Philo of Alexandria and the Timaeus of Plato vol 2

145 Pages·1983·8.35 MB·English

by  Douwe Thenuis Runia

TE
D.T. Runia
PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA
TIMAEUS OF PLATO,
^5?
VU Boekhandel
PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA
AND THE
TIMAEUS OF PLATO
II
Druk: Offsetdrukkerij Kanters B.V., Alblasserdam
ISBN 90-6256-183-7 (2 volumes) / '-j* jj
® 1983 D. T. Runia, Kampen \ \ — ,'
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording,
or by any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing
from the holder of the copyright.
VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT TE AMSTERDAM
PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA
AND THE
TIMAEUS OF PLATO
ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT
ter verkrijging van de graad van
doctor in de letteren
aan de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam,
op gezag van de rector magnificus
dr. H. Verheul,
hoogleraar in de faculteit
der wiskunde en natuurwetenschappen,
in het openbaar te verdedigen op
donderdag 2 juni 1983 te 15.30 uur
in het hoofdgebouw der universiteit,
De Boelelaan 1105
door
DOUWE THEUNIS RUNIA
geboren te Marknesse
VU Boekhandel
Promotor: Prof. dr. A. P. Bos
Copromotor: Prof. dr. J. C. M. van Winden
Referent: Prof. dr. C. Datema
NOTES
Notes I 1 .
1. The 'publication' of the Timaeus can be dated with reasonable probabi
lity to 360-355 B.C. Plato reached the age of seventy in 357 B.C. The attempt
of G.E.L.Owen to place the Timaeus in a much earlier stage of Plato's career
has not received general acceptance (cf. Guthrie 5.243 with references).
2. On the compilation of the Pentateuch and its attribution to Moses see the
recent surveys in B.S.Chi Ids, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture
(Philadelpia 1979) 110-135, C.Houtman, Inleiding in the Pentateuch (Kampen
1980).
3. The chronology of Philo's life is almost wholly obscure. It is general
ly agreed that he must have been born between 25 and 10 B.C. and died in the
decade after 40 A.D.
Notes I 2.
1 . A virtually complete and up-to-date bibliography of Philo can be acqui
red by consulting the following: H.L.Goodhart and E.R.Goodenough, A general
bibliography of Philo (New Haven 1938)(works up to 1938); L.H.Feldman, Scho
larship on Philo and Josephus (1937-1962)(New York 1963?); A.V.Nazzaro, Recen-
ti Studi Filoniani (1963-1970)(Naples 1973); G.Delling and R.Maser, Bibliogra
phie zur jüdisch-hellenistischen und intertestamentarischen Literatur 1900-
1970 TU 106 (Berlin 19752) 56-80; bibliographies by E.Hilgert in each issue of
Studia Philonica (works from 1963 onwards). Surveys of the development of
Philonic scholarship are found in Völker 1-47, Arnaldez FE 1.17-112, Nikipro-
wezky passim (cf. also his article 'L'exégèse de Philon d'Alexandrie' RHR 53
(1973)309-329). The recent survey by Farandos 7-149 fails to make good its
title 'Geschichte der Philon-Forschung' through its manifest lack of discrimi
nation and clarity. A bibliography of Philonic Studies (1935-1975) and a
'critical and synthetic survey' of recent scholarship on Philo by E.Hilgert
and P.Borgen respectively are promised in the forthcoming volume on Philo in
ANRW due to appear in 1983. Also eagerly awaited is a critical bibliography
on Philo being prepared by R.Radice (Luino). It will contain a section on
'works in progress'. (For further details see now the Bibliography.)
Notes I 2.1.
1. By R.Reitzenstein, Das iranische Erlösungsmysterium (Bonn 1921) 106,
quoted by Völker 5.
2. For more detailed descussions see the illuminating chapter in E.R.Good
enough, A introduction to Philo Judaeus (Oxford 19622) 1-29, and also Nikipro-
wetzky passim.
3. I.Heinemann, Philons griechische und jüdische Bildung (Breslau 1932,
repr. 1962) .
4. E.R.Goodenough, By Light, Light: the mystic gospel of Hellenistic Juda-
ism (New Haven 1935). The title is based on Praem.46.
454 NOTES TO
5. W.Völker, Fortschritt und Vollendung,bei Philo von Alexandrien TU 49.1
(Leipzig 1938). The monograph is rather difficult to consult because it lacks
any form of index. I have prepared an index locorum of Philonic passages,
which will be published in Studia Philonica.
6. H.A.Wolfson, Philo: Foundations of religious philosophy in Judaism,
Christianity and Islam 2 vols. (Cambr.Mass. 1947, 19622 ). According to Wolf son
the historian of philosophy should be a sleuth! See the fascinating biography
-s, by L.W.Schwarz, Wolfson of Harvard: Portrait of a scholar (Philadelphia 1978).
7. A.-J.Festugière, La révélation d'Hermès Trismégiste 4 vols. (Paris 1945-
1954, repr.1981), vol.2 Le dieu cosmique 519-585.
8. One might add that previous generations of Philonic scholars were no
less divided. For the years 1880-1920 one could put forward the quintet Zel
ler (or Drummond)- Cohn - Schwarz - Bousset - Reitzenstein, for the years
1830-1870 the quintet Gfrörer - Dahne - Ritter - Georgii - Lipsius. See the
survey in Völker 1-47.
9. For Wolfson Alexandrian and Palestinian Judaism are collateral forms of
'native Judaism'; he agrees with S.Belkin, Philo and the Oral Law (Cambr.Mass.
1940), that Philo was well-acquainted with the Hebrew language and Palestinian
traditions. Heinemann (and also Gcodenough) denied that he knew Hebrew and
minimized the 'Palestinian connection', as did S.Sandmel in his study Philo's
place in Judaism: a study of conceptions of Abraham in Jewish literature (Cin
cinnati 1956); cf. further Sandmel 127-134.
10. Cf. the entirely different conclusions reached in the monographs by T.H.
Billings, The Platonism of Philo Judaeus (diss. Chicago 1919), and E.Turowski,
Die Wiederspiegelung des stoischen Systems bei Philon von Alexandreia (diss.
Königsberg, Leipzig 1927) . A third dissertation affirmed the indispensable
role of Posidonius, by M.Apelt, De rationibus quibusdam quae Philoni Alexan-
drino cum Posidonio intercedunt (diss. Jena, Leipzig 1907). See further Niki-
prowetzky 12.
11. Farandos 115-139, in distinguishing a 'Stoa-Richtung' and a 'Platon-
Richtung' in Philonic scholarship, wrongly absolutizes the role of philosophy
both in Philo's writings and in the research done on them.
12. It is interesting to observe that in his famous study of Spinoza's
thought Wolfson also concluded that the Euclidean form of the Ethica was arti
ficial, whereas most scholars consider the method more geométrico to be a deli
berate formalization of Spinoza's radical rationalism.
Notes I 2.2.
1. Cf. Feldman op.cit.(I 2.n.l) and the review article by H.Thyen, 'Die
Problème der neueren Philo-Forschung' ThRdschau 23(1955)230-246.
2. R.Arnaldez, J.Pouilloux, C.Mondésert (edd.), Les Oeuvres de Philon d'
Alexandrie (Paris 1961- ). Only the parts dealing with Quaestiones in Gene-
sim III-IV, Quaestiones in Exodum, De animalibus and the Fragmenta (Hypothe-
tica, De Deo etc.) have not yet appeared.
3. The proceedings of the Colloque were published in Philon d'Alexandrie:
Lyon 11-15 Septembre 1966 (Paris 1967)(abbreviated to PAL)•
4. M.Harl, Quis rerum divinarum heres sit in Les Oeuvres de Philon d'Alex
andrie vol.15 (Paris 1967).
5. Ibid.13-162.
6. M.Harl, 'Cosmologie grecque et représentations juives dans l'oeuvre de
Philon d'Alexandrie' PAL 189-203. The French translation and commentary on
the De Deo promised at 192n.2 has, to my knowledge, not materialized.
PAGES 6-11 455
7. PAL 189, FE 15.151.
8. FE 15.20,62-63.
9. FE 15.63.
10. Cf. esp. FE 15.16-22. 'Religious' is not defined, but appears to be
taken to mean pertaining to a direct inner relation with God', i.e. the result
of an interiorization of faith and religious observance. This 'phenomenologi-
cal' definition of 'religious' and 'religion' is widely current in modern
times. It fails to do justice to the Christian conviction that the whole of
reality is God's creation, so that a religious attitude is a priori inevitable
in our view of that reality and truly 'life is religion' (H.E.Runner).
11. FE 15.153.
12. Cf. ibid.87,111.
13. Ibid.74-87.
14. PAL 203.
15. Cf. ibid.199, FE 15.142-150.
16. SPh 1(1972)1.
17. Six issues, three annual and three biennial, , have so far been published
18. R.G.Hamerton-Kelly, 'Sources and traditions in Philo Judaeus: Prolego-
mena to an analysis of his writings' SPh 1(1972)3-26.
19. B.L.Mack, 'Exegetical traditions in Alexandrian Judaism: a program for
the analysis of the Philonic corpus' SPh 3(1974-75)71-115.
20. Ibid.107-108.
21. May one protest against the almost unsufferable technical jargon which
pervades the paper and makes great demands on the patience of the reader. To
give a by no means atypical example (ibid.80) : 'The distinctive type of inter­
pretation characteristic of the Allegory would be the 'reasoned allegory', a
method of establishing the correspondence for a given symbolic equivalency (!)
and applying it it analogically to various fields of existence (!).'
22. The anti-anthropomorphic apology, the encomium, the reasoned allegory,
the identification allegory, the development of a theme, the clarification of
the literal meaning; see ibid.81-87.
23. Ibid.99-100.
24. Ibid.103-104. I regret having given the impression (Runia 140n.167)
that Mack, by 'bracketing' the question of philosophy, regards it as unimpor­
tant for our understanding of Philo and the tradition of Alexandrian exegesis.
He is primarily interested in the move from Jewish modes of thought uninflu­
enced by Hellenistic conceptuality to the kind of highly conceptualized
thought found in Philo. Nevertheless I would wish to insist that the bracke­
ting of philosophical conceptualization in Philo's writings can only be done
on the basis of assumptions on the nature of his thought (or that of his pre­
decessors) . It might well be the case that the combination of exegesis and
philosophical conceptualization is what makes Hellenistic-Judaic thought dis­
tinctive .
25. Cf. B.L.Mack, Logos und Sophia: Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie im
hellenistischen Judentum (Gottingen 1973); 'Imitatio Mosis: Patterns of cosmo­
logy and soteriology in the Hellenistic synagogue' SPh 1(1972)27-55.
26. SPh 3(1974-75)115.
27. Some preliminary results can be seen in an analysis of the treatise De
congressu eruditionis gratia by B.L.Mack in 'Weisheit und Allegorie bei Philo
von Alexandrien' SPh 5(1978)57-105.
456 NOTES TO
28. Mack's proposal is in fact a considerably modernized and improved ver­
sion of the thesis of W.Bousset in his study Jüdisch-christlicher Schulbetrieb
in Alexandria und Rom (Göttingen 1915), with the important difference that the
centrality of exegetical traditions has been recognized. For Bousset Philo is
essentially a compiler. Mack has perceived that this view of Philo's role is
inadequate, but his whole proposal depends on a reasonably pure or at least a
positively identifiable transmission of traditions. Hamerton-Kelly's explicit
comparison with Biblical studies is revealing and somewhat disquieting. After
all, in NT scholarship source-critism came first, followed by redaction criti­
cism. But now, with the recent swing in some quarters to structural exegesis,
there is a growing emphasis on the way that the gospels were composed by one
Writer, who, though using source-material, is anything but a mechanical com­
piler.
29. D.M.Hay, 'Philo's references to other Allegorists' SPh 6(1979-80)41-75;
'Literalists and literal interpretation in Philo's world' (forthcoming).
30. ALGHJ 11 (Leiden 1977). The work was submitted to the Sorbonne as a
thesis and defended in June 1970. A provisional edition was published in
Lille in 1974. It is this version that is cited by Mack at SPh 3(1974-75)73
in support of his proposal. Nikiprowetzky's views can already be found in germ
in his excellent commentary on the De Decalogo (FE 23, Paris 1965).
31. This is indeed the title of the last chapter. Nikiprowetzky actually began
his study as the first chapter of a work on the concept of light in the Septu-
agint, Philo, Plato and the Greek tradition. But the question of method be­
came so important that it developed into a book on its own.
32. Ibid.10-14
33. Ibid.14-26.
34. Ibid.40-44,50-81.
35. On the second-last page of the study (241) he asserts that Völker's work,
despite its imperfections, presents an image of Philo which remains most faith­
ful to the texts and that it ushers in the truly modern period of Philonic re­
search.
36. Ibid.97-108.
37. Ibid.117-131, against Heinemsnn, Goodenough and others.
38. Ibid.159-162.
39. Ibid.170-180. One would like some hard evidence for this theory. Do we
actually know that the quaestio method was used in the Synagogue or is it de­
duced from Philo's works only? Nikiprowetzky argues further (192-202) that
Philo only wrote two commentaries, the Quaestiones constituting the one, the
entire complex of the Allegorical Commentary and the Exposition of the Law
the other.
40. Ibid.181-184.
41. Ibid.184.
42. Ibid.184-192.
43. Ibid.104,189,206.
44. Cf. ibid.23-28,98-99,104-105,187-189,237.
45. Cf. ibid.241.
46. Ibid.236-241.
47. J.Dillon, The Middle Platonists: A study of Platonism 80 B.C. to A.D.220
(London 1977). At the time of publication Dillon taught at Berkeley. He is
now Regius Professor of Greek at Trinity College, Dublin.
PAGES 12-17 457
48. Ibid.139-183. Some of his reviewers were surprised too; cf. Gnomon 51
(1979)385 (Witt), JHS 99(1979)190 (Blumenthal), CR 30(1980)57 (Glucker); but
G.Luck (AJP 101(1980)376) calls the chapter on Philo 'one of the best in the
book'.
49. Ibid.144-182.
50. Ibid.141. Dillon gives no evidence for the 'conversion'. One suspects
he is thinking of the theory that the philosophical treatises are youthful
works, written before he turned to his exegetical tasks. The weak foundations
of this theory have been exposed by A.Terian, 'The implications of Philo's
dialogues on his exegetical works' SBL Seminar Papers (Missoula 1978) 1.181-
190, Runia passim. Dillon's book was published in a semi-popular series and -
quite legitimately - lacks full scholarly documentation.
51. Ibid. 143. See the further remarks on Middle Platonism below at I 4.
52. Ibid.140,145,182,418.
53. Ibid.xiv-xv and passim.
54. The order of the divisions of philosophy was a source of dispute, Philo
prefers the order Logic-Ethics-Physics or Physics-Ethics-Logic, but Dillon for
reasons unexplained presents his ideas in the order Ethics-Physics-Logic; see
ibid.145.
55. Cf. ibid.184. It is interesting to observe how Dillon deals with the
large number of inconsistencies which have always proved a stumbling block for
those wishing to regard Philo as a systematic philosopher. A diversity of
causes is postulated: (a) the tendency of Middle Platonism to absorb, for
well-defended reasons, elements from other philosophical traditions (cf.n.53);
(b) Philo's concern with the Biblical text on which he is commenting, which
leads occasionally to different reactions to different texts (144,148,175);
(c) rhetorical flourishes (156); (d) insufficient absorption of confusing tra­
ditions (164); (e) chronological development (173-174, clearly a last resort).
56. Ibid.143.
57. D.Winston, Philo of Alexandria: The contemplative life, The giants, and
Selections (New York 1981). A brief preface to the book is supplied by Dillon
(xi-xiv).
58. Ibid•1-37. This in lieu of the full-length study on Philo which Winston
is preparing. Cf. also 'Freedom and Determinism in Greek philosophy and Jew­
ish Hellenistic Wisdom' SPh 2(1973)40-50; 'Freedom and Determinism in Philo of
Alexandria' SPh 3(1974-75)47-70; The Wisdom of Solomon (New York 1979)(in
which it is argued that the Sapientia Salomonis was probably written in 37-41
A.D. and may just as easily have been influenced by Philo's works as the other
way around, as is usually assumed). In collaboration with Dillon, Nikiprowet-
zky and other scholars Winston has prepared a detailed commentary on two Phi-
Ionic treatises. It will soon be published under the title Two treatises of
Philo of Alexandria: A commentary on the De gigantibus and Quod Deus sit immu-
tabilis• (For further details see now the Bibliography.)
59. Cf. ibid.1,21. The anthology appeared as part of the series The Clas­
sics of Western Spirituality.
60. Ibid.1-7 (I have paraphrased parts of Winston's excellent, economical
prose).
61. Ibid.2. Winston refers to Nikiprowetzky's study here, but this is some­
what misleading. His view of the role of scripture in Philo's thought is rad­
ically different to that of the French scholar.
62. Ibid.2-3.
63. Ibid.21.