Читать книгу Philo of Alexandria - Jean Danielou - Страница 5

Erwin Goodenough remarks, “There is no important writer of antiquity who has been so little studied as Philo Judaeus . . . no one seems to have tried to read Philo, if I may say so, with the grain instead of against it, to understand what Philo himself thought he was driving at in all his passionate allegorical labors.”1 Goodenough himself and even more Harry Austryn Wolfson did an enormous amount to remedy this lack. Of course, since Goodenough and Wolfson, scholarly monographs on Philo continue to appear, and Richard Schenk has recently authored A Brief Guide to Philo. Daniélou’s Philo of Alexandria gives us a historical, philosophical, and religious context of Philo. We almost know him personally by the end.

If it is generally appropriate when translating to give the author’s important sources as they appear in published English translations, this is particularly true for Daniélou, who sometimes does not indicate ellipses or who occasionally paraphrases, though using quotation marks. The English speaking world is fortunate to have the Loeb Classical Library, Cambridge: Harvard University Press and London: W. Heinemann, 1971–91 (for the set I consulted). Philo’s treatise consists of ten volumes in Greek and English and two volumes in English only that are supplements containing treatises preserved in Ancient Armenian translations. The English translation of volumes I–V is by F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker. The English translation of volumes VI–X is by F. H. Colson alone. Ralph Marcus did the translation from Armenian. To these I will refer by their Latin titles, books where applicable, and paragraphs as Daniélou does, adding the volume and page of the English translations, e.g. Philo, I, 1, or Philo, Appendix I, 1.

A useful one volume English translation is available in The Works of Philo, done in the nineteenth century by C. D. Yonge and recently updated and corrected by David Scholer.

Within quotations from Philo, material in square brackets is Daniélou’s, unless it is explicitly indicated that they are the translator’s. Material in curved parentheses appears in the Loeb version.

Incidentally, when checking Daniélou’s quotations against the Loeb version, I verified the Greek terms he sometimes includes in his quotations. Daniélou usually mention these terms in the nominative. Where terms appear within quotations, I have tried to present them in the case in which they actually are found in Philo.

Daniélou is not consistent in the abbreviations he uses to refer to Philo’s treatises. I have followed the Loeb for Latin names, made my own (hopefully transparent) contracted names, and generally followed the Loeb’s English with minor adaptations. I render Apologia pro Iudaeis as Apology for the Jews rather than the Loeb’s Hypothetica.

Incidentally, though Daniélou’s French text could have stood more editing, the Loeb also manages to refer to both De Congressu Querendae Eruditionis Gratiae and De Congressu Eruditionis Gratiae; to both Quod Deterius Potiori Insidiari Solet and Quod Deterius Potiori Insidiari Soleat, and both Quod Deus Immutabilis Sit and Quod Deus Sit Immutabilis. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone!

Accordingly, the following columns give the Loeb’s Latin titles, my contractions, and the English name.

Volume I

De Opificio Mundi	De Opificio	On Creation
Legum Allegoriae	Legum Allegoriae	Allegorical Interpretation

Volume II

De Cherubim	De Cherubim	On the Cherubim
De Sacrificiis Abelis et Caini	De Sacrificiis	On the Sacrifice of Abel and Cain
Quod Deterius Potiori Insidiari	Quod Deterius	The Worse Attacks the Better Soleat
De Posteritate Caini	De Posteritate	On the Posterity of Cain
De Gigantibus	De Gigantibus	On the Giants

Volume III

Quod Deus Immutabilis Sit	Quod Immutabilis	On the Unchangeableness of God
De Agricultura	De Agricultura	On Husbandry
De Plantatione	De Plantatione	On Noah’s Work as a Planter
De Ebrietate	De Ebrietate	On Drunkenness
De Sobrietate	De Sobrietate	On Sobriety

Volume IV

De Confusione Linguarum	De Confusione	On the Confusion of Tongues
De Migratione Abrahami	De Migratione	On the Migration of Abraham
Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres	Quis Heres	Who is the Heir of Divine Things
De Congressu Queredae Eruditionis Gratia	De Congressu	On Preliminary Studies

Volume V

De Fuga et Inventione	De Fuga	On Flight and Finding
De Mutatione Nominum	De Mutatione	On the Change of Names
De Somniis	De Somniis	On Dreams

Volume VI

De Abrahamo	De Abrahamo	On Abraham
De Josepho	De Josepho	On Joseph
De Vita Mosis	De Vita Mosis	Moses

Volume VII

De Decalogo	De Decalogo	On the Decalogue
De Specialibus Legibus I–III	De Specialibus Legibus	On Special Laws

Volume VIII

De Specialibus Legibus IV	De Specialibus Legibus	On Special Laws
De Virtutibus	De Virtutibus	On Virtues
De Praemiis et Poenis	De Praemiis	On Rewards and Punishments

Volume IX

Quod Omnis Probus Liber Sit	Quod Probus	Every Good Man is Free
De Vita Contemplativa	De Vita Contemplativa	On Contemplative Life
De Aeternitate Mundi	De Aeternitate Mundi	On the Eternity of the World
In Flaccum	In Flaccum	Against Flaccus
Apologia pro Iudaeis	Pro Iudaeis	Apology for the Jews
De Providentia	De Providentia	On Providence

Volume X

De Legatione ad Gaium	Ad Gaium	On the Embassy to Gaius
Supplement I
Quaestiones et Solutiones in Genesim	In Genesim	Questions and Answers on Genesis
Supplement II
Quaestiones et Solutiones in Exodum	In Exodum	Questions and Answers on Exodus

Daniélou refers to De Explicatione Legum, which seems to be a collective name for Legum Allegoriae and some of the treatises on the patriarchs. He also mentions De Mundo, which Yonge regards as identical to De Aeternitate Mundi.

Alexandria was the homeland of the Septuagint. (Daniélou has some intriguing comments on Greek translations of the Bible.) Philo, who wrote in Greek used it. One of the differences between the Septuagint, which the Vulgate and translations from the Vulgate follow, is in the numbering of the Psalms. Daniélou himself follows the Hebrew enumeration, even when referring to the Septuagint. It will be noted that both counts total 150. As an exercise upon completion of the present work, the reader might try to imagine Philo giving a homily on the excellence of 150.

To avoid confusion, below is a helpful table that I have adapted from A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture (Bernard Orchard and others ed., Thomas Nelson and Sons, London, etc., 1953, section 335d):

Hebrew and Contemporary	Septuagint and Vulgate
1 through 8	same
9 and 10	9
11 through 113	10 through 112
114 and 115	113
116	114 and 115
117 through 146	116 through 145
147	146 and 147
148 through 150	same

I have made two terminological decisions. The adjective derived from “Philo” is “Philonic,” on the model of “Platonic.”

More importantly: the Logos is it. In French, Joan of Arc and the kitchen table are feminine. Louis XIV and books are masculine. In English people, animals, some odd plants, and ships have gender. Everything else is “it.” The delightful suggestion was made to me that, since in some ways later discussions of the Shekinah derive from Philo’s reflections upon the Logos, I might call the Logos “she”. The trouble, for one thing, is that Shekinah is Hebrew for Sophia. Philo also uses Sophia, and the relations between Sophia and Logos are not quite clear. Besides, I did not want to make him into an early cabbalist. Nor did I think I should make him a Christian by referring to the Logos as “he.” Maddeningly, sometimes it sounds very much as if the Logos is a personal being and other times is being described as an aspect of one. Sometimes it is a creature, but sometimes not. I have not dared to try to discern. So the Logos is “it.” Although the Loeb’s English may sometimes deliberately cultivate an archaic (or perhaps King James version) English, use of it has also forestalled any impulses of mine to render language about God with an eye to medieval metaphysics, and I have thus avoided the final temptation of making Philo into a Thomist or a Scotist.

1. Goodenough, By Light Light, 5.