The root
sources of Spinoza's philosophy;
and he, in turn, left sources for those who came after
him.
See also
| 1. PHILOSOPHY,
JEWISH 2. BIBLICAL AND RABBINIC ANTECEDENTS 3. Bible 4. Rabbinic Literature 5. HELLENISTIC JEWISH PHILOSOPHY 6:1 Philo of Alexandria + W + 1 6:2 BIBLICAL EXEGESIS 6:3 GOD, LOGOS, AND THE WORLD 6:4. SOULS 6:5 KNOWLEDGE AND PROPHECY 6:6 ETHICS AND POLITICS 7. MEDIEVAL PERIOD 8. Sources and Translations 9:1 Main Schools KALAM + W + 1 + Wolfson MUTAZILITE + W + 1 ASHARITES + W 9:2 MU’TAZILITE KALAM 9:3 NEOPLATONISM + 1 9:4 ARISTOTELIANISM + 1 9:5 CRITICS OF ARISTOTELIANISM 10. Saadiah Gaon + W 11. Other Rabbanite Followers of Kalam 12. Karaites + W 13. Isaac Israeli + W 14. Solomon ibn Gabirol + W 15:1 Bahya ibn Paquda + W 15:2 abstinence 15:3 PSEUDO-BAHYA 16. Abraham bar Hiyya + W 17. Joseph ibn Zaddik 18. Moses + W and Abraham ibn Ezra + W 19:1 Judah Halevi + W + 1 19:2. GOD 19:3 PROPHECY 19:4 ATTITUDE TOWARD PHILOSOPHY 19:5 ATTITUDE TOWARD PHILOSOPHY 20. Hibat Allah 21. Nethanel al-Fayyumi 22. Abraham ibn Daud + W 23.1 Maimonides + W + 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 23:2 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES 23:3 GOD 23:4 CREATION |
23.1 Maimonides: Cont. 23:5 PROPHECY 23:6 EVIL AND DIVINE PROVIDENCE 23:7 ANALYSIS OF THE TORAH 23:8 THE MESSIAH 24. Hebrew Translators of the 13th Century 25.1 Maimonidean Controversies 25:2 SAMUEL IBN TIBBON + W 25:3 JACOB ANATOLI + W 25:4 SHEM TOV BEN JOSEPH ALAQUERA 25:5 JOSEPH IBN KASPI 26. Hillel ben Samuel 27. Isaac Albalag 28. Abner of Burgos and Isaac Pollegar 29. Moses of Narbonne 30.1 Levi ben Gershom + W 30:2 IMMORTALITY 30:3 PROPHECY 30:4 PREDESTINATION AND DIVINE PROVIDENCE 30:5 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES 30:6 CREATION 31.1 Hasdai Crescas + W 31:2. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF JUDAISM 31:3. SPACE AND INFINITY 31:4. EXISTENCE OF GOD 31:5 PROVIDENCE AND FREEDOM 32. Simeon ben Zemah Duran 33. Joseph Albo + W 34. Shem Tov Family, Abraham Shalom, and Isaac Arama 35. Isaac + W and Judah Abrabanel + W 36. Elijah Delmedigo + W 37. Joseph Delmedigo Shem 38. Influences on Christian Thought 39. Christian Scholastic Influences on Jewish Thought 40. Developments of Medieval Studies, 1970–1983. 41. MODERN PERIOD Introduction Descartes - JBY added 42. Spinoza + W + 1 43. Moses Mendelssohn + W + 1 + 2 44. Kant , Schelling + W, Hegel + W 45. Solomon Formstecher + W + 1 + 3 46. + W |
47. Nachman
Krochmal + W
48. S. D. Luzzatto + W 49. S. L. Steinheim 50. Moritz Lazarus + W + 1 51. Hermann Cohen + W + 1 52. Franz Rosenzweig + W + 1 53. Martin Buber + W + 1 + 2 + I-thee 54.1 Developments in the 1970s 54:2 Two Diaspora Thinkers 54:3 Fackenheim - Messianic redemption 54:4 Fackenheim - Nazism + W 54:5 Fackenheim - Idolatry 54:5:1 Fackenheim - Holocaust 54:5:2 Lévinas - Humanism 54:5:3 Lévinas - Zionism 54:6 Five Israeli Thinkers 54:7 JEWISH LAW—HALAKHAH + W 54:8 Man's Relationship with GOD Heschel + W Spinoza Scholars. Added by JBY. Frederick Pollock R. H. M. Elwes Herman De Dijn Samuel Shirley Edwin Curley William James - Implied + W Steven B. Smith Lewis S. Feuer Harry A. Wolfson + AAR + 1 G. H. R. Parkinson + CCJ + 1 Albert Einstein + W + 1 Jonathan Bennett Gilles Deleuze Steven M. Nadler Dagobert D. Runes + 1 Abraham Wolf Antonio Damasio + W + 1 + 2 Mark Twain - Implied + W Joseph E. LeDoux + W Jorge Luis Borges + W + 1 Isaac Bashevis Singer + W + 1 J. Thomas Cook + 1 + 2 Bertrand Russell + W + 1 George Santayana + W + 1 H. F. Hallett Stuart Hampshire + W + 1 + 2 |
From Encyclopædia
Judaica on a CD-Rom.
[Accessed September 24, 2003].
1. Jewish Philosophy {Wikipedia}
[1:1] Jewish philosophy may be described as the
explication of Jewish beliefs
and practices by means of general philosophic concepts and norms.
Hence it must be seen as an outgrowth
of the biblical and rabbinic traditions on which Judaism rests
as well as part of the history of philosophy at large.
This description must, however, be expanded to include
the general philosophic literature in Hebrew {why
Hebrew, witness Aramaic?}
produced by Jews in the latter part of the Middle
Ages and the various secular
{constitution,
Spinozistically, no such thing as
secular}
philosophies of Jewish existence formulated by modern Jewish thinkers.
General philosophers who happened to be Jews or of
Jewish extraction are not considered
part of the tradition of Jewish philosophy {sic}.
Whereas the biblical and rabbinic
traditions were indigenous products of the Jewish community,
Jewish philosophy arose and flourished as Jews participated
in the philosophic speculations of the external culture.
Significant religious
and philosophical differences distinguish ancient and medieval from much
of modern Jewish thought; nevertheless, the subject
matter of Jewish philosophy may be divided into three parts.
First, as interpretation
of unique aspects of Jewish tradition, Jewish
philosophy deals with such topics as the election of Israel; the revelation,
content, and eternity of the Torah
{Gen:8449;
Strong:8451, from yaw-raw' to teach);
instruction, doctrine, law.};
the special character of the prophecy of Moses; and
Jewish conceptions of the Messiah and the afterlife.
Second, as philosophy
of religion, it investigates issues common to Judaism, Christianity,
and Islam (as well as to certain kinds of metaphysics {RH—essentially,
studies the nature of existence}, {Speculation}),
such as the existence of God,
divine attributes, the creation of the world, the phenomenon of prophecy,
the human soul, and general principles of human conduct.
Third, as philosophy proper,
it studies topics of general philosophic interest,
such as the logical categories,
the structure of logical arguments, the division of
being, and the nature and composition of the universe.
Historically, Jewish philosophy may be divided into
three periods:
(1) its early development in the Diaspora
community of the Hellenistic
world, from
the second
century B.C.E. {before
Christian era} until
the middle of the first century
C.E.; {Christian
era}
(2) its flourishing in Islamic
and Christian countries during
the Middle Ages from the
tenth until
the early 16th century; and
(3) its modern phase beginning
in the 18th century and
continuing to the present.
Its prehistory,
however, begins with the Bible.
msnusers
2.
BIBLICAL AND RABBINIC
ANTECEDENTS
Although the Bible and the rabbinic
literature
contain definite views about God, man,
and the world, these views are presented unsystematically, without
a technical vocabulary, and without formal arguments in their support. Hence,
it is more appropriate to speak of biblical and rabbinic theology rather
than philosophy. Nevertheless,
Jewish philosophers of all periods held that their opinions were rooted
in the Bible and the rabbinic writings, and
they quote these literatures extensively in support of their views. Interestingly,
quotations from the Bible far outnumber those from the rabbinic writings, so
that one may speak of a certain "Bible-centeredness" of Jewish
philosophy. In
quoting the Bible, Jewish philosophers often imposed a philosophic rigor
on its vocabulary and
thought that is not immediately apparent from the literal reading of the
text. However,
besides quoting the Bible, certain philosophers also had a theory concerning
the nature of this document. Aware
that the world view of the Bible is
rather simple and unphilosophical, they
found it difficult to accept that the Bible lacked philosophical sophistication. If
God created man with reason, the discoveries of the human mind must be
related in some fashion to the content of divine revelation. Hence,
they viewed the Bible as twofold: on
its literal level it was addressed to philosophers and non-philosophers
alike, and thus it had to speak in a manner intelligible to all; but
behind its rather simple exterior it contained a more profound meaning,
which philosophers could discover by proper interpretation. This
esoteric {RH—understood
by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest
or for the initiates of a group}
content is identical, fully
or in part, with the teachings of philosophy. In
assuming this methodological principle, Jewish philosophers resembled Jewish
mystics, who discovered secret mystical teachings
behind the literal biblical text {Speculative}.
We may now examine some representative biblical
passages which
Jewish philosophers cited to support their views.
(For a fuller picture the reader may refer to the
indexes of biblical passages appearing in Saadiah Gaon, The Book of Beliefs
and Opinions, tr. by S. Rosenblatt (1949); Judah
Halevi, The Kuzari, tr. by H. Hirschfeld (1964); Moses Maimonides, The
Guide for the Perplexed, tr. by M. Friedlaender (1904; repr. 1956);
Joseph
Albo, Sefer ha-Ikkarim, ed. and tr. by I. Husik, 4, pt. 2, 1930).
3. Bible
{WikimediA}
[3:1] Of verses concerning God that were cited by Jewish philosophers, perhaps the central one was "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is One" {(Deut. 6:4) and 1D6 foundation stones}, which was held to refer to God's uniqueness as well as to His simplicity. The opening of the Decalogue—"I am the Lord thy God" (Ex. 20:2, Deut. 5:6)—was understood as a declaration of God's existence {of their Constitution}, and, by some, even as a positive commandment requiring the affirmation of the existence of God. God's omnipotence was indicated by the verse: "I know that Thou canst do all things, and that no purpose of Thine can be thwarted" (Job 42:2), and His omniscience, by the verse: "His discernment is past searching out" (Isa. 40:28). That God is incorporeal was derived from the verses: "... for ye saw no manner of form" (Deut. 4:15) and "To whom then will ye liken Me, that I should be equal?" (Isa. 40:25), and that His essence is identical with His existence, from the verse: "I am that I am" (Ex. 3:14). How God can be known was derived from a story concerning Moses. Moses had asked God to show him His ways and then he had requested that He show him His glory. God granted Moses the first of these requests, but denied him the second (Ex. 33:12ff.). This story was interpreted to mean that God's glory, that is, His essence {Substance}, cannot be known by man, but His ways, that is, His actions, can be known.
[3:2] Of passages and verses concerning the universe, the creation chapters (Gen. 1–2) were interpreted as stating that the world was created out of nothing and in time. The creation of the universe was also derived from the verses: "I have made the earth, and created man upon it; I, even My hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their hosts have I commanded" (Isa. 45:12) and "It is He that hath made us, and we are His" (Ps. 100:3). That the celestial spheres are animate and rational was deduced from the verse: "The heavens declare the glory of God" (Ps. 19:2), and the verse: "The sun also arises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to his place where he arises" (Eccles. 1:5) was seen as a description of the daily motion of the uppermost celestial sphere, which produces day and night. That the heavens and the earth are finite was derived from the verses: "... from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth" (Deut. 13:8) and "... from the one end of heaven unto the other..." (Deut. 4:32). From four terms appearing in Genesis 1:2 it was deduced that the sublunar world consists of the four elements: earth (erez), air (ru'ah), water (mayim), and fire (hoshekh—ordinarily darkness, but here interpreted as fire). Reference to the composition of these four elements of matter and form and to the succession of forms in matter was seen in the verses: "Then I went down to the potter's house, and, behold, he was at his work on the wheels. And whensoever the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter, he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it" (Jer. 18:3–4). Somewhat more fancifully, Abraham and Sarah, respectively, were identified with form and matter.
[3:3] Other
verses provided a description of human nature. The
verses: "See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death
and evil... therefore choose life, that
thou mayest live..." (Deut.
30:15–19) were frequently quoted in support of the notion
that man possesses freedom of choice
{not
free-will}.
That man's essential nature is his reason was derived
from the verse: "Let us make man in our image..." (Gen.
1:26), and that wisdom distinguishes
him from other creatures, from the verse: "He that teaches man knowledge"
(Ps. 94:10).
That man has five senses is indicated by the verses
"They have mouths, but they speak not; Eyes
have they, but they see not; They have ears, but they hear not;
Noses have they, but they smell not; They have hands,
but they handle not..." (Ps.
115:5–7). "For the life
of the flesh is in the blood..." (Lev.
17:11) refers to the nutritive faculty of the human soul,
and "Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat
flesh within all thy gates, after all the desire of thy soul..." (Deut.
12:15), to the appetitive.
Some interpreted that man's ultimate goal in life
is to understand God {know
G-D} from the
verses: "Know this day,
and lay it to thy heart, that the Lord, He is God in heaven above and upon
the earth beneath..." (Deut.
4:39) and "Know ye that
the Lord He is God" (Ps.
100:3); but others invoked the verse "And
thou shalt love the Lord thy God..."
(Deut. 6:5)
to show that man's final goal is the love
of God. That man should be
modest in his conduct is indicated
by the verse: "The righteous
eateth to the satisfying of his desire..." (Prov.
13:25), and that the middle way is the best is shown by the verse:
"... and thou shalt walk in His ways" (Deut.
28:9). While many other verses and passages were cited in support
of these and other teachings, Jewish philosophers
were also interested in whole chapters and complete biblical books.
The theophany {RH—a
manifestation or appearance of God}
in Isaiah 6
and the account of the divine chariot in Ezekiel
1 and 10
were used as descriptions of God and the angelic realm.
Of special interest were the more philosophical books
of the Bible, including Proverbs,
Job, Song
of Songs, and Ecclesiastes,
on which numerous philosophical commentaries were written,
especially in the late Middle Ages.
4. Rabbinic
Literature
[4:1] Since the Greek philosophers had appeared
by the time the rabbis of the
Talmud
formulated their teachings, it
may be asked whether the rabbinic literature reveals any Greek philosophical
influence. While the rabbis had
some acquaintance with Greek philosophical ideas, particularly with those
of the Stoics
{RH—of
or pertaining to the school of philosophy founded by Zeno, who taught that
people should be free from passion, unmoved
by joy or grief, and submit without complaint to unavoidable necessity.
The stoics emphasized living
in harmony with a natural world over which one has no direct control.}
(in popular versions),
it has now been shown that the rabbis were not familiar
with formal philosophy (see
S. Lieberman, in: Biblical and Other Studies, ed. by A. Altmann (1963),
123–41). The
names of the major philosophers are absent from the rabbinic writings,
and the only philosophers mentioned by name
are Epicurus
{Epicurus
and his followers pointed out that since the indestructible atoms that
constitute the material world move, swerve, and
collide entirely by chance, everything that happens in the universe lies
outside the reach of direct human control. Human
life is, therefore, essentially passive:
all we can do is to experience what goes on, without supposing ourselves
capable of changing it. Even so, Epicurus held that
this sort of life may be a good one, if the experiences are mostly pleasant
ones. He taught that pleasure is the only good and
the end of all morality, through a life of simplicity, prudence, honor,
justice.} and
the obscure, second century cynic Oenomaus of Gadara.
In the tannaitic literature the term "Epicurean"
(apikoros) is used, but it seems to refer to a heretic in general
rather than someone who embraces Epicurus' doctrines.
H. A. Wolfson, the modern historian of philosophy, stated that he was unable
to discover a single Greek philosophic term in
rabbinic literature (Wolfson,
Philo, 1 (1947), 92).
Jewish philosophers cited rabbinic sayings, as they
did biblical quotations, for
support of their views, once again imposing a philosophic rigor that the
sources, on literal reading, lacked. To
indicate that attributes describing God
in human terms must be interpreted allegorically
{RH—the
representation of spiritual, moral or other abstract meanings through the
actions of fictional characters
that serve as symbols. George
Orwell's Animal Farm is generally interpreted as an allegory about the
Russian Revolution.},
philosophers invoked the saying:
"The Torah
speaks in the language of the sons of man" (Yev.
71a; BM 31b). How circumspect one must be in describing
God is shown in the following story:
[4:2] Someone reading prayers in the presence of Rabbi Hanina said "God, the great, the valiant and the tremendous, the powerful, the strong, and the mighty." Rabbi Hanina said to him, "Have you finished all the praises of your Master? The three epithets 'the great, the valiant, and the tremendous,' we should not have applied to God, had Moses not mentioned them in the Law, and had not the men of the Great Synagogue followed and established their use in prayer; and you say all this. Let this be illustrated by a parable. There once was an earthly king who possessed millions of gold coins; but he was praised for owning millions of silver coins. Was this not really an insult to him?" (Ber. 33b).
[4:3] To show that the substance of the heavens differs from that of sublunar beings the philosophers cited R. Eliezer's saying: "The things in the heavens have been created of the heavens, the things on earth of the earth" (Gen. R. 12:11) {cash value?}. Similarly, that the heavens are animate beings was derived from a passage in Genesis Rabbah (2:2) which states in part "... the earth mourned and cried on account of her evil lot saying, 'I and the heavens were created together, and yet the beings above live forever, and we are mortal.'" The saying "The world follows its customary order" (Av. Zar. 54b) was taken as confirmation that a natural order exists in the world.
[4:4] Other
rabbinic sayings deal with human nature. The
saying: "All is in the hands of heaven except the fear of heaven"
(Ber. 33b; Nid. 16b) is interpreted
to mean that while certain natural dispositions are fixed in man, his actions
are free. That there is a correlation
between what man does and the fate he suffers is supported by the sayings:
"There is no death without sin, and no sufferings
without transgression" (Shab. 55a) and "A
man is measured with the measure he uses himself" (Sot. 1:7).
The spiritual nature of the afterlife is taught in
the saying of Rav: "In the World to Come, there
is no eating, no drinking, no washing, no anointing, no sexual relations,
but the righteous sit, their crowns on their heads,
and enjoy the radiance of the Shekhinah"
(Ber. 17a). Many other citations could be added to this list.
Of special interest are two esoteric rabbinic doctrines
known respectively as "the account of creation"
(ma'aseh bereshit) and "the
account of the divine chariot" (ma'aseh merkavah). While it
is clear that, historically speaking, these two doctrines
were forms of Jewish gnosticism
{RH—possessing
knowledge, esp. esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters.}
(see Scholem,
Mysticism, 40ff.; idem, Jewish
Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition, 1960),
philosophers saw in them philosophical truths.
Maimonides goes so far as to identify ma'aseh bereshit
with physics and ma'aseh merkavah
with metaphysics,
holding that the rabbis were conversant with philosophic
doctrines but presented them enigmatically. For
editions and translations of philosophic works described below,
the reader is referred to the entries appearing under
individual philosophers' names {in
the EJ CD-Rom}.
The modern scholarly literature concerning individual
philosophers is also listed there.
5. HELLENISTIC
JEWISH PHILOSOPHY Bk.XIV:1:1253
[5:1] Jewish philosophy began, as
has been noted, in the Diaspora
community of the Hellenistic world during the second century B.C.E.
and continued there until the middle of the first
century C.E. It arose out of
the confrontation between the Jewish religion and Greek philosophy (particularly
the Stoic-Platonic tradition)
and had as its aim the philosophic interpretation
of Judaism. It also had an apologetic
{presented
in defense or vindication}
purpose: to show that Judaism is a kind of philosophy,
whose conception of God
is spiritual and whose ethics is rational. Jewish
philosophers polemicized {engaged
in controversy} against
the polytheism
of other religions and against pagan
practices. In spite of their
philosophic interests they maintained that
Judaism is superior to philosophy
(see H. A. Wolfson,
Philo, 1 (1947), 3–27).
Philo
of Alexandria is the only Jewish Hellenistic philosopher
from whom a body of works has survived; all the other
materials are either fragmentary or
only allude to philosophic or theological topics.
The dating of these other materials also presents
considerable difficulties. The
language of Hellenistic Jewish philosophy was Greek.
Jewish Hellenistic culture may be said to have begun
with the Septuagint,
the Greek translation of the Bible. The
translation of the Pentateuch dates from the third century B.C.E.
Some scholars have held that this translation already
manifests philosophic influences (ibid., 94, n. 39).
[5:2]
The first Jewish philosopher appears to have been
Aristobulus
of Paneas (middle of second century B.C.E.), who
wrote a commentary on the Pentateuch, fragments of which have been preserved
by Christian
Church Fathers. He argues
that Greek philosophers and poets derived their teachings from the wisdom
of Moses, and he interpreted the Bible allegorically.
He held, for example, that the expression "hand
of God" refers to God's
power. He maintained that
wisdom (the Torah)
existed prior to heaven and earth and
that God's power extends through all things.
He gives a symbolic interpretation of the Sabbath
and comments on the symbolic character of the number "seven."
The letter of Aristeas, a pseudepigraphic account
of the history of the Greek translation of the Bible,
which incidentally polemicizes against paganism,
states that God's power is manifested throughout the world,
praises the mean as the best course of action,
holds that the help of God is necessary for the performance
of good deeds, and advocates the control of passions.
The author also presents moral interpretations of
the ritual laws, holding that such laws are designed
to teach man righteousness,
holiness, and perfection of character.
II Maccabees mentions cryptically resurrection and
creation out of nothing. IV Maccabees,
evidently written by someone familiar with Greek philosophy, particularly
with the teachings of the first-century B.C.E. Stoic
Posidonius,
maintains that reason can control the passions,
illustrating this theme through examples from Jewish
history. The author cites the Stoic definition of
wisdom and identifies wisdom
with the Law. The Sibylline
Oracles
(in their extant form a combination of Jewish and
Christian teachings) denounce paganism
and mention the resurrection and the messianic age.
The Wisdom
of Solomon, which is patterned after Hebrew Wisdom Literature,
contains occasional philosophic terms and arguments.
The work polemicizes against idolatry,
holding that it is a source of immoral practices.
H. A. Wolfson
(Philo, 1 (1947), 287–9) maintains that the author's conception of wisdom
is the same as Philo's conception of the logos (see
below), although others have
argued that the two conceptions are different. According
to Wolfson, wisdom first existed as an attribute of God,
then as an independent being created by God prior
to the creation of the world, and, finally, as immanent
in the world. God created the
world out of formless matter. Man can love righteousness, God, and wisdom,
and the love of wisdom is manifested in the observance
of the Law. The attainment of
wisdom also requires the help of God. The righteous are rewarded with immortality,
while the wicked shall perish.
6. Philo
of Alexandria E1:Endnote
De.VIa
[6:1] Philo (c. 20 B.C.E.–c.
50 C.E.), who was well versed
in Greek philosophy and poetry, presented his views in a series of commentaries
on passages of the Pentateuch, works
on biblical topics, and independent philosophic treatises.
He was influenced largely by Platonic
{the belief
that physical objects (modes) are impermanent
representations of unchanging Ideas , and that the Ideas alone give true
knowledge as they are known by the mind. 'Ideas'
are related to Idols. Cash
Value: see things clearly
and distinctly as possible and know that every mode is part of the
whole—G-D.}
and Stoic ideas, and his philosophy
also has a mystical streak. Because
of its unsystematic presentation, his philosophy has been interpreted in
several ways. Some consider Philo
merely a philosophic preacher, others a philosophic eclectic,
still others a mystic. H.
A. Wolfson, in his Philo (on which what follows is based),
presents him as a systematic philosopher who is the
founder of religious philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
Wolfson describes
philosophy from Philo to Spinoza as essentially
Philonic (Philo, 1 (1947), 87–115). (For
a discussion of Philo's knowledge of Hebrew and of Palestinian Jewish traditions,
see Philo, 1 (1947), 88–93.)
[6:2] BIBLICAL
EXEGESIS
The Bible for Philo was
the revealed word of God
which had an apparent and a hidden meaning: the apparent
meaning was addressed to the masses, while
the hidden meaning was reserved for students
of philosophy. To discover these
two meanings Philo used the literal
and allegorical methods of interpretation.
Most biblical passages lend themselves to both kinds
of interpretation,
but Philo insists that anthropomorphic
descriptions of God must be interpreted allegorically.
While he interprets certain parts of the creation
story only allegorically and while
he allegorizes biblical names, persons, and events,
he also appears to accept biblical narrations
in their literal sense. Philo's
attitude toward the laws of the Pentateuch is complex and depends on one's
evaluation of the nature of Alexandrian halakhah
{The
word "halakhah" (from the root halakh, "to
go"), the legal side of Judaism (as distinct from aggadah,
the name given to the non-legal material, particularly of
the rabbinic literature) embraces
personal, social, national, and international relationships, and all the
other practices and observances of Judaism.}.
In some passages he maintains that one must observe
the totality of Mosaic law, but
in others he states that such laws as that requiring the return of a pledge
before sunset (Ex.
22:25–26) are trivial {??.
The verse says garment; perhaps the person needs it to cover himself at
night. The law means that if
you know that a person needs his wages or payment to sustain himself, you
must pay it before nightfall.}
in their literal sense and must be understood allegorically.
[6:3] GOD, LOGOS
, AND THE WORLD
{(Logos.
Greek “word,” “reason,” or “plan”) In Greek philosophy and theology,
the divine reason
implicit
in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning. Torah.}
Philo's conception of the world is based on
Platonic notions,
particularly as interpreted and systematized by Posidonius.
Characteristic of this approach is the opinion that
there exist intermediary beings between God and the world.
God, according
to Philo, transcends
the world. He
is one (both in the sense of unique and simple), self-sufficient, eternal,
incorporeal, and unlike His creatures. He
is good, but He is not identical with the idea of the good of which Plato
spoke. In His essence He is unknowable,
indescribable, and unnameable; the terms used by Scripture to describe
Him are properties referring to His actions. To
explain creation and the structure of the world, Philo uses the Platonic
notion of "ideas"
{The
content of conscious thought. Plato used the Greek word 'idea' to designate
the universal Forms.} {For
example, from the image of a dog the intellect abstracts the ideas
of being alive, being capable of reproduction, movement,
and whatever else might be essential to being a dog.
All these ideas are common to all dogs because they
are essential to them. These ideas can be contrasted with the ideas of
being owned by Dion and weighing five pounds, namely, with properties that
vary from dog to dog.} .
These ideas, according to him, {Philo},
exist first as patterns in the mind of G-D
{Substance},
then as incorporeal beings between God and the world {Attributes},
and finally as immanent
in the world {Modes}.
Since ideas must inhere
in a mind, Philo posits a logos
(also called wisdom) in which the ideas inhere. Like
the ideas, the logos exists in three forms:
as an attribute of God, as an incorporeal being existing between God and
the world, and as immanent in
the world. The ideas are patterns of things,
but they are also causes
producing these things; in the latter sense they are called powers.
God created the world because He is good,
and He created it freely and by design.
He first created the incorporeal logos,
also called intelligible world, and then the perceptible world.
The perceptible world was created out of matter, but
it is not clear whether Philo held that this matter was created or uncreated.
Creation is not a temporal process, and when it is
said that God is prior to His creation it is meant that He is its cause.
To create the world God used the self-existent logos,
but everything is said to have been created by God
Himself except man's body and his irrational soul.
The immanent logos, while inhering in the material
world, is still immaterial. It
produces the laws of nature; but since God created these laws,
he can change
them if he so desires, and this makes miracles
possible.
{Spinoza's
concept of G-D, evolved from this
Hellenistic view of God.}
[6:4] SOULS
When God created the world, He
created with it incorporeal rational souls of varying degrees of impurity.
The souls which had greater purity remained incorporeal
and became the angels which are God's messengers;
the less pure souls were joined to bodies and became
the souls of men. The human soul
is active in sensation and cognition and it possesses free
will. Upon death, the human soul may ascend to the upper realm
where it may come to rest among angels, in the intelligible
world, or even beyond this, close to God, Immortality
is the gift of God.
[6:5] KNOWLEDGE
AND PROPHECY
Basing himself on Plato,
Philo speaks of
three kinds of knowledge: sensation
or opinion {imagination},
rational knowledge derived from sensation {reason},
and the knowledge of ideas {intuition}.
However, whereas Plato describes knowledge of ideas
as recollection, Philo identifies it with prophecy. Prophecy,
which is said to come from God, can come in three
possible ways: through the Divine Spirit, through
a specially created divine voice, or through angels. Prophecy can be accompanied
by frenzy and ecstasy and it is here that
Philo's mystical inclination comes to the fore. There
are also three kinds of prophetic dreams which correspond to the three
kinds of prophecy. Prophecy through
an angel can come to a non-Jew, prophecy through the Divine Spirit can
also come to a non-Jew provided
he has attained moral and intellectual perfection, but prophecy through
the voice of God is reserved for Jews. Prophecy
has a fourfold function: prediction of the future,
expiation of the sins of the people, promulgation
of law, and vision of incorporeal beings.
[6:6] ETHICS
AND POLITICS
Philo accepts the philosophic notion that happiness
comes through the acquisition
of the moral and the intellectual virtues; but
he holds that human laws achieve this purpose only imperfectly whereas
the Law of Moses, divine in its origin, achieves it perfectly.
The good life is not so much life in accordance with
virtue but life in accordance with the Law. The
Law contains the philosophic virtues,
but adds to them additional ones of its own such as
faith, humanity, piety, and holiness as well as prayer, study, and repentance.
Obedience or disobedience to the Law leads to reward
or punishment, respectively, which are, for Philo, individual.
Philo presents
Jewish law in the light of Greek political theories.
The Law of Moses is the constitution
of a state initiated by Moses. In
this state there live citizens and noncitizens of various kinds. The state
is ruled by a king, a high priest, and a council of elders.
However, since this state is based on God's Law, God
is the real ruler, and earthly
rulers only administrate and interpret the divine Law.
This state was originally only a state for the Jewish
people, but it also provides the pattern for an ideal society (still
composed of states) which
will come to be in messianic times.
Philo influenced the teachings of Church Fathers such
as Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Gregory of Nysea,
but his works remained unknown to Jewish philosophers
of the Middle Ages. Whatever influence he may have had on them
came through the indirect transmission of his ideas.
It was only in the 16th century that, through Azariah
dei Rossi, his works became known once again among Jews.
7. MEDIEVAL
PERIOD E1:Endnote
De.VIa, E1:Bk.XIV:1:158
Medieval Jewish philosophy began in the early tenth century
as part of a general cultural revival in the Islamic
East, and continued in Muslim
countries—North Africa, Spain, and Egypt—for some 300 years.
The Jews of the period spoke, read, and wrote Arabic
and thus were able to participate in the general culture of their day.
Although Jews produced a rich literature on biblical
and rabbinic subjects and much poetry, they
did not produce an extensive scientific and philosophical literature of
their own. The extant literature
was adequate for their needs, and their major speculative
efforts were devoted to investigating
how Judaism and philosophy were related. Most
of their philosophic works were written in Arabic. Toward the end of the
12th century the setting of Jewish philosophy began to change.
The Jewish communities in the Islamic world declined,
and communities hospitable to philosophic and scientific
learning developed in Christian lands, particularly Christian Spain, southern
France, and Italy. As a result,
Arabic was gradually forgotten, and
since, with some notable exceptions, Jews had little occasion to learn
Latin, Hebrew became the language
of Jewish works in philosophy and the sciences. Thus,
whereas in Muslim countries Jews were part of the mainstream of general
culture, in Christian lands they had to foster a general culture of their
own. In this period, while Jews
continued to write works investigating the relation of Judaism and philosophy,
they now also produced an extensive literature devoted
to purely philosophic topics. As
a first step they translated into Hebrew the extensive Arabic philosophical
literature of the previous period. Then
they commented on the newly translated works, summarized
them in compendia and encyclopedias, and composed their own treatises and
books. Jewish
philosophy during this period was largely based on sources
from the Islamic philosophic
tradition, but some Jewish philosophers were also influenced by the views
of Christian scholastics.
The second period in medieval Jewish philosophy lasted
until the early 16th century.
8. Sources and Translations
The philosophic literature available during the Islamic
period was based on works studied
in the late Hellenistic schools.
As the Islamic empire expanded, these schools came
under Muslim rule, and the works studied in them were soon translated into
Arabic. At times these translations
were made from Greek originals, but more often from intermediary Syriac
translations. A number of works
were translated more than once. The
translators, most of whom were Nestorian and Jacobite Christians,
were active from about 800 until about 1000. (For
an account of these translations see R. Walzer, Greek into Arabic, 1962.)
Of Platonic works translated,
the most important were the Timeaus, Republic,
and Laws, but Arabic translations of some other dialogues are extant.
Perhaps the most important influence was exercised
by the works of Aristotle
{Bk.XIV:1:1253},
all of which were known, except for the Dialogues and Politics.
Together with the works of Aristotle there were translated
works by his commentators Alexander
of Aphrodisias, Themistius, Theophrastus, Simplicius, and John Philoponus.
There were also translations of works by Galen,
some of which are no longer extant in the original
Greek. The neoplatonic
tradition was represented by the Theology of Aristotle,
a collection of excerpts from Plotinus' Enneads,
and the Liber de Causis, a
collection from Proclus' Elements of Theology, as well as by other neoplatonic
writings, some of which have
been discovered only recently. There were also
translations of the Hermetic writings. In
addition, philosophers of the period were familiar with Epicurean,
Stoic, and skeptic teachings
(see Epicurus, Stoicism,
and Skeptics
{Belief
that some or all human knowledge is impossible. Since
even our best methods for learning about the world sometimes fall short
of perfect certainty, skeptics argue, it
is better to suspend belief than to rely on the dubitable products of reason.},
which, however, reached them
through the reports of other authors rather than through translations of
original works. Jewish philosophers
were similarly influenced by the works of Islamic philosophers of the period,
including Al-Kindi Al-Razi, Al-Farabi, Avicenna (Ibn
Sina), Al-Ghazali, Avempace (Ibn Bajja), and Averroes
(Ibn Rushd). However, Averroes
influenced medieval Jewish philosophy during
its second period rather than its first. Jews were familiar, also,
with the collection known as the "Epistles of
the Brethren of Sincerity," and they knew the writings of Sufi
mystics.
9. Main Schools
[9:1] Paralleling Islamic philosophers,
Jewish philosophers of the Islamic period may be divided
into four groups: followers of
the Mutazilite
branch of the Kalam, Neoplatonists, Aristotelians,
and philosophical critics of Aristotelian
rationalism.
In the work of one philosopher, at times doctrines
from several schools were mixed. Before
expositions of the opinions of individual philosophers are given,
the characteristics of each of the four
groups will be briefly described.
[Lawrence V. Berman]
Ph.D.; Associate Professor of Religious Studies,
Stanford University, California.