按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
which will； I doubt not； issue in a clearer light； and in a nobler life； if not
for us； yet still for our children's children for ever。
52
… Page 53…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
The name of Philo the Jew is now all but forgotten among us。 He
was laughed out of sight during the last century； as a dreamer and an
allegorist； who tried eclectically to patch together Plato and Moses。 The
present age； however； is rapidly beginning to suspect that all who thought
before the eighteenth century were not altogether either fools or impostors；
old wisdom is obtaining a fairer hearing day by day； and is found not to be
so contradictory to new wisdom as was supposed。 We are beginning； too；
to be more inclined to justify Providence； by believing that lies are by their
very nature impotent and doomed to die； that everything which has had
any great or permanent influence on the human mind； must have in it some
germ of eternal truth； and setting ourselves to separate that germ of truth
from the mistakes which may have distorted and overlaid it。 Let us
believe； or at least hope； the same for a few minutes； of Philo； and try to
find out what was the secret of his power； what the secret of his weakness。
First： I cannot think that he had to treat his own sacred books
unfairly； to make them agree with the root…idea of Socrates and Plato。
Socrates and Plato acknowledged a Divine teacher of the human spirit；
that was the ground of their philosophy。 So did the literature of the Jews。
Socrates and Plato； with all the Greek sages till the Sophistic era； held that
the object of philosophy was the search after that which truly exists： that
he who found that； found wisdom： Philo's books taught him the same
truth： but they taught him also； that the search for wisdom was not
merely the search for that which is； but for Him who is； not for a thing； but
for a person。 I do not mean that Plato and the elder Greeks had not that
object also in view； for I have said already that Theology was with them
the ultimate object of all metaphysic science： but I do think that they saw
it infinitely less clearly than the old Jewish sages。 Those sages were
utterly unable to conceive of an absolute truth； except as residing in an
absolutely true person； of absolute wisdom； except in an absolutely wise
person； of an absolute order and law； except in a lawgiver； of an absolute
good； except in an absolutely good person： any more than either they or
we can conceive of an absolute love； except in an absolutely loving person。
I say boldly； that I think them right； on all grounds of Baconian induction。
For all these qualities are only known to us as exhibited in persons； and if
53
… Page 54…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
we believe them to have any absolute and eternal existence at all； to be
objective； and independent of us； and the momentary moods and
sentiments of our own mind； they must exist in some absolute and eternal
person； or they are mere notions； abstractions； words； which have no
counterparts。
But here arose a puzzle in the mind of Philo； as it in reality had； we
may see； in the minds of Socrates and Plato。 How could he reconcile the
idea of that absolute and eternal one Being； that Zeus； Father of Gods and
men； self…perfect； self…contained； without change or motion； in whom； as a
Jew； he believed even more firmly than the Platonists； with the Daemon of
Socrates； the Divine Teacher whom both Plato and Solomon confessed？
Or how； again； could he reconcile the idea of Him with the creative and
providential energy； working in space and time； working on matter； and
apparently affected and limited； if not baffled； by the imperfection of the
minds which he taught； by the imperfection of the matter which he
moulded？ This； as all students of philosophy must know； was one of the
great puzzles of old Greek philosophy； as long as it was earnest and cared
to have any puzzles at all： it has been； since the days of Spinoza； the
great puzzle of all earnest modern philosophers。 Philo offered a solution in
that idea of a Logos； or Word of God； Divinity articulate； speaking and
acting in time and space； and therefore by successive acts； and so doing； in
time and space； the will of the timeless and spaceless Father； the Abysmal
and Eternal Being； of whom he was the perfect likeness。 In calling this
person the Logos； and making him the source of all human reason； and
knowledge of eternal laws； he only translated from Hebrew into Greek the
name which he found in his sacred books； 〃The Word of God。〃 As yet
we have found no unfair allegorising of Moses； or twisting of Plato。
How then has he incurred this accusation？
I cannot think； again； that he was unfair in supposing that he might
hold at the same time the Jewish belief concerning Creation； and the
Platonic doctrine of the real existence of Archetypal ideas； both of moral
and of physical phenomena。 I do not mean that such a conception was
present consciously to the mind of the old Jews； as it was most certainly to
the mind of St。 Paul； a practised Platonic dialectician； but it seems to me；
54
… Page 55…
ALEXANDRIA AND HER SCHOOLS
as to Philo； to be a fair； perhaps a necessary； corollary from the Genetic
Philosophy； both of Moses and of Solomon。
But in one thing he was unfair； namely； in his allegorising。 But
unfair to whom？ To Socrates and Plato； I believe； as much as to Moses
and to Samuel。 For what is the part of the old Jewish books which he
evaporates away into mere mystic symbols of the private experiences of
the devout philosopher？ Its practical everyday histories； which deal with
the common human facts of family and national life； of man's outward and
physical labour and craft。 These to him have no meaning； except an
allegoric one。 But has he thrown them away for the sake of getting a step
nearer to