philo on human perfection - michael satlow

Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Vol. 59, Pt 2, October 2008

PHILO ON HUMAN PERFECTION

AbstractThis paper is an inquiry into Philos ideas about human perfection: forPhilo, what qualities and/or activities constitute a perfect life, and howare we to live our lives to achieve it? Philos model of ideal perfection, Iargue, is exemplified by the life of Moses. Moses, however, is so perfectthat he is inimitable; ordinary human beings must, rather, follow the pathsto perfection exemplified by the three biblical patriarchs Abraham, Isaac,and Jacob. Each heuristically represents a distinct path to perfection:Abraham, the first philosopher, exemplifies a life of contemplation,teaching, and inquiry; Isaac exemplifies natural perfection; and Jacob a lifemade perfect through righteous action. For Philo, the Essenes andthe Therapeutae further represent historical communities that exemplifythe pursuit of human perfection, the Essenes in the path of Jacob and theTherapeutae in that of Abraham. Most of us, however, are neither Essenesnor Therapeutae, and Philo discusses the possibilities, and challenges, thatordinary mortals face as we pursue human perfection.

PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA may have been an eclectic philosopher, butby the standards of his day he was indeed a philosopher.1 Likethe Hellenistic philosophers with whom he was surely familiarand from whom he drew many of his ideas and much of histerminology, Philo sought to help his readers perfect themselves.As Martha Nussbaum notes, for the Hellenistic philosophicalschools philosophy is above all the art of human life; andengagement in it that is not properly anchored to the business ofliving well is regarded as empty and vain.2 Philo, like theseother Hellenistic philosophers, was in the business of therapy, ofhelping people overcome their obstacles to human flourishingand true happiness (e2daimonia).

This paper is an inquiry into Philos ideas about humanperfection: what qualities and/or activities constitute a perfectlife, and how are we to live our lives to achieve it? My argument,in short, is that much of Philos oeuvre can profitably be seen as

1 All translations of Philo are taken from Francis H. Colson and GeorgeH. Whitaker, Philo (Loeb Classical Library; London: Heinemann, 192962).

2 Martha C. Nussbaum, The Therapy of Desire: Theory and Practice inHellenistic Ethics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 15.

The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.For Permissions, please email: [email protected]

doi:10.1093/jts/fln089

at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014

http://jts.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

a response to these questions. He develops an anthropologicaltheory that accounts for human imperfection (the result of thework of the irrational part of the soul). At the same time, andmore importantly, he seeks to show how we can transcend ourinherent imperfections to obtain true happiness and flourishing.

After briefly surveying Philos anthropology, I will discuss hisapproach to human perfection generally. Philos model of idealperfection is exemplified by the life of Moses. Moses, however,is so perfect that he is inimitable; ordinary human beings must,rather, follow the paths to perfection exemplified by the threebiblical patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Each heuristicallyrepresents a distinct path to perfection: Abraham, the firstphilosopher, exemplifies a life of contemplation, teaching, andinquiry; Isaac exemplifies natural perfection; and Jacob a lifemade perfect through righteous action. For Philo, the Essenesand the Therapeutae further represent historical communitiesthat exemplify the pursuit of human perfection, the Essenes inthe path of Jacob and the Therapeutae in that of Abraham. Mostof us, however, are neither Essenes nor Therapeutae, and Philodiscusses the possibilities, and challenges, that ordinary mortalsface as we pursue human perfection.

PHILOS ANTHROPOLOGY

For Philo, humans are naturally and by design imperfect. Hesummarizes what he sees as the human condition, among otherplaces, at Conf. 21:

trimeroA" 3m8n t8" uc8" 3parco0sh" t1 m1n noA" ka1 l0go", t1 d1 qum0",t1 d1 2piqum0a keklhr8sqai l2getai. khra0nei d1 kaq a3t0 te 6kaston 2d1Gka1 pr1" 4llhla p0nta koinI, 2peid1n 3 m1n noA" 7sa 2ros0nai ka1 deiliai2kolasiai te ka1 2dikiai speirousi qeris:, 3 d1 qum1" t1" 2kmane8" ka1para0rou" l0tta" ka1 7sa 4lla 2d1nei kak1 t0k:, 3 d1 2piqumia to1" 3p1nhpi0thto" 2e1 ko0ou" 7rwta" ka1 to8" 2pitucoAsi s0masi te ka1 pr0gmasiprosiptam0nou" 2pip0m : pantac0seOur soul ( uc8"), we are told, is tripartite, having one part assignedto the mind and reason (noA" ka1 l0go"), one to the spirited element(qum0"), and one to the appetites (2piqumia). There is mischief workingin them all, in each in relation to itself, in all in relation to eachother, when the mind reaps what is sown by its follies and acts ofcowardice and intemperance and injustice, and the spirited part bringsto the birth its fierce and raging furies and the other evil children ofits womb, and the appetite sends forth on every side desires (7rwta")ever winged by childish fancy, desires with light as chance directs onthings material and immaterial.

P H I L O O N H U M A N P E R F E C T I O N 501

at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

In this scheme, all three parts of the soul are necessary andnone are completely pure. At the same time, though, Philoclearly believes that there is a hierarchy among the soulscomponents. He most systematically works out this hierarchy inhis interpretation of Genesis 23 in Legum Allegoriae.

Philo reads the story of Genesis 23 not as a drama ofdisobedience to God, sin, and the loss of immortality (as manylater readers do), but as a story of the formation of human nature.In fact, he explicitly rejects the literal meaning of the biblical text.Commenting on Gen. 2:21, in which God puts Adam into a tranceand removes his side, Philo writes, These words in their literalsense are of the nature of a myth. For how could anyone admitthat a woman, or a human being at all, came into existence out ofa mans side? (Leg. 2.19; cf. Leg. 1.43). Why, after all, wouldGod not simply create Eve without resorting to this intricatesurgery? For Philo, the plain meaning of Genesis 23 isits allegorical one.

A full analysis of this allegorical interpretation is beyond thescope of this essay, but the anthropology that emerges from it iscritical for understanding much of Philos other writings. ForPhilo, God initially created mind or reason (noA" ka1 l0go") in Hisown image.3 But the mind did not exist in the world alone, forwith the mind so formed, linked to it in closest fellowship, aresenses, passions, vices, ten thousand other presences (Leg. 2.4).God thus brings the passions to the soul: The passions (t1 p0qh)[Moses] likens to wild beasts and birds, because, savage anduntamed as they are, they tear the soul to pieces, and because likewinged things they light upon the understanding (Leg. 2.11; cf.Gen. 2:19). These passions are obviously of little help to thehuman, so God creates the souls true helper, sense-perception(a2sq0sew"; Leg. 1.28), symbolized by the creation of woman in thebiblical account (Leg. 2.24). God did this by individuatingperception from the mind, and extending it till it reached theflesh and the whole surface of the body (Leg. 2.38). God thenleads active perception to the mind (Leg. 1.40), which recognizesthe faculty that had been drawn from it (bone of my bone, Gen.2:23). It is sense-perception, plus the organs of speech andgeneration, that comprise the irrational part of the soul

3 Cf. John Whittaker, The Terminology of the Rational Soul in theWritings of Philo of Alexandria, Studia Philonica Annual 8 (1996), pp. 120.

502 M I C H A E L L . S AT L O W

at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

(Leg. 1.11, 40).4 The irrational part of the soul is created from therational part, and is thus subordinate to it: For the mind is, so tospeak, God of the unreasoning part (Leg. 1.40). Elsewhere, Philopoints out that the irrational part of the soul depends on therational part for its continued vitality: The irrational part of thesoul is divided into seven parts, seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting,touching, speaking, begetting. Were a man to do away with theeighth, mind, which is the ruler of these, and here called Cain, hewould paralyse the seven also (Det. 168).

But all is not well with this marriage of the rational andirrational parts of the soul. Sense-perception threatens the mind.Philo reads Gen. 2:24 as meaning that For the sake of sense-perception the mind, when it has become her slave, abandons bothGod the Father of the universe, and Gods excellence and wisdom,the Mother of all things, and cleaves to and becomes one withsense-perception and is resolved into sense-perception so that thetwo become one flesh and one experience (Leg. 2.49). Creatednaked of vice and virtue (Leg. 2.53), mind and sense-perceptionare drawn together in the form of pleasure, represented by theserpent (Leg. 2.71). This is the pleasure that insinuates itselfabout all the organs of the irrational portion of the soul (Leg.2.75), and whose antidote is self-mastery (swros0nh Leg. 2.79).

Self-mastery is but one of the virtues that God provided inorder to help humans overcome unruly pleasures. For pitying ourrace and noting that it is compact of a rich abundance of ills, Hecaused earthly excellence (2ret1n) to strike root, bringing succourand aid to the diseases of the soul (Leg. 1.44). The term forexcellence, or better, virtue, refers generally to human virtuesand obligations (Leg. 1.56), but also to the four specific virtues ofprudence, self-mastery, courage, and justice (r0nhsi" swros0nh2ndreia dikaios0nh; Leg. 1.63). The earthly mind is to till and guardthe virtues, taking benefit from them all (Leg. 1.89, 97).

Philos anthropology is relatively consistent, even if histerminology is not. The passage from Conf. 21 with which thissection opened refers to the same tripartite nature of the soul, butwith diVerent terms. Drawing directly on Platos discussion inPhaedrus 246, Philo writes: We must observe, then, that our soulis threefold, and has one part that is the seat of reason, anotherthat is the seat of high spirit, and another that is the seat of desire(noht0on oBn 7ti 2st1n 3m8n trimer1" 3 uc1 ka1 7cei m0ro" t1 m1n

4 Cf. Harry Austryn Wolfson, Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy inJudaism, Christianity, and Islam, 2 vols. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1947), vol. 1, pp. 3859.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

logik0n, t1 d1 qumik0n, t1 d1 2piqumhtik0n; Leg. 1.70).5 In thisterminology, it is the latter two components of the soul thatcomprise its irrational part. For Philo, as for Plato, there is adichotomy between the soul and its corporeal container, the body.For neither, however, is the struggle between body and soul asimportant as the struggle between the rational and irrational partsof the soul itself.6

This struggle in fact defines the human condition. According toPhilo, the human mind, created in the divine image, is perfect(Leg. 1.94). We, however, are anything but. It is our task to achieveperfection, and Philo, like other Hellenistic philosophers, sees hisown task as helping us to do so.

PERFECTION

Philo frequently uses the language of perfection, teleioAn ort0leio". The language, as he uses it, is more philosophical thanbiblical. The verb teleioAn appears several times in the LXX, whereit usually means something like completed. More relevant for ourpurposes is that it is the stem often used to translate the Hebrewtam or tamim, where it usually denotes the condition of the sacrifice.On occasion, though, the Hebrew term is applied to a person.Noah, referred to as an ish s:adiq tamim (Gen. 6:9; cf. Sir. 44:17),becomes an 4nqrwpo" dikaio" t0leio". Deut. 18:13 commands that onebe tamim, which is rendered into Greek as t0leio"; a similar usageappears at Judg. 20:26, and then later at Wis. 9:6. Only Enochandthen only at Wis. 4:13is said to become perfect/blameless.

What, though, does it mean for a human being to be perfect? Inone passage, Philo suggests that the soul rid itself (2pobalo0sh")of its irrational part, the part of the soul that rouses the violenceof the passions (Fug. 91).7 Elsewhere, though, Philo is a bit moreprecise about what he means. In one discussion in which hediVerentiates between the man already perfected and the one stillmaking progress towards perfection, Philo writes:

6sper oBn pr0teron e3risketo 3 m1n t0leio" 7lon 2kt0mnwn t1n qum1n t8"2ristik8" uc8" ka1 poi8n a2t1n tiqas1n ka1 ceiro0qh ka1 e2rhnaian ka1

5 Cf. Leg. 1.713; 3.115.6 See David Winston, Philo and the Rabbis on Sex and the Body, in The

Ancestral Philosophy: Hellenistic Philosophy in Second Temple Judaism: Essays ofDavid Winston, ed. Gregory E. Sterling (Brown Judaic Studies/StudiaPhilonica Monographs; Providence, RI: Brown Judaic Studies, 2001),pp. 199219, esp. pp. 20610.

7 Cf. Mut. 85, which describes Jacob as overthrowing his passions, eventhough he will never be fully free of them.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

6lewn pr1" p0nta 7rgN te ka1 l0gN, 3 d1 prok0ptwn | o2 dun0meno" m1n2pok0 ai t1 p0qo"0rei g1r t1 st8qo", paide0wn d1 a2t1 l0gNkekrim0nN, 7conti d0o 2ret0", sa0neian ka1 2l0qeian. . .

We have already discovered the perfect man cutting out the seat ofanger (2kt0mnwn t1n qum1n) entirely from the wrangling soul, and sorendering it gentle and submissive and peaceable, and cheerfully readyto face every demand both in act and word; while the man of gradualimprovement was found powerless to cut away the passion (2pok0 ait1 p0qo"), for the breast is Aarons portion, but schooling it bywell-tested speech, attended by two virtues, clearness and truth. (Leg.3.140)8

Philo seems to identify two problems with the irrational soul.The first problem is with the thymos, the seat of anger. The perfecthuman being eliminates this part of the soul completely.The second distinct problem, though, appears to be rooted in theepithymia, and is manifested in how a person deals withthe passions.

This is, as Philo himself states, a subtle distinction. Philounderstands the biblical commands to cut out and put aside thebreast of the sacrifice and to wash its entrails (Lev. 7:30 and 9:14)as symbolic for what is necessary for human perfection:

Mwus8" t1 m1n sthq0nion 2aire8tai, t1n d1 koilian o2k 2aire8 m1n, pl0nei d0di1 ti; 7ti 3 t0leio" so1" 7lon m1n t1n qum1n 2sc0ei parait0sasqai ka1 2pok0 ai2rg8" katexanast0", t1n d1 koilian 2kteme8n 2dunate8Moses removes the breast; the belly he does not remove, but washes.Why is this? Because the perfect wise man can, by wholly renouncinganger, utterly avert and drive oV the uprising of the spirited elementin him, but to exscind the belly he is powerless. (Leg. 3.147)

For Philo, the passions are in fact necessary in a way thatthe thymos is not. Everybody must eat and drink. The goal isnot to eliminate these needs but to control them. Indeed,whereas those who are in the process of perfecting themselvesrun away from the passions, a perfect man recognizes and fightsthem:

so1 m1n g0r, 9 di0noia, m0pw teleiwqeis: ug1n ka1 drasm1n t8n paq8n3rm0zei melet8n, Mwuse8 d1 tJ teleiN param0nein tJ pr1" a2t1 pol0mNka1 2ntistate8n a2to8" ka1 diam0cesqai

8 Cf. Somn. 2.234 for another distinction between the perfect man and theone making progress.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

For while it well befits thee, O my mind, who art not yet madeperfect, to get practice by flying and running away from the passions,it befits Moses, the perfect one, not to desist from the warfare againstthem, but to resist them and fight it out. (Leg. 2.91)

True human perfection for Philo, then, entails both excisingthe seat of anger and rage and standing up to and fighting theinevitable passions. Moses himself would seem to oVer a modelworthy of emulation.

MOSES

Moses is the greatest and most perfect of men (Mos. 1.1). Thisappellation does not appear to be mere hyperbole; elsewhere Philois careful to contrast the perfect Aaron to the most perfectMoses (Det. 132). Philos description of Moses so impressedDavid Winston that he calls him a super-sage, a sage in the Stoicmould but whose virtues go beyond what any Stoic sage couldpossess.9

Philo portrays Moses as part of a chain or tradition of virtuoustraining. In the same way that Abrahams training began with theconsummation of Noahs, so too did Moses begin where Abrahamleft oV (Post. 174). But the diVerence between Moses and hisancestors seems not to be one merely of quantity, but also of kind.Moses is so perfect that nothing can be added or taken away fromhim; he seems not equal in rank to the logos but in fact part of it(Sacr. 8). Philo continues:

o2 m1n o2d0, 7te to8" perigeioi" cr0sa" a2t1n e4asen 2nomile8n, 4rconto" 5basil0w" koin0n tina 2ret1n 2n8pten a2tJ, kaq 7n 2n1 kr0to" 3gemone0seit8n t8" uc8" paq8n, 2ll e2" qe1n a2t1n 2ceirot0nei p8san t1n per1 t1s8ma c0ran ka1 t1n 3gem0na a2t8" noAn 3p0koa ka1 doAla 2po0na"didwmi g0r se hsi qe1n Fara0

9 David Winston, Sage and Supersage in Philo of Alexandria, in D. P. Wright,D. N. Freedman, and A. Hurvitz (eds.), Pomegranates and Golden Bells: Studies inJewish and Near Eastern Ritual, Law, and Literature in Honor of Jacob Milgrom(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1995), pp. 81524, repr. in The AncestralPhilosophy, ed. Sterling, pp. 17180. Cf. Ian W. Scott, Is Philos Moses a DivineMan?, Studia Philonica Annual 14 (2002), pp. 87111. Carl Holladay demonstratesthat Philos theological presuppositions account for his avoidance of labelling anyindividual a divine man (Carl R. Hollady, Theios Aner in Hellenistic-Judaism: ACritique of the Use of this Category in New Testament Christology [Society of BiblicalLiterature Dissertation Series 40; Missoula, MO: Scholars Press, 1977],pp. 10398). Cf. Louis H. Feldman, Philos View of Moses Birth andUpbringing, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 64 (2002), pp. 25881: Philos goal is topresent Moses as the perfect representation of the ideal of the kingly character(p. 258).


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

And even when He sent him as a loan to the earthly sphere andsuVered him to dwell therein, He gifted him with no ordinaryexcellence, such as that which kings and rulers have, wherewith tohold sway and sovereignty over the passions of the soul, but Heappointed him as god, placing all the bodily region and the mindwhich rules it in subjection and slavery to him. I give thee, He says,as god to Pharaoh (Exod. 7:1). (Sacr. 9)

The extraordinary claim of the passagethat Moses really isdivineis highlighted through comparison with another passage,Det. 161. Departing also from Exod. 7:1, Philo argues there thatthe wise man is said to be a god to the foolish man, but that inreality he is not God. Hence, in their note to this translation ofSacr. 9, Colson and Whitaker state that [t]o argue, therefore, ashe does here, that an attribute which is inconsistent with Godmust also be inconsistent with Moses is to give the text ameaning which he shrinks from elsewhere.10

Moses is simply diVerent from mere mortals. He is pure bodyand rational soul, lacking all of the lower impulses of the soul.Mosess perfected reason does not need to generate rationalimpulses, but simply computes its bodys true needs and proceedsto satisfy them in the only way it knows how, which is with perfectrationality.11 At QE 2.29 Philo claims that Moses aloneapproached God at Sinai (Exod. 24:2) because only the propheticmind can approach the divine, for having left behind all mortalkinds, he is changed into the divine.

Winston argues that Philos portrayal of Moses as a perfect,divine, super-sage serves an apologetic function: Moses is moreStoic than any Stoic sage could possibly be.12 Whether or not thisis the case, it is clear that Philos Moses was one of a kind. He wasthe holiest of men ever yet born (Mos. 2.192) and so good astudent that he seemed a case rather of recollection than oflearning (Mos. 1.21). At death he was transformed into mind,pure as sunlight (Mos. 2.288).

Philo is unclear on how Moses achieved this summit ofperfection. Ultimately, I think, it matters little to Philo. Mosessperfection is necessary for Philo for a variety of reasons: how, afterall, could the lawgiver of the Jews be anything less than perfect?But Moses cannot be emulated; no mortal can ever hope to reach

10 Philo, vol. 2, p. 488.11 Winston, Sage and Supersage, p. 179.12 Ibid. p. 180. For a similar line of interpretation, see Louis H. Feldman,

Moses in Midian, According to Philo, Shofar 21 (2003), pp. 120.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

his state of perfection.13 This, however, is not entirely true ofother biblical personages, whom Philo truly does see as models ofhuman perfection.

MODELS OF PERFECTION

Unlike Moses, the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob oVermodels for human perfection. Moses, according to Philo, did notrelate their lives merely to praise them, but more importantly, forthe instruction of the reader and as an inducement to him to aspireto the same (Abr. 4). As laws endowed with life and reason (Abr.5), the lives of these men serve as the very models of virtue.14

Philo explicitly argues that the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, andJacob oVer three distinctively heuristic models for achievinghuman perfection:

tr0pou" g1r uc8" 7oiken 3 2er1" diereun8sqai l0go", 2steiou" 6panta", t1nm1n 2k didaskalia", t1n d 2k 0sew", t1n d 2x 2sk0sew" 2i0menon toAkaloA. 3 m1n g1r pr8to", 2piklhsin Abra0m, s0mbolon didaskalik8" 2ret8"2stin, 3 d1 m0so", Isa0k, usik8", 3 d1 trito", Iak8b, 2skhtik8". 2ll1g1r o2k 2gnoht8on, 7ti metepoie8to t8n tri8n 5kasto" dun0mewn, 2nom0sqhd1 2p1 t8" pleonazo0sh" kat2pikr0teian o6te g1r didaskalian 4neu 0sew"7 2sk0sew" teleiwq8nai dunat1n o6te 0si" 2p1 p0ra" 2st1n 2lqe8n3kan1 dica toA maqe8n ka1 2sk8sai o4te 4skhsi", e2 m1 proqemeliwqeih0sei te ka1 didaskaliG proshk0ntw" oBn ka1 t1n t8n tri8n l0gN m1n2ndr8n 7rgN d 3" e9pon 2ret8n o2kei0thta sun8 e, 0sew", maq0sew",2sk0sew".

For the holy word seems to be searching into types of soul, all ofthem of high worth, one which pursues the good through teaching,one through nature and one through practice. The first calledAbraham, the second Isaac and the third Jacob, are symbols of virtueacquired respectively by teaching, nature, and practice. But indeed wemust not fail to note that each possesses the other three qualities, butgets his name from that which chiefly predominates in him; forteaching cannot be consummated without nature or practice, nor is

13 Philo seems to suggest that as a student of Moses he is an inspiredinterpreter, but never that he or anyone else could actually become anotherMoses. Cf. Hindy Najman, Seconding Sinai: The Development of MosaicDiscourse in Second Temple Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 2003), pp. 70107.

14 Cf. John Martens, Nomos Empsychos in Philo and Clement ofAlexandria, in Wendy E. Helleman (ed.), Hellenization Revisited: Shaping aChristian Response within the Greco-Roman World (Lanham, MD: UniversityPress of America, 1994), pp. 32338, esp. pp. 3256; Hindy Najman, TheLaw of Nature and the Authority of Mosaic Law, Studia Philonica Annual 11(1999), pp. 5573


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

nature capable of reaching its zenith without learning and practicing,nor practice either unless the foundation of nature and teaching hasfirst been laid. Very properly, then, Moses thus associated these threetogether, nominally men, but really, as I have said, virtuesteaching,nature, practice. (Abr. 524; cf. Congr. 348)

These types or virtues lead to perfection, as recognized by thelater editor who attached to De Abrahamo the subtitle, That is,the life of the wise man made perfect through teaching, or thefirst book on unwritten laws (BIOS SOFOU TOU KATA DIDASKALIANTELEIWQENTOS H NOMWN AGRAFWN 5TO PRWTON4 O ESTI PERI ABRAAM).Each of the patriarchs provides, at least heuristically, a diVerentmodel for human perfection.

Abraham is the exemplar of perfection reached throughlearning. Abram began his study modestly with a curriculumrecommended by his wife, Sarah, whom Philo views as a symbolfor wisdom (cf. Cher. 10). For at an earlier time, when he had notyet become perfect but, before his name had been changed, wasstill only inquiring into supramundane things, being aware that hecould not beget seed out of perfect virtue, she advises him to begetchildren out of the handmaiden, that is school-learning, evenHagar (Leg. 3.244). Only after Abram completed these pre-liminary studies, primarily the natural sciences, did he leave thestudy of nature for the life of the wise, the lover of God (Cher.7).15 Prior to perfection, Abraham was guided by the divine word(l0go"), to which he became equal, attending upon God, onceperfected (Mig. 174175). God changed his name when he reachedthis higher level of learning.16

Philo sees the biblical account of Abrahams name change asmarking his movement from a learner to a sage. At the conclusionof the biblical story of Abrahams name change, God went upfrom Abraham (Gen. 17:22). Philo writes: And when the learninghad become perfect, the Lord went up from Abraham, saysMoses. He does not mean that Abraham was parted from Him, forby his very nature the sage is Gods attendant, but he wished toshew the independence of the learner (Mut. 270). God rewardedAbraham for his faith by talking to him as one would with a friend(Abr. 273).

15 This might contradict Abr. 56, in which Philo emphasizes that asembodiments of the laws of nature these men learned from no one.

16 Cf. Lala Kalyan Kumar Dey, The Intermediary World and Patterns ofPerfection in Philo and Hebrews (Missoula, MO: Scholars Press, 1975),pp. 4950.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

Isaac is one of the rewards of Abrahams philosophical rigour.As noted above, Philo interprets the wives of the patriarchs asvirtues; the patriarchal marriages represent the virtues studied andacquired by the patriarchs. This is why Abrahams children byHagar and Keturahwives representing lower or preliminarystudiesdo not receive the patrimony. Only Isaac, the fruit ofAbrahams mastery of true virtue, as symbolized by Sarah,possesses the true wealth, the perfect virtues (Sacr. 434).Indeed, as Philo interprets his name, Isaac is perfect joy, a typeof natural perfection (Cher. 110). Isaac is entirely self-taught (cf.Mut. 255); unlike Abraham, he symbolizes a kind of naturalknowledge that listens to and learns from no other teacher butitself (Somn. 1.160). Philo finds support for this interpretation inthe fact that Isaacs name is never changed and that whereasAbraham and Jacob needed to master many virtues (as symbolizedby their polygamous marriages), only Isaac, being perfect bynature, could suYce with a single wife (Congr. 348).

Despite the fact that Philos treatise on Isaac is no longer extant,it appears that he had little interest in Isaac as an archetype. Hepeppers extended references to Abraham and Jacob throughout hisworks, but gives Isaac little and passing notice. It could be that forPhilo, Isaac was sui generis, representing the kind of natural virtuethat is not imitable. In this respect he was a precursor to Moses.

Jacob represents an altogether diVerent model of perfection.Philo calls Jacob the Practiser (2skht1"), referring to hisacquisition of virtue through practical toil (cf. Mut. 84, citedbelow). Whereas Abraham learns through instruction and study,he who acquires the good through practice, and not throughteaching, fixes his attention not on what is said, but on those whosay it, and imitates their life as shewn in the blamelessness of theirsuccessive actions (Congr. 69). Jacobs exertion to perfect hisvirtues is well symbolized by his dream of angels ascending anddescending a ladder to heaven (Gen. 28:12): [F]or practicing is bynature an uneven business, at one moment going onward to aheight, at another returning in the opposite direction, and at onetime like a ship making lifes voyage with fair winds, at anotherwith ill winds. For the life of practisers is, as one has said, a life ofalternate days, sometimes alive and wakeful, sometimes dead orasleep (Somn 1.150). Indeed, Philo suggests that Jacobs ownperfection only came about when God allowed Jacob a divinevision (Ebr. 823). Achieving perfection through practice requiresconstant vigilance. Whereas philosophy attempts to root out thepassions, practice treats their eVects by strengthening the rationalsoul to resist them.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

Philo refers to other biblical characters as virtuous or evenperfect, but none rise to the level of a type as do Abraham,Isaac, and Jacob. On Noahs perfection, as mentioned in Gen. 6:9,Philo, like the Rabbis later, notes that Noahs virtue was relative,not absolute (Abr. 36).17 Joseph represents yet another kind ofvirtuous life, marked by statesmanship (cf. Jos. 54), but Philo iscareful to state that this form of life stands apart from and issubordinate to the three factors that produce consummateexcellence (t1 4riston t0lo"; Jos. 1), namely, learning, nature,and practice.18 Joseph himself is not called perfect.

Philo is left with two primary models of perfection, philosophy(as exemplified by Abraham) and practice (as exemplified byJacob). Unlike the models of Moses and Isaac, these are notsimply theoretical models; they oVer normal human beings pathsto perfection. In fact, Philo argues, two historical communitiesthe Essenes and Therapeutaeexemplify the pursuit of humanperfection along each of these two paths.19 Philos depictions ofthese communities cannot be seen outside his larger concern withthe general issue of human perfection.

ESSENES AND THERAPEUTAE

At the very beginning of his tract De vita contemplativa, Philocontrasts the Essenes with the Therapeutae:

Essaiwn p0ri dialecqei", o6 t1n praktik1n 2z0lwsan ka1 diep0nhsan b0on 2n4pasin 5t1 goAn orht0teron e2pe8nto8" pleistoi" m0resi dienegk0nte",a2tika ka1 per1 t8n qewrian 2spasam0nwn 2kolouqiG t8" pragmateia"0p0meno" t1 pros0konta l0xw.

17 For the parallel rabbinic comment, see Genesis Rabbah 30:9.18 On the tensions of this portrayal of Joseph, see Francoise Frazier, Les

Visages de Joseph dans le de Josepho, Studia Philonica Annual 14 (2002),pp. 130, esp. pp. 1214. Note that at Jos. 28 Philo translates Josephs name asaddition of a lord, which he uses to further the political interpretation that hegives to Joseph.

19 Whether Philo had any actual historical knowledge of these groups is, ofcourse, highly debatable. Cf. Emil Schurer, The History of the Jewish People inthe Age of Jesus Christ, rev. and ed. Geza Vermes et al., 3 vols. (Edinburgh:T & T Clark, 1973), vol. 2, pp. 5917, vol. 3.2, pp. 8568; Troels Engberg-Pedersen, Philos De Vita Contemplativa as a Philosophers Dream, Journalfor the Study of Judaism 30 (1999), pp. 4064; Joan E. Taylor, Jewish WomenPhilosophers of First-Century Alexandria: Philos Therapeutae Reconsidered(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003). For the purposes of this essay theunderlying historical veracity of these accounts is far less relevant than theways in which Philo presents them.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

I have discussed the Essenes, who persistently pursued the active lifeand excelled in all or, to put it more moderately, in most of itsdepartments. I will now proceed at once in accordance with thesequence required by the subject to say what is needed about thosewho embraced the life of contemplation. (Contempl. 1)

Philo presents these two communities as exemplars of twodistinct modes of a virtuous life, one marked by active life (t1npraktik1n) and the other by contemplation (qewrian). Philosterminology here is diVerent from what he uses when discussingJacob (2sk0sew") or Abraham (didaskalia"), but it seems to methat Philo sees the Essenes as a concrete example of a communitythat lives in the path of Jacob, and the Therapeutae as followingAbrahams model.

Philo calls the Essenes the athletes of virtue produced by aphilosophy free from the pedantry of Greek wordiness (Prob. 88).These Essenes avoid cities, living frugally, communally, andpeacefully without slaves (Prob. 769, 857; cf. Hypoth. 11.1,11.4). They labour at various occupations with untiring applica-tion (Hypoth. 11.6). This lifestyle both enables and embodiestheir ethical commitments. Philo writes:

ilosoia" te t1 m1n logik1n 3" o2k 2nagka8on e2" kt8sin 2ret8"logoq0rai", t1 d1 usik1n 3" me8zon 5 kat1 2nqrwpinhn 0sinmetewrol0scai" 2polip0nte", pl1n 7son a2toA per1 3p0rxew" qeoA ka1 t8"toA pant1" gen0sew" ilosoe8tai, t1 2qik1n eB m0la diaponoAsin 2leiptai"cr0menoi to8" patrioi" n0moi"

As for philosophy they abandon the logical part to quibblingverbalists as unnecessary for the acquisition of virtue (2ret8"), and thephysical to visionary praters as beyond the grasp of human nature,only retaining that part which treats philosophically of the existenceof God and the creation of the universe. But the ethical part theystudy very industriously, taking for their trainers the laws of theirfathers. (Prob. 80)

It is not that the Essenes do not studythey devote everySabbath to philosophical study (Prob. 812)but that their studyis focused on practice, primarily as directed in the law. Philosview of the law, of course, is expansive: allegorical study ofScripture can generate all ethical and speculative truths.20 Heenumerates their virtues and the activities that exemplify them.So, for example, they demonstrate their love of God throughreligious purity, abstaining from oaths, speaking the truth, and

20 Cf. Reinhard Weber, Das Gesetz bei Philon von Alexandrien und FlaviusJosephus (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2001), pp. 1026, 11446.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

believing that the divine causes only good (Prob. 84). They toil inservice to God, which Philo elsewhere notes is necessary in orderto achieve piety and holiness (Sacr. 37).21 Yet in his descriptionof them in Hypothetica he does not even bother to mention thatthe Essenes study; there he focuses entirely on their exemplarylifestyle, which manifests their zeal for virtue (Hypoth. 11.2:z8lon 2ret8").

Any seriously philosophical group would have been expected tohave lived moderate lives, and the Therapeutae are no exception.Like the Essenes, the Therapeutae live frugally (Contempl. 13),without slaves (70), and outside of cities (24). Similarly, theypractice (2skoAsin) an all-round simplicity (Contempl. 39) thatincludes simple clothes and shelter and a minimum of food anddrink (cf. Contempl. 69). And like the Essenes, they too devotemuch time to study, including the entire seventh day (Contempl.303).

They diVer from the Essenes, though, in the content and goal ofwhat they study. They desire the vision of the Existent and soarabove the sun of our senses and never leave their place in thiscompany which carries them on to perfect happiness (Contempl.11). Towards this end they seem not to work; they devote all oftheir time to study and prayer (Contempl. 278). Philo is vagueabout what they study, but it seems relatively clear that their studyis directed towards speculative rather than ethical reflection. Thehighlight of their year occurs on the eve of Pentecost, when theyall assemble for a sacred banquet whose character Philo(favourably) contrasts with those of the dissolute Greeks.22

Before their sparse dinner they hear an exposition of Scripturefrom their pr0edro". The exposition is allegorical:

For to these people the whole law book seems to resemble a living creaturewith the literal ordinances for its body and for its soul the invisible mindlaid up in its wording. It is in this mind especially that the rational soulbegins to contemplate the things akin to itself and looking through thewords as through a mirror beholds the marvelous beauties of the concepts,unfolds and removes the symbolic coverings and brings forth the thoughtsand sets them bare to the light of day for those who need but a littlereminding to enable them to discern the inward and hidden through theoutward and visible. (Contempl. 78)

21 It is interesting to note that Philo derives the name Essenes from theGreek 3si0th" (Prob. 75). At Cher. 912 he identifies 3si0th" as one of thenecessary qualities of a sage.

22 Contempl. 65. It is also possible to read this passage as referring to everyfifty days rather than once each year. Cf. Philo, vol. 9, p. 152, n. a.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

The goal of this exercise appears to be to eVect an ontologicalchange. Proper instruction of Scripture thus serves to help therational soul return to its primal state, free of the passions. TheTherapeutae have taken to their hearts the contemplation ofnature and what it has to teach, and have lived in the soul alone(Contempl. 90). They are the embodiment of the type of pietyexemplified by Abraham.

Unfortunately, the analysis oVered here of Philos treatment ofthe Essenes and Therapeutae does not shed new light on the vexedquestion of the historicity of his accounts. Philo may have alteredcritical details, or even invented the Therapeutae, in order to fit inwith his typology. But it is also possible that he knew of thesecommunities from other sources and understood them within theframework of his typology. The accounts of both groups, though,highlight Philos belief that the theoretical paths exemplified byAbraham and Jacob could find concrete, historical expression.

Philos treatment of the Therapeutae also raises the issue ofgender. Among the Therapeutae, Philo reports, there are women,mostly aged virgins who sit separately from the men but whosepresence is also necessary for the singing of sacred hymns(Contempl. 323, 68, 88).23 According to Joan Taylor, Philostone in these descriptions is apologetic; on the one hand he isuncomfortable with the presence of female Jewish philosophers,but on the other he cannot ignore the historical fact of theirexistence.24 Whether or not Taylors historical claim is correct,Philos notice of female philosophers certainly is unexpected.25

Nowhere else does he suggest that women could becomephilosophers, and his anthropology militates highly against it. Inhis allegorical expositions he always genders rational mind as maleand sense-perception as female.26 Philo consistently portrays realwomen as embodying sense-perception. Men, of course, could

23 Cf. Ross S. Kraemer, Monastic Jewish Women in Greco-Roman Egypt:Philo Judaeus on the Therapeutrides, Signs 14 (1989), pp. 34270; HolgerSzesnat, Mostly Aged Virgins: Philo and the Presence of theTherapeutrides at Lake Mareotis, Neotestamentica 32 (1998), pp. 191201;id., Pretty Boys in Philos De Vita Contemplativa, Studia Philonica Annual10 (1998), pp. 87107; Joan E. Taylor, Virgin Mothers: Philo on the WomenTherapeutae, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 12 (2001), pp. 3763;ead., Jewish Women Philosophers.

24 Taylor, Virgin Mothers, pp. 4850.25 Cf. Taylor, Jewish Women Philosophers, pp. 22764.26 Cf. Dorothy Sly, Philos Perception of Women (Atlanta, GA: Scholars

Press, 1990); Richard A. Baer, Philos Use of the Categories Male and Female(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970); Judith Romney Wegner, Philos Portrayal ofWomenHebraic or Hellenic? in Amy-Jill Levine (ed.), Women Like


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

find themselves enslaved to their sense-perception (the definition,for Philo, of eVete), and some women might find themselves ableto overcome their sense-perception, but the judgements ofwomen as a rule are weaker and do not apprehend any mentalconception apart from what their senses perceive (Legat. 319).Philo, it would seem, denies the possibility of perfection towomen.27

ACHIEVING PERFECTION

Philo identifies philosophy and practice (askesis) as the twopaths to human perfection. Philosophy seems to be the superiorpath, as it involves an ontological change in the way that the souldeals with the passions. Practice is less certain. Yet both can leadto human perfection.

But what if you are not an Essene or Therapeutride? DoAbraham and Jacob represent types of piety that are accessible toordinary individuals? How, according to Philo, should a commonAlexandrian Jew strive for perfection?

Philo is clearly partial to philosophy as a path to virtue. Heexplicitly compares the two paths. He writes in a passage thatseeks to explain why Jacob, unlike Abraham, continues to be calledJacob even after his name was changed to Israel:

3 m1n g1r didaskaliG beltiwqei", e2moirou lac1n 0sew", 7 peripoie8 t14lhston a2tJ di1 sunergoA mn0mh", monI cr8tai, An 7maqen 2pr1x2peilhmm0no" ka1 bebaiw" periec0meno" 3 d 2skht1" 2peid1n gumn0shtaisunt0nw", diapne8 p0lin ka1 3panietai

He who is improved through teaching [i.e., Abraham], being endowedwith a happy nature which with the co-operation of memory assureshis retentiveness, gets a tight grip and a firm armhold of what he haslearned and thus remains constant. The Practiser on the other hand,takes a breathing-space and relaxation while he collects and recoversthe force which has been enfeebled by his labours. (Mut. 84)

The problem with Jacobs path is that it leads to non-linearprogress. Some days are better than others; nobody can staydisciplined all the time. Abraham has been changed for ever

This: New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco Roman World (Atlanta,GA: Scholars Press, 1991), pp. 4166.

27 Cf. Sly, Philos Perception of Women, p. 70: Does Philo consciouslyinclude woman in his generalizations about the human condition? And can welearn about his understanding of women by reading what he has to say aboutman? The answer is no.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

through his study of philosophy. Jacob, though, will alwayswaver.

Philos preference for philosophy leads him to a more extendeddiscussion of how one can attain it. He recommends that studentsbegin their study of the preliminary subjects (grammar, geometry,music, and rhetoric) when they are 10 years old (Congr. 121).28

The mastery of these subjects prepares the soul for the study ofphilosophy, which is the practice of wisdom, and wisdom is theknowledge of things divine and human and their causes (Congr.79). Philo recognizes that there are stages in the human road toperfection; we have already seen above that he discusses onemaking progress (prok0ptousi). He develops this typology inanother passage: It befits all these, the beginners (2rcom0noi"),those making progress (prok0ptousi), and those who have reachedperfection (teteleiwm0noi"), to live without contention, refusing toengage in the war raged by the sophists, with their unceasingpractice of quarrelsomeness (Agr. 159).

Philo distinguishes between the one making progress and thehoper who is defective inasmuch as he always desired theexcellent, he has not yet been able to attain to it, but resemblessailors eager to put into port, who yet remain at sea unable to reachtheir haven (Abr. 47). The world is full of hopers, those who bynature are unable to master even the preliminary studies, theslow-souled dullards [who] labour fruitlessly in the study of anybranch of knowledge (Deus 93). Some by nature do not take tostudy, and rather than continuing to waste time at it Philorecommends that such people abandon it entirely (Sacr. 11617).His evaluation of dullards is in places rather blunt: All that isheard or learned is a superstructure, built on the foundation of anature receptive of instruction, for if nature be not there to beginwith all else is useless. For those who are ungifted by nature wouldseem to diVer not at all from an oak or mute stone, for nothing canadhere or fit into them, but all is shaken oV and rebounds as froma solid substance (Mut. 211).

Yet even for the ungifted hopers, all is not hopeless:

t1n 2 eud8" m0non a4tion qe0n. mhde1" oBn t8n 2anest0rwn ka1tapeinot0rwn e9nai doko0ntwn 2lpido" 2pogn0sei t8" 2meinono" 2poknhs0tw3k0th" e2c0risto" gen0sqai qeoA, 2ll e2 ka1 mhd1n 7ti prosdokK t8nmeiz0nwn, 3p1r to0twn An 7lacen 4dh kat1 t1n 3autoA d0namine2caristeitw. . ..

28 Cf. Mut. 834, and C. T. R. Haywood, Philo, the Septuagint of Genesis32:2432 and the Name Israel: Fighting the Passions, Inspiration and theVision of God, Journal of Jewish Studies 51 (2000), pp. 209226, at 217.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

e2kt1n m1n 2qr0N tJ pl0qei t8n 2ret8n 2gcore0ein e2 d1 toAto me8zon 5kat1 2nqrwpinhn 0sin, 2gap8men, e4 tN 2xeg0neto miK tini t8n kat1 m0ro"| 2ntuce8n, swros0n: 5 2ndreiG 5 dikaios0n: 5 ilanqrwpiG. er0twg1r 7n ti 2gaq1n 3 uc1 ka1 tikt0tw, m1 p0ntwn 4oro" ka1 ste8ragin0sqw.

Let none then of the lowly or obscure in repute shrink throughdespair of the higher hope from thankful supplication to God, buteven if he no longer expects any greater boon, give thanks accordingto his power for the gifts which he has already received . . .. Weshould indeed pray that our course may lie amid the collected bodyof the many virtues. But if this be too great for human nature, let usbe content whenever it be granted to consort with one of the specificvirtues, with temperance, or courage, or justice or humanity. Let thesoul carry its womb and bring to the birth one good thing at leastand not be unfruitful and barren of them all. (Mut. 222, 225)

Although some can never achieve perfection, they neverthelesscan acquire virtue. Everybody by nature is capable of acquiringsomething of at least some cardinal virtue, and for some, that isthe most that they are able to achieve.

Herein lies, for Philo, the importance of the Law. His evaluationof the commandments is not entirely clear. On the one hand, hestates that the law of Moses is a copy of the law of nature; toconform to it is to conform with nature, which many Greekphilosophers would have regarded as ideal behaviour.29 On theother hand, Philo, like Aristeas, elsewhere seems to regard the lawas mandating behaviours that promote specific virtues. Onecannot achieve true, generic Virtue through fulfilment of thecommandments; that is reserved for those who contemplate theirtrue and symbolic meanings. Nevertheless, adherence to thecommandments of the law spurs an individual to performance ofspecific virtues. The law is a guard against overindulgence inpleasure; it gets rid of the principles which cause the infirmity,and introduce in their place good healthy principles by means of atraining under the law or indeed of a good education (Det. 16)most likely a reference to practical (training under the law) andcontemplative pursuits. Philo, as is well known, condemns thosewho ignore the symbolic aspect of the law, but also those who payattention only to their symbolism (Mig. 93). He calls those who

29 Wolfson, Philo, vol. 2, pp. 18994; V. Nikiprowetzky, Loi de Mose, loide nature, sagesse, in Le Commentaire de lecriture chez Philon dAlexandrie:Son caracte`re et sa portee, observations philologiques (Arbeiten zur Literatur undGeschichte des hellenistischen Judentums; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977),pp. 11755.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

adhere to the law athletes of virtue (Pra. 5), a term which, asnoted above, he also applies to the Essenes.30

Proper behaviour on the Sabbath, for Philo, models andinspires the path towards perfection. We should imitate God byworking for six days and ceasing from work on the seventh. Butwhereas God, being immortal, had no need of time after that firstseventh day, we mortals need to use every seventh day to studywisdom (ilosooAnta"; Dec. 98). This activity becomes a constantreminder of our quest for perfection:

toioAton oCn 2rc0tupon t8n 2ristwn biwn, praktikoA te ka1 qewrhtikoA, m1par0lqwmen, 2ll a2e1 pr1" a2t1 bl0ponte" 2narge8" e2k0na" ka1 t0pou" ta8"3aut8n dianoiai" 2gcar0ttwmen 2xomoioAnte" qnht1n 0sin 3" 7nestin2qan0tN kat1 t1 l0gein ka1 pr0ttein 6 cr0.

Let us not then neglect this great archetype of the two best lives, thepractical and the contemplative, but with that pattern ever before oureyes engrave in our hearts the clear image and stamp of them both,so making mortal nature, as far as may be, like the immortal bysaying and doing what we ought. (Dec. 101)31

For Philo, then, true human perfection involves an ontologicalchange in the individuals nature, which culminates in theabsolute victory of the rational soul. The only way to achievethis change is through philosophy, which also requires virtuousactions. Many, perhaps most, humans can never hope to reachthis summit; by nature, they are not capable of this intellectualendeavour. These individuals, though, may still practise avirtuous life through their fulfilment of the commandments.Jacob may have been able to achieve perfection through practice,although I doubt very much that Philo saw this path as open tomany of his contemporaries.

CONCLUSIONS

Philo was above all a Hellenistic philosopher, and like mostof them he sought to help his audience achieve perfection.He understands the human as intrinsically imperfect, whose soulis torn between its rational (Godlike) and irrational parts.

30 Cf. Gregory E. Sterling, Athletes of Virtue: An Analysis of theSummaries in Acts (2:4147; 4:3235; 5:1216), Journal of Biblical Literature113 (1994), pp. 67996.

31 Cf. Robert Goldenberg, The Jewish Sabbath in the Roman World up tothe Time of Constantine the Great, Aufstieg und Niedergang der RomischenWelt II.19.1, pp. 41447.


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

The perfect man (it is unlikely that he believes that perfection ispossible for most, or perhaps even all, women) succeeds incutting out his thymia, which generates anger and rage, while atthe same time taming his passions.

There are three ways to achieve this perfection. One,exemplified by Isaac and then Moses, is simply through natureor birth. This, however, is also not the path open to humanemulation. Instead, Philo directs us to lives of philosophicaltraining and discipline. The life of Abraham and the communityof the Theraputae best exemplify a perfection achieved throughphilosophical training, while the life of Jacob and the communityof the Essenes exemplify a practical life of discipline.

Philo recognizes that the path to perfection is a long one that isnot fully accessible to all. More gifted individuals will, or should,choose to engage in philosophy, thus becoming like Abraham, onewho has transformed himself on an ontological level. The lessgifted individual may still live virtuously through his actions,fighting his irrational soul, like Jacob, on a daily basis. Regardlessof the path, though, the ultimate goal is the same: to achieve aperfection and purity of the rational mind that allows him tohonour and desire God, ever eager to be His suppliant andservant (Congr. 105).

MICHAEL L. SATLOWBrown University

[email protected]


at University of N

otre Dam

e on April 17, 2014


ownloaded from

philo on human perfection - michael satlow

Documents