PHILO. — The greatest writer among the Jews of Alexandria, b. ca. 30 B.C., d. ca. A.D. 50. Of distinguished family (Flavius Josephus, *Antiquitates Judaicae*, XVIII, 8, 1), he received, along with his Hebrew education, the Greek education common to distinguished citizens (Cong., 74-76). He sometimes withdrew into solitude to devote himself to contemplation (Leg. All., II, 21). In A.D. 40, already an old man (Caligula, opening), he joined the mission that the Jewish community sent to Caligula, on account of the persecution it was suffering (ibid. and *Flaccus*).
In his writings, he attempted to reconcile the Hebrew Revelation with Greek culture, placing the latter at the service of the former; he is therefore the first true Jewish theologian. Imbued with ardent faith and a cultivator of the Torah like a Palestinian Pharisee, Philo had a pronounced taste for philosophy, “the most perfect of the goods that have ever come to humanity” (Opif., 54), which he sincerely aspired to (Spec., III, 1-6) and heartily praised Plato (Prob., II, 23), the Neopythagoreans (loc. cit., I, 2), Heraclitus, and the Stoics, whom he considered mere imitators of Moses in matters of truth and morality (Her., 214; M.-J. Lagrange, p. 554).
Here is a list of Philo’s writings with the usual abbreviations in parentheses:
1. Catechetical exposition:
Quaestiones et solutiones in Genesis, I-IV (Q. G.);
In Exodum, I-II (Q. Ex.).
2. Allegorical commentary on Genesis:
Legum allegoriae I-III (Leg. All.);
De Cherubim et flammmeo gladio (Cher.);
De sacrificiis Abelis et Caini (Sacr.);
Quod deterius potiori insidari soleat (Det.);
De posteritate Caini (Post.);
De gigantibus (Gig.);
Quod Deus sit immutabilis (Deus);
De agricultura (Agr.);
De plantatione Noe (Plant.);
De ebrietate (Ebr.);
De sobrietate (Sobr.);
De confusione linguarum (Conf.);
De migratione Abrahami (Migr.);
Quis rerum divinarum heres sit (Her.);
De congressu quaerendae eruditionis causa (Cong.);
De fuga (Fug.);
De mutatione nominum (Mut.);
De somniis I-II (Somn.).
3. Exposition of Mosaic legislation:
De mundi opificio (Opif.);
De Abrahamo (Abr.);
De Iosepho (Ios.);
De decalogo (Decal.);
De specialibus legibus, I-IV (Spec.);
De virtutibus: de fortitudine, de caritate, de potentia (Virt.);
De praemiis et poenis (Praem.).
4. Other writings:
Vita Mosis, I-III (Mos.);
Quod omnis probus sit liber (Prob.);
Adversus Flaccum (Flacc.);
De legatione ad Gaium (Leg. G.);
De providentia (Prov.);
De Alexandro et quod propria ratione mutua animalia habeant (Alex.);
Hypothetica;
De Judaeis;
De vita contemplativa (v. Cont).
E. Schürer, pp. 487-542; the abbreviations are those of the Loeb edition, adopted by Völker.
Philo is the natural fruit of the Alexandrian environment, the most striking effect of that centuries-old contact between Judaism and the Greek spirit. While some Jews, corrupted by Greek sophistry, apostatized, scorning God and the Law (Post., 33-38), others no longer observed the Law, interpreting it allegorically (Migr., 89), or, remaining faithful to the literal sense, found in the Sacred Books legends akin to Greek myths (Conf., 2-3). Philo defended revealed truth and illustrated it with the humanism that recognizes the bond of knowledge and religion between God and man, who by himself is incapable of reaching God (Q. Ex., II, 68; Conf., 97; Fug., 97; passim; E. Bréhier, p. 175).
The first intermediary is the *Logos* (Her., 205; Bréhier, p. 170). Philo believed he found it on every page of the biblical narratives: the angel of Yahweh in the various theophanies (Somn., I, 117, 226; Cher., 3; etc.); the high priest is its symbol as mediator (Fug., 168-19; etc.). Philo interprets the *Logos* through such expressions as “the Name,” “the Glory,” etc. (Somn., I, 62, 227) and rabbinic speculations on the Word of God (Decal., 32-36); he calls it (cf. Wis 7:8; Post., 8, 25) the instrument of God in creation (Cher., 12-27); the image of God (Fug., 101); His firstborn Son (loc. cit., 109, etc.). In reality, these are mere evocations occasioned by the sacred text. Philo explains the Bible with the philosophical terminology of Alexandrian thought. The *Logos* is an ideal prototype between heaven and earth, the exemplar of the world (Opif., 24-25), the revealer of God; it is the cosmic principle of separation and diversity (ἀγῶς τομεύς), just as human reason is the logical principle of discrimination (Her., 130-40; H. A. Wolfson, I, p. 335 ff.). To these Platonic elements corresponds the predominant Stoic influence. As in Chrysippus, the *Logos* is the force that sustains the world, the principle of determination, the seminal *Logos* (loc. cit., p. 118 ff.), which, like the soul in us, fertilizes and acts in the world (loc. cit., pp. 230-33; Fug., 110); upon it depend the holy men (Det., 176); the law of the universe (Opif., 143), the moral law. The guiding idea behind these various images is the transcendence of God and the necessity of an intermediary between God and the world. The *Logos* therefore is not God; otherwise the entire system would collapse. The name of God given to it (Somn., I, 228-30; Leg. All., II, 207 ff.; Q. G., II, 52) is merely a concession made; and it is attenuated to the point of being an improper term (ἐνέπρεψεν θεός). It is not a person, but a personified nature, closer to a simple abstraction (J. Lebreton, pp. 209-51).
In cosmology, Philo adopts the commonplaces of the philosophy of his time: a blend of Platonism, Stoicism, and Neopythagoreanism (A. J. Festugière, *La révélation d’Hermès Trismégiste*, pp. 528-33).
In anthropology, he illustrates Jewish thought with the doctrines of Aristotle and Plato. In man there is a twofold element: the *nous*, which is the seat of his intellectual, moral, and mystical life; and the *pneuma*, which is the image of God. Only the *nous* is immaterial and constitutes the personality of man. The *pneuma* is intermediate between the *nous* and the lower part of the soul (the irrational element), in the continual struggle that takes place between them. The *pneuma* is bound like a prisoner in the body, which is the root of evil; freed from the domination of the lower soul, it returns to the intelligible world. It is impossible for the *nous* to rise to the knowledge (*φύσις*) of God without the communication of the *pneuma*. The *pneuma* is the image of God. The *pneuma* is the receptacle of the divine *Logos* (Leg. All., I, 12-13; Det., 80-84; Her., 11-12; A. J. Festugière, *L’idéal religieux des Grecs et l’évangile*, pp. 212-23). Just as it is impossible without the divine Grace (the action of the Spirit of Yahweh, often identified by Philo with the *Logos*) to renounce mortal things or to remain always in incorruptible things (Ebr., 145 ff.). The Spirit of God (the *Logos*) is the cause of virtue, the force that enables one to overcome the lower soul (E. Bréhier, pp. 214-24).
Man, with his natural faculties, can only arrive at knowing from creation the existence of God; to rise to the two powers: the creative and the royal, closer to the divine Mother; sometimes even to the *Logos*. When the soul recognizes its weakness, the divine *pneuma* descends upon it; divine fire that blazes when the human *pneuma* is kindled (Somn., I, 118). The divine light carries it even to the pure idea, absolutely simple, God Himself. In ecstasy, the *pneuma* is not separated from the body, nor is it suppressed, but it is possessed by God. The virtuous man thus becomes a prophet, an instrument of God (M.-J. Lagrange, pp. 554-57).
Philo makes of history a religious-moral lesson: the care of God for every soul; and thus he paves the way for messianism, of which he has only a faint image. Philo remained isolated. There is no connection between the New Testament and Philo, except for the literary dependence of Hebrews. Philo was ignored by Judaism. While Christianity was breaking into the Hellenic world, some of the Fathers gave credence to his writings because of their theology of the Word; but the heretics made more use of them against their opponents.