only to suppliants For Philo, the Israelites are the quintessential suppliants both historically, owing to their experience in Egypt, and spiritually, since they turn constantly to God \u201cin prayers and supplications,\u201d relying on divine grace (Moses 1.34\u201336, 72).
\ntheir thirst for wisdom The water imagery may be derived from Deut. 32:2; 33:9, 13, 28, though wisdom was frequently likened to a river or fountain.
\n80\u2013160 Part 2: The Humanity of the Law. Philo gives a select survey of Mosaic laws that he thinks exemplify humanity. After a short preface (80\u201381), the section treats three broad categories: people (82\u2013124), animals (125\u201347), and trees (148\u201360), presented in the reverse order of creation (see Gen. 1). Throughout, Philo exhibits a tendency to generalize biblical ordinances, interpreting them in terms of basic virtues.
\n82\u2013101 Laws Promoting Humanity toward the Poor and Dispossessed. This includes a range of different types of people, including debtors (82\u201387, 89), day laborers (88), the hungry (90\u201394, 97\u201398), priests (95), those who have lost an animal (96), and those who have lost their property (99\u2013101).
\n82. He forbids anyone to lend money on interest to a brother Excessive personal debt and abusive lending practices were common in antiquity, often being listed among the major sources of social instability. Lending without interest is stipulated by no less than three different sources in the Pentateuch (Exod. 22:25; Lev. 25:35\u201338; Deut. 23:19\u201320, cf. 15:7\u201311). Philo treats the same topic more succinctly in Spec. Laws 2.74\u201378 while reviewing legislation on the sabbatical remission of debts.
\n83. This is the best course In dealing with a man in need, Deut. 15:8 commands, \u201copen your hand, and lend him sufficient for whatever he needs.\u201d Philo takes this to mean that it is preferable to give him \u201cfree gifts,\u201d with a loan being the next best option.
\n84. a good report and good fame Extending loans and other favors to a friend in need was among the most widely recognized ways of earning a good reputation.
\n85. the Great King Philo\u2019s description of this figure (by which Greek authors usually mean the King of Persia, Alexander the Great, or the Roman emperor) evokes the ancient critique of illiberality, according to which riches ought to be put to good use, not vainly hoarded (e.g., Eccles. 5:12\u201319; Sir. 14:3\u201319; Syr. Men. 368\u201373).
\nmoney-grubbing usurers Philo attacks such people elsewhere for their greed and deceit; for example, Flight 28.
\n86. they supply food on loan Lev. 25:37 and Deut. 23:20 specifically mention food among the items that may not be lent out at interest. With fluctuations in the market value of commodities, such loans might still result in profit for the lender, a problem that occupies Rabbinic sources (e.g., M. BM 5:1\u201311).
\n88. The wages of the poor man are to be paid on the same day Deut. 24:14\u201315 states that the wages of \u201ca needy and destitute laborer\u201d must be paid before the sun sets (cf. Lev. 19:13). As Josephus argues, \u201cOne must not deprive a poor man of his wages, knowing that this, instead of land and other possessions, is the portion that God has granted him\u201d (Ant. 4.288). Philo elaborates on the psychological benefits of this practice for the laborer.
\n89 Both in terms of the biblical order and the logic of Philo\u2019s presentation, this paragraph would be better placed before 88.
\na creditor must not enter the houses of his debtors \u2026 but must stand outside Deut. 24:10\u201311 protects the integrity of a debtor\u2019s home against the possible abuses of a lender trying to collect on an outstanding loan: \u201cWhen you make a loan of any sort to your countryman, you must not enter his house to seize his pledge. You must remain outside, while the man to whom you made the loan brings the pledge out to you.\u201d According to Josephus, one may take a collateral pledge only with a court\u2019s approval (Ant. 4.267\u201369; cf. M. BM 9:13).
\n90. leave part of the field uncut Remnants of the harvest yielded by one\u2019s fields must be left for those with no fields of their own: \u201cyou shall not reap all the way to the edges of your field, or gather the gleanings of your harvest \u2026 you shall leave them for the poor and the stranger\u201d (Lev. 19:9\u201310; cf. Lev. 23:22; Deut. 24:19\u201322). Philo mentions only the poor.
\n91. he forbids them to collect the grapes that fall \u2026 He gives the same order to the olive pickers For the references to these products, see Lev. 19:10 (\u201cYou shall not pick your vineyard bare, or gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard\u201d) and Deut. 24:20\u201321 (\u201cWhen you beat down the fruit of your olive trees, do not go over them again \u2026 When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, do not pick it over again\u201d).
\nto make them partners Philo makes a similar case in Spec. Laws 2.107 when reviewing the sabbatical year legislation.
\n92. a slavish and illiberal meanness The caricature of the greedy man, a slave to his desires and negligent of his moral duties, is common in Philo\u2019s writings.
\n93. The most numerous and indispensable parts \u2026 are due to nature Philo describes \u201cthe wealth of nature,\u201d also in Virtues 6, by which he means air, water, and the annual harvests: \u201cthese no one lacks, but everybody everywhere has an ample and more than ample sufficiency.\u201d Such optimism may be inspired by the promises expressed in texts like Lev. 26:3\u20134 and Deut. 11:13\u201315.
\n94. inhumanity and impiety The greedy individuals introduced in 92 are seen to be not only inhumane, by not providing for the less fortunate, but also impious, by failing to acknowledge what God has provided for them. Embodying these two vices, they represent the opposite of the Mosaic ideal; see comment on 51.
\n95. firstfruits to the officiating priests Priests are included with the poor since they, too, are landless and rely on contributions from landowners for their survival. The readers of Deuteronomy are to give the priests \u201cthe firstfruits of your new grain and wine and oil, and the first shearing of your sheep\u201d (18:4; cf. Num. 18:12\u201318; Deut. 18:1\u20135; 26:1\u20134). The laws of tithing are reviewed at length in Spec. Laws 1.131\u201361, though there, as elsewhere, Philo betrays certain inconsistencies in his interpretation of such material.
\nin full baskets with hymns composed in honor of God Philo refers to the firstfruits ceremony prescribed in Deut. 26:1\u201311, where each Israelite is to present at the altar a representative basket from the offering for the priest and then recite a creed (\u201cMy father was a fugitive Aramean,\u201d etc.) narrating God\u2019s gift of the land. Philo explains the details of this \u201cbasket\u201d ceremony in Spec. Laws 2.215\u201322.
\n96. if you see a beast \u2026 straying in the wilderness, take it away and restore it Someone missing an animal would represent another kind of \u201cdispossessed\u201d person, like the other subjects of this section. The biblical injunction mentions not only an ox, sheep, or ass, but \u201canything that your fellow loses and you find\u201d (Deut. 22:1\u20133; cf. Exod. 23:4\u20135). Philo mentions only animals, anticipating an emphasis we encounter later in the treatise (Virtues 116\u201320, 125\u201347). The extrabiblical phrase \u201cin the wilderness\u201d is found also in Josephus\u2019s version of the statute (Ant. 4.274).
\nif the owner is away In contrast to Deut. 22:2 (\u201cIf your fellow does not live near you or you do not know who he is, you shall bring it home and it shall remain with you until your fellow claims it\u201d), Philo assumes that the owner is known and lives nearby, but is away. According to M. BM 2:7, the finder is to keep what was lost until he is able to determine whether or not the claimant is a deceiver.
\n97. on the seventh year \u2026 the land should be left during that year to stand idle The sabbatical legislation in Exod. 23:10\u201311 shows concern for the land (\u201clet it rest\u201d), the poor (\u201cLet the needy among your people eat of it\u201d), and even the wild beasts, who are to eat what the poor leave behind (cf. Lev. 25:1\u20137). Only the second of these is mentioned here, though Philo gives a fuller exposition in Spec. Laws 2.86\u2013109.
\n98. the free gifts which come from God alone Biblical passages like Lev. 25:20\u201321 depict the sabbatical year as a time of special blessing, during which the people recognize God\u2019s sovereignty over the land and their reliance on God\u2019s generosity as expressed through its abundance.
\n99\u2013101. rules prescribed for the fiftieth year Lev. 25:8\u201317 describes the Jubilee (or year of \u201crelease\u201d), when all sold or mortgaged property is to be restored to its original owners, preserving the integrity of ancestral lands. God can demand this since \u201cthe land is mine; you are but strangers resident with me\u201d (Lev. 25:23). Here Philo focuses less on theological explanations and more on the virtue displayed by those who obey.
\n100. The measures taken in the seventh year are repeated The Rabbis (Sifre Deut. 112), following the biblical tradition, hold that debts are annulled in the sabbatical, but not Jubilee, year. Philo, however, seems to think that all the laws of the former apply to the latter (cf. Ant. 3.282).
\nthat insidious foe and source of all evils In Spec. Laws 4.78\u2013131, Philo has a long discourse on the Tenth Commandment, \u201cThou shalt not desire.\u201d Desire (epithymia) is the most devious and intractable of the passions since, of all of them, \u201cit alone originates within ourselves\u201d (Decalogue 142\u201353); see also Virtues 109\u201315.
\n101. I have sufficiently noted them in my former treatises Most likely referring to Spec. Laws 2.110\u201323.
\n102\u20138 Laws Promoting Humanity toward Proselytes and Settlers.
\n102. the incomers too should be accorded every favor Philo takes biblical injunctions about aliens residing in the holy land to apply to \u201cincomers\u201d to Judaism (ep\u0113lytai or, elsewhere, pro\u0113slytai), in other words, proselytes; for example, Deut. 24:17. As in this passage, they were often associated with other types of poor or marginalized people. In Against Apion, Josephus similarly emphasizes the equitable treatment accorded proselytes (2.209\u201310), commenting also on the attraction of Judaism to outsiders: \u201cThe masses have long since shown a keen desire to adopt our religious observances.\u2026 As God permeates the universe, so the Law has found its way among all humankind\u201d (2.282\u201384).
\nabandoning their kinsfolk Stories about converts to Judaism emphasize their experience of social dislocation, for example, Jos. Asen. 8:4\u20135, 12:12.
\n103. He commands all members of the nation to love the incomers A restatement of Lev. 19:34: \u201cThe stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.\u201d According to Deut. 10:17\u201319, the Israelites are to love the aliens just as God loves them (cf. Spec. Laws 1.51\u201352).
\n104. food and drink and raiment Cf. Deut. 10:17\u201318: \u201cFor the LORD your God \u2026 befriends the stranger, providing him with food and clothing.\u201d Their basic needs are a subject of concern elsewhere, for example, Lev. 19:9\u201310; 23:22; Deut. 24:14.
\n105. instructions about settlers \u201cSettlers,\u201d or metoikoi, refers to non-Jews residing as aliens in Israel (e.g., Exod. 22:20; Lev. 19:34; Deut. 10:19). Philo, himself a resident of Egypt, often makes reference to biblical reminders that before taking possession of the Promised Land the Jews themselves were once settlers in Egypt \u201canxious to obtain equal rights\u201d (Moses 1.35).
\nHe would have those who have immigrated \u2026 pay some honor to the people which has accepted them Cf. Moses 2.58: \u201cimmigrants, to secure themselves, usually show respect for the customs of their hosts, knowing that disrespect for these entails danger at the hands of the original inhabitants.\u201d
\n106. Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian Philo draws on Deut. 23:8\u20139 (\u201cYou shall not abhor an Egyptian, for you were a stranger in his land. Children born to them may be admitted into the congregation of the LORD in the third generation [i.e., of residence in Israel\u2019s territory]\u201d) while ignoring Deut. 23:4\u20137, which forbids the Ammonites and Moabites and their descendants from ever joining the community. Philo takes the prohibition of abhorrence in verses 8\u20139 as a command to practice hospitality, a popular topic in Jewish sources.
\n107. originally they received the nation As Philo explains in Moses 1.34\u201339, the Jews were formally welcomed in Egypt when they first migrated there in search of food (cf. Gen. 47:1\u201312), but were subsequently enslaved (cf. Joseph 257; Ant. 2.188). According to S. Olam Rab. 3, the Egyptians\u2019 mistreatment of the Jews began as soon as the last of Jacob\u2019s sons died.
\n109\u201320 Laws Promoting Humanity toward Enemies, their Female Relatives, and their Animals.
\n109. They must not he declares be yet regarded as enemies Deuteronomy 20:10\u201318 functions as a code of war when the Israelites lay siege to a city: \u201cWhen you approach a town to attack it, you shall offer it terms of peace. If it responds peaceably and lets you in, all the people present there shall serve you at forced labor.\u201d Philo reverses the roles, presenting the Israelites as defenders, not aggressors, and speaks of friendship, not forced labor, as the outcome for the compliant foe. When interpreting the same law in Spec. Laws 4.219\u201325, Philo envisions the Israelites as besieging (and slaughtering) the seditious members of a treaty, an act he says exemplifies justice.
\nuntil envoys have been sent This extrabiblical addition is paralleled in Josephus, Ant. 4.296\u201397.
\n110\u201314 A relatively detailed treatment of Deut. 21:10\u201313: \u201cWhen you take the field against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your power \u2026 and you see among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her and would take her to wife, you shall bring her into your house and she shall trim her hair, pare her nails, and discard her captive\u2019s garb. She shall spend a month\u2019s time in your house lamenting her father and mother; after that you may come to her and possess her, and she shall be your wife.\u201d With no adult male relatives to protect her, a female captive would have been especially vulnerable to physical and social abuse. Presumably the acts required of her signal not only a (fairly long) period of mourning, but also her transition to a new life (cf. 11Q19 63:10\u201315; B. Yev. 48b). Josephus also views these provisions as proof of the Law\u2019s philanthr\u014dpia (Ag. Ap. 2.212\u201313); see also Virtues 43.
\n112. for love of her mate or for the birth of children In the biblical text, no provision is given for the captive\u2019s woman\u2019s wishes or for the prospect of childbearing, though both are addressed also by Josephus in Ant. 4.257\u201359. Among other things, the 30-day waiting period (Deut. 21:13) would help to ensure the legitimacy of the first child of the new union.
\n113. For reason will fetter desire On the problem of desire (epithymia), see comment on 100, that insidious foe and source of all evils.
\n114. if she is a widow Deuteronomy 21:13 mentions only the captive woman\u2019s parents. Josephus also adds that a woman who has been previously married may be taken (Ant. 4.257\u201359; cf. Sifre Deut. 211; B. Kid. 21b).
\n115. no longer minded to continue his association with the captive The section in Deut. 21 on the treatment of female captives concludes with a rule stipulating her rights in the case of divorce: \u201cThen, should you no longer want her, you must release her outright. You must not sell her for money: since you had your will of her, you must not enslave her.\u201d According to Sifre Deut. 214, it is inevitable that a man who takes such a wife will end up disdaining her, given the topic of the verses that immediately follow in the biblical text: \u201cIf a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, etc.\u201d (Deut. 21:15\u201317).
\n116. if beasts of burden fall See Exod. 23:5: \u201cWhen you see the ass of your enemy lying under its burden and would refrain from raising it, you must nevertheless raise it with him.\u201d Philo generalizes \u201cass\u201d to \u201cbeasts of burden.\u201d Josephus also discusses the rule, but without mentioning that such distressed animals include those belonging to one\u2019s enemies (Ant. 4.275; cf. T. BM 2:29; Mek. R. Ish., tractate Kaspa 20).
\nthis malignant joy was a savagely rancorous passion, closely akin, and at the same time, opposite to envy Aristotle also classifies malignant joy (epichairekakia) as a kind of passion and the opposite of envy: \u201cRighteous indignation is the observance of a mean between envy and malignant joy.\u201d The victim of this passion \u201cactually feels pleasure\u201d at the misfortune of others (Eth. nic. 2.7.15, cf. 2.6.18).
\n117. if you see an enemy\u2019s beast straying Philo now discusses the biblical injunction that immediately precedes the one he discussed in the previous paragraph, namely, Exod. 23:4 (\u201cWhen you encounter your enemy\u2019s ox or ass wandering, you must take it back to him\u201d), again generalizing as to the kind of animal involved.
\nthe greatest and most precious treasure in the whole world, true goodness True goodness, or kalokagathia, usually takes on connotations of \u201cexcellence\u201d or \u201cnobleness,\u201d for which Virtues 187\u2013227, entitled \u201cOn Nobleness of Birth,\u201d especially 201, 206, 226.
\n118. a termination of the feud According to 4 Macc. 2:14, observance of Exod. 23:5 is one of the ways in which \u201creason through the Law can prevail over enmity\u201d (cf. Lev. 25:41 and Ant. 4.273).
\n119\u201320 A summary transition that names a number of the treatise\u2019s major values and goals. For \u201cunanimity\u201d (homonoia), see 35 (the highest source of this for the Israelites \u201cis their creed of a single God, through which \u2026 they feel a love for each other, unifying them in an indissoluble bond\u201d). For \u201cneighborliness\u201d (koin\u014dnia), see the Introduction. For \u201creciprocity of feeling\u201d (homophrosyn\u0113), see Rewards 87. And for \u201chappiness\u201d (eudaimonia), see comment on 61, a decision for good or ill brings happiness. It is difficult to see how returning lost animals to one\u2019s enemies reconciles \u201ccities and nations and countries,\u201d though cf. 140\u201341.
\n120. these things live only in our prayers Such entreaties are consistent with those of Moses himself, as reported in 77 (cf. Rewards 84, 126).
\nthe virtues should bear abundantly For the imagery, cf. Agriculture 9: \u201cFor the virtues, when sown and planted in the mind, will produce the most beneficial fruits, namely fair and praiseworthy conduct.\u201d
\n121\u201324 Laws Promoting Humanity toward Slaves.
\n122. The serfs who \u2026 have subjected themselves to servitude Exod. 21:2 and Deut. 15:12 command that any Jew who is sold must be released after seven years, a provision that Philo extends to all slaves. Here, as in an earlier, lengthier discussion (Spec. Laws 2.79\u201385), Philo argues that such people should be treated as hired servants, not slaves, for which see Lev. 25:39\u201340: \u201cIf your kinsman under you continues in straits and must give himself over to you, do not subject him to the treatment of a slave. He shall remain with you as a hired or bound laborer.\u201d
\nhow incalculable is fortune Appreciation for the vicissitudes of fortune was a proverbial truth and a source of human solidarity (e.g., Sir. 18:25\u201326; Syr. Men. 110\u201312; Pseudo-Phocylides 27; Moses 1.31).
\nAs for the debtors Overwhelming debt would have been one of the most common reasons for people to be sold into servitude; note how Lev. 25:39\u201340 and Deut. 15:12 are connected to instructions about lending and interest (Lev. 25:35\u201338; Deut. 15:1\u201311). See also Neh. 5:1\u20135.
\n123. should pass back to the old independence of which they were deprived Exodus 21:3 explains that an Israelite released in the seventh year should be allowed to take with him the wife he had before his servitude began. Deut. 15:13\u201314 adds, \u201cWhen you set him free, do not let him go empty-handed: Furnish him out of the flock, threshing floor, and vat\u201d (cf. Lev. 25:41; Josephus, Ant. 4.273). Philo makes no mention of the provision in Exod. 21:5\u20136 and Deut. 15:16\u201317 that allows him to choose to stay with his master and the family he started in servitude.
\n124. another man\u2019s slave \u2026 do not disregard his plea Deut. 23:16\u201317 takes up the matter of runaway slaves, apparently those fleeing from foreign countries: \u201cYou shall not turn over to his master a slave who seeks refuge with you from his master. He shall live with you in any place he may choose among the settlements in your midst, wherever he pleases; you must not ill-treat him.\u201d Rather than his relocation, Philo argues for a slave\u2019s reconciliation with his master or, barring that, his being sold to a new one.
\nwho has fled to your hearth as to a temple Runaway slaves often fled to sanctuaries.
\n125\u201347 Laws Promoting Humanity toward Animals. Moses extends \u201cmoderation and gentleness\u201d to animals through various prohibitions: not to separate a newborn from its mother for at least seven days (126\u201333); not to sacrifice the mother and its offspring on the same day (134\u201341); not to boil a kid in its mother\u2019s milk (142\u201344); not to muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain (145); not to plow with an ox and ass together (146\u201347).
\n126\u201333 A relatively extended meditation on Lev. 22:27 (\u201cWhen an ox or a sheep or a goat is born, it shall stay seven days with its mother, and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable as an offering by fire to the LORD.\u201d); cf. Exod. 22:28\u201329.
\n126. by taking them at once either for food or \u2026 for sacrifice The former reason is Philo\u2019s extrabiblical addition. As he goes on to explain in 127, such reasoning is unacceptable, since nature provides other kinds of food in abundance (cf. 93\u201394).
\ndisplease and horrify the soul Participation in the sacrificial ritual is supposed to be an exercise in piety (e.g., Heir 123) and a lesson in philanthr\u014dpia (e.g., Spec. Laws 1.294\u201395). Therefore the moral commitment of the participant is critical: \u201cThe law would have such a person pure in body and soul, the soul purged of its passions and distempers and infirmities and every viciousness of word and deed\u201d (Spec. Laws 1.257; cf. Dreams 2.71), the soul being benefited specifically by the purity of the animal offered in worship.
\n127. your duty is to excel in self-restraint The fundamental aim of Moses\u2019s rules for cultic rituals and sacrifices is to foster in the worshipers self-restraint (enkrateia), especially with regard to food and drink, and impede its opposite, desire (Spec. Laws 1.149; and see comment on Virtues 100, that insidious foe and source of all evils).
\n128. the breasts \u2026 grow indurated and strained by the weight of the milk coagulated within them The induration or coagulation of breast milk was known to other ancient authors, such as Hippocrates (Epid. 2.3.17) and Aristotle (Hist. animals 9.11); cf. Gyn. 2.25.
\n129. for the seven first days From the biblical perspective, the animal is only developed enough for use in sacrificial rites after the seventh day, seven being symbolic of completeness. The age of sacrificial victims is an issue also in Lev. 9:3; 12:6; 23:12; Judg. 6:25.
\n130. milk, the happily timed aliment The positive qualities of breast milk were well known (e.g., Aristotle, Hist. an. 3.20\u201321). Cf. Spec. Laws 3.199\u2013200, and comment on Virtues 142\u201344.
\n131. who ever breathe slaughter against your infants Mercy for newborn animals reflects the mercy that should be shown to newborn infants. Scripture nowhere prohibits infanticide, though it was frequently condemned in early Judaism.
\n132. the murderers of your own children In the course of his discussion of the Decalogue\u2019s commandment against murder, Philo interprets the ordinance in Exod. 21:22\u201323 LXX as carrying with it the prohibition of infanticide, that is, leaving newborns for wild beasts to devour; doing such a thing breaks the laws of nature (Spec. Laws 3.108\u201319; cf. Moses 1.10\u201311). In the Greco-Roman world, infanticide seems to have been widely practiced (largely for economic reasons) and rarely condemned (though see, e.g., Epictetus, Diatr. 1.23).
\n133. Still more for your sake See the comment on 140.
\n134\u201341. He forbids them to sacrifice the mother and its offspring on the same day The law in Lev. 22:28 (\u201cNo animal from the herd or from the flock shall be slaughtered on the same day with its young\u201d), like those referred to below in Virtues 142\u201344, reflect ancient taboos about mixing parents and children. While the biblical prohibition makes no explicit distinction (cf. B. Hul. 75b), Philo\u2019s rendition makes it apply only to the mother, agreeing with Temple Scroll 52:6 and M. Zev. 14:2 (cf. M. Hul. 5:1\u20135).
\n135. such actions are slaughters, not sacrifices Philo uses the term \u201cslaughter\u201d to describe human sacrifice in Abraham 176, 188, 196\u201397, 201.
\nWhich of God\u2019s altars will accept oblations so unhallowed Sacrifices offered by those acting immorally can have the opposite of the intended result: \u201cif the worshiper is without kindly feeling or justice, the sacrifices are no sacrifices, the consecrated oblation is desecrated, the prayers are words of ill omen with utter destruction waiting upon them. For, when to outward appearance they are offered, it is not a remission but a reminder of past sins which they effect\u201d (Moses 2.107).
\n136. the strange and unnatural craving of this monstrous gluttony For the caricature of the glutton, see Dreams 2.48\u201351: even though the simplest food is sufficient for meeting one\u2019s needs, he is always demanding \u201celaborate and diversified food,\u201d acting out of vanity, greed, and a lack of self-control (cf. Creation 158\u201359; Agriculture 37; Drunkenness 206). Moses\u2019s laws of sacrifice are designed to curb this vice (Spec. Laws 1.223).
\nthese limbs \u2026 would not remain mute Attributing speech to inanimate objects was a common literary device (e.g., Cherubim 35\u201338; Josephus, Ant. 4.299).
\n137. the law also banishes from the sacred precincts all pregnant animals Philo deduces this ban from Lev. 22:28, as does M. Hul. 4:5, 7, and Temple Scroll 52:5: \u201cNeither are you to sacrifice to me any ox, sheep, or goat that is pregnant\u201d (cf. 4QMMT B 36). See comment on 134\u201341.
\nThus counting what is still in the depths of the womb as on the same footing as what has already been brought to the birth Philo applies a similar line of reasoning to human beings in Spec. Laws 3.108\u20139, 117\u201318.
\n139. It was on this principle \u2026 that some legislators introduced the law Moses sets a precedent and standard for the lawmakers of other nations. The Egyptians, some Greek states, and, later, the Romans, forbade the execution of a pregnant woman condemned to death until after she gave birth.
\n140. by practicing on creatures of dissimilar kind we may show humanity in far fuller measure to beings of like kind to ourselves Like some Greco-Roman philosophers, Philo believed that people could \u201cpractice\u201d being more just, in their interactions with one another, by treating animals humanely. For the interpretive principle, see Spec. Laws 1.260: \u201call this careful scrutiny of the animal is a symbol representing in a figure the reformation of your own conduct, for the law does not prescribe for unreasoning creatures, but for those who have mind and reason.\u201d See also Virtues 133.
\n141. to accuse the nation of misanthropy Typical of this sort of anti-Jewish bias are the statements of Manetho, an Egyptian priest at Heliopolis (3rd century BCE), who, among other things, claimed that Moses commanded his followers \u201cto have no association except with those of their own confederacy\u201d (Josephus, Ag. Ap. 1.239, cf. 1.73\u201392).
\n142\u201344. \u201cThou shalt not seethe a lamb in his mother\u2019s milk\u201d Commands like Exod. 23:19; 34:26, and Deut. 14:21 express ancient anxieties about violating the maternal relationship (cf. Exod. 22:29; Lev. 22:27\u201328; Deut. 22:6\u20137) and taboos about mixing the spheres of life and death.
\n144. If indeed anyone thinks good to boil flesh in milk Philo\u2019s concession differs from M. Hul. 8:1, which extends the biblical ban to all meats: \u201cEvery kind of flesh of cattle, wild beast, and fowl, it is prohibited to cook in milk.\u201d
\ncompassion, that most vital of emotions Accordingly, Moses \u201chas filled practically his whole legislation with injunctions to show compassion and humanity\u201d (Spec. Laws 4.72, cf. 2.138, 3.116). For the Jewish perspective on compassion, or eleos, see especially the T. Zeb. 5:1\u20138:6.
\n145. This law forbids muzzling the ox when it treads out the corn Seeing how a farmer relies on his ox for a good harvest (Prov. 14:4), he should make sure that it is well provided for: \u201cA righteous man knows the needs of his beast\u201d (Prov. 12:10; cf. Pseudo-Phocylides 139). Philo\u2019s interpretation of Deut. 25:4 (\u201cYou shall not muzzle an ox while it is threshing\u201d) emphasizes the cooperation of divine, human, and bovine agents in the various tasks of farming, similar to Josephus in Ant. 4.233.
\n146. It forbids the yoking together of an ox and ass for ploughing Deut. 22:10 (\u201cYou shall not plow with an ox and an ass together\u201d) belongs to a paragraph that identifies several forbidden mixtures (22:5\u201312). In Ant. 4.228\u201329, Josephus applies this rule to any two animals of different species, as does M. BK 5:7 (cf. M. Mak. 3:9).
\n147. insistent that we should do no wrongs to men of other nations The unflattering correlation of non-Jews with the weaker, unclean ass of Deut. 22:10 seems inconsistent with Philo\u2019s statements about them elsewhere in the treatise, for example, Virtues 102\u20138. The interpretation of the verse offered in Spec. Laws 4.205\u20136 also draws an analogy with the human sphere, though there the ass represents people of low social standing, who ought to be treated fairly by their judges (cf. 3.46).
\n148\u201360 Laws Promoting Humanity toward Plants. Two illustrations are given, one concerning cultivated trees (149\u201354), the other concerning newly planted trees (155\u201359), Like the preceding section, Philo argues that while these laws are ostensibly about nonhuman life, obedience to them strengthens human virtues and relationships.
\n149. no trees of the cultivated type are to be cut down Deut. 20:19 (\u201cWhen in your war against a city you have to besiege it for a long time in order to capture it, you must not destroy its trees, wielding the ax against them. You may eat of them, but you must not cut them down. Are trees of the field human to withdraw before you into the besieged city?\u201d) protects enemy territory from the devastation of total war. In Spec. Laws 4.226\u201329, the injunction is taken as an illustration of the Law\u2019s justice: the fruit of the enemy\u2019s cultivated trees may be used for food, but their wood may not be used for siegeworks (see Deut. 20:20; cf. Josephus, Ant. 4.299, Ag. Ap. 2.212). Here Philo generalizes the rule, taking it to apply to all food-producing plants at all times and in all places (cf. Pseudo-Phocylides 38).
\n150. he forbids them to devastate the land even of their enemies Deut. 20:19 is now seen as an extreme test of the generalizing interpretation Philo has just given it.
\n151. the keen-sighted vision of reason to consider the future As 4 Macc. 2:14 puts it, when \u201cthe fruit trees of the enemy are not cut down\u201d this is a way by which \u201creason through the law can prevail over enmity.\u201d For both authors the law about trees presupposes a certain attitude toward one\u2019s enemies.
\nour enemies \u2026 may send ambassadors For this extrabiblical scenario, cf. the comment on 109, until envoys have been sent.
\n152. a very admirable saying of the ancients Wariness, says Aristotle, is characteristic especially of the aged, with whom neither love nor hate is strong, \u201cbut according to the precept of Bias (one of the Seven Sages), they love as if they would one day hate, and hate as if they would one day love\u201d (Rhet. 2.13.4)
\n153. who in peace should provide for the needs of war Philo gives one rationale for such preparedness in Joseph 115: \u201cjust as in peace we must exercise forethought in preparing for war, so, too, in years of plenty must we provide against dearth. Wars and famines and times of adversity in general are uncertain, and we must stand ready to meet them, and not wait till they have come and look for the remedy when nothing is available.\u201d
\nslow to trust their allies too freely A piece of proverbial wisdom; for example, Sir. 6:7: \u201cIf you would gain a friend, put him to the test, and do not put your trust in him quickly\u201d (cf. Sir. 19:4; Pseudo-Phocylides 70; and from the political realm, Josephus, J.W. 3.538\u201342).
\nnor yet absolutely distrust their enemies as though they could never pass over into amity Cf. the advice given a king in Let. Aris. 227: \u201cwe must show liberal charity to our opponents so that in this manner we may convert them to what is proper and fitting for them.\u201d
\n154. Why then should we carry on hostilities against trees Deut. 20:19 also poses a similar rhetorical question; see comment on 149.
\nthat they may pay their yearly tributes Like the people who work it (see comment on 95, firstfruits to the officiating priests), the land itself pays an \u201cannual toll and bounden tribute,\u201d which is \u201cfor the sustenance of the various kinds of animals without number\u201d (Spec. Laws 2.205; cf. Decalogue 163).
\n155. particularly in the cultivated kind Deut. 20:20 permits the destruction of trees that do not yield food for the construction of siegeworks. Philo develops the contrast between \u201ccultivated\u201d and \u201cwild\u201d species in various ways (e.g., Worse 105; Planting 97\u201398).
\nthe husbandman\u2019s science Like other elites of his time, Philo was fascinated with farming, and his writings often contain agricultural imagery; for the procedures depicted in 155\u201357, cf. Worse 105\u20139 and Agriculture 3\u20137.
\n156. He bids them nurse the newly planted trees for three successive years Taken with Lev. 19:24\u201325 (see next comment), Lev. 19:23 (\u201cWhen you enter the land and plant any tree for food, you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden for you, not to be eaten.\u201d) seems to be part of a cultic code, concerned primarily with the purity of fruit offerings. With its extrabiblical provisions about how the trees should be tended, Philo\u2019s interpretation concentrates more on agricultural matters. 4QMMT B 62\u201363 (cf. 4Q251 6 7\u20139) and T. Orlah 1:8, following the biblical text, restrict the ordinance to the Land of Israel, while Philo and Josephus (Ant. 4.226) do not.
\ncutting off their superfluous overgrowths On Planting 94\u2013116 gives an extended meditation on Lev. 19:23\u201325, in which the cultivated tree is allegorically interpreted as a person\u2019s moral purpose, which must be pruned of its vices (cf. Alleg. Interp. 1.52).
\n157. exhausted as they are by the labor of prematurely bearing the crops Cf. Josephus, Ant. 4.226: fruit brought forth by trees during the first three years \u201chas not been borne by them in season; and since nature has used force in an untimely fashion, it is neither suitable for God nor for the owner himself to enjoy.\u201d
\n158. in harmony with the perfect number four In Planting 117\u201331 (also Abraham 13; Dreams 1.33), Philo explains the significance of the fourth year in Lev. 19:24 (for which see 159). The number four, in fact, \u201cinvolves deep principles both of physics and ethics,\u201d as can be seen by the fact that there are four cosmic elements, four seasons, and so on (cf. Creation 47\u201354).
\n159. to dedicate the whole of it as a firstfruit to God According to Lev. 19:24, \u201cIn the fourth year all [the tree\u2019s] fruit shall be set aside for jubilation before the LORD.\u201d This apparently refers to a type of firstfruit offering (cf. Virtues 95).
\npartly in hope of fertility to come Leviticus 19:25 continues, \u201cand only in the fifth year may you use [the tree\u2019s] fruit\u2014that its yield to you may be increased.\u201d
\n160 This summary concludes the section in 148\u201360 by applying to plant life the same kind of reasoning Philo had used earlier (140) with respect to animal life.
\n161\u201374 Part 3: The Humanity of Judaism\u2019s Leading Citizens. Having reviewed the positive benefits and virtues fostered by some of the Law\u2019s individual statutes, Philo concludes by describing the vices from which the Law in general is meant to protect its followers, and the \u201criches\u201d that the community\u2019s elite share with their fellow citizens.
\n161. pride and arrogance In essence, pride (hyperopsia) and arrogance (alazoneia) are the opposite of philanthr\u014dpia (Spec. Laws 4.72). In Decalogue 4\u20136, they are included among the manifestations of typhos (\u201cvanity\u201d) and the sources of impiety and conflict (cf. T. Dan 1.6\u20138; 4 Macc. 1:26; 2:15).
\n162. it is conspicuous in the great Arrogance is a vice associated especially with the ruling class, with those who seek glory, power, and high position.
\n\u201csatiety begets insolence,\u201d as the ancients have said A maxim attributed to Solon, one of the Seven Sages: \u201cWealth breeds satiety, satiety insolence\u201d (Diogenes Laertius, Lives 1.59; cf. Menander, Sent. 792). Insolence, or hybris, would have been associated with not only an arrogant attitude, but also insulting actions.
\n163. Moses \u2026 exhorts them to abstain from \u2026 pride In Deut. 8:11\u201320, Moses warns the people that the prosperity they will enjoy in the Promised Land will lead them to arrogance and apostasy. See especially verse 14: \u201cbeware lest your heart grow haughty.\u201d Similar themes are struck in the final chapters of Deuteronomy, which figure prominently in the opening sections of On the Virtues; for example, Deut. 31:27; 32:15.
\nhe reminds them Moses\u2019s speech in Deut. 8:11\u201320 contains numerous appeals for the people to remember the blessings they have received from God. Again see especially verse 14: \u201cbeware lest your heart grow haughty and you forget the LORD your God\u2014who freed you from the land of Egypt.\u201d
\n164. God, the spiritual sun According to Spec. Laws 1.279, God is \u201cthe sun of the sun,\u201d illuminating the realm of the mind like the sun illuminates the realm of the senses (cf. Dreams 1.72\u2013101, 116).
\n165. \u201cFor he \u2026 gives thee strength to make power\u201d Philo uses the same rendition of Deut. 8:18 (\u201cRemember that it is the LORD your God who gives you the power to get wealth\u201d) in Sacrifices 54\u201356 (together with Deut. 8:12\u201314, 17) when addressing those who have forgotten \u201cthe spirit of thankfulness\u201d (cf. Agriculture 172).
\nunthankfulness is akin to pride Arrogance is rooted in an incorrect attitude toward God, who will repay the guilty (e.g., Creation 169; God 48, 74; QG 1.96).
\n166. those who fail to discern the full meaning Philo often contrasts his interpretation with that of others who miss the deeper or true intent of Scripture. In the case of Deut. 8:18, the full meaning of \u201cto make power\u201d (LXX) has nothing to do with acquiring material wealth, but with imparting virtue to others and thereby imitating God (see 167\u201368).
\nThey become rich and make others poor As Philo sees it, Moses\u2019s instruction defies the prevailing moral logic of the ancient world, according to which the pursuit of social goods like wealth and status is seen in competitive terms, being acquired for oneself only at the expense of others.
\n167. sagacity \u2026 temperance \u2026 gallantry \u2026 justice This is the traditional \u201ccanon\u201d of primary virtues, familiar from Platonic and Stoic writings, as well as elsewhere in Philo\u2019s corpus. The canon also partly informs the structure of the Exposition of the Law itself; see Spec. Laws 4.132 and \u201cIntroduction.\u201d
\n168. a man should imitate God as much as may be The Mosaic Law not only encourages piety and thankfulness, but also makes it possible to know God well enough to follow the divine example and even to assimilate oneself to God and the divine order. This entails \u201cfollowing God step by step in the highways cut out by the virtues,\u201d so that one\u2019s soul might be \u201cfully conformed to God\u201d (Creation 144).
\n169. the gifts of the Chief Ruler are of universal benefit The idea that God\u2019s indiscriminate beneficence ought to set a model for human imitation was a widely held belief. The wealthy imitate God\u2019s generosity and demonstrate philanthr\u014dpia when they share with the needy (Spec. Laws 4.72\u201374).
\n170. preferring jealousy and envy to virtue Since envy has no place in the divine order (Good Person 13; Spec. Laws 2.249; cf. Pseudo-Phocylides 70\u201375), it stands to reason that those who would imitate God refrain from this vice. In the literature of the time, envy (phthonos) is often associated with strife and conflict. See especially the Testament of Simeon, subtitled \u201cOn Envy.\u201d
\n171. \u201cWhosoever sets his hand to do anything with presumptuousness provokes God\u201d The punishment stipulated by Num. 15:30 (\u201cBut the person, be he citizen or stranger, who acts defiantly [lit., \u201cwith upraised hand\u201d] reviles the LORD; that person shall be cut off from among his people\u201d) is for those who commit intentional or rebellious sins. Here, as in Spec. Laws 1.265, Philo takes the verse as evidence that God hates and punishes those guilty of arrogance and self-conceit.
\n172. the soul is invisible save only to God Jewish sources often affirm God\u2019s ability to survey all things, including human hearts, for example, T. Gad 5:3: \u201cThe person who is just and humble is ashamed to commit an injustice, not because someone else will pass judgment on him but out of his own heart, because the LORD considers his inner deliberations.\u201d
\nChastisement is not for the blind to give One must be able to see clearly in order to offer reproof (e.g., B. Arak. 16b). Cf. On Dreams 1.91: recognizing that God\u2019s \u201ceye is upon all things\u201d is the first step on the path to repentance and appeasing divine chastisement.
\nas Pindar says Pindar, frag. 280 (otherwise unknown); cf. Pindar\u2019s Pyth. 4.12\u201313.
\n173. puffs himself out A common characteristic of the arrogant and conceited.<\/p>\n
On the Contemplative Life<\/p>\n
David M. Hay<\/p>\n
Philo\u2019s treatise On the Contemplative Life describes the Therapeutae, a community of Jewish men and women ascetics who reside in a somewhat isolated region near Alexandria, Egypt, in the 1st century CE. Devoted to scriptural study and worship, they maintain an austere lifestyle, including celibacy and abandonment of private property. Most of their time is devoted to solitary study and contemplation, but periodically they gather for worship and biblical sermons or lectures.
\nThe form of the treatise makes it unusual among Philo\u2019s works. Unlike most of them, it is not a biblical commentary, although it describes a community of industrious biblical exegetes. Nor is it a philosophical treatise, though he describes the Therapeutae as philosophers. It has often been classified as one of Philo\u2019s \u201capologetic writings,\u201d but it is not organized around a thesis (in contrast to his That Every Good Person Is Free), nor does it seem to have as a principal aim the defense of Jews or Judaism (in contrast to his Hypothetica). Perhaps it might best be regarded as an account of a distinctive Jewish community that Philo regards as attaining the height of human perfection (Contempl. Life 90). Some sizable sections of the work (primarily 3\u201310 and 40\u201363, not included here) describe pagan polytheism and deplorable dinner parties; these negative passages point up the excellence of the Therapeutic way of life in general and the sanctity of their dinner gatherings.
\nThe work seems to be aimed at an audience familiar with paganism and pagan literature, though gradually Philo makes the Jewish identity of the Therapeutae unmistakable (the Jewishness of the group is plain only from 63 onward). Philo\u2019s laudatory account of the Therapeutae may in fact rely on a familiar literary template for describing religious ascetics, a template also used in an encomium of Egyptian priests written by one of Philo\u2019s pagan contemporaries, Chaeremon. Philo\u2019s treatise describes the customary or rule-guided actions of the Therapeutae, with no reference to individual variations or lapses (see, e.g., 30\u201331). It seems likely that he bases his account at least partly on personal contacts he has had with the Therapeutae, but he never says so.
\nPhilo probably hoped that his treatise would appeal to sympathetic Gentiles as well as to Jews familiar with Greek writers, from Homer to Plato. Although he offers some puzzlingly sharp criticism of Plato at one point, the treatise as a whole seems strongly influenced by Platonic concepts of immaterial realities and philosophical contemplation. The treatise portrays the Therapeutic way of life in terms that might win the respect or admiration of Jews and non-Jews alike. (For a rather similar positive view of pagan culture, see the Let. Aris. 121\u201322.) One of the results is that Philo describes the customary actions of the Therapeutae, but only occasionally mentions their motives or purposes (e.g., in 20, 39, 68).
\nPhilo begins the treatise by mentioning that he has previously written about the Essenes, who are outstanding representatives of the \u201cpractical life,\u201d but goes on to say that he will now describe an even better group whose focus is the \u201ccontemplative life.\u201d He begins by comparing the excellence of their worship of God to those who worship other deities and idols (1\u201312). He then goes on to speak of Therapeutae (this term includes both men and women) as lovers of God who have left families, friends, and property to live outside cities (13\u201320). He says, rather cryptically, that Therapeutae are found all over the world, but that \u201cthe best of them\u201d come from all over to reside in a well-situated settlement just south of Alexandria beside the Mareotic Lake (21\u201323). They live alone in individual houses, the main feature of each being its \u201csanctuary,\u201d a room in which they spend most of their days pursuing allegorical study of the Bible, meditation on God, and the writing of hymns. They assemble every seventh day, however, to hear a discourse. Then Philo gives details about their ascetic self-control, involving lengthy fasts, a sparse diet, and inexpensive clothing (24\u201339).
\nAfter a long interruption, describing other people\u2019s immoral banquets (40\u201363), he resumes his account of the Therapeutae with an extended description of their 50th-day festivals. They assemble in white robes, line up in order, and begin with prayers. The president gives a speech on some issue of biblical interpretation, emphasizing allegorical interpretation since the group gives most attention to inward meanings concealed behind the literal sense of the text (75\u201378). Then each of the members, beginning with the president, sings a solo hymn. Afterward, some more recent members of the community bring in the food: bread, seasoned with salt and hyssop, plus water. After supper there is an all-night \u201cvigil,\u201d consisting of choral singing and dancing. At first the men and women form separate choruses, but eventually they merge into one, in imitation of the male and female Israelites led by Moses and Miriam, who sang songs of thanksgiving to celebrate God\u2019s miraculous deliverance at the Red Sea (Exod. 15). At dawn they pray and depart to their private dwellings and \u201csanctuaries,\u201d where they resume their religious labors. Philo concludes by declaring that the Therapeutae have reached the summit of human excellence and happiness, living \u201cin the soul alone\u201d as friends of God (79\u201390).
\nFor more on Philo, see the essay \u201cThe Writings of Philo,\u201d elsewhere in these volumes.<\/p>\n
Significance<\/p>\n
As far as our evidence goes, ancient Jewish writers after Philo\u2019s time never referred to the Therapeutae or to Contemplative Life, just as they ignored his other writings. Christian writers, however, at least by the 4th century CE, manifested a keen interest in this treatise. Eusebius of Caesarea (Hist. eccl. 2:16:2\u201317:24; 18:7) summarized the treatise at length because he thought that it described 1st-century Egyptian Christians. Epiphanius (Pan. 1:29:5:1\u20133) and Jerome (Vir. ill. 11:1\u20132, 6) followed this line of interpretation, which became the standard Christian view down to the 16th century. All the Christian writers of later times who mentioned the Therapeutae appear to have depended entirely upon Philo\u2019s treatise for their information. In the 19th century a number of scholars argued that Contemplative Life was falsely attributed to Philo and that it was an artful Christian forgery of the 3rd or 4th century, designed to recommend monasticism as an invention of the 1st-century church. Since the end of the 19th century, however, nearly all scholars have agreed that Philo really wrote the treatise and that the Lake Mareotis community he describes was Jewish, not Christian.
\nSome recent scholarship has focused on the question of whether Philo\u2019s account of the Therapeutae should be construed as a historically reliable report, as an idealization of an actual group, or as a utopian fiction. Given Philo\u2019s precise location of the group\u2019s residence, in the immediate vicinity of Alexandria, it seems unlikely that he is describing a purely imaginary group. One point of comparison has been Philo\u2019s accounts of the Essenes, which are widely regarded as historically quite reliable. Some scholars have argued that the Therapeutae were a subgroup of the Essenes, others that the groups were essentially independent. Since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, many investigators have pointed out some similarities between the groups described there and in Contemplative Life.
\nAnother focus of modern attention has been the treatise\u2019s depiction of women members of the community (the \u201cTherapeutrides\u201d\u2014see 2). These women seem to be represented as fully equal to their male associates in both religious dedication and intellectual activity; this depiction is in some contrast to Philo\u2019s tendency in other treatises to regard women as intellectually and religiously inferior to men (e.g., QE 1:7: \u201cThe female is nothing else than an imperfect male\u201d). Some modern interpreters have speculated that Therapeutae might have authored the Testament of Job or Joseph and Aseneth, two hellenistic Jewish writings of the same general period that also give prominence to women.
\nThere are aspects of the Therapeutic community on which some modern readers (and perhaps ancient ones as well) have wished Philo had said more. He gives only a few hints about the organization and leadership of the community, says nothing about procedures for admission or discipline, nothing about violation of community rules or restitution, nothing about the economic support system, and very little about the relation of the Lake Mareotis community to outsiders (especially their relationship with the Jewish community in Alexandria, which must have periodically supplied new recruits). A final notable feature of the treatise is that Philo says almost nothing about any distinctive beliefs or biblical interpretations accepted by the Therapeutae. He offers an extensive description of how they lived, but says little about what they thought.<\/p>\n
SUGGESTED READING<\/p>\n
Engberg-Pedersen, T. \u201cPhilo\u2019s De vita contemplativa as a Philosopher\u2019s Dream.\u201d JSJ 30 (1999): 40\u201364.
\nGusella, L. \u201cThe Therapeutae and Other Community Experiences of the Late Second Temple Period.\u201d Hen 24 (2002): 295\u2013329.
\nHay, D. M. \u201cThe Veiled Thoughts of the Therapeutae.\u201d In Mediators of the Divine: Horizons of Prophecy, Divination, Dreams, and Theurgy in Mediterranean Antiquity, edited by Robert M. Berchman, 167\u201384. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998.
\nKraemer, R. S. \u201cMonastic Jewish Women in Greco-Roman Egypt: Philo Judaeus on the Therapeutrides.\u201d Signs 14 (1989): 342\u201370.
\nTaylor, J. E. Jewish Women Philosophers of First-Century Alexandria: Philo\u2019s \u201cTherapeutae\u201d Reconsidered. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
\nVermes, G. \u201cEssenes, Therapeutae, Qumran.\u201d Durham University Journal 52 (1960): 97\u2013115.
\nWinston, D. Philo of Alexandria: The Contemplative Life, the Giants, and Selections. Classics of Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1981.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
1. having written about the Essenes Philo\u2019s phrasing suggests that he wrote Contemplative Life as a companion piece to a detailed account of the Essenes, probably in a lost treatise, since his only surviving descriptions of the Essenes (Good Person 75\u201391; Hypoth. 11) are so brief that neither could serve well as a parallel to the present treatise.
\n2. the vocation of these philosophers is shown at once by their name. For they are called \u201cTherapeutae\u201d and \u201cTherapeutrides\u201d Philo at the outset indicates that both men and women belong to this movement. He proposes that these titles\u2014which probably originated with the group (or at least were applied to them by outsiders)\u2014indicate that they manifest either a distinctive kind of healing or an elevated manner of worship. Since he explains both meanings (i.e., pertaining to healing and worshiping) at some length, Philo implies that both meanings fit this community. On the one hand, their devotion to God is connected with\u2014and perhaps is the source of\u2014their own spiritual health and freedom from spiritual \u201cdiseases\u201d (the first disease that Philo mentions is pleasure). On the other hand, this group worships God, maintaining a particularly exalted concept of the deity based on \u201cnature\u201d and \u201cthe sacred laws\u201d (presumably the laws of Moses, though Philo will not make this clear until 63\u201364). It is noteworthy that Philo describes the group as \u201cphilosophers\u201d (see note on 28).
\nthe Existent, who is better than the Good, purer than the One, and more primal than the Monad Philo implies that the concept of God held by the Therapeutae is superior to any presented by Greek philosophers (especially Platonists and Pythagoreans). This leads into a scathing survey of various forms of pagan religion (3\u201310). On the theology of this text see notes 3 and 4.
\n11. strive for the vision of the Existent The goal of the Therapeutae is to \u201csee God.\u201d On the theme of spiritual vision, see further 12\u201313, 66, 68. Plato had already spoken of the eye of the soul (Resp. 533d) and the ascent to the vision of the idea of the good (517b\u201319d; 533d). Well before Philo, Aristobulus, another Jewish Greek author, dismissed the idea of seeing God in a physical sense: \u201cNo mortal casts an eye on him; rather, he is beheld by the mind.\u201d In other writings Philo speaks of those who love God desiring a vision of God; mortal eyes cannot see God, but an intellectual \u201cseeing\u201d of God (though not of the divine essence) is possible.
\n12. they have been seized by a heavenly love and are persons possessed until they see what they long for, like Bacchantes and Corybants Elsewhere Philo says that God knows that humans cannot attain any goal \u201cunless a vehement love of such effort be implanted in us\u201d (Posterity 157). As he will again in 85, Philo compares the Therapeutae to pagans involved in ecstatic worship in the Dionysiac tradition (see commentary on 85 below; cf. Creation 71; Dreams 2.1). Plato had already likened true philosophers to participants in such worship (e.g., Phaed. 69c\u2013d).
\n13. and because of their love of the deathless and blessed life they judge that their mortal life has already come to an end. So they abandon their property The text is the clearest indication that the Therapeutae were motivated by their belief in and yearning for immortality: they were seeking a \u201cdeathless life\u201d related to the vision of God, and they considered their \u201cmortal life\u201d already over. \u201cMortal life\u201d here entails ties to family, friends, and property. This passage also shows that the Therapeutae had significant economic assets that they left to others. Philo says virtually nothing about how the Therapeutae obtained food or other necessities once they abandoned their property. Elsewhere he reports that the Essenes pooled their resources in a common fund (Good Person 86; Hypoth. 11.4, 10), but he does not say this of the Therapeutae.
\npersons who have the wealth of vision should at once hand over the wealth that is blind The contrast here is between spiritual and material wealth; the latter is represented by the Greek deity Ploutos (wealth), who was blind. In a somewhat similar vein, the Testament of Job\u2019s protagonist says that he can easily bear the loss of material possessions because he enjoys the \u201ctruly great wealth\u201d of a relationship with God that provides him with an eternal kingdom (26:3; 33:1\u20139; 36:3; 40:3).
\n14. the Greeks praise Anaxagoras and Democritus Anaxagoras and Democritus were philosophers of the 5th century BCE. Similar reports that both men gave up property to pursue philosophy are recorded in other ancient sources.
\n16. themselves through engaging in philosophy See Sir. 38:24, where it is claimed that the person who does less business is the one who will be wise.
\n17. they live simply on milk and are the most righteous of men Philo cites this obscure Homeric passage (Il. 13.6) evidently to bolster his claim that the Therapeutae display admirable justice in abandoning their property to pursue philosophy. They anticipate Ralph Waldo Emerson\u2019s ideal of \u201cplain living and high thinking.\u201d
\n18. they depart without a backward glance, abandoning siblings, children, wives, parents \u2026 friends, the homelands in which they were born and raised The Therapeutae separate themselves from all the members of their biological families and their wives. Philo does not say they divorce their wives (though that may be implied), and he does not speak of wives leaving their husbands (apparently most of the Therapeutrides, at least in the Lake Mareotis community, were unmarried; see 68). Philo does not say that the Therapeutae cut off all ties or communications with these family members, though they may have done so. In another treatise Philo remarks that a person who seeks freedom from pleasures and passions \u201cmust prepare for a change of residence and flee from home and country and family and friends without a backward glance\u201d (Rewards 17; cf. Virtues 214, 219 [Abraham, like all proselytes, exemplifies such a decision; see, e.g., Spec. Laws 1.52]; Alleg. Interp. 2.85 [Philo himself sometimes separated from family, friends, and country to go into a wilderness for the sake of contemplation, without finding the peace and concentration he sought]). As far as we know, celibacy was unusual in ancient Judaism. Philo reports that the Essenes eschewed marriage on principle (Hypoth. 11.14\u201317), but Josephus mentions that some Essenes avoided marriage while others did not (J.W. 2.120\u201321, 160\u201361). The Dead Seas Scrolls suggest that the Qumran community was largely or entirely male.
\n19. they do not move to another city See Abraham 22\u201323 and Let. Aris. 142. Members of the Qumran community went into the wilderness to separate themselves from sinners and prepare the way for God by study of the law (1QS 8:13\u201315).
\n20. This is not because of any bitter misanthropy In antiquity Jews were accused of misanthropy, a charge that Philo responds to both explicitly (Spec. Laws 2. 167, Virtues 141) and implicitly (e.g., Virtues 50\u2013174). In defending the Therapeutae, he may have in mind this more general complaint against the Jews.
\n21. the type is found in many locations in the civilized world (since perfect goodness must exist among Greeks and Barbarians alike) For the remainder of this treatise, Philo concentrates on describing a group of Jewish Therapeutae and Therapeutrides residing near Alexandria by the Mareotic Lake, but in this paragraph he suggests that they belong to a worldwide movement. He may here refer to Jews devoted to wisdom living all over the Roman world, or he may imply that some pagans display a \u201cperfect goodness,\u201d which qualifies them as being of \u201cthis kind.\u201d
\n25. a sacred room, which is called the \u201csanctuary\u201d or \u201cplace to be alone\u201d The Greek term Philo uses for \u201cplace to be alone,\u201d monast\u0113rion, is a rare word. Philo is the first author known to use it, and he employs it only here and in 30. Probably, then, the term was used (or invented) by the Therapeutae themselves. Since later Christian writers used monast\u0113rion to refer to monasteries, Philo\u2019s choice of this word probably encouraged Christians in later centuries to imagine that the Therapeutae were Christian monks. The monast\u0113rion of the Therapeutae, however, was obviously a single room in an individual house, not a building or group of buildings.
\ninitiated into the mysteries of the sanctified life Philo frequently uses for his own purposes language borrowed from Greek mystery religions, through which believers were initiated into a new life (see note on section 85).
\nlaws, prophetic oracles, and hymns and the other things by means of which knowledge and piety grow This phrasing may imply that the Therapeutae divided the Jewish Scripture in three parts: Torah, Prophets, and Writings. This threefold division is not attested elsewhere in Philo\u2019s writings. (Perhaps, however, Philo\u2019s reference to \u201chymns and the other things\u201d refers to compositions of the Therapeutae themselves.)
\n26. even in dreams they think about nothing except the beauties of the divine excellences and powers Philo repeatedly associates the Therapeutae with beautiful thoughts or contemplation of beautiful objects. Perhaps the Therapeutae made special efforts to remember and interpret their dreams, conceiving them to have special importance as revelations of God\u2019s nature or will, like some of the dreams in Genesis (cf. Migration 189\u201392; Dreams 1.2; 2.2\u20133). Pythagoras was said to have given instruction about visions in dreams (Iamblicus, VP 107).
\n27. it is their custom to pray two times each day, in the morning and in the evening See 89. The Qumran scrolls also affirm morning and evening prayers (1QS 9:26\u201310:4; 4Q408; 4Q503), whereas a tradition of praying three times a day, apparently originally correlated with sacrifices in the Temple in Jerusalem, is attested in Ps. 55:18; Dan. 6:11; and M. Ber. 4:1; see also T. Ber. 3:1\u20133.
\n28. they read the sacred writings and investigate the ancestral philosophy by allegorizing Philo represents the Therapeutae as pursuing philosophical study, as he himself did, mainly or solely through exegesis of the Bible. By emphasizing allegorical rather than literal interpretation (cf. 78), they may have explored Jewish religious issues in relation to Greek and Hellenistic philosophical ideas and concepts\u2014as Philo also did. Yet Philo is remarkably silent about any particular allegorical interpretations reached by the Therapeutae.
\n29. writings of men of a previous generation who became the founders of the movement This comment indicates that the group had predecessors, but Philo is ambiguous about how far back they went. Since the group encompasses women as well as men, it is noteworthy that he describes the founders as men (andres) only. Unfortunately their writings have not survived.
\nthey not only practice contemplation but also produce songs and hymns to God \u2026 which they necessarily inscribe in solemn rhythms While he does not go far in describing their musical compositions, Philo makes it clear that the Therapeutae compose and record them. Later he will emphasize the prominent role of individual and group singing of hymns in connection with the 50th-day festival (80\u201381, 84, 88). Philo strongly implies that all of their music-making is connected with worship. Probably their hymns were modeled on the biblical Psalms (apparently mentioned in 25); they may also have resembled the hymns produced in the Qumran community (e.g., 1QH).
\n30. on the seventh day they come together as to a common assembly Without using the term \u201cSabbath\u201d (which he readily uses in other treatises), Philo implies that the Therapeutae gather for Sabbath study and\/or worship services. The Lake Mareotis community had at least one sizable building for group meetings besides the individual homes of the members. Philo says that Jewish Sabbath assemblies are \u201cschools\u201d for the study of their \u201cancestral philosophy\u201d (Moses 2.215\u201316).
\n31. he presents a well-reasoned and wise discourse Philo says nothing about prayers, hymns, or Scripture reading. In the light of 75, 78, however, it may be assumed that the discourse mentioned in 31 is an exposition of the Jewish Bible.
\nall the others listen in silence All the Therapeutae are extraordinarily attentive to the speaker\u2019s discourse or sermon. There is no attempt at group discussion. Cf. 89; Dreams 2.126\u201327; Good Person 81\u201382.
\n32. for it is their custom to have women present as listeners because the women have the same zeal and commitment Philo emphasizes the presence of women at the Sabbath services, presumably the Therapeutrides mentioned in 2. They exhibit the \u201csame ardor and sense of vocation\u201d as the men, but a wall separates the sexes.
\n33. the dividing wall Philo carefully describes a partition designed to be high enough to keep the men and women from seeing each other, yet not so high as to prevent the women from hearing the speaker (presumably a male) (cf. Ant. 15.419; J.W. 5.198\u201399). Such spatial separation of the sexes for worship, however, may well have been unusual in Philo\u2019s day.
\n34. Having begun by making self-control a kind of foundation for their soul, they build the other virtues on it Elsewhere Philo calls self-control the opposite of desire (Spec. Laws 1.149) and sees it taught in the last of the Ten Commandments (Spec. Laws 4.96\u201397. The Therapeutae exhibit self-control especially in fasting and in confining themselves to plain food and drink (37), as well as the simplest and cheapest housing and clothing (38). Philo also implies, but does not say explicitly, that all the Therapeutae and Therapeutrides abstained from sexual activity. In Jos. Asen. 4:7 Joseph is described as one who worships God, exercises self-control, and is a virgin.
\n35. they have become accustomed to abstinence, like grasshoppers who, they say, feed on air Philo apparently alludes to a passage in Plato\u2019s Phaedrus (259b\u2013c) in which Socrates whimsically reports a traditional story that grasshoppers are descended from human beings who were so entranced by the singing of the Muses that they forgot to eat or drink; after dying they report to the Muses which humans are devoted to their concerns, the highest being philosophy. Good Person 8 may contain a similar Platonic allusion, though in that passage Philo compares grasshoppers to humans who subsist on virtue rather than wisdom.
\n36. likewise they release the cattle This Sabbath practice is in accord with the literal meaning of Exod. 20:10 and Deut. 5:14. This passage seems to indicate that the Therapeutae own cattle, despite having given away their possessions (13). Since they themselves are vegetarians (37), it seems likely that they raise the cattle as an income-producing venture that contributed to the community\u2019s economic base. The cattle may have been cared for at nearby farms (23), and those who cared for them may have been non-Therapeutae hired laborers or, perhaps younger members of the community (cf. 72).
\n37. they eat nothing costly but only common bread seasoned with salt \u2026 and their drink is spring water Similar information is given for the 50th-day banquet in 73\u201374. The diet of the Therapeutae is far more restrictive than Lev. 11 requires. Daniel and his friends consumed only legumes and water (Dan. 1:12). Similar diets are attributed to Pythagoras (Iamblichus, On the Pythagorean Way of Life 106\u20139) and ancient Egyptian priests.
\n39. recognizing that vanity is the source of falsehood, freedom from vanity the source of truth This statement suggests that the Therapeutae maintain a very simple and austere lifestyle on the assumption that this facilitates their pursuit of religious truth. This agrees with the group\u2019s emphasis on self-control as the basis of other virtues (34).
\n40. I also want to speak about their common meetings \u2026 in contrast to other people\u2019s dinner parties Philo signals his readers that he intends a major interruption in his account of the Therapeutae. He will conclude this account with a lengthy description of their 50th-day meetings, which include religious instruction, prayers, singing and dancing, together with special meals (64\u201390). He will preface this, however, with a description, almost as long, of the special meals (symposia) of \u201cthe others\u201d (presumably pagans), who exhibit drunkenness and violence (40\u201347), ostentatious luxury (48\u201356), and philosophers\u2019 foolishness or endorsement of sexual immorality (57\u201363). Criticism of luxurious banqueting was a stock theme in Greco-Roman literature of Philo\u2019s day, and Jewish writings of the postexilic period sometimes emphasized the banqueting of tyrants or wrongdoers.
\n64. in accord with the supremely sacred teachings of the prophet Moses Only with 63\u201364, in which he mentions Moses explicitly, does Philo make the Jewish identity of the Lake Mareotis community absolutely clear.
\n65. after seven weeks, showing reverence not only for the seventh day but also for the square of seven; for they know that it is holy and ever-virgin The chief festival of the Therapeutae is a 50th-day one, but it begins on the evening of the 50th day with a \u201cprefeast\u201d gathering. Philo\u2019s wording (\u201cafter seven sets of seven days\u201d) is ambiguous since he does not say what date is the beginning point for the calculation. Further, his phrasing could mean \u201cevery fifty days\u201d (which would schedule such a 50th-day feast seven times each year). Philo does not directly refer to the Bible to explain the special significance of these numbers. In other passages (Decalogue 102; QG 2.12a) he speaks of the number seven as signifying Athena, wisdom, and virginity. Forty-nine, as the square of seven, has a high symbolic value; and 50, formed by the addition of 49 and 1 (symbolizing God), is supremely rich in symbolism. Arithmetically it is rich as the sum of the squares of a right-angled triangle with sides of 3 and 4 and a hypotenuse of 5. Two reasons can be given as to why the right-angled triangle is called \u201cthe beginning of the formation of the universe.\u201d In the account of the genesis of the cosmos in Plato\u2019s Timaeus, the four elements are shaped by two kinds of right-angled triangles. In Pythagorean lore, the right-angled triangle is called \u201cthe beginning of shapes and qualities\u201d (see Creation 97). This pronouncement is based on the contrast between the One and the many. There can be every kind of acute or obtuse angle, but only one right angle. Until the right angle is produced, there can be no solid structure. It should be noted, however, that there are different kinds of right-angled triangles.
\n66. one of those on duty for the day The term Philo uses (Gk. eph\u0113mereutos) suggests an officer appointed to give the signal to begin the evening events. There is no reason to think this person is also the president who gives the main speech of the evening (75).
\nthey raise their hands to show that they are clean and uncontaminated by any money-making or even the appearance of commerce Cf. 16\u201317; Sir. 26:29; 31:5; Letter of Aristeas 306. On the raising of hands in prayer, see also Contempl. Life 89, Flaccus 121.
\n67. the seniors recline in the order of their admission Evidently, also at Qumran rank or seniority was based on length of time one had been a member of the group. This is Philo\u2019s only reference to \u201cadmission\u201d to the community; the event probably involved special ritual and oath-taking and was clearly duly recorded (cf. 1QS 1:1\u201325; 5:7\u201310:24; see also Abr. 270\u201371). By \u201creclining\u201d while dining, the Therapeutae follow the standard practice in Greco-Roman society. This practice is continued at the Passover Seder to underscore that the participants are free and no longer slaves.
\nif they have come to love this commitment The Greek term translated \u201ccommitment\u201d here is proairesis, which Philo uses also in 2, 17, 29, 32, 79 in ways that seem to allude to the distinctive beliefs or principles that guide the group\u2019s life.
\nthe contemplative branch of philosophy, which is indeed most beautiful and divine part The language suggests a Platonic view of philosophy, unless the term \u201cdivine\u201d means \u201cGod-oriented\u201d rather than \u201cmaking humans resemble God.\u201d
\n68. Women also take part in the feast. Most of them are elderly virgins The explanation of their virginity is that it arises from their eager pursuit of wisdom and desire for immortal \u201cchildren\u201d in the form of thoughts and virtues linked with eternity.
\n70. No slaves serve them because they believe that owning slaves is entirely opposed to nature Like the Essenes (Good Person 79) the Therapeutae reject slave-holding on principle (perhaps influenced by Stoic teaching that it was an unnatural practice; see, e.g., Seneca the Younger, Letters 47).
\n71. free persons serve, providing the necessary services Those who serve the senior members of the society are recent members (Philo\u2019s language may allow for women also to be serving their elders). They serve willingly, regarding the senior members as their own spiritual mothers and fathers.
\n74. right reason teaches those who share this life to abstain from wine, just as it teaches that lesson to priests when they offer sacrifices In contrast to 82, this paragraph suggests that the Therapeutae thought of themselves as similar to priests offering sacrifices (presumably those priests serving in the Jerusalem Temple). In B. Naz. 19A, the Nazirite who abstains from wine is considered a sinner.
\nfor wine is the drug that induces folly, and rich dishes stir up desire, that most insatiable of creatures In 40\u201347 Philo gave a lengthy account of alcohol-drenched dinner parties, which promote violence, folly, and general acting on evil desires.
\n75. he [the president] seeks to explain something in the sacred writings or resolve a problem raised by someone else Probably, but not certainly, the president is the same senior member who gives the Sabbath discourse (31). The subject of his discourse is the meaning of a passage in the \u201cHoly Writings,\u201d which Philo has already indicated as including laws, prophetic oracles, psalms, and other writings (25).
\nhe does not speak out of any concern to make a display Philo implies that this is no mere \u201cacademic\u201d lecture but rather a sermonlike presentation designed to guide or inspire the religious ideas and lives of the membership (cf. 31 and Sir. 33:18).
\n78. For these people think that the entire law is like a living animal This interpretation of the nature of the Bible using body and soul imagery appears in Philo\u2019s works in only one other passage, Migration 93, where Philo uses it to argue against some radical allegorizers who explore symbolic interpretations of the laws of Moses but fail to practice them at the literal level. Evidently the Therapeutae, like Philo, maintain literal observance while considering the allegorical meaning more important.
\nthe rational soul begins to distinguish and see the things that are like itself, looking through the words, as through a mirror Philo seems to mean that those who practice allegorical exegesis rightly discover invisible concepts or truths (perhaps like the Platonic ideas) that somehow are \u201cakin\u201d to the minds of the interpreters. Philo\u2019s mirror simile suggests that their biblical allegorizing brought the Therapeutae to a deep understanding of their own \u201ctrue\u201d nature.
\n80. hymns beautifully designed \u2026 for processions, libations, and at the altars, or for a chorus while standing or dancing The concluding feature of the feast is a group dance modeled on the dancing of the Israelites at the Red Sea (88\u201389; see Exod. 15:20). Evidently the hymns composed by the Therapeutae or by the \u201cpoets of old\u201d mentioned here were understood to include pieces appropriate for choral singing and dancing. The description here of various styles of hymns seems based on Greek musical models, but Philo may have in mind mainly the psalms in the Bible (25), though he has already mentioned that the Therapeutae themselves compose songs to God \u201cin all sorts of meters and melodies\u201d (29). The implication is that the hymns are diverse and manifest musical sophistication akin to that of complex music in the Greek tradition.
\n81. when everyone has completed his or her hymn After the president has sung, each of the men and women in the community individually sings a hymn, and the hymn may evidently be one she or he has personally written or it may be a traditional one.
\n82. it was fitting that the simplest and purest food should be reserved for the highest class, that of the priests The Therapeutae aspire to serve God like true priests, but they humbly recognize their inferiority to the priests serving in the Jerusalem Temple. They signal this humility by making their meals unlike those of the Jerusalem priests, who according to the Law of Moses ate unleavened bread with salt but without other condiments like hyssop.
\n83. the most honored and musical person is chosen as director and leader of each Philo\u2019s phrasing implies that a woman leads the women\u2019s choir. For the Rabbinic attitude toward women\u2019s singing in the presence of men, see B. Ber. 24A, noted above (section 33).
\n84. then they sing hymns to God Singing of religious songs obviously has high importance in the community. Earlier in the evening each member of the group sang a solo (80\u201381). Now the members sing and dance in two gender-defined groups, sometimes together, sometimes responsively.
\nfilled with enthusiasm Philo uses this term (epitheiazo) 14 times in other treatises, always giving it a positive meaning, often with the sense of humans speaking by divine inspiration. Elsewhere Philo implies that the Therapeutae experience spiritual elevation in solitude as well as in corporate worship (12, 26, 34\u201335).
\n85. as in the Bacchic revels having drunk of the strong wine of those who are beloved by God The Therapeutae drink only water (37, 74). They are intoxicated with an awareness of God\u2019s love and friendship corresponding to their own love for God (12, 90; cf. Moses 2.67). Like pagan worshipers in the Dionysiac tradition, they exhibit enthusiasm or inspiration, but Philo does not suggest that they lose consciousness, rationality, or reverence. The great model for their exaltation is the ecstatic singing and dancing of Israelites at the Red Sea (87). Elsewhere Philo frequently makes positive metaphorical use of language related to pagan mystery cults (e.g., 12), but he denounces those mysteries at a literal level (Spec. Laws 1.319\u201323; cf. Ag. Ap. 2.188\u201389).
\na copy of that one which of old was set up by the Red Sea Philo in part is justifying the merging of the men\u2019s and women\u2019s choirs at the Therapeutae banquet on the precedent of Exod. 15. Yet his detailed account of the Red Sea event in 86\u201387 suggests that the Therapeutae are ritually reenacting that celebration of God\u2019s decisive miracle of deliverance. Philo describes this act of deliverance (in which he explicitly mentions two choirs) in Moses 1.168\u201380 2.246\u201347. The departure of Israel from Egypt also holds great symbolic significance in Philo\u2019s thought as the departure, or crossing, of the soul from concern with the body, senses, and passion, and Philo understands Passover as a commemoration of the crossing (rather than of the LORD\u2019s sparing of the Israelites when He smote the firstborn of the Egyptians, as in Exod. 12:27; see, e.g., Spec. Laws 2.145\u201349). Given their emphasis on matters of the spirit and on allegorical interpretation, one wonders whether the event at the Red Sea held similar symbolic meaning for the Therapeutae.
\n87. both men and women were inspired by God, and, having become a single chorus The text of Exod. 15 (both MT and LXX) does not explicitly say that the Israelite men and women joined into a single choir. It describes Moses and the \u201csons (or children) of Israel\u201d singing in praise of God\u2019s deliverance (15:1\u201319) and then reports Miriam leading Israelite women in a similar song (15:20\u201321). In Moses 1.180 and 2.256\u201357 Philo speaks of Moses forming two choirs, one of men, one of women. See also Wis. 10:20\u201321, based on the same scriptural passage.
\n89. when they see the sunrise The Therapeutae have a special appreciation of daylight (34), but they do not worship the sun (5, 27). They pray with faces and bodies turned toward the east.
\ntheir individual sanctuaries The Therapeutae spend most of their time alone in their individual residences (30).
\n90. the contemplation of nature The Therapeutae investigate nature or true reality by means of intensive study of the Mosaic writings (64). It should be noted that Philo often uses \u201cnature\u201d as a designation for God.
\nthey live in the soul alone As far as possible the Therapeutae seek to disregard bodily concerns and concentrate on spiritual ones (cf. 34\u201337, 78).
\nas citizens of both heaven and earth In their pursuit of wisdom and virtue, the Therapeutae have cut themselves off from cities and human politics (19\u201320).
\nthe Father and Maker of the Universe The formulation here is reminiscent of the way that Plato describes his creator god in Timaeus 28C.
\nmaking them friends of God \u2026 which brings them to the very summit of happiness The closing sentence of the treatise is long, and the relationship of some of the terms is not made clear by the syntax. Philo seems to mean that the Therapeutae enjoy fellowship with God and their own high virtue and that the combination gives them the reward of supreme felicity. \u201cFelicity\u201d (or wellbeing) translates the Greek word eudaimonia. It is a key term in Greek philosophy and denotes the final goal of existence to which all human action should ultimately be directed.<\/p>\n
Hypothetica<\/p>\n
Gregory E. Sterling<\/p>\n
In his Preparation for the Gospel, Eusebius (ca. 260\u2013ca. 339 CE Bishop of Caesarea from ca. 313\u2013339) preserved two related fragments that he attributed to Philo. He ascribed one fragment to the first scroll of a work entitled Hypothetica that \u201cargued on behalf of the Jews against their accusers\u201d (Hypoth. 8.5.11\u20137.20). The fragment offers explanations for the Exodus, Moses\u2019s qualities as a leader in the wilderness, and the settlement in the land (8.6.1\u20139), and includes a summary of the law code (8.7.1\u201320).
\nThe treatments of the Exodus, the wilderness, and the settlement in the Land of Israel play freely with biblical traditions in an effort to exonerate the Jews and Moses of scurrilous charges by arguing on the basis of logical probabilities rather than historical evidence. In contrast to the widespread story that the Jews were Egyptian lepers who were thrown into the wilderness, Philo argues that they were originally from Chaldea and left Egypt as a result of a flourishing population, a revelation from God, and the people\u2019s desire to return to their ancestral home. He notes that although some have \u201crailed at [Moses] as a trickster and rogue\u201d (8.6.2) his success in overcoming the hardships of the wilderness must be due either to his brilliance or to the submissive nature of the people. In response to the charge that the Jews had forcefully taken the land and violated temples, he positions the reader to accept an either\/or explanation: Either they took the land as a result of the force of their numbers\u2014an explanation that non-Jewish accounts had attempted to undermine by downplaying their numbers\u2014or received it peacefully from the inhabitants, who welcomed them.
\nThe most important characteristic of the people who settled in the land was their loyalty to the law. The mention of this quality leads to a fivefold summary of the law. The summary concludes with a defense of the Sabbath, when the Jews learn their laws thoroughly (8.7.10\u201314), and of the seventh year, when they allow the land to lie fallow to regenerate itself (8.7.15\u201320). Both explanations counter the charge that the Jews were lazy.
\nLater the bishop quotes a fragment \u201cfrom [Philo\u2019s] apology on behalf of the Jews\u201d that provides a brief summary of the Essenes, whom even kings admire (8.10.19\u201311.18). The Essenes join their association voluntarily (8.11.2\u20133). The association requires a common life (8.11.4\u20135). While each member has an occupation (8.11.6\u20139), he contributes his wages into a common treasury (8.11.10). The common life extends to meals, clothes, and health care (8.11.11\u201313). They reject marriage, which could undermine their commitment to a common way of life (8.11.14\u201317).
\nThe two excerpts are probably from the same work. Eusebius most likely dropped the opaque title Hypothetica when he introduced the second fragment and repeated his characterization of the work as an apology. He hints at this when he divides the Jewish people into two groups in his preface to the second fragment: the multitude follow the literal meaning of the law\u2014probably a reference back to the earlier summary (frag. 1), whereas the philosophical group of Essenes (frag. 2) advances to higher forms of contemplation (8.10.18\u201319). The introduction thus serves as a bridge from the contents of fragment 1 to fragment 2.
\nThe relationship is not, however, straightforward. When Eusebius catalogued Philo\u2019s works in his Ecclesiastical History, he did not mention Hypothetica, but included a one-volume work entitled Concerning the Jews (Hist. eccl. 2.18.6). This title is a common heading for works that deal with the Jewish people and was probably given by someone other than the author. While it is possible that Concerning the Jews refers to Hypothetica, the fact that it is listed among the single-scroll works of Philo while the Preparation for the Gospel suggests that Hypothetica had several scrolls makes the identification problematic.<\/p>\n
Authorship and History<\/p>\n
This is not the only difficulty with the work. The effort to provide rational options for explaining the Exodus, Moses\u2019s leadership in the wilderness, and the settlement in the land is unusual in ancient Jewish literature. It is so unusual among the writings of Philo that a number of modern scholars have questioned whether Eusebius was correct when he attributed the fragments to Philo. The editors of the major critical edition of the Greek texts of Philo omitted the work, although they later included it in their minor edition of his works. Such skepticism does not account for the Philonic character of the treatments of the Sabbath and Essenes and fails to understand the unique setting of the work.
\nThe title Hypothetica does not help clarify the setting at first glance. It has been understood as \u201cSuppositions,\u201d based on the hypothetical approach of the opening of fragment 1; \u201cCounsels\u201d or \u201cAdmonitions,\u201d based on the use of hypoth\u0113k\u0113 elsewhere in Philo; \u201cImputations,\u201d in the sense of imputing false opinions about Jews; or as \u201cHypothetical Propositions,\u201d based on the use of the term in Stoic logic. While we cannot be certain, the last possibility helps to provide a reasonable explanation for the setting of the work.
\nThe Jewish community of Alexandria was large. It may have constituted nearly a third of the total population of the second largest city in the Roman Empire (ca. 400,000 to 600,000). Tensions between the Jewish community and the Greek citizens of the city as well as the native Egyptians were palpable. When Agrippa I visited Alexandria on his way to claim the kingdom that the emperor Gaius (Caligula) gave him, a group of Alexandrians mocked him. In an effort to win the support of local political forces, the Roman governor, Flaccus, stood by and allowed a pogrom to develop. Flaccus had, however, misread the political landscape. He was summoned to Rome\u2014accused in part by none other than Isodorus and Lampo, the same political leaders who had pledged their support if he would ignore the pogrom\u2014and exiled. The new prefect, C. Vitrasius Pollio, moved the issue from the streets into the courtroom. Two embassies set out for Rome: an Alexandrian delegation headed by Isodorus and Apion and a Jewish delegation headed by Philo. After two hearings, it was apparent that the emperor favored the Alexandrians.
\nFollowing the assassination of Gaius on 24 January 41 CE, hostilities broke out again. Claudius quickly suppressed them, heard both delegations, and issued a decree that attempted to reestablish the policies of Julius Caesar and Augustus (Ant. 19.279). However, neither group of antagonists was ready to give up: both the Alexandrians and Jews sent second delegations (CPJ 153, 87\u201392). Claudius settled the matter with a famous letter that gave the Jewish community in Alexandria the right to practice their ancestral religion but closed the door for them to have Alexandrian citizenship (CPJ 153).
\nIt is likely that Philo wrote Hypothetica in preparation for his role in the embassy. One of his opponents was Chaeremon, an Egyptian priest who embraced Stoic thought. Philo\u2019s use of Stoic logic in offering options to explain Moses\u2019s leadership and the settlement in the land (see the comment on the basis of a certain line of reasoning about them in 8.6.5) probably reflects his effort to defuse the criticisms of Chaeremon or other opponents. His defense of the law, the Sabbath, and the seventh year was similarly intended to deflect criticisms and to demonstrate the superiority of the Jewish way of life. The Essenes represented a paradigm of Jewish virtue and were presented to show that Jews had their \u201cathletes of virtue\u201d just as other peoples did. Hypothetica is thus an important example of Jewish apologetic literature.<\/p>\n
Significance<\/p>\n
Although the scope of the text is restricted to two fragments, they are important for a number of reasons. Philo\u2019s use of Stoic logic in the opening section dealing with historical issues is striking. He said that he was not going to deal with these issues \u201con the basis of history\u201d but \u201con the basis of a certain line of reasoning\u201d (Hypoth. 8.6.5). Philo is not offering alternative historical reconstructions as much as he is attempting to present the logical options for explaining what took place. His beginning point is not the biblical text, but the version of his opponents that he wants to discredit. His explanations are an attempt to put Jewish accusers on the horns of a dilemma: they could accept one or another explanation, but whichever they selected rebounded to the favor of the Jewish people. It is an interesting example of how a devout Jew could play with the text in an effort to defend his people.
\nThe epitome of the law occurs in five sections, each marked off by an editorial refrain that refers to \u201cother laws.\u201d The fivefold structure reflects the practice of imitating the structure of the Torah found in a number of other texts: the book of Psalms, the five megillot, 1 Enoch, the five discourses in Matthew, and Pirke Avot. While the structure could have been imposed by Eusebius, the clear use of five refrains probably reflects the structure of the original text. The fascinating aspect of this fivefold summary is that Philo intermingled Hellenistic ethical aphorisms with biblical laws (e.g., see the third group of laws in 8.7.6\u20138a). The combination of Jewish laws and Hellenistic aphorisms moves the Mosaic Law code into the larger world of ethics.
\nThe contents of the epitome are similar to the summaries in Pseudo-Phocylides and Josephus\u2019s Against Apion (2.145\u2013219, esp. 190\u2013219). The summary of the law in Hypothetica has 21 laws in common with the summary in Josephus and 15 in common with the summary in Pseudo-Phocylides. The three have 12 laws in common or approximately one-third of the total number of laws in Hypothetica. The most striking feature of the similarities is that two of the three authors often cluster the same laws together. There are nine such clusters, dealing with sexual offenses, violations of others, a household code, mistreatment of others, care for others, burial customs, human reproduction, economic honesty, and the treatment of animals. While there have been different explanations for the relationships among these treatments, it is likely that they drew from a common tradition, perhaps from common thematic treatments in Jewish ethical instruction. It is likely that collections of related laws became the basis for ethical instruction.
\nThe fivefold summary of the law based on traditional ethical instruction in synagogues rather than directly on the biblical text was intended to answer the charge that the Jews were isolated misanthropes. Tacitus captured the view of many in a characteristically frank statement: \u201cthey [the Jews] consider everything profane that we hold sacred, and inversely, they permit what we consider defiled\u201d (Hist. 5.4.1). While Philo could criticize Greek laws and practices at times, he argued that the Jewish law code inculcated the noblest virtues in the Greco-Roman world.
\nThe treatment of the Essenes is similar but not identical to Philo\u2019s treatment of them in other treatises. It is an example of holding out a group of people as exemplars of the highest moral values. In this case, it may be that Philo saw the Essenes as \u201cathletes of virtue\u201d to counter Chaeremon\u2019s presentation of Egyptian priests in his work. His portrait is similar enough to some of the writings found in the caves in and around Qumran that one wonders if he is describing the community that lived on the northwest side of the Dead Sea. There are two issues here. First, should we connect the ruins and the caves with the scrolls, or are they separate? While the relationship has been debated, the proximity of the caves to the ruins, especially Cave 4, and the jars at both the ruins of Khirbet Qumran and the caves makes this connection probable. Second, are the covenanters at Qumran the Essenes of Philo, Josephus, and Pliny? The number of similarities between Philo\u2019s description and the statements in the scrolls argues for the identification (see comments on 8.11.1\u201317). While there are also differences and other hypotheses have been offered, the consensus is that the covenanters who lived at Qumran were Essenes.<\/p>\n
GUIDE TO READING<\/p>\n
The apologetic nature of this text as a response to criticisms from outsiders presumes that the reader has some knowledge of the criticisms. Philo mentions the criticisms explicitly in some sections (8.6.2; 8.7.14), while in others we must infer it. The most virulent criticisms against the Jews in the ancient period came from Egyptian authors. It is worth reading the fragments that we have of their writings to understand the rationale for the presentation. The most important authors who lived in Egypt include Manetho, Lysimachus, Apion, and Chaeremon. Apollonius Molon of Rhodes is also an important witness. A number of Roman authors commented disparagingly on the Jews, including Tacitus and Juvenal. The comments of all of these authors are conveniently collected in Menahem Stern\u2019s Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (GLAJJ; see below). The other source is Josephus\u2019s masterful apology Against Apion. The value that the work offers is that it is complete. While Josephus had a slightly different agenda as a historian, he deals with the same issues as Philo did. The work can be read as an analogous writing.<\/p>\n
SUGGESTED READING<\/p>\n
Barclay, John M. G. Against Apion, edited by Steve Mason. Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary 10. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
\nBerthelot, Katell. Philanthr\u00f4pia judaica: Le d\u00e9bat autour de la \u201cmisanthropie\u201d des lois juives dans l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9 (esp. 301\u201314). Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 76. Leiden: Brill, 2002.
\nCarras, George. \u201cDependence or Common Tradition in Philo Hypoth. VIII 6.10\u20137.20 and Josephus Contra Apionem 2.190\u2013219.\u201d The Studia Philonica Annual 5 (1993): 24\u201347.
\nMendels, Doron. \u201cHellenistic Utopias and the Essenes.\u201d Harvard Theological Review 72 (1979): 207\u201322.
\nRunia, David T., and Sterling, Gregory E., ed. \u201cSpecial Section: The Hypoth.\u201d SPhA 22 (2010): 139\u2013207. Articles by Gregory E. Sterling, \u201cIntroduction,\u201d 139\u201342; Dulcinea Bosenberg, \u201cPhilo\u2019s Description of Jewish Sabbath Practice,\u201d 143\u201363; Horacio Vela, \u201cPhilo and the Logic of History,\u201d 165\u201382; and Michael Cover, \u201cReconceptualizing Conquest: Colonial Narratives and Philo\u2019s Roman Accuser in the Hypoth.,\u201d 183\u2013207.
\nSterling, Gregory E. \u201cPhilo and the Logic of Apologetics: An Analysis of the Hypoth.\u201d In Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 29, edited by David J. Lull, 412\u201330. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.
\n\u2014\u2014\u2014. \u201c \u2018Athletes of Virtue\u2019: An Analysis of the Summaries in Acts (2:41\u201347; 4:32\u201335; 5:12\u201316).\u201d Journal of Biblical Literature 113, no. 4 (1994): 679\u201396.
\n\u2014\u2014\u2014. \u201cUniversalizing the Particular: Natural Law in Second Temple Jewish Ethics.\u201d The Studia Philonica Annual 15 (2003): 64\u201380.
\nStern, Menahem. Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. 3 vols. Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974\u20131984.
\nTaylor, Joan E. Jewish Women Philosophers of First-Century Alexandria: Philo\u2019s \u2018Therapeutae\u2019 Reconsidered (esp. 21\u201373, 105\u201325, 154\u201370). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
8.6.1 The first historical issue that Philo deals with is the origin of the Jewish people. There were a number of theories about Jewish origins; Tacitus listed six. Philo is probably responding to the widespread view that the Jews were originally a group of Egyptian lepers who had been expelled. The view is attested in Manetho, Diodorus Siculus, Pompeius Trogus, Lysimachus, Apion, >Chaeremon, and Tacitus. Josephus captured the thrust of the accusations and his own rejoinder to this scurrilous report when he wrote: \u201cThey claim that our ancestors were Egyptians; however, they were shown to have come to Egypt from elsewhere.\u201d He continued: \u201cThey falsely assert that they were expelled because of their ravaged bodies; however, they were shown to have returned to their own land by their free choice and by their exceptional strength\u201d (Ag. Ap. 2.289). Philo refuted the charge by insisting that the Jews were Chaldeans and had their own reasons for leaving Egypt.
\nTheir ancient ancestor was from Chaldea The subsequent statement, \u201ctheir ancestor had come into Egypt,\u201d identifies the ancestor as Jacob, the father of the 12 sons from whom the later tribes of Israel took their names according to the biblical tradition. The point is that the Jews ultimately came from Chaldea, not Egypt.
\nThe reasons for their emigration were as follows Philo lists three reasons for the emigration from Egypt: the swelling population (based on Exod. 1:7, 9\u201310, 12, 20), a message from God (e.g., Exod. 3:1\u20134:23; 6:1\u201313), and their desire to return to their homeland (Exod. 2:23\u201325). Jewish opponents commented on their numbers: Chaeremon mentioned 200,000 while Lysimachus thought 110,000 was more accurate. Philo\u2019s emphasis on the large number plays with the tradition that Egypt was so populous that it sent out colonies to other lands.
\n8.6.2\u20134 The next issue was the journey from Egypt to the homeland. The trek became the occasion for a number of accusations against the Jews, especially Moses. Several pointed out that the lepers were expelled into the wilderness. The force of the account to which Philo is responding is that Moses proved to be inept as a leader of the people in the wilderness. In the passage from Josephus that we quoted above, the historian captured the essence of the argument: \u201cThey reviled our legislator as completely worthless; however, long ago God was found to be a witness to his virtue and, after God, time\u201d (Ag. Ap. 2.290). Philo\u2019s argument moves from two features of the story that raise doubts about such accusations (Hypoth. 8.6.2\u20133) to possible explanations of Moses\u2019s success as a leader (8.6.4).
\n8.6.2. so some have even railed at him as a trickster and rogue with words According to Josephus, Apollonius Molon and Lysimachus \u201cslandered him as a trickster and deceiver\u201d (Ag. Ap. 2.145). Others claimed that Moses was a magician (e.g., Pliny, Nat. 30.11).
\nhe not only preserved the entire people without water, in famine conditions This is part of the biblical tradition. The biblical narrative relates several stories about water and food. Tacitus knew this aspect of the tradition (Hist. 5.3.2). The point of Philo\u2019s argument is that Moses was able to overcome enormous obstacles in the wilderness.
\nbut also kept them free from internal dissensions and completely obedient to himself Philo assumed that his opponents did not know the biblical tradition; if they had, they would have known that the complaining of the children of Israel against Moses was a motif in the wilderness experience, including significant revolts against him (e.g., Korah in Num. 16:1\u201348).
\n8.6.3. These conditions were not for a brief period of time This is an allusion to the tradition that the trek took six days. Several who offered such an explanation suggested that the seventh day was different and that this experience was the basis for the Jewish Sabbath. Philo\u2019s argument is that Moses demonstrated his leadership over a sustained period of time.
\n8.6.4. What do you make of this? The conclusions that follow this question place the hearer in an either-or position, with both alternatives pointing to Moses\u2019s exceptional skills.
\n8.6.5\u20139 The third historical issue that was part of the debate was the settlement in the land. Lysimachus had accused the Jews of a violent entry. Philo deflects this criticism by playing with logical possibilities: either they were more numerous than others would concede and took the land by force or they were few in number but won the favor of the inhabitants. He does not come down clearly on one side or the other, but pushes the latter. The point is not that Philo has forgotten the book of Joshua, but that he wants to overturn a story like that of Lysimachus.
\n8.6.5. on the basis of a certain line of reasoning about them Philo acknowledges that he is playing with the biblical tradition to explore logical possibilities. We should not therefore wonder whether Philo believed the possibilities that he threw out. He is making a logical argument to deflect the criticisms leveled against the Jews. As suggested in the introduction, it is possible that the \u201ccertain line of reasoning\u201d refers to Stoic logic, especially hypothetical syllogisms. This would explain the title Hypoth. and help us understand his use of either- or explanations. Here his reasoning appears to run: either (a) they took it by force, or (b) they were given it by the inhabitants; (b) they were given it by the inhabitants; therefore not (a) they took it by force. This is a form of the fifth undemonstrated argument developed by Chrysippus, the second founder of the Stoa: Either 1 or 2; but not 1; therefore 2. Philo provided a very brief summary of Stoic logic in Agriculture 140\u201341. He had certainly read the handbooks and would have known the basics of their reasoning.
\n8.6.6. with weapons in hand The question of how the Israelites were armed was part of the Jewish exegetic tradition (see, e.g., Demetrius in Eusebius, Praep. ev. 9.29.16).
\nimmediately and without a long delay This ignores the biblical tradition that Solomon built the Temple after Israel had been in the land for an extended period of time. Philo contravenes the biblical text in order to argue that the Jewish cult had a uniform history. The account is similar to that of Hecataeus of Abdera, who said that Moses founded Jerusalem and the Temple.
\n8.6.9. more than two thousand Josephus also used the figure of 2,000 years. This is the only place where Philo gives the figure. The claim participates in the ancient debate over the relative antiquity of a people. The aphorism that \u201colder is better\u201d captures the key argument in the debate. A number of critics of the Jewish people dated the Exodus in connection with an Egyptian pharaoh: One version in Manetho put it at the time of Ahmose I (1570\u20131546 BCE) or the expulsion of the Hyksos and beginning of the New Kingdom; another version in Manetho and Chaeremon put it at the time of Amenophis IV (1353\u20131336 BCE) and Rameses II (1279\u20131213 BCE); Lysimachus, at the time of Bocchoris (720\u2013715 BCE); Ptolemy of Mendes, at the time of Amosis, whom later writers synchronized with Inachus, the first king of Argos; and Ptolemo of Ilium, at the time of Apis, the grandson of Inachus. Apion situated it in Greek history by locating it in the seventh Olympiad (752 BCE).
\nThey would sooner endure the experience of death ten thousand times Jewish fidelity to the law was a motif: Hecataeus of Abdera mentioned it and Josephus underscored it.
\n8.7.1\u20132 The first unit in the fivefold summary of the law consists of two conditional sentences. The first \u201cif\u201d (protasis) clause contains five conditions that deal with sexual sins. The second \u201cif\u201d (protasis) has seven \u201cifs\u201d but only five verbs (in Greek), which deal with a range of issues. The \u201cthen\u201d clause (apodosis) in both cases specifies the penalty as death. The insistence on the capital penalty is striking since some of the sins mentioned in the protases were not capital crimes in the biblical tradition (e.g., theft). The insistence is part of the larger tradition: Josephus made the same point (Ag. Ap. 2.215\u201317). This backs the question up one step. Why such severity in the tradition? The best explanation is that the tradition, and Philo in following it, wanted to underscore the fact that violations of these laws were not violations of a civil code but of a divine code. The point may be more rhetorical than real since it is not entirely clear that the Alexandrian Jewish community could have inflicted the death penalty.
\n8.7.1. Is there anything like these or anything similar to these among the former The statement implies that Philo has already treated examples of negotiations and mitigation of penalties in Greek law. This must refer to a now lost section of the treatise.
\nIf you commit pederasty \u2026 commit adultery \u2026 violate a youth The first three conditions draw directly from the biblical text: Lev. 20:13 (homosexuality), 10 (adultery); Deut. 22:23\u201327 (rape of an engaged woman). Philo uses a specific verb, \u201ccommit pederasty,\u201d for the general practice of homosexual relationships, as he does elsewhere (Spec. Laws 2.50; 3.37\u201342).
\nif you prostitute yourself, if you permit \u2026 something shameful for your age These do not appear to have specific biblical antecedents. It is possible that the prohibition against self-prostitution echoed the proscription of sacred prostitution (Deut 23:17\u201318); however, there is nothing in the Hypoth. that suggests a cultic context for the prostitution. Presumably, self-prostitution was for economic reasons. Philo thought that prostitution earned the death penalty (Spec. Laws 3.51). The final clause is a generalizing clause that is intended to catch what the previous four did not.
\n8.7.2. If you abuse the person of a slave The first four laws in the second conditional sentence deal with abusive treatment of human beings: slaves and free persons. The biblical text set a slave free who was injured (Exod. 21:26\u201327). It recognized temporary slavery or indentured service for a Hebrew (Exod. 21:1\u201311; Lev. 25:39\u201346; Deut. 15:12\u201318). The death penalty here is far more stringent.
\nif you steal something ordinary, if you steal something sacred The next two laws deal with theft: ordinary (a biblical prohibition; Exod. 20:13 (v. 15 NRSV)) and sacred. The latter may deflect the criticism that Jews despoiled temples. This reappears in Hypoth. 8.7.4 below.
\nif you commit an act of impiety The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of parents on pain of death (Exod. 21:17; Lev. 20:9).
\n8.7.3\u20135 The laws in the second group are presented differently: they consist of three infinitives with the force of imperatives force: \u201cwives should serve \u2026 parents should rule \u2026 each individual should have control.\u201d Each of the commands or statements is expanded with explanatory clauses that qualify the statement. The commands are organized in a household code, a code whose form goes back to Aristotle. The Stagirite argued that a citizen first had to rule his house and defined this in three relationships: his relationship to his slaves, his wife, and his children (see also comment on Hypoth. 8.7.14). He added that there was a similar or subordinate field: the management of wealth (Pol. 1.1253b.1\u201314). Aristotle\u2019s analysis became the basis for a significant body of literature on household management in the Hellenistic world, which Jews and Christians adopted. The household code here was part of the common ethical instruction that Philo (here and Decalogue 165\u201367), Josephus (Ag. Ap. 2.189\u2013209), and Pseudo-Phocylides (175\u2013225) shared. Philo deals with two of the three relationships and property. He uses the household code to demonstrate that Judaism offers the same basic values as those held in the larger Greco-Roman world.
\n8.7.3. Wives should serve their husbands Josephus has a very similar statement (Ag. Ap. 2.201). Such declarations reflect the patriarchal perspective that dominated so much of the ancient world. Philo was no exception: he had an ontological hierarchy that subordinated women to men.
\nParents should rule their children for their well-being and care Cf. the statement in Pseudo-Pho-cylides 207\u2013209. Both Josephus (Ag. Ap. 2.206, 217) and Pseudo-Phocylides (8) emphasize that children should honor their parents.
\nEach individual should have control over their own possessions unless he has invoked the name of God over them or given them to God Philo opens his discussion of property by stressing the inviolability of oaths and vows. In doing this, he is following the biblical legislation (Num. 30). He appears to have in mind a practice associated with the Aramaic word qorban. An ossuary outside of Jerusalem contains the following inscription: \u201cEverything that a person finds to his profit in this ossuary is qorban to him from the one who is within.\u201d The word denoted what was dedicated to God and hence off-limits to others, including the one who dedicated it. According to Mark, Jesus clashed with the Pharisees over this issue: the Pharisees said that once something had been dedicated to God, it precluded any further use; Jesus challenged this (Mark 7:1\u201323, esp. 11). The later Rabbis discussed vows and oaths at great length. An oath refers to constraints on a person (I prohibit myself from something) while a vow refers to constraints on an object (I am prohibited from something). One of the standard formulas for the latter is korban which places a ban on the use of the object. The tractate Nedarim in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and the Babylonian and Palestinian Talmuds is devoted to vows. Philo opens his discussion by stressing the inviolability of something that has been dedicated, but then indicates that there are two ways in which the dedication can be relaxed: a priest can do so or those in positions of higher authority, presumably Jewish courts in Alexandria. While the grounds for his reasoning are not the same as those of Jesus in the gospels, he is closer to Jesus than to the Pharisees. Philo\u2019s willingness to accept these relaxations puts this statement in tension with his opening statement that the Jewish law does not contain equivocations.
\n8.7.6\u20138a The third group of laws consists of 14 negative infinitives, generally accompanied with qualifiers. Philo introduces this group with a threefold heading that includes unwritten customs, practices, and laws. The first two reflect the traditions of a people; the last, their written laws. Philo understood the Pentateuch to contain both: the lives of the ancestors embodied the unwritten laws, and the Mosaic legislation was the written code. The thrust of these laws is captured at the end of the section when Philo asks, \u201cWhere in the name of God are those rules of your Buzyges?\u201d The reference is to an Athenian hero who required the kind treatment of all. Juvenal captured the sentiment that the code seeks to overturn when he complained about sons who learn the ways of Judaism from fathers: \u201cAccustomed to disdain Roman laws, they learn, observe, and revere the Jewish code, whatever Moses handed down in his arcane scroll: to point out the way only to those who practice the same rite and to lead only the circumcised to the desired fountain\u201d (Sat. 14.100\u2013104). This section of the code insists that the Jewish law code is humane. It does so by incorporating Hellenistic practices among biblical laws.
\n8.7.6. What someone hates to experience, he should not do This is the negative formulation of the Golden Rule. It may be based on Lev. 19:18 (NJPS). The negative form is attested in other Second Temple Jewish authors as well as the Rabbis. The positive formulation is attributed to Jesus preserved by Matthew and Luke (Matt. 7:12\/\/Luke 6:31).
\nWhat he has not deposited, he should not take While the biblical text warns against defrauding a deposit and the principle of \u201cfinders keepers, losers weepers\u201d (Lev. 5:20\u201322 [6:2\u20133 NRSV] LXX; Deut. 22:1\u20133), this formulation is Greek. Other Second Temple and early Christian authors knew the proverb.
\nHe should not refuse someone in need of fire This opens a series of statements that parallel the laws of Buzyges, whom Philo mentions at the end of the section. Josephus has a close parallel: \u201cWe must supply to all who are in need fire, water, food, to point out the way, not to overlook an unburied corpse, but to be kind even to those who are judged to be enemies\u201d (Ag. Ap. 2.211). Buzyges was the first to yoke oxen to a plow. He was also known as a lawgiver who required people to supply water, fire, food, show the way, and bury the dead. The Buzygian priests are said to have uttered Buzygian curses against those who transgressed these laws.
\n8.7.7. People must not cut off the reproductive power of males Second Temple Jews did not practice castration. The Rabbis also found it problematic.
\nnor cause women to miscarry Second Temple Jewish positions on abortion go back to the Septuagint (LXX) translation of Exod. 21:22\u201325. The case law imposes penalties on an individual who strikes a pregnant woman while fighting. The issue under consideration in the Masoretic Text was the injury done to the woman. The LXX changed the focus from the woman to the fetus: \u201cIf two men are fighting and strike a pregnant woman, if her child comes out and is unformed, a fine will be imposed; however, if it is formed, he will pay life for life\u201d (my translation). Philo followed the LXX in his understanding (Spec. Laws 3.108\u20139). The opposition to abortion was part of the common ethical tradition. Some Greek moralists also opposed the practice, especially Stoics.
\nHe must not treat animals in a way that is contrary to what either God or a legislator has established Philo argues that the treatment of animals should inform us of how we treat humans (see also Virtues 131\u201333). Josephus took a similar position (Ag. Ap. 2.213). This included a prohibition against castration (Lev. 22:24; Ag. Ap. 2.271).
\n8.7.8. He must not substitute fraudulent scales, nor an improper dry measure See Lev. 19:35\u201336. Pseudo-Phocylides has a similar statement (15). Philo treated these elsewhere (Spec. Laws 4.193\u201394). Here, Philo adds a reference to coinage to reflect Hellenistic and Roman economies.
\nHe must not reveal the secrets of friends in hostility This was part of the ethical tradition (so also Ag. Ap. 2.207). The tradition incorporated it from the friendship tradition (Demon. 22, 24; Mor. 53f\u201354b).
\n8.7.8b The fourth group contains only two laws, which deal with family relationships. It is curious that these were not placed in the household code in the second group. The brevity of this section suggests that Eusebius may have elided some of it or that Philo created the fivefold structure artificially rather than thematically.
\nA wife should not live apart from her husband This is different from the biblical legislation that allowed for the separation of wife and husband, especially when they were slaves or servants (Exod. 21:2\u20136; Lev. 25:39\u201346).
\n8.7.9 The fifth group consists of two negative infinitives and a third generalizing negative. The laws deal with animals. Josephus provided the rationale for these laws in his introduction to them: \u201cHe instructed us about gentleness and humanity to the extent that he did not overlook irrational animals but stipulated only their lawful use and forbade every other use\u201d (Ag. Ap. 2.213). The argument is a minore ad majus (\u201cfrom the lesser to the greater\u201d): if we treat animals humanely, we will certainly treat humans humanely. The same argument was made by a number of philosophers (e.g., Plutarch, Mor. 996a; Porphyry, Abst. 3.26.5). Philo is deflecting the charge of misanthropy that was commonly leveled against Jews by their detractors. The charge began as early as Hecataeus of Abdera, whose otherwise quite positive account contains the statement that \u201con account of their own expulsion, he [Moses] introduced an anti-humane and misanthropic way of life\u201d (in Diodorus Siculus, Library 40.3.4). Many repeated the charge: Apollonius Molon (Ag. Ap. 2.148), Apion (in Josephus, Ag. Ap. 2.121), and Tacitus (Hist. 5.5.1\u20132).
\na person should not empty a nest that is under the roof of their house This rests upon Deut. 22:6\u20137 and is part of the common ethical tradition.
\nHe should not reject the petition of animals Josephus has a similar statement (Ag. Ap. 2.213).
\n8.7.10\u201314 One of the most sensitive and well-known aspects of Jewish life in the Roman world was the observance of the Sabbath. A large number of pagan authors commented on it, frequently with derision: they regularly pointed to it as a sign of laziness. Philo states this in the final section below. Seneca (De superstitione in Augustine, Civ. 6.11), Tacitus (Hist. 5.4.3), and Juvenal (Sat. 14.105\u2013106) all make this charge. Philo\u2019s answer is that the Jews are not idle, but use the Sabbath to learn their laws.
\n8.7.11. a great achievement and something amazing This refers to the Jews\u2019 knowledge of the law.
\nthey should \u2026 be competent to accomplish them and similarly not to accomplish them That is, they should be trained in the active and in the contemplative life. Elsewhere Philo argues that six is tied to the body and seven to the soul: the soul rests while the body works on six days, and the body rests while the soul works on the seventh day (Decalogue 100\u2013101; Spec. Laws 2.64).
\nthey should also know their ancestral laws and customs Philo repeatedly emphasizes in his writings that this was the purpose of the Sabbath. Josephus made the same point.
\n8.7.13. One of the priests \u2026 reads the sacred laws to them and explains them in detail The reading and explanation of the laws is a consistent element in Philo\u2019s descriptions of the Sabbath. It is possible that Philo taught in the Alexandrian \u201chouses of prayer,\u201d although he also probably had a private school in which he offered instruction.
\n8.7.14. Do you think that these things belong to the idle This is Philo\u2019s direct reference to the charge that Sabbath observance was a result of indolence. Philo responded to the charge on more than one occasion (Spec. Laws 2.60).
\na husband seems to be capable of handing on the laws to his wife, a father to his children, and a master to his slaves These are the three relationships that were part of the discussion of household management from the time of Aristotle (Pol. 1.1253b.1\u201314; see comment on Hypoth. 8.7.3\u20135). Instruction in the law is thus presented on two levels: a priest or elder instructed the males in the assemblies, and the males instructed the wives, children, and slaves at home.
\n8.7.15\u201320 The treatment of the Sabbath naturally led to the seventh year, in which\u2014according to the biblical legislation\u2014the fields were permitted to lie fallow and debts were remitted. This appears to have been practiced in Persian (Neh. 10:32 [v. 31 NRSV]), Hellenistic (1 Macc. 6:49\u201353), and Roman times (Ant. 14.202). Pagan authors attributed the same motive for the Sabbath year as they did the Sabbath: the Jews were lazy. Philo dealt with the seventh year in a number of treatises in the Exposition of the Law. In Hypoth. he deals with letting the land lie fallow but not with the remission of debts. This might be because he is responding to the charge of idleness as well as to possible resentment among the pagans over Julius Caesar\u2019s having granted the Jews a tax exemption for the seventh year (Ant. 14.202).
\n8.7.15. with a view to the future for the sake of prosperity This is a rational explanation of Lev. 25:1\u20136, but it goes beyond what the text says. Philo makes the point much more fully in Spec. Laws 2.97\u2013103.
\nis not reduced to a worthless condition through continual working This is the negative formulation of the same principle.
\n8.7.16. You can see the same principle results in strength for our bodies Cf. Spec. Laws 2.98\u2013103.
\n8.7.19. This is a truly great indication of their humanity The statement anticipates what follows: \u201cthey think it right that travelers or others who want or need [these fruits] should enjoy them in abundance.\u201d Philo gives a more detailed account in On the Special Laws that also emphasizes that this provision is motivated by humanity (philanthr\u014dpia): \u201cFor he introduced this not simply on the grounds that I have stated, but also on the ground of that customary humanity that he aims to interweave in every part of the legislation, stamping the seal of common and kind customs on the readers of sacred Scriptures\u201d (Spec. Laws 2.104\u20139, esp. 104). Cf. also Virtues 97\u201398.
\nthrough the earth sending them up spontaneously This reflects the language of Lev. 25:5 (LXX).
\nthey think it right that travelers or others who want or need (them) should enjoy them in abundance This is based on Exod. 23:11 and Lev. 25:6\u20137. Philo or the tradition has added \u201ctravelers\u201d to the biblical text.
\n8.11.1\u201317 Philo appears to have written three accounts of the Essenes. He sets out a description of them in Good Person 75\u201391 as a Jewish example of wise men who are the equals of the Seven Sages of Greece, the Magi of Persia, and the Gymnosophists of India whom he mentions as a frame (Good Person 72\u201374). Hypothetica is the second account and is similar to the account in Good Person in its broad outline: they offer the same etymological explanation of the name (Good Person 75; Hypoth. 8.11.1); note their noble occupations (Good Person 77\u201378; Hypoth. 8.11.9); mention the absence of slaves (Good Person 79; Hypoth. 8.11.4); register their practice of common property (Good Person 85\u201387; Hypoth. 8.11.4) including their common treasure, meals, and clothes (Good Person 86; Hypoth. 8.11.10\u201312); describe their treatment of the ill and aged (Good Person 87; Hypoth. 8.11.13); and record the reaction of kings to them (Good Person 88\u201391; Hypoth. 8.11.18). At the same time, there are differences in the topics treated and in the sequence of material. The two accounts appear to be independent treatments of a common topic by the same author. The third account may be lost. In the opening of On the Contemplative Life, Philo says: \u201cHaving discussed the Essenes who pursued and worked hard at the active life and excelled in all aspects or\u2014to put it more moderately\u2014in most aspects, I will now\u2014in keeping with the sequence of the matter\u2014set out the appropriate details about those who embrace the contemplative life\u201d (Contempl. Life 1). Since he devoted an entire treatise to the Therapeutae, who represented the contemplative life, it is likely that he devoted an entire treatise to the Essenes. This excludes the account in Good Person and probably the account in Hypothetica; the third treatise has probably been lost. Josephus also described the Essenes (J.W. 2.119\u201361; Ant. 18.18\u201322). The relationship between the accounts in the two authors is disputed: Josephus may have drawn from Philo, both may have drawn from a common source, or they may have had independent sources. Philo (and Josephus) could have read about the Essenes in Nicolaus of Damascus or in a Hellenistic Jewish source, or combined a written source with some firsthand knowledge of the group. The rationale for including a description of the Essenes is that they represent the highest ethical values of Judaism. Philo may offer this as a direct counter to Chaeremon, who held the Egyptian priests out as exemplary figures for Egypt (Abst. 4.6\u20138).
\n8.11.1. countless pupils Philo gave the number as 4,000 in Good Person 75, the same round number that Josephus offered (Ant. 18.20).
\nThey are called Essenes \u2026 on account of their holiness Philo offers a fuller explanation in Good Person 75, 91. He appears to link the name Essaioi with hosioi, \u201choly ones\u201d (he uses the noun hosiot\u0113s, \u201choliness\u201d\u2014). Modern scholars have explained the etymology of the name in multiple ways: some think that it is linked to the Aramaic hasiya, \u201cpious ones,\u201d the equivalent of the Heb. hasidim or \u201cpious ones\u201d; while others have associated it with the Aram. asiya, \u201chealers,\u201d and appealed to Philo\u2019s comments in Good Person 75, where he mentions that the Essenes are \u201cdevout servants of God\u201d (therapeutai theou).
\nThey inhabit many cities of Judaea as well as villages In Good Person 76, he says that they live in the country and avoid the city, a statement that is in keeping with his own view of virtue. Josephus says that they lived in cities (J.W. 2.124). The Damascus Document also assumes that Essenes lived in villages (CD 7:6\u20137).
\n8.11.2. Their course of life is \u2026 due \u2026 to zeal for virtue and a longing for humanity Like ancient philosophical groups, membership was voluntary. The scrolls emphasize the fact that the members of the covenant \u201cfreely volunteer.\u201d Their motives include both virtue and humanity, an echo of the last section of the law code (Hypoth. 8.7.9). Philo\u2019s description gives the Essenes a philosophical patina that is absent from the Dead Sea Scrolls. While one might conclude that the residents of Qumran were dedicated to virtue, it is hard to attribute their sectarian orientation to \u201ca longing for humanity,\u201d although see CD 6:20\u20137.1.
\n8.11.3. Rather they are mature men Philo mentioned three different ages: a child, someone in puberty, and a mature person. In other texts he offered a sevenfold classification of ages (Cherubim 114 and Creation 105). The graveyard at Qumran contains only a handful of burials of children; the community there appears to have been composed primarily of adult males.
\nbut enjoy the true and only real freedom This statement reflects the thesis of the treatment of the Essenes in Good Person. It is repeated in the next statement (Hypoth. 8.11.4) and again at the end of the description of the Essenes (8.11.17).
\n8.11.4. enjoy the benefit of everything in common This is a paraphrase of the famous aphorism that friends hold all things in common. Philo quotes the proverb elsewhere (Abraham 235).
\n8.11.5. They live together in guilds Cf. Good Person 85, 86; J.W. 2.130\u201333.
\n8.11.8. For some of them are farmers So also Good Person 86 and Josephus (Ant. 18.19, but not J.W. 2.129). They must have worked in the fields near the spring at Ein Feshkha. The Damascus Document assumes that the members engage in some agricultural pursuits (CD 12:8\u201310).
\n8.11.10. he gives it to an appointed treasurer This was a feature of the community that was widely known. Philo mentions a common treasury in Good Person 86, 87. Josephus also mentioned the common treasury in J.W. 2.122\u201323, 125, and the election of individuals to receive and manage the funds in Ant. 18.22. The scrolls from Qumran deal with the common treasury and \u201ctreasurer over the work of Many\u201d (ha-mebaker al-melekhet ha-rabbim) in some detail.
\n8.11.11. common meals and common tables This is emphasized by Philo (Good Person 86, 91) and Josephus (J.W. 2.130\u201333, 139). The scrolls deal with allotments from the common table in detail (1QS 6:4\u20136; 1QSa 2:17\u201322). Cf. also Philo\u2019s description of the Therapeutae (Contempl. Life 34\u201337).
\n8.11.12. but their clothing is as well See also Good Person 86.
\n8.11.13. if one of them becomes ill Philo treats the same topic in Good Person 87. For treatment of the ill and elderly in the scrolls see CD 6:20\u201321; 14:12\u201317.
\n8.11.14. For none of the Essenes takes a wife Josephus made the same point (Ant. 18.21) as did Pliny (Nat. 5.73). The rationale is one of the most misogynistic statements in Philo. Some scrolls assume that an Essene could marry. There has been a controversy over the gender of some of the skeletal remains in the cemetery at Qumran. It appears that there may have been a few women buried at the site, although they represent a very small percentage of the skeletal remains to date. If the remains indicate the group who lived at Qumran, it was overwhelmingly a community of males.
\n8.11.15. Practiced in fawning speeches and the rest of acting The phrase \u201cfawning speech\u201d is used in the dramatists. Philo several times quotes a fragment of Euripides that includes the expression.
\nshe entices his seeing and hearing and after these \u2026 she tricks the leader, the mind See the fuller description in Creation 165.
\n8.11.17. a slave instead of a free person This does not have a direct parallel in Good Person, although the phrase fits the theme of the treatise. Paul wrote of the conflict that occurs within someone who is married (1 Cor. 7:32\u201335).
\n8.11.18. even great kings \u2026 are amazed See Good Person 88\u201391. Philo also ends his treatment of the Sabbath and seventh year with a reference to outsiders\u2019 knowledge of Jewish mores and groups (Hypoth. 8.7.20). The closing refrain situates the Jewish people favorably in the larger Greco-Roman world, a fitting ending to an apologetic treatise.<\/p>\n
Stories Set in Biblical and Early Post-Biblical Times<\/p>\n
These stories were originally composed in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek, and, with the exception of the book of Judith, outside the Land of Israel. Several have come down to us as part of the Christian canon of Greek Jewish Scripture. As fictitious narratives that retell aspects of biblical or historical events, they offer perspectives on the ways that Jews in the Second Temple period, in a variety of locations, coped with the political upheavals and social realities of their times, filtered through lenses on the past.<\/p>\n
Joseph and Aseneth<\/p>\n
Patricia Ahearne-Kroll<\/p>\n
Joseph and Aseneth (hereafter Aseneth) is an ancient Greek novel that reworks the story of Joseph in Gen. 37\u201350. The narrative begins within the timeframe of Gen. 41, when Pharaoh appoints Joseph as second-in-command and marries him to Aseneth, the daughter of a Heliopolitan priest (41:45). Aseneth, however, rearranges the sequence of events in Gen. 41 (i.e., Joseph marries Aseneth after he began gathering grain and not before) and adds more scenes to the Genesis story. Aseneth 1\u201317 presents Aseneth\u2019s initial encounter with Joseph, his rejection of her because of her polytheistic religious practices, and her subsequent conversion to Judaism. She discards everything remotely related to her polytheistic devotion, fasts and sits in sackcloth, and repents before God. After one week, an angel visits her and promises that (1) her name will be inscribed in the book of life, (2) she will partake in the life-giving ways of following God, (3) she will become a city of refuge for all those devoted to God, and (4) she will marry Joseph. The angel also feeds her from an extraordinary honeycomb that delivers knowledge of the mysteries of God. Immediately after the angel\u2019s visit, Aseneth clothes herself in regal attire and meets Joseph again; the two are married soon after, and before long, Aseneth conceives and bears Manasseh and Ephraim (Aseneth 18\u201321).
\nThe second stage of the novel takes place after Jacob and his sons move to Egypt (cf. Gen. 46\u201347), and these chapters spin an engaging tale of intrigue (Aseneth 22\u201329). Pharaoh\u2019s son had wanted Aseneth to be his wife, and in a zealous rage, he successfully recruits the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah to help him kill both his father and Joseph and also kidnap Aseneth. The covert operation fails on several counts, most notably because Benjamin and Leah\u2019s sons commit amazing acts of heroics, but the sons of Zilpah and Bilhah find shelter under Aseneth\u2019s care, and she convinces Leah\u2019s sons to desist from any more retaliatory violence. Aseneth\u2019s rationale changes Levi\u2019s mind, and he protects and tries to heal Pharaoh\u2019s son from his injuries. Levi\u2019s attempt fails, however, and Pharaoh\u2019s son and, soon after, Pharaoh himself die. The novel concludes with Joseph inheriting the crown from Pharaoh; he rules 48 years in Egypt and then bequeaths the crown to Pharaoh\u2019s younger son, who was not of age to rule when Pharaoh had died.
\nAseneth is written in the genre of the ancient Greek novel, which consists of a particular plotline and certain literary conventions. In these narratives, a female and a male fall in love, marry, and spend the rest of their lives in happiness after encountering a series of obstacles. The protagonists are always from nobility and are portrayed as a perfect match, but they often respond emotionally to their trials as they face the fate that the divine realm creates for them. The unfolding of the plot is also driven by a dialogic tension between the audience\u2019s expectation that the protagonists unite and the narrative\u2019s repeated suspension or seeming termination of that union.
\nNot all these novels are the same, however, and Aseneth presents several distinct features. Most obvious are (1) Aseneth\u2019s encounter with the angel and her conversion to Judaism; and (2) the narrative\u2019s prescriptions for those who worship God (regarding conversion before marriage and not \u201crepaying evil for evil\u201d). Other ancient Greek novels reflect a polytheistic worldview, and their storylines do not defend affiliation to a particular cult, but Aseneth promotes a monotheistic worldview that requires a different sequence of events. Both protagonists must endorse this worldview, so Aseneth converts. Joseph\u2019s allegiance to God is well documented in Gen. 37\u201350, so Aseneth spends more time developing the portrayal of Aseneth and less time on the male protagonist than what other Greek novels provide.
\nWithin the genre construction of an ancient Greek novel, Aseneth also fully imitates the language and style of the (LXX). The plot is rooted in the Genesis story about Joseph, and at several points in the narrative, Aseneth repeats particular phrases from Genesis to more securely embed it in the Joseph tradition. Other biblical scenes and paradigms are utilized in the portrayal of Aseneth, her encounter with the angel, and the presentation of events in the latter half of the story (e.g., from Daniel, Judges, Psalms, and 2 Samuel); and particular literary conventions of LXX Greek (e.g., kai egeneto and idou) are scattered throughout the narrative. Aseneth also shares similarities of interest with other Second Temple literature. Aseneth\u2019s prayers and rise to greatness are replete with wisdom imagery (cf. Wisdom of Solomon), and Aseneth\u2019s embellishment of Joseph\u2019s reign is shared by other Jewish texts from Egypt (e.g., Artapanus and Philo\u2019s Joseph).<\/p>\n
Authorship and History<\/p>\n
Aseneth most likely was composed in Greek, but the evidence for this narrative exists in several languages. Ninety-one manuscripts are known to preserve all or a portion of Aseneth (see \u201cGuide to Reading,\u201d below), and scholars continue to debate which manuscripts best reflect the initial composition. The majority of scholars depend upon the reconstruction by Christoph Burchard, but some argue that Marc Philonenko\u2019s reconstruction may better represent the initial text. Although the transmission history of this narrative is much more complex than what the two reconstructions imply, the manuscripts display both a uniform quality (i.e., they share in common the basic storyline and much of the same imagery and phraseology) and a fluid quality in each individual telling of the narrative (e.g., some manuscripts omit scenes and others embellish them).
\nThe manuscripts are dated from the 6th to 17th centuries CE, but scholars agree that the narrative was produced prior to the 6th century CE. The majority opinion assigns its composition to between 100 BCE and 115 CE in Egypt. During this period, Jewish communities thrived in Alexandria and towns along the Nile, and they produced several Jewish literary texts in Greek (notably the LXX, but also other writings, such as the works of Philo, Wisdom of Solomon, and Letter of Aristeas). Aseneth\u2019s close attention to the content and literary style of the LXX and its concern for maintaining Jewish identity in a polytheistic environment correspond well to what is known about the life and literature of Jews in Egypt at this time.<\/p>\n
Significance<\/p>\n
The seeming royal appearance of Joseph (Aseneth 5, 25) and Aseneth (Aseneth 3, 18, 28) not only foretells what they become at the end of the narrative but is also reminiscent of depictions of royalty in Greco-Roman Egypt. Within the concrete experience of life in Egypt, Aseneth reconstructs the past by applying imagery and concepts that had significant clout with the dominant group of this setting (i.e., Ptolemaic and Roman rule), but it does not forsake the delineation of Jewish identity. As a pharaonic couple, Aseneth and Joseph condemn idolatry and solely worship the God Most High; Joseph becomes a king, but he is not deified. Although Aseneth\u2019s lifestyle before her conversion is comparable to that of a goddess (e.g., her room is a shrine and chaste women perpetually serve her), the narrative predominantly characterizes her devotion to her gods as excessive. Held in tandem, both impressions bolster the narrative\u2019s critique of polytheistic practices, which Aseneth ultimately rejects.
\nAseneth also directly addresses the challenges of delineating Jewish identity in a polytheistic society, and it promotes positive engagement in this setting while maintaining definite distinctions of Jewishness. Aseneth concentrates on the ambiguity of life within such a diverse environment: friendly relations are forged between Hebrews and Egyptians (e.g., Joseph and Pentephres), enmity is fueled from within Jacob\u2019s household (the sons of Leah versus those of Bilhah and Zilpah), and responses to violent acts against Joseph and Aseneth shift on account of the involvement of an initial outsider (Aseneth, the converted Egyptian) and result in the building of closer relations between the households of Jacob and Pharaoh. Aseneth defines legitimate marriage only in terms of religious affiliation and practice, and this ruling stands in contrast to other Jewish opinions that defined endogamy to include individuals\u2019 ancestral background (e.g., Jub. 30).<\/p>\n
GUIDE TO READING<\/p>\n
Burchard\u2019s reconstructed text includes notes that frequently provide information about manuscript variations, to make transparent the difficulties in ascertaining the original composition of Aseneth and the flexibility that scribes exercised in transmitting this story. Burchard classifies the textual evidence as follows:<\/p>\n
Syr Two Syriac manuscripts
\nArm Fifty Armenian manuscripts
\nL2 Two subsets: (1) one manuscript (436) and (2) a group of five manuscripts (435&)
\nFamily f Three subsets: (1) two Greek (FW) and four Romanian (Rum) manuscripts, (2) an illuminated Greek (G) and two new Greek (Ngr) manuscripts, and (3) nine Latin manuscripts (L1)
\nE One Greek manuscript
\nfamily Mc Four Greek manuscripts (M, HJK)
\nFamily a Six Greek manuscripts (A, CR, O, PQ)
\nfamily d Two Greek (BD) and two Slavonic (Slaw) manuscripts<\/p>\n
Note: Philonenko\u2019s reconstruction primarily is based on family d, and Burchard\u2019s on family f, Syr, Arm, L2, and partly family a. SUGGESTED READING<\/p>\n Ahearne-Kroll, Patricia. \u201cJoseph and Aseneth and Jewish Identity in Greco-Roman Egypt.\u201d PhD diss., University of Chicago Divinity School, 2005. COMMENTARY<\/p>\n 1:1. in the first year of the seven years of abundance This phrase conceptually and linguistically joins Aseneth with the Gen. 37\u201350 narrative about Joseph. The first year of the seven years of abundance refers to the point in the Genesis plot when Joseph, having been appointed by Pharaoh, begins to collect provisions in Egypt to prepare for the coming famine (41:46\u201349). This phrase also mirrors the Greek in LXX Genesis in two ways: (1) \u201cseven years of abundance\u201d refers to Egypt\u2019s predicted years of good harvest (41:29, 34, 47, 53); and (2) the beginning of this verse in Aseneth literally reads in the Gk., \u201c(And) it happened (that)\u201d (rendered by either kai egeneto or egeneto in the Gk. or by an equivalent in ancient translations), and variations of this introductory clause appear in LXX Genesis and correspond to a similar introductory clause in biblical Hebrew prose.
\nIn the translation, words in brackets (e.g.,
\nBurchard, Christoph, assisted by Carsten Burfeind and Uta Barbara Fink. Joseph und Aseneth. Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 5. Leiden: Brill, 2003.
\nChesnutt, Randall D. From Death to Life: Conversion in \u201cJoseph and Aseneth.\u201d Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement 16. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.
\nFink, Uta Barbara. Joseph und Aseneth: Revision des griechischen Textes und Edition der zweiten lateinischen \u00dcbersetzung. Fontes et Subsidia ad Bibliam pertinentes 5. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008.
\nHezser, Catherine. \u201c \u2018Joseph and Aseneth\u2019 in the Context of Ancient Greek Novels.\u201d Frankfurter judaistische Beitr\u00e4ge 24 (1997): 1\u20134.
\nHumphrey, Edith M. Joseph and Aseneth. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000.
\nKraemer, Ross Shepard. When Aseneth Met Joseph: A Late Antique Tale of the Biblical Patriarch and His Egyptian Wife, Reconsidered. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
\nPhilonenko, Marc. Joseph et As\u00e9neth: Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes. Studia post-biblica 13. Leiden: Brill, 1968.
\nStandhartinger, Angela. Das Frauenbild im Judentum der hellenistischen Zeit: Ein Beitrag anhand von \u201cJoseph und Aseneth.\u201d Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 26. Leiden: Brill, 1995.<\/p>\n
\nin the second month, on the fifth day of the month This phrase also imitates one way that biblical narratives mark the time period in which a scene takes place (cf. Gen. 7:11; 8:4, 13\u201314).
\n1:2. in the fourth month of the first year \u2026 and he was gathering the grain of that region (which was) like the sand of the sea An additional reference to the plotline of Gen. 41, although Aseneth presents an alternative version about when Joseph met Aseneth (cf. Gen. 41:45\u201349). In Genesis, Joseph first marries Aseneth and then proceeds to travel throughout Egypt where he collects grain in an amount \u201clike the sands of the sea\u201d (41:49). Aseneth specifies a different time when Joseph and Aseneth met, but the sand metaphor alludes to the fact that Aseneth retells a portion of the Joseph novella in Genesis.
\nHeliopolis Located on the southern tip of the delta in Egypt, about 20 miles north of Memphis (near modern day Cairo). Gen. 41:45 reports that Aseneth and her family came from Heliopolis (Heb. On), and Jewish audiences in Hellenistic Egypt would have understood the religious significance of this city in Egyptian culture. Heliopolis was associated with ancient Egyptian religious traditions dating back to the beginning of the pharaonic period. Several temples were built there\u2014one for Re (the Egyptian sun god, which explains the Greek name for this city [Heliopolis, \u201ccity of the sun\u201d]), Re-Atum (a consolidation of the sun god and a creator god), and Re-Harakhty (the representation of Re at the beginning of time, literally \u201cRe of the two horizons\u201d)\u2014and one ancient Egyptian tradition located the beginning of creation in Heliopolis.
\n1:3. satrap of Pharaoh In ancient sources, the term \u201csatrap\u201d (Aramaic \u2019ahashdarpan, Gk. satrap\u0113s) first appears as a Persian imperial title (usually for a governor of a province). The LXX Daniel translates the Persian Aramaic title as satrap\u0113s, but in other LXX texts, satrap\u0113s denotes governing positions that predate the Persian Empire (e.g., Judg. 5:3; 1 Sam. 5:8, 11). The use of this term in Aseneth is best understood as an archaizing device that describes the importance of Pentephres \u201cback then\u201d during the time of Joseph.
\nchief official In the Hellenistic world, this term (Gk. arch\u014dn) usually designated an administrative (local or provincial) or military official. A Jewish community in Heirakleopolis of Egypt also used this title to refer to its administrative leaders. In Aseneth, the term is translated in various ways to reflect the different implications of the term when applied to particular cases.
\nkind Sometimes translated \u201cgentle,\u201d epieik\u0113s implies the yielding behavior of a superior who graciously permits a loose application of the rules (or expectations thereof) or grants leniency to a guilty subject.
\nnotable men Literally \u201cgreat men,\u201d this term refers to men of high rank who may or may not have had specific administrative positions in the empire but were nonetheless influential (like a courtier or magnate).
\nPentephres In MT Gen. 41:45, Aseneth\u2019s father is named \u201cPoti-phera,\u201d and this name sounds very similar to the Egyptian courtier, \u201cPotiphar,\u201d who bought Joseph from the Ishmaelites (Gen. 39). LXX Genesis manuscripts provide either \u201cPetephres\u201d or \u201cPentephres\u201d for the names of both figures. In Aseneth manuscripts, \u201cPentephres\u201d is most used, but some Latin manuscripts (435& of the group L2) provide \u201cPetephres\u201d instead. To diminish confusion, the Greek Q text adds the following verse: \u201cHe was not Pentephres the chief butcher, who [literally \u201cwhere he\u201d] used to own Joseph, but another Pentephres who also called himself (such).\u201d
\n1:4. parthenos \u2026 parthenoi Gk. parthenos (plural parthenoi) is usually translated \u201cvirgin,\u201d which does not convey well the nuances of the term in this narrative. In Classical Greek and Hellenistic literature, parthenos is a socially constructed term that usually referred to a young, unmarried woman, but at times it can describe married women, goddesses, and even males. When applied to women of any age, the term parthenos predominantly signified that a woman was unmarried, but when describing the status of a young female, it also implied specific designations of bodily existence (e.g., it usually referred to her heterosexual innocence and identified that she was in or had just completed puberty). When referring to women, Aseneth uses the latter connotation of the young female, but the genre of this narrative produces more expectations regarding the nature of female parthenoi. In ancient Greek novels, chastity is an outward sign of noble youth, and parthenos especially describes the female protagonist, so a female parthenos in Aseneth is a heterosexually innocent woman who is unmarried, capable of producing offspring, and from a wealthy household.
\n1:5. she was in no way like \u2026 the Hebrews The manuscripts are quite diverse in regard to this sentence. Most notably, family d reads, \u201cand she was not like [BSlaw: the daughters of] the Egyptians and the Hebrews.\u201d In the context of this narrative\u2019s genre, the distinction between regular Hebrew women and the Hebrew matriarchs is not problematic (see below).
\ntall like Sara, attractive like Rebekka, and beautiful like Rachel Sara, Rebekka, and Rachel are extraordinary ancestors with whom most Hebrew women cannot compare but Aseneth can. Ancient Greek novels present the female protagonists as exceptional in appearance (often likening them to goddesses), and here Aseneth\u2019s extraordinary beauty resembles three of the epic heroines of Judaism.
\nparthenos See comment on 1:4.
\n1:6. the report of her beauty spread \u2026 to fight against each other on account of her The extraordinary beauty of the female protagonist and the interest of noble suitors that her renowned looks generate are typical features in ancient Greek novels.
\n1:7\u20139. to give her to him as a wife \u2026 take this woman Common expressions of marriage in the LXX (Gen. 29:28; 38:2; 41:45; Exod. 2:21), derived from its use in Hebrew biblical narratives.
\n1:8. who is inferior to you An ancient audience would assume that a pharaoh\u2019s son would marry a woman from within the extended royal household or from a foreign royal family (which would enhance diplomatic relations). From an ancient perspective, it is the request of Pharaoh\u2019s son, and not Pharaoh\u2019s response, that is surprising, and therefore the request highlights Aseneth\u2019s remarkable appeal.
\n1:9. the daughter of Joachim, the king of Moab This reference is best understood as an archaizing device that places Aseneth in the biblical past. The region of Moab was located southeast of the Dead Sea, and within the Genesis\u2013Numbers storyline, the idea of a kingdom of Moab made sense. According to this storyline, the Moabites first came into being during the time of Abraham (Gen. 19), and they had a kingdom two generations after Joseph (Num. 22\u201324).
\n2:1. Pentephres\u2019s tower \u2026 10 rooms \u201cTower\u201d (pyrgos) usually refers to a tower of a citadel, but it can refer to a farm building or even to living quarters (e.g., Demosthenes, Euerg. 56). For this reason, \u201ctower\u201d is best understood as Aseneth\u2019s living quarters, which is restricted to particular women and few others (cf. Aseneth 2:6; 8:1; 18:2\u20135, 11).
\n2:2. (it was) covered with purple stones \u2026 and the ceiling of that room was gold Fitting within the genre of ancient Greek novels, this scene portrays Aseneth\u2019s noble lifestyle. Colorful pavement, marble facing, and gold leaf on ceilings would be in only extremely wealthy homes (or temples).
\n2:3. gold and silver Egyptian gods Cultic statues allude to a worship space and most likely imply an inner temple chamber rather than a domestic shrine (which would be located in a public space in the home).
\nAseneth used to worship all those (gods) \u2026 and perform sacrifices to them daily The combination of these ritual acts taking place in Aseneth\u2019s bedroom and the fact that she has a storeroom of agricultural products nearby (2:5) also suggests a temple setting. Even an ancient audience would find Aseneth\u2019s living quarters to be puzzling, and they would recognize the ritual elements of her space and her actions (also Aseneth 10; see \u201cIntroduction: Significance\u201d).
\nfear them In the context of ancient Mediterranean religious practice (not just in Judaism), \u201cto fear a god\u201d was a common way to describe proper posture and conduct before a deity. There are ample examples of the phrase in ancient Israelite and Second Temple literature, but other Greek writings express similar gestures of reverence.
\n2:4. clothing interwoven with gold See comment on 2:8.
\nparthenia an all-encompassing term for the transitional phase of a young parthenos from being a child to becoming a wife (gyn\u0113). See comment on 1:4.
\n2:6. seven parthenoi \u2026 and these women continually served Aseneth Aseneth\u2019s companions are also parthenoi (see comment on 1:4), but their solitary lifestyle with Aseneth and the fact that they serve her are highly unusual in an ancient setting (because these women are not slaves and they are most likely from noble households). However, the lifestyle of these women shares similarities with that of notable parthenoi who served goddesses (such as the Greek deity Demeter or Roman deity Vesta), and Aseneth\u2019s templelike space enhances the impression that these women are comparable to cultic functionaries.
\nand she loved them very much Attested in only three family a manuscripts (ACP). Most likely, this phrase was added by a later scribe who transcribed this story.
\n2:7. where her parthenia was nurtured Where Aseneth spent her time as a parthenos (see comments on 1:4 and 2:4). The narrative is simply confirming that, at her age, Aseneth was sexually innocent and therefore honorable (see also 2:9). The isolation of a parthenos is a common motif in Greek literature (e.g., Callirhoe in Chariton\u2019s Chaereas and Callirhoe 1:1\u20136), but it is not clear how much this was the case for parthenoi in real life.
\ntoward the street where people pass by This clearly locates Pentephres\u2019s household complex within the city of Heliopolis, and it is apparently situated along a busy street. A structure of this size would typically be a palace or a temple site (see 2:10\u201311).
\n2:8. purple cloth interwoven with gold and interwoven out of violet, purple, and fine linen The design of this bedspread is luxurious, made with textiles that were expensive in the ancient world. The Gk. word for \u201cpurple\u201d (noun porphyra, adjective porphyrous; Hebrew \u2019argaman) refers to variations of purplish colors (from a red- to black-purple), depending upon the dye used. Gk. hyakinthos (\u201cviolet\u201d) is the LXX\u2019s choice for translating Hebrew tekelet, and here (along with the second \u201cpurple\u201d in this sentence) it refers to dyed thread used in embroidered works (e.g., Esther 1:6). Byssos (\u201cfine linen\u201d) was the finest quality of linen produced in Egypt, and it was used throughout the Mediterranean world to make elite clothing as well as costly coverings or tapestries. For example, the Babylonian tapestry that hung in the Herodian Temple was embroidered out of violet, purple, scarlet, and fine linen (J.W. 5.212). The word chrysouph\u0113s (\u201cinterwoven in gold\u201d) is first attested in the late Hellenistic period, and it refers to exquisite clothing or cloth designs that sparkled with interwoven gold thread (e.g., Chariton, Chaereas and Callirhoe 8.4.7).
\n2:10. a large courtyard was adjacent to the house Courtyards were common in urban domestic spaces of the elite, but this one\u2019s fortified wall and defense force imply a palace or temple structure (cf. 1 Macc. 10:11; Ant. 20.221).
\n2:11. mature trees of every kind\u2014all (of them) fruit-bearing The abundance of this courtyard resembles that of the Garden of Eden (Gen. 2:8\u20139) and not that of an urban temple complex. However, sanctuaries outside of major cities sometimes had large groves (Xenophon, Anab. 5.3.11\u201313).
\n2:12. a fount of abundant spring water, and \u2026 a large basin that caught the water The fount of spring water also hearkens to Eden (Gen. 2:10), but the basin of water was a common element in courtyards of wealthy households, temple complexes (Plutarch, Sulla 32), and later Jewish synagogues.
\nwhere a river flowed Much of this sentence parallels Gen. 2:10, which begins as follows: \u201cA river flowed out from Eden to irrigate the orchard.\u201d
\n3:1. in the first year \u2026 was gathering the grain of abundance of that region The action from Aseneth 1:2 is resumed. This sentence also begins with the narrative construction kai egeneto (\u201cand it happened [that]\u201d), which imitates a similar prose construction in Genesis LXX (see comment on 1:1).
\n3:2. so that I may be refreshed under the shade of your house Burchard reads \u201cso that I may cool off [Gk. katapsych\u014d],\u201d but he admits that \u201cto be refreshed\u201d (anapsych\u014d) is conceivable because so many manuscripts attest to this word or its equivalent. It is possible that scribes chose katapsych\u014d in order to correlate this scene with the visit to Abraham and Sarah by the three men at Mamre (Gen. 18:1\u201315). There, Abraham has a meal prepared for his guests and tells them, \u201cLet water be taken, let them wash your feet, and you cool off [katapsych\u014d] under the tree\u201d (18:4). In Aseneth, when Joseph requests to rest \u201cunder the shade\u201d of Pentephres\u2019s home, Pentephres immediately sets out to prepare a meal for his guest (Aseneth 3:4); and when Joseph arrives, he receives the hospitable gesture of foot washing (7:1).
\n3:3. he was extremely glad Literally, \u201che rejoiced a very great rejoicing.\u201d The TANAKH uses this style of expression (i.e., a transitive verb and cognate accusative), and the LXX reflects it in the Greek (Gen. 9:14; Joel 3:1; Num. 11:4). In continuity with the LXX, Aseneth applies this style in several places.
\nblessed is the LORD \u2026 because my lord, Joseph Gk. kyrios (\u201cLORD\/lord\u201d) is used as a term of respect for the authority and power of a deity or person. In the LXX, kyrios sometimes translates Heb. \u201cLORD\u201d (Isa. 40:5; Gen. 2:8), but it also is used for Heb. \u2018adon or ba\u2019al (\u201clord\u201d). In the TANAKH, these latter two Hebrew words may stand for the male head of a household (Gen. 18:12), the owner or overseer of property (40:7), an official over a jurisdiction (45:5, 9), or a king (40:1). The use of kyrios in the Hellenistic world reflects similar connotations; the word may refer to a deity or to a human superior of some sort.
\n3:5. field of their inheritance In the LXX, \u201cinheritance\u201d can refer to land ownership (Jdt. 16:21), and here it most likely refers to cultivated land. The idea of an Egyptian priest owning agricultural land in the countryside would not be surprising to a Jewish audience in Egypt. Egyptian priests and officials associated with Egyptian temples were wealthier than the average Egyptian, and papyrological evidence demonstrates that some Egyptians of this status owned large estates. Since Pentephres lives in Heliopolis (see comment on 2:7), his agricultural estate is in the countryside.
\n3:6. she put on a fine linen garment \u2026 on all sides The entirety of this scene is a good example of \u201cthe male gaze\u201d used as a literary technique in ancient Greek novels. It is presumed that for an ancient audience, this attention to \u201cwatching\u201d Aseneth dress would be produced in particular for men (even though women most likely heard and maybe even read this story). There are several times where the audience \u201cgazes\u201d at the undressing or dressing of Aseneth (cf. Aseneth 10, 14, 18).
\nfine linen garment Gk. stol\u0113 byssin\u0113 is the same phrase used in the LXX for the \u201crobes of fine linen\u201d that Pharaoh provides for Joseph (Gen. 41:42).
\ngirded herself with a golden girdle In Hellenistic literary and artistic depictions of elite women, they are often portrayed as wearing a cloth sash or cord (z\u014dn\u0113) around the waist over a garment.
\nbracelets on her hands and feet The bracelets on the feet perhaps are anklets. According to Athenaues, Chares of Mitylene (Histories of Alexander 7) describes a similar jewelry fashion worn by women from Persia, Media, and Asia Minor (Deipn. 3.45). At the very least, Aseneth\u2019s attire is exotic (see next comment).
\ngolden trousers \u201cTrousers\u201d (Gk. anaxyrides) are described by Greek writers as a typical clothing for men from certain eastern cultures (e.g., from Asia Minor and Persia). This word is well attested in the manuscript tradition (so it seems authentic to the initial renderings of this narrative), but the description of a woman wearing \u201ctrousers\u201d is unusual and most likely is intended to emphasize the exotic nature of Aseneth\u2019s attire.
\n upon her head and bound a diadem around her temples Several manuscripts provide only one headpiece for Aseneth, and in these cases the word is \u201cdiadem\u201d or its equivalent. A diadem was a band tied around the head (at the level of one\u2019s temples), and it signified royalty. It was usually referred to as a male headpiece, but some women (especially Ptolemaic queens) appeared to have worn them. Some Greek writers (e.g., Xenophon, Cyr. 8.3.13) refer to a Persian crown that consisted of a tiara and diadem, so the manuscripts that combine the two may imply this kind of crown. Either way, this scene suggests that Aseneth is akin to royalty even though Pharaoh gave a different opinion to his son (Aseneth 1:8).
\ncovered her head with a cloth Usually translated \u201cveil,\u201d which in modern parlance can imply the concealment of one\u2019s face. This cloth is understood to cover the head of Aseneth but not her face. Throughout the ancient Mediterranean world, women of status wore this kind of head covering, and some Ptolemaic queens were depicted in portrait coins wearing a head covering over a diadem or crown.
\n4:1. very glad Literally, \u201crejoiced a great rejoicing.\u201d See comment on 3:3.
\nadorned like a bride of God Or, \u201cdivine bride,\u201d in the sense that Aseneth looks like no other bride, more stunning than all the others. This description of Aseneth is best understood in the context of the ancient Greek novel genre, in which the female protagonist\u2019s beauty reflects that of the goddesses. The monotheistic focus of Aseneth, however, alters how Aseneth is described; she herself is not likened to a divine being but her beauty is associated with the perfection of the divine. Kraemer suggests that the description \u201cbride of God\u201d is one of several places in the story where the theme of a sacred marriage (hieros gamos) is used.
\n4:2. grapes, dates, doves, pomegranates, and figs The agricultural items in this list were delicacies in the ancient world, and so they represent a rich harvest from Pentephres\u2019s estate. The mention of doves is well attested in the manuscript tradition, but their inclusion here seems out of place. This verse, however, may imply that Pentephres owned a pigeon house on his agricultural estate. In ancient Egypt (and increasingly in other regions in the Hellenistic period), pigeons were valued for providing fertilizer for farming, and they were kept in houses to expedite the manure collection. Pigeons were also part of the meat diet in Egypt, and although fairly inexpensive, they appear to have been consumed by the wealthy.
\n4:3. \u201chere I am\u201d The Gk. idou eg\u014d (Heb. hinneni) is a noteworthy response to direct addresses in biblical narratives. See also Aseneth 4:6.
\n4:7. he is ruler of the entire land of Egypt The word of \u201cruler\u201d (arch\u014dn) is the same word used of Pentephres\u2019s official position (cf. 1:3, translated \u201cchief official\u201d). Here, and for the rest of his speech, Pentephres is paraphrasing narrative facts from the Genesis account. In LXX Gen. 42:6, Joseph is described as an \u201carch\u014dn of the land,\u201d so Pentephres\u2019s description and that of Genesis are nearly identical. At this point of the story in both Aseneth and Genesis, however, it is clear that Joseph is not a monarch of any sort. He is a premier official in the pharaonic empire, but he is subordinate to Pharaoh.
\nappointed him as king of the entire land Burchard\u2019s decision to include the word \u201cking\u201d (basileus) is problematic. Some manuscripts read \u201cking,\u201d others \u201cruler\u201d (arch\u014dn), others \u201cruler and king,\u201d and some Armenian manuscripts read \u201clord\u201d (most likely translated from Gk. kyrios). The Syriac and most Armenian manuscripts provide \u201cover all the land of Egypt,\u201d which appears to allude to Gen. 41:41, 43. Given the context of this narrative (cf. Aseneth 29), it makes most sense that Pentephres would distinguish between the authority of Pharaoh and Joseph. A better reading would be either \u201cruler of all of Egypt\u201d or \u201cover all of Egypt.\u201d
\nsuppling all the land (with) provisions \u2026 saving it This is a direct reference to the storyline of Gen. 41:47\u201349, and in 47:25, Joseph is said to have \u201csaved\u201d the Egyptians from the famine.
\ngod-fearing Literally \u201cone who has reverence for a god\u201d (theoseb\u0113s), this word refers to a person who worships and attends to a deity. Theoseb\u0113s appears a few times in the LXX to refer to ancient Israelites or Jewish devotion to God, but in other Hellenistic literature, it describes the general devotion of other peoples to their gods.
\nchaste Joseph is called a parthenos, but when this word refers to a male, it primarily denotes sexual abstinence and not necessarily innocence (cf. female parthenos; see comment on 1:4). Pentephres\u2019s comment that Joseph is \u201cself-controlled and chaste\u201d alludes to the scene in Gen. 39:7\u201323 where Joseph refuses the sexual advances of Potiphar\u2019s wife, but the protagonists\u2019 commitment to chastity (by both the male and the female) is also a distinctive feature of ancient Greek novels. Genesis implies that Joseph is also sexually innocent, but for an ancient audience, the literary description of a male parthenos would primarily refer to a chaste man; there would not be any other social connotations associated with this word like there is when applied to young women (e.g., such as being worthy and fit for marriage).
\nadept in wisdom \u2026 the favor of the LORD is with him Again, Pentephres\u2019s descriptions correlate with the Genesis account, whereby Joseph\u2019s wisdom, skill, and divine favor are recognized by Pharaoh (Gen. 41:33, 38\u201339), and God\u2019s favor of Joseph is evident in all his encounters (in Potiphar\u2019s household, Pharaoh\u2019s prison, Pharaoh\u2019s household, all of Egypt, and protection for his own family).
\n4:9\u201310. to a foreign man \u2026 because he interpreted his dream Now Aseneth recounts details of the Genesis narrative, but with a negative spin (cf. Gen. 37\u201346).
\n4:9. runaway The basic meaning of the word phygas is \u201cone who flees,\u201d and it usually refers to flight from one\u2019s homeland. Fugitives and banished people (exiles) are sometimes called phygas, but Aseneth is not explicit about the legal causes of Joseph\u2019s arrival in Egypt. She does, however, intend a negative connotation of the word, and \u201crunaway\u201d at least conveys the idea that Joseph is dishonorable (by deserting his family and homeland).
\n4:10. female master Gk. kyria is the female equivalent to Potiphar\u2019s title of authority over Joseph (Potiphar is kyrios, \u201c[male] master\u201d). \u201cMistress\u201d lacks the sense of power that Potiphar\u2019s wife wielded over Joseph (and that noblewomen in the ancient world had over their slaves).
\n5:4. the second chariot of Pharaoh \u2026 built entirely out of pure gold According to Gen. 41:43, Pharaoh gave Joseph a second chariot, but Aseneth expands on its quality. Gold-studded bridles are reserved for the powerful and\/or elite (2 Macc. 10:29; Herodotus, Hist. 9.20; Xenophon, Cyr. 1.3.3), as also a pure gold chariot would be.
\n5:5. white and distinguished tunic, his external robe was purple, fine linen interwoven with gold In Gen. 41:42, Pharaoh gives Joseph \u201crobes of fine linen,\u201d but Aseneth augments Joseph\u2019s clothing. His external robe (literally \u201cthe robe of his covering garment\u201d) is similar to Aseneth\u2019s attire (cf. 3:6), but the purple color of Joseph\u2019s garment is a sign of his special status in the empire. Because royalty wore purple garments in the ancient world and because Joseph is wearing a gold crown, the narrator is also alluding to Joseph\u2019s royal capabilities.
\ngold crown \u2026 12 golden rays Joseph does not wear a diadem (which would signify kingship), but he wears a crown commonly depicted on Ptolemaic and Seleucid portrait coins. The design of this crown is attributed to Helios who, according to Greek tradition, drove the sun chariot across the sky every day (Gk. helios means \u201csun\u201d). In the Homeric Hymn to Helios, Helios drives a chariot with a golden yoke, wears a gold helmet and a finely worked garment, and \u201crays\u201d (aktis, the same Gk. word used in Aseneth) shine forth from him as he crosses the sky. The picture of Joseph\u2019s entrance resembles this kind of Helios depiction, and given that some Ptolemies associated themselves with Helios, Joseph\u2019s attire strongly hints at his royal essence if not his actual power.
\n12 stones This description no doubt reminded a Jewish audience of Aaron\u2019s attire, in particular the 12 choice stones on his breastplate (Exod. 39; Sir. 45).
\na royal staff was
\n5:6. every man and woman (who was) strange Literally \u201cevery strange man and woman.\u201d The term \u201cstrange\u201d is a distinction of status and not ethnicity. It distinguishes other inhabitants of Heliopolis from the members of Pentephres\u2019s extended family who greet Joseph (5:3). All those who are not a part of this inner circle are excluded from the visit, and this comment by the narrator suggests the elite status of Joseph and Pentephres\u2019s family and communicates to the audience that they have access to a private meeting.
\n5:7. paid obeisance to Joseph Although in Greek literature the word \u201cpaid obeisance\u201d (proskyne\u014d) sometimes refers to a gesture of worship, at other times (as here) it refers to an ancient form of bow or curtsy before royalty or superiors (cf. Gen. 37:7\u20139; 42:6; Herodotus, Hist. 1.119; 3.86; 8.118).
\n6:1. Aseneth saw Joseph on the chariot, and she was deeply stricken Relying upon rumor, Aseneth had made clear to Pentephres why she did not want to marry Joseph (Aseneth 4), but once she sets eyes on Joseph, she radically changes her mind. This reaction is characteristic of ancient Greek novels in which at least one of the protagonists falls in love with the other at first sight.
\n6:2\u20137. what will I do now \u2026 in ignorance In the manuscript tradition, the order of these verses is preserved in two different ways, and either order conceivably represents the original composition of this narrative. That the verses are simply rearranged (and not rewritten) reflects the flexibility that scribes believed they could exercise when copying and\/or translating this story.
\n6:2. the sun from heaven has come to us in his chariot \u2026 shines in it like light upon the earth Another correlation between Joseph\u2019s appearance and depictions of Helios in Greek traditions. A Jewish audience in Ptolemaic Egypt would have also recognized an allusion to Ptolemaic depictions of royalty (see second comment on 5:5).
\n6:3. son of God Although in some Second Temple writings this phrase carried messianic implications (e.g., the Gospels and letters of Paul), there is no indication in Aseneth that it does so here. This phrase is best understood as a description of Joseph\u2019s favored status before the Hebrew god. Several Greek stories describe the divine ancestry of heroes and wise men and, therefore, emphasize the distinction between these figures and \u201cregular\u201d people. In ancient Greek novels, the protagonists are often likened to the divine realm in order to highlight their extraordinary nature, and the descriptions of Joseph in Aseneth 5 (by the narrator) and Aseneth 6 (by Aseneth) follow a similar pattern. In both Jewish and Greek traditions, the metaphorical reference \u201cson of a god\u201d was often applied to royalty, but unlike Hellenistic and Roman rulers, Joseph is not explicitly understood as deified. So, when Aseneth calls Joseph a\/the son of God, she describes his seeming royal status and extraordinary nature; he is unlike any man (see also 6:5).
\n6:4. who among men on earth \u2026 will bear such light? This comment corresponds with Aseneth\u2019s identification of Joseph as \u201cson of God\u201d (see previous comment). Upon seeing Joseph, Aseneth realizes that he is no ordinary man. Ancient Greek novels characterize the transparency of the protagonists\u2019 noble essence in similar ways; anyone in the presence of the protagonist quickly ascertains the noble stature of that person. Part and parcel of their nobility, the protagonists are exceedingly beautiful, but Aseneth also builds on the account of Joseph\u2019s handsome appearance in Gen. 39:6.
\n6:6. no secret \u2026 the great light that is in him In Greek tradition, Helios has a blinding gaze that is also passed on to his children, and since he rides his chariot across the sky each day, he sees more than people or even other gods (e.g., Hymn to Demeter 74\u201388). Filling out the likeness of Joseph to Helios, Aseneth also assumes that he has all-seeing powers like that of Helios. In Jewish Wisdom Literature, the way of the righteous is likened to a shining light (Prov. 4:18; also Prov. 13:9; 20:27; Wis. 5:6), and several Second Temple writers associate wisdom with light. It is possible, then, that this light imagery also refers to the insight and intelligence that Joseph displays in the Genesis account.
\n6:8. servant and slave, and I will serve him forever Keep in mind that Aseneth is saying this while dressed like royalty (cf. 3:6) and from the vantage point of having seven parthenoi serve her. Societies in the ancient Mediterranean world were highly stratified, especially in urban areas, so an ancient Jewish audience would assume that Aseneth is speaking metaphorically here. It would be humiliating and dishonorable for her to become a slave; instead, she is stating her humbled stance where she now recognizes that Joseph is far nobler than Pharaoh\u2019s son (cf. 4:11).
\n7:1. because Joseph routinely did not eat \u2026 an abomination to him This scene is a reversal of the meal etiquette in Gen. 43:32. In the biblical account, Joseph and his brothers eat separately from the Egyptians because it is \u201cabhorrent to the Egyptians,\u201d but in Aseneth, the separation is made out of respect for what Joseph believes.
\n7:3. for all the wives and daughters \u2026 suffer horribly because of his beauty This is an expansion of the events that transpire between Joseph and Potiphar\u2019s wife in Gen. 39, about which several versions exist in late antique Judaism. According to James L. Kugel, several features of Gen. 39:14 led Jewish exegetes to narrate how Potiphar\u2019s wife solicited other noblewomen in her household to complain to their husbands about Joseph \u201cdallying\u201d with them or how Potiphar\u2019s wife summoned the noblewomen to see how breathtakingly gorgeous Joseph was. Aseneth builds upon this latter theme.
\n7:4. whom the wives regularly sent to him with gold, silver, and costly gifts Along the same vein of the narratives about women gawking at Joseph (explained above), other stories circulated about women (both wives and unmarried, young women) climbing walls or looking down from buildings to catch a glimpse of Joseph and tossing jewelry and other riches to him. Kugel notes that Aseneth is looking down from her upper story window, and so she appears to Joseph to be like the other Egyptian women he has encountered. Given Aseneth\u2019s reaction to his arrival (Aseneth 6), Joseph\u2019s impression is not too off track.
\nI will not sin before the LORD Cf. Gen. 39:9, where Joseph gives a similar reason to Potiphar\u2019s wife.
\n7:5. the face of his father, Jacob, before his eyes The Babylonian Talmud (Sotah 36b) narrates a similar vision that Joseph has of his father when Potiphar\u2019s wife seizes Joseph\u2019s garment, and Jacob urges Joseph to overcome his desires.
\nhe kept in mind his father\u2019s commands This additional feature provides Joseph\u2019s source of moral guidance when he responded to Potiphar\u2019s wife (i.e., how he knew that committing adultery with her would be a sin against God; Gen. 39:9).
\nfervently guard yourselves against the strange woman, (from) associating with her. For association with her is destruction and ruin In Jub. 39:6, Joseph refuses the advances of Potiphar\u2019s wife because he remembers Jacob\u2019s instructions never to commit adultery, which would be punishable by death. In Aseneth, Joseph is in another kind of scene whereby he has repeatedly had to fend off scores of Egyptian women from wealthy households, many of whom are maidens (\u201cdaughters\u201d; 7:3) like Aseneth. Regarding this latter group, the pressing point of Jacob\u2019s instruction here, then, is that the sons of Jacob should not marry women who are considered outsiders (i.e., deemed inappropriate for marriage). The female stranger (or \u201cforbidden woman\u201d) is discussed in several biblical texts, but the clarity displayed in these examples conceals a more complex situation in ancient Israelite history. The notion of the female outsider expressed concerns about interactions that were perceived to threaten the identity of a group (whether self-identified as Judeans, Israelites, or Jews). In the Second Temple period, this notion fueled some discussions about intermarriage, and Jacob\u2019s teaching here in Aseneth seems to reflect that discussion.
\n7:7. not a female stranger \u2026 a parthenos who hates every man Pentephres\u2019s concept of \u201cstranger\u201d is slightly different than Joseph\u2019s. Because Aseneth is his daughter, Pentephres assumes that she would not be viewed as an outsider by Joseph, but how Joseph applied Jacob\u2019s command (which the audience knows and Pentephres does not) does not seem to coincide with Pentephres\u2019s understanding. Aseneth is a daughter of a satrap (1:3), just like the other daughters of Egyptian leaders (7:3). However, Aseneth is a parthenos (see comment on 1:4) who has never shown or acted upon any sexual desire with a man; presumably the other young noblewomen are parthenoi (i.e., sexually innocent), but unlike these women, Aseneth has no sexual desire for Joseph (so Pentephres thinks; cf. 4:9\u201311). It is this last bit of information that convinces Joseph that she is not a threat (7:8).
\n7:8. Joseph was extremely glad Literally, \u201cJoseph rejoiced a very great rejoicing.\u201d See comment on 3:3.
\n8:1. chaste Gk. parthenos. See comment on 1:4 and fourth comment on 4:7.
\nhe hates every strange woman as you also (hate) every strange man From Pentephres\u2019s perspective, he believes that Aseneth has no desire for Joseph (cf. Aseneth 4), so he assures her that Joseph is not like the other noblemen who have come to their home (cf. Aseneth 1).
\n8:2. God the Most High Gr. theos hypsistos is the most common epithet for the Hebrew god in Aseneth, other than the familial reference to \u201cthe god of Joseph.\u201d In Greek religious practice, hypsistos (\u201cMost High\u201d) referred to the most supreme god (e.g., Zeus) of a tradition and\/or geographical region. In the LXX, theos hypsistos translates Heb. \u2019el \u2018elyon or \u2018elyon, and it also is used in Second Temple writings as a reference to God. This epithet appears on Jewish inscriptions dated to the Greco-Roman period in Egypt.
\n8:5. and her breasts already were standing like ripe apples This complete line is attested in only two manuscripts; several show part of this line, and many lack any kind of description of Aseneth\u2019s breasts. This visual description enhances the \u201cmale gaze\u201d in this scene, but most likely later scribes added it.
\ngod-fearing man See fourth comment on 4:7.
\nblessed bread of life \u2026 with blessed oil of incorruption The first of several dyadic or triadic phrases in Aseneth that are interpreted by many scholars to reflect actual Jewish ritual practices, but the phrase is more likely a general metaphorical description meant to distinguish between the religious practices and lifestyle of Joseph and Aseneth. The \u201cbread of life,\u201d \u201ccup of immortality,\u201d and \u201coil of incorruption\u201d contrast with the \u201cbread of strangulation,\u201d \u201ccup of treachery,\u201d and \u201coil of destruction\u201d of which Aseneth partakes, so Joseph\u2019s comment does not refer to a specific Jewish ritual but expresses Jewish life as it compares with his view of non-Jewish existence. Grain, wine, and oil were not only common elements of everyday life in the ancient world, but in biblical texts, this group of three repeatedly refer to the essentials of the good life. Aseneth\u2019s participation in Egyptian ritual practice pollutes the essentials of her life, and therefore Joseph forbids her to kiss him; Aseneth is not like kin (Aseneth 8:6) who can share this kind of intimate greeting.
\nto kiss A gesture of greeting for those who were kin or considered as such (cf. Xenophon, Cyr. 1.4.27).
\ndead and dumb idols A common depiction in biblical texts and Second Temple literature that portrays how statues, images, or other representations of foreign deities (i.e., \u201cidols\u201d) do not bear any effective connection to the divine realm. The portrayal of idols as dead and dumb suggests that idolaters believed that these representations were gods, but this implication is an exaggeration meant for rhetorical purposes. Most so-called idolaters did not believe that the omnipotence of divine beings could be contained in human creations, but they did believe that religious objects conveyed divine power in some way. The stereotype of depicting idols as lifeless forms mistaken for gods clarified the difference between the religious practices of others and that of ancient Israelites\/Jews.
\n8:6. from his tribe and kindred In the few places in the LXX where \u201ctribe\u201d (phylos) and \u201ckindred\u201d (or \u201cclan,\u201d syngeneia) are used together, these terms refer to the broader social unit (tribe) that consisted of more localized, extended families (kindred) (Num. 1; Judg. [Alexandrinus] 18:2, 19; [Alexandrinus and Vaticanus] 21:24). Syngeneia consisted of brothers and male cousins and their spouses and children, and both the social units of \u201ctribe\u201d and \u201ckindred\u201d were presumably endogamous (cf. Gen. 24). However, phylos sometimes is synonymous with syngeneia (24:4, 40), and so Joseph could simply be making a parallel statement to emphasize his point. Some scribes may have determined that including syngeneia was redundant, as some Greek manuscripts do not provide it.
\nand the woman with whom he shares a bed A man\u2019s wife. Joseph defines non-strangers (for men) to include only women of one\u2019s extended family (and\/or tribe), but he lists a man\u2019s wife (who is obviously a member of the extended family) as a separate category. Since an ancient Jewish audience would know that Aseneth eventually marries Joseph, Joseph\u2019s emphasis may highlight the begging question of the audience (i.e., when does she kiss him?), but it may also underscore a distinction that unfolds in Aseneth, that a god-fearing man can marry a woman who descends from outside the extended family (or tribe). For Joseph, the category of \u201cnonstranger\u201d is determined by ritual practice and devotion solely to the Hebrew god.
\nthe living God An epithet for the Hebrew\/Jewish god in biblical and Second Temple literature, and it stands in contrast to gods represented by \u201cidols\u201d (see last comment on 8:5).
\n8:7. it is not fitting for a god-fearing woman \u2026 an abomination before the LORD The rules that Joseph applies to himself and to men like him, he also applies to women like him. He adds, however, that a woman who breaks this rule commits an \u201cabomination\u201d (bdelygma) before God, which is not said about god-fearing men who break the same rule. In ancient Israelite and Second Temple literature, \u201cabomination\u201d consistently describes sacrilegious behavior when referring to actions before God. Although presumably men who kissed a non-stranger committed as serious an error as women would, Joseph does not make this clarification, and so the question remains whether a woman who commits this error is more at fault than a man. Such an assumption would coincide with other biblical and Second Temple traditions that located the source of a family\u2019s honor in the actions of its female members.
\n8:8. Joseph looked at her \u2026 because Joseph was gentle and merciful, and he feared God Although Joseph refuses to greet Aseneth intimately, he is moved by her reaction to his words. Joseph\u2019s response here resonates well with his characterization in Gen. 42\u201347 and 50. Even though he first deals harshly with his brothers, he is often moved to tears about them (e.g., 42:24 and 43:30\u201331), and he ultimately forgives his brothers for their cruel actions against him (37).
\n8:9. called from darkness to light, from error to truth, and from death to life This triplet begins with creation references (cf. Job 37:15; Isa. 42:16; Gen. 1) and transitions to wisdom imagery in which light, truth, and life are all images of the good (Prov. 20:27\u201328). It also calls to mind God\u2019s deliverance of the petitioner out of darkness (1 Sam. 2:6).
\nparthenos See comment on 1:4.
\nand include her \u2026 before everything came into being Family d reads a different line: \u201cShe whom you chose before (she) came into being\u201d (cf. Jer. 1). The concept of the chosen people is prevalent in biblical literature (Deut. 7:6; Exod. 19:3\u20136; Isa. 43:20), but the shift away from the election of Aseneth herself leads some scholars to argue that family d preserves the original version of Aseneth and later scribes changed this verse.
\nlet her enter your resting place, which you prepared for your chosen ones In biblical literature, the idea of God\u2019s chosen resting place is Jerusalem and\/or God\u2019s presence in the Temple (Ps. 132:13\u201318; Isa. 66:1), but closely associated with this idea is the guaranteed security for the chosen people, Israel (1 Kings 8:56). In Aseneth, however, neither Jerusalem nor the physical Temple serve as the resting place for the elect.
\n9:1. Aseneth was extremely glad Literally, Aseneth rejoiced a very great rejoicing. See comment on 3:3.
\nshe was \u2026 experiencing joy, grief, much fear, trembling, and continuous sweating The excess and conflict of emotional responses are a common trait that characters display in ancient Greek novels.
\n9:5. began to create all of his creation This is a paraphrase of Gen. 1:1. Joseph appears to have visited Pentephres on the Sabbath, on which day he plans to visit again. \u201cHis creation\u201d is literally \u201chis created things\u201d in the Greek. Given Joseph\u2019s reference to Genesis 1, \u201ccreated things\u201d likely refers not only to creatures but also to the created world (e.g., night and day, the expanse separating the waters, and the constellations).
\n10:1. parthenoi See comment on 1:4.
\n10:2. came to the gateway The entryway between Aseneth\u2019s tower and the rest of the house complex.
\ncurtain In the LXX and other Second Temple literature, Gk. katapetasmata refers to a curtain in the sacred space of the Jerusalem Temple. The use of this word here helps to convey the sacred setting of Aseneth\u2019s dwelling, as does the fact that she is left alone with her attendants (10:1).
\n10:4. parthenos \u2026 parthenoi See comment on 1:4.
\n10:8\u201317 Aseneth\u2019s actions follow a similar pattern of behavior shown by biblical characters who repent and\/or petition for God\u2019s mercy: she changes her attire to more suitable clothing, sits in sackcloth and ashes, abstains from food and drink for a period of time, and in the following chapters prays to God (Aseneth 12\u201313; cf. Dan. 9\u201310; Additions to Esther C; Jdt. 9). Aseneth also demonstrates her complete commitment to changing her lifestyle: she destroys her divine representations (both her statuettes and jewelry with divine images), throws out all food associated with her ritual sacrifices, and even tosses the royal garb she had been wearing. Finally, her posture at this point is akin to the Ninevites in Jon. 3:5\u20139; neither she nor they voice certainty that their penitent behavior will change God\u2019s mind.
\n10:8. parthenoi See comment on 1:4.
\n10:13. royal meal As was the case for ancient Israel, ritual sites tended to be the butcheries of the ancient world (cf. Deut. 12).
\nthe fatlings, the fish, the meat of the heifer, and all of the sacrificial offerings of her gods and their vessels of wine libation The materials for sacrifice may have been slightly different in Jewish ritual practice in Jerusalem as compared to that of other groups in the ancient world, but the fact of sacrifice was not. Ritual offerings or sacrifices were ubiquitous in the ancient world, for it was one of the standard ways of honoring gods, appeasing gods, forming social contracts and other kinds of relationships, and ensuring social well-being for an individual, group, city, or people as a whole. In Jewish sacrificial offerings, the animals regularly offered (for both regular festivals and daily rituals in the Jerusalem Temple) were limited to domesticated animals from the herd or flock (rams, goats, lambs, bulls, and birds [turtledoves or pigeons]). Along with animal offerings, there were grain offerings of choice flour mixed with oil and sometimes sprinkled with incense (Lev. 2; 6\u20137) and drink offerings of wine (libations) poured out at the base of the altar. The materials for ritual offerings varied among other ancient groups; whatever animals or grains were staples of the local population\u2019s diet would be fit for ritual offerings. Here in Aseneth, the impression is that Aseneth was extremely devout, performing several different kinds of sacrificial offerings.
\n10:14. skin of sackcloth This is an unusual description because sackcloth is made of animal hair (goat or camel) and not skin. In the LXX, however, the word for \u201cskin\u201d (derris, which is translated as \u201cleather\u201d in Aseneth 10:2 and 14) is used in Ex. 26:7\u201310 in place of \u201ccloth\u201d (yeriah Heb.). So the cloths of (goat) hair that are used to make the Tabernacle tent are \u201cskins of hair\u201d in the LXX. Aseneth girds herself with sackcloth and sits in ashes; this gesture aligns her actions well with other biblical characters (see comment on 10:8\u201317).
\n10:16. and lo, there was much mud \u201cLo\u201d (Gk. idou, Heb. hinneh) is translated several different ways in this narrative (e.g., \u201clook!\u201d or \u201csuddenly\u201d). It is best understood as a literary device that abruptly directs the audience\u2019s attention to a particular scene or image in the narrative.
\n11:1x\u201319 None of this appears in family d, and several manuscripts omit 11:15\u201318.
\n11:1x\u20131y. her face was drenched from her tears \u2026 and she failed in her strength Common posture of the psalmist in lament psalms.
\n11:3. with whom am I to seek refuge This is a rhetorical question. The image of God as a place of refuge is prevalent in biblical literature: seeking refuge in God (Ps. 143:9; 2 Sam. 22), and God as refuge.
\nparthenos See comment on 1:4.
\nfatherless The word for \u201cfatherless\u201d (orphanos) is usually translated \u201corphan,\u201d but in antiquity the loss of specifically the father had destabilizing effects in the economic and social conditions of a child\u2019s life. Both in ancient Israelite and Greco-Roman times, most households were hierarchically structured whereby the majority of the assets belonged to the father, and especially in urban areas, the public position of the household depended upon the father. The metaphor \u201corphan\u201d as a description of a lowly and vulnerable state would immediately remind an ancient audience of the condition of a child loosing a father, losing the financial and social stability of a healthy family unit. This fundamental role of the father, then, becomes a metaphor for God who takes care of the socially vulnerable and needy (Pss. 68:6; 89:27; Deut. 8:5).
\ndesolate, abandoned, and hated Frequent imagery in lament psalms whereby the psalmist describes his\/her vulnerable state.
\n11:4. all have come to hate me, even including my father and my mother Since all of Aseneth\u2019s extended family left a week prior (10:1) and they return in Aseneth 20, Aseneth does not actually know what her parents think. She is imagining their reaction, and given that her father is the chief priest of Heliopolis, an ancient Jewish audience would find her prediction believable. Cf. Ps. 27, where the psalmist specifically mentions the abandonment of the parents.
\n11:6. all people hate me because I, for my part, have hated every man The narrative does not confirm Aseneth\u2019s assessment that \u201call hate her\u201d (11:4\u20136). Her emotional response is best understood in the context of ancient Greek novels, in which the protagonists voice emotional complaints that describe their plight. The reproach of others is also a repeated claim in lament psalms (Ps. 42, 44, 79).
\n11:7. impassioned Gk. z\u0113l\u014dt\u0113s, often translated \u201czealous\u201d or \u201cjealous,\u201d is best understood with the connotation of divine rage. The term typically describes God\u2019s response to Israelites who worshiped other gods (Exod. 20:5), and God\u2019s reaction against this rule is vehement.
\n11:9. my mouth was defiled by the sacrificial offerings of the idols See 2 Macc. 7; 4 Macc. 5:36.
\n11:10. true \u2026 merciful, compassionate, patient, abounding in mercy, and kind A list of attributes for God mentioned several times in biblical texts (Exod. 34:6\u20137). Psalm 86 not only provides this list, but also calls God \u201ckind\u201d (epieik\u0113s). The same word describes the equitable administrative style of Pentephres (see comment on 1:3); here it is applied to God, but it has the same implications: it describes God as an overseer who is graciously tolerant when judging human behavior. The overall structure of the Psalm 86 also matches Aseneth\u2019s posture and complaint. Although, unlike the psalmist, Aseneth is not yet petitioning to God, she is assessing her situation in a way similar to the psalmist.
\nHe does not consider (the) sin of a humble person The biblical idea that God will not reckon the errors of the contrite or humble of heart (cf. Jer. 31:34; Isa. 40:1\u20132; Pss. 25:7; 32:2).
\n11:13. protector of the pursued, and helper of the afflicted \u201cProtector\u201d and \u201chelper\u201d are also common descriptions of the compassionate God, and several psalms pair them together.
\n11:15. toward the window \u2026 she spread out her hands to heaven In her upper room, Sarah takes a similar posture before she petitions God (Tob. [Sinaiticus] 3:11; cf. Dan. 6).
\n11:18. if the LORD strikes me in anger, He in turn will heal me Cf. Deut. 32:39, where God \u201cstrikes\u201d (patass\u014d) and \u201cheals\u201d (iaomai), and Hosea 6:1. In Isa. 19:22, the prophet proclaims that God will strike (patass\u014d) the Egyptians with a great blow, then heal (iaomai) them, and they will return to the LORD.
\nif He disciplines me \u2026 in His mercy In Ps. 6:1\u20133 the psalmist begs God not to \u201cdiscipline\u201d (paideu\u014d) him but to have \u201cmercy\u201d (elee\u014d) on him and \u201cheal\u201d (iaomai) him (cf. Ps. 41:5). \u201cDiscipline\u201d is an instructional term that implies tough correction with the purpose of helping a student\/child gain perfection in their knowledge about and intuition for living properly (cf. Prov. 23:12\u201314). This image also describes God\u2019s instruction of the Israelites (Deut. 8:5).
\n12:1\u201313:15 Aseneth\u2019s prayer closely resembles the recognizable pattern of certain psalms called psalms of individual lament. The categories of traditional form criticism on these psalms are somewhat helpful here, even if they do not describe precisely how this particular prayer flows and functions:<\/in><\/a><\/p>\n