i. 43~65), on Gen ii. 1-17. (2) Nou Zep ahh Bebrepat (Leg. all. 11b. ii., M. i. 66-86), on Gen ii 18-111 Ia. (3)N6;a. iep. aM. 1-pina (Leg. all. lib. ni, M. i. 87-137), on Gen in Sb-19. The commentaries on Gen. ui. 1b-Sa, 20-23 are lost (4) Ilepi 1-av Xepouma Kal Tis ¢K0'Y|lVT]S' /3op.q5afas Kal T05 KT(U'0é1/TOS vrpdvrou éi du/0p<b1rou Kaw (De cherubzm et jlammeo gladw, M. i. 138-162), on Gen 11i 24 and iv. I. (5) H6/Jil dw l.E/JOU/.7'Y0l'-lll'LV 'Afi'e} T6:cal Kdw (De Sacfzjicus Abelzs et Calm, M. i. 163-190), on Gen. iv. 2-4. The commentaries on Gen. iv. 5-7 are lost. (6) He/al T00 fb Xe?/Jov TQ: Kpelrrow 4>L}e'Ev évm-26'e¢r0a< (Quod detenus ponon mszdzan soleal, M. i 191-225), on Gen. iv. 8-15. () Ile/al 1'<'iW Toi) 50KT]U'LU'6d)0U Kan/ é'y'y61/wv Kal das /dev-avdm-ng 'ying-at gDeposlentale Calm, &c., M. i 226-261), on Gen. iv. 16-25; this book, which is wanting in ed1t1ons prior to Mangey's, is incorrectly given by him, but much more correctly by T1SCh€nd0ff, Phzlonea, pp. 84-143. None of the preceding is mentioned by its special title by Euseb. HE. ii. 18, while he cites all that follow by their titles. The reason must be that all up to this point, and no further, are included by him in the Nbawv Zepav &>>ry0p2a<; agreeing with this we find that these, and these only, are cited under that general title in the Florllegla, especially the so-called Johannes M onachus medzlus (see Mangey's notes before each book). We may therefore conclude with confidence that Philo published the continuous commentaries on Gen il -iv. under the title Allegones of the Sacred Laws, and the following commentaries on select passages under special titles, th011gh the identity of literary character entitles us to regard the latter as part of the same great llterary plan with the former. (8) IIE/Ji 'yvyavrwv (De zganlzbus, M. i. 262-272), on Gen. vi. 1-4. (9) On dv-pam-ov 1-6 0e?ov (€Quod Deus su! zmmulabzlzs, M. i. 272-299), on Gen. vi. 4-12. (10) Ile/al 'yfwpvfas (De agncultura, M. i 300-328), on Gen. iX. 203. (11) Ile/al ¢UTOU/J'Yl¢'LS' Nibe rd Beifrepov (De plantanone Noe, M. i. 329-356), on Gen 1x. 20b. 512) Ile/12, uétlns (De ebnetate, M. i. 357-391), on Gen. ix 21; the 1ntro uct1on shows that this book was preceded by another which put together the views of the philosophers about drunkenness. (13) Ileplrofaiiéz/11PeN&>e (De sobmetate, M. i. 392-403), on Gen. ix. 24. (14) Ile/at auvxbaews 5LG.)éKTwV (Dc confuswne lmguarum, M. i. 404-435), on Gen. xi. I*9. (15) Ilepiavrol/ua; (De mlgralwneAb1ahamz, M.1 436-472), on Gen xii. 1-6. (16) He/Ji. Toi] Tfs 6 1'¢1'W 0e2o.>v 1rpa'y/J.6¢Twv xhnpovb/Los (Quls rerum dwmarum haeres sn, M. 1. 473-518), on Gen. xv. 1-18. (17) He/al Tis els TEL 1rpo1ra¢§ e0p.a1'a cruvédou (De congfessu quaerendae erudmoms causa, M. i. 519-545), on Gen. xvi. 1-6. (18) 1'Iepl¢>u'ya§ wv (De profugzs, M. i. 546-577), on Gen. xvi. 6-14 (19) Ilfpl -rv p.e1'ovo;.:.a§ 'o/J.c1/wv Kal dw evefca;.1.eTovop.a§ 'o1/far (De mulalzone nomznum, M. i 578-619), on Gen. xvii I-22, in this work Philo mentions that he had written two books, now wholly lost, Ile/al 61w6m<¢3v (M. i 586). (20) Ile/Jl Toi) 0eo1ré/J.1rTous° eil/at Tous 61/62/JOUS (De somnus, llb. i., M. i. 620-658), on the two dreams of Jacob, Gen. xxv111. and xxxi. (21) Book 11 of the same (M i 659-699), on the dreams of Joseph, the chief butler, the chief baker, and Pharaoh, Gen. xxxvn. and xl, xli Eusebius makes Philo the author of five books on dreams; three, therefore, are lost.
III. A work of a very different kind is the group of writings which we may call "An Exposition of the Mosaic law for Gentiles," which, in spite of their very various contents, present on nearer examination indubitable marks of close connexion In them Philo seeks to give an orderly view of the chief points of the Mosaic legislation in the Pentateuch, and to recommend it as valuable to Gentile readers. The method of exposition is somewhat; more popular than in the allegorical commentaries, for, though that method of interpretation is not wholly excluded, the main object is to give such a view of the legislation as Philo accepted as historical. This work has three main divisions (a) an Account of the creation (noafaon-alfa) which Moses put first to show that his- ↑ See, especially Mai, Scnpll veit. nov. coll vol. vii. pt. i. pp. 100, 106, 108.
- ↑ See Opp, ed. Mangey, ii 648-680; Mai, op mt, vol vii pt. i, 96 seq.; Euseb. Praep E11 vu 13. A fragment on the cherubim, Exod xxv 18, has been published by Mai, Class. Auctt. iv. 430 seq., by Grossmann (1856) and by Tischendorf (p. 144 seq.).