THE SPIRIT IN FIRST CENTURY JUDAISM
THE SPIRIT IN FIRST-CENTURY JUDAISM
BY
JOHN R. LEVISON
^6 8^ *
BRILL ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS, INC. BOSTON • LEIDEN 2002
library of Congress Cataioging'tn-Publication I^ta Levison, John R. The spirit infirstcentury Judaism / by John R. Levison. p. cm. Originally published: Leiden ; New York : Brill, 1997. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums ; Bd. 29. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-391-04131-2 1. Judaism—History—Post-exilic period, 586 B.C.-210 AD. 2. Holy Spirit (Judaism)—History of doctrines. 3. Judaism—Relations—Greek. 4. Greece— Religion. I. Title. BM176 .U8 2002 296.3*1—dc21 2002066279
ISBN 0-391-04131-2 O Copyright 1997 by Koninidijhe Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All right5 reserved. No part of (his puHication may be reprodwxd, iramlat^, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, elKtmnic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otHemnse, withoM prior umtien permission from the publisher.
Authorisation to photoo^ items for iruemal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The C o p y r ^ Clearance Center, 222 Bxxeuxiod Drive, Suite 910
Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are suhject to change. PRINTED IN THE UNFTED STATES OF AMERICA
For Priscilla
CONTENTS
PREFACE
xiii
I. I N T R O D U C T I O N Discerning an Appropriate Method The Isolation of Exegetical Movements The Identification of Relevant Milieux The Elucidation of Particulars Cicero Plutarch Cicero and Plutarch Consulting Influential Antecedents Paul Volz and the Vitality of Early Judaism Hans Leisegang and Popular Greco-Roman Religious Philosophies
1 4 4 5 6 7 10 13 17 17 19
PART ONE AN ANOMALOUS PROPHET PROSPECT II. T H E SPIRIT AS AN INVADING ANGEL Exegetical Movements The Angel and the Spirit Loss of Mental Control Relevant Milieux Israelite Literature Platonic Literature Plutarch Summary IIL T H E SPIRIT AS LIFE ITSELF The Spirit as Life Itself Exegetical Movements Relevant Milieu: Israelite Literature
25 27 27 28 30 33 34 42 46 54 56 57 57 59
Vlll
CONTENTS
Genesis 6:3 Wisdom Literature Summary The Spirit as the Holy Spirit Exegetical Movements Relevant Milieux Israelite Literature Greek and Latin Literature Stoicism and the Spirit Greek Danielic Literature The Dead Sea Scrolls Summary RETROSPECT
59 62 64 65 65 65 65 67 67 72 73 76 78
PART TWO A N ECLECTIC ERA PROSPECT
83
IV. T H E SPIRIT A N D H U M A N TRANSFORMATION: PALESTINIAN A N D DIASPORA PERSPECTIVES .... Pseudo-Philo's Exegetical Movements Kenaz's Military Prowess Gideon's Military Prowess Philo Judaeus' Exegetical Movements Abraham's Ancestral Character Abraham's Rhetorical Prowess Summary
84 84 84 88 90 91 93 97
V. T H E SPIRIT A N D PROPHETIC TRANSFORMATION: A PALESTINIAN PERSPECTIVE Exegetical Movements Joshua's Prophecy to Israel Shared Prophetic Experiences of Kenaz and Saul Kenaz's Vision Amongst the Elders Relevant Milieux Early Jewish Accounts of Ascent
99 99 99 102 104 109 109
CONTENTS
IX
Popular Greco-Roman Culture Summary
114 128
VI. T H E SPIRIT A N D PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSFORMATION: D L \ S P O R A PERSPECTIVES Josephus and Jewish Philanthropy Exegetical Movements The Relevant Stoic Milieu Philo Judaeus and the Ascent of the Mind Exegetical Movements Plant 18-26 Gig. 19-55 Summary Relevant Milieux The Sapiential Tradition Stoicism and the Sapiential Tradition Philosophical Ascent and Platonism Summary RETROSPECT
131 131 131 133 137 137 138 139 142 143 143 144 151 158 161
PART THREE AN EXTRAORDINARY MIND PROSPECT
167
VIL T H E SPIRIT A N D E X T R A O R D I N A R Y INSIGHT Exegetical Movements Daniel according to Josephus Moses according to Philo Judaeus Three Sorts of Inspired Oracles Moses as a Prophet "in the Strict Sense" Joseph according to Philo Judaeus Summary Relevant Milieux The Israelite and Early Jevrish Sapiential Tradition The Spirit of Wisdom and Israel's Leading Figures ...
168 168 168 171 171 173 176 177 178 178 178
X
CONTENTS
The spirit of Wisdom and the Messianic Servant Socrates' Daemon in Greco-Roman Discussion
181 183
VIII. T H E SPIRIT A N D INSPIRED EXEGESIS Autobiographical Reflection Relevant Milieux Israelite and Early Jewish Literature The Greco-Roman Milieu Summary
190 190 194 194 208 210
RETROSPECT
212 R E T R O S P E C T A N D PROSPECT
IX. R E T R O S P E C T The Spirit and the Human Spirit The Spirit and Extraordinary Power The Spirit and the Military Hero The Spirit and the Prophet The Spirit and the Ideal Ruler The Spirit and the Philosopher The Spirit and Cosmic Unity The Spirit and the Temple The Spirit and the Sage The Spirit and Angelic Presence An Invading Angel A Customary Friend Summary
217 217 220 220 221 223 224 226 226 227 229 229 232 235
X. PROSPECT The Spirit and Individual Authors The Spirit and Prophecy The Spirit and Charismatic Exegesis
237 238 244 254
APPENDIX: Essential Data on Philo Judaeus, Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarunij and Josephus ABBREVIATIONS SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
261 273 276
CONTENTS
INDEXES Ancient Sources Subjects and Ancient Names Modern Authors
XI
281 281 296 301
PREFACE
Although this research would have proven satisfying and stimulating even without personal or professional support, I have been the for tunate recipient of both. I undertook this research in earnest during the summer of 1992 in the marvelous context of a National Endow ment for the Humanities Summer Seminar for College Teachers on the theme, "The Greek Encounter With Judaism in the Hellenistic Era," led by Louis H. Feldman, Professor of Classics at Yeshiva Uni versity. That community of scholars, in the purest sense, comprised the crucible in which I could envision the contours of this study. That professional opportunity also yielded a gratifying friendship with Louis, whom I regard as a colleague and friend of enormous worth. Other scholars provided an unforeseen venue of professional sup port to render this research feasible. During the Society of Biblical Literature meeting in 1991 (in the book stalls to be exact), I had ex pressed to Larry Hurtado my dream of studying in Germany. Larry then took the initiative to correspond on my behalf with Martin Hengel, who agreed to sponsor my application for a research fellow ship from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. David Aune then proffered valuable advice on the research proposal. In November, 1992, I received the good news that I had received a Humboldt research fellowship. The privilege of passing the 1993-94 academic year in Tubingen, at the Institut flir antikes Judentum und hellenistische Religionsgeschichte, of the Eberhard-Karls-Universitat Tubingen, proved remark able. Although I spent the lion's share of my hours in a study with a wonderful view of the hills, too many other opportunities prevented me from sequestering myself altogether. I participated in a splendid seminar on Torah and Covenant, led by Hermann Lichtenberger, director of the Institute. I attended various seminars sponsored by the Melanchthon Stiftung. I had enlivening conversations with new colleagues and friends, such as Friedrich Avemarie, Otto Betz, Marietta Hammerle, Ronald Heine, Armin Lange, and others associated with the Institute. Martin and Marianne Hengel were extraordinary hosts, inviting my family and me to their lovely home on countless occasions, both scholarly and celebratory. Martin Hengel's impact, therefore.
XIV
PREFACE
extends measurably beyond his sponsorship of my application for a Humboldt fellowship and even beyond his recommendation to E. J. Brill that this volume be published in the AGAJU series. Nor have I remained isolated while bringing this research to com pletion. Bruce Fisk and Ross Wagner, Duke University graduate stu dents, commented on an early version of the manuscript. A recent graduate of Duke Divinity School, Edgardo Colon-Emeric, painstak ingly checked citations and references. Joan Lamorte, Assistant to the Faculty of Duke Divinity School, whose aid I enlisted because of her efficient effort on a prior volume, typed the bibliogr^hy and undertook excruciating labor in an effort to compile the index of ancient sources. Gerald F. Hawthorne, who taught me Greek more than two decades ago and has himself written on the topic of the spirit, read the manuscript thoroughly, proflferring acute critique and honest appraisal. The significant ways in which I have modified this book—though apparent only to him—are an indication of my re spect for Jerry's intellect. One colleague and confidant in particular has remained with re markable consistency by my side each day of the past five years. During these days, we have together experienced the precious pleas ure of welcoming our two children, Chloe and Jeremy, into our lives, and we have known the satisfaction and joy of being appointed to the faculty of Duke Divinity School. I have dedicated this book to Priscilla Pope-Levison because of how deftly she has allowed our personal and professional aspirations to dovetail, how elegantly she has folded our lives—as parents and scholars—into one another. John R. Levison Durham, North Carolina 30 May, 1997
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
In Plutarch's De gemo Soaatis, Simmias narrates the myth of Timarchus who, "in his desire to learn the nature of Socrates' sign [inspiration], acted like the high-spirited young initiate in philosophy he was'" and descended into the crypt of Trophonius, where he waited underground two nights and a day until it seemed to him "that he heard a crash and was struck on the head, and that the sutures parted and released his soul." Timarchus' soul raised its eyes to a celestial world popu lated by spirit beings—daemons—then dipped to a pitch dark abyss, from which souls intermittently ascended and into which they plunged. Then came the query of Timarchus' guiding daemon, "Timarchus, what would you have me explain?" foUowed by the flustered re^Donse, "Everything." The daemon's explanation is intricate, the blueprint of a calculable cosmos—all of which, of course, is lost on an impetuous and unprepared Timarchus, who confesses, "But I see nothing.. . only many stars trembling about the abyss, others sinking into it, and others again shooting up from below." The realm of research represented by this study is equally complex and confounding. The range of meanings suggested by the single word, icvevjia, is itself bewildering, encompassing entities as diverse as subter ranean vapors, heavenly winds, human attitudes, unpredictable ghosts, and a holy spirit. Because an unmoored exploration of this realm may lead less to comprehensibility than to confusion—Timarchus, seeing much, sees "nothing"—the present book is intended to function similarly to Timarchus' daemon as a guide through the amorphous realm of the spirit.
' The myth of Timarchus is recounted in Plutarch, De gemo SocraHs 589F- 592E. All citations of classical literature, including Philo Judaeus and Josephus, are from the Loeb Classical Library, unless otherwise indicated. On rare occasions, I have modesdy changed gender-exclusive tnmslations when the Greek is more inclusive (e.g., t o . . . OeoKXvcouncvov Y^Oolitics during these decades. During this period of his life, the growing realization that Julius Caesar would not be able to restore the republican constitution was coupled with personal sadness. In 46 BCE, Cicero divorced his wife of thirty years, Terentia, and soon married Publilia. In 45 BCE, Cicero's daughter, Tullia, died, and Pufcrfilia's lack of sympathy led to divorce. Caesar was then mur dered in 44 BCE. During these years, 46~44 BCE, while he was in his eariy axties, Cicero compmed many of hb philosophical writings, such as De fimbus bamum et malorum, on the \^uyii^ conceptions of the "chief good" hdd by philosophers, Tuxukmae disputationes, on the conditions of happiness, De natura demon, on the views of various philosophical schoob on the nature of the gods, and De fato, on free will. During thb period, Cicero wrote as well De etioinatime. Just shy of two years after the pub lication of De dioinatione, on December 7, 43 BCE. Marc Antony's soldiers captured Cicero, executed him, and di^layed hb head and hands on the Rostra in Rome. For a critical text, an excellent introduction, and commentary, see A. S. Pease, M. TuUius Ciceroms De Divinatume, University of lUinob Studies in Language and Literature, 3 parts (Urbana: Univereity of Illinois, 1920-24).
INTRODUCTION
9
as the interpretation of thunder. De dmnatwne, then, was written to counter popular ignorance, convenient political fictions, and the re actionary adoption of obsolete religious practices.'® Book one of De divinatione presents the most important Stoic views on divination (e.g., 1.10, 82, 118; 2.8, 100), based predominantiy upon the works of the great Stoic philosopher, Posidonius, whom Cicero had met in Rhodes. Book two contains a refutation of this view, with particular attention paid to the arguments of Cameades. Of the two, book one is more significant for our study. Quintus, Cicero's brother and an advocate for the Stoic position, defines divination as "the foreseeing and foretelling of events consid ered as happening by chance" (1.9). He distinguishes between two forms of divination: artificial, which employs methods of divination such as augury, astrology, and the examination of entrails; and natu ral divination, which is produced by mental excitement and dreams (1.12). The validity of both, contends Quintus, demonstrates two re lated propositions: "if there is divination there are g o d s . . . if there are gods there is divination" (1.10, 82-83). In particular, the gods communicate with humankind, and divination is the means by which humans interpret the gods' signs. Based upon this fundamental distinc tion, the first book of De divinatione is tighdy organized. (1) l . l l b - 3 6 and 1.72-109. Quintus discusses artificial divination in two lengthy sections. He amasses coundess examples (including Cicero's own writings) to demonstrate that artificial divination is both ancient, extending as far back as Romulus, and widespread, encom passing Romans and barbarians alike. Quintus is deeply concerned to refute the objection that occasional errors of artificial divination disqualify the entire enterprise; he observes that all arts based on deduction are occasionally wrong (1.24-25). (2) 1.37-71 and 1.110-121. Quintus also discusses natural divina tion in two sections, as well as in his peroration (1.129-30). Once again, he is concerned to dispute the inference that a few false dreams invalidate the entire enterprise. This concern leads Quintus to argue, on a negative note, that untrustworthy dreams come to ill-prepared people and that unskilled interpreters misconstrue the meaning of dreams and oracles (1.60 and 1.116-21). On a positive note, Quintus contends that people must be properly prepared to receive dreams
See Pease, De Dtoinatione, 1.10-13.
10
INTRODUCTION
and inspirauon. The details of this latter point are of extraordinary significance for the present study: the souls of such people have devel oped their innate kinship with the cosmos and receive dreams and oracles when they are freed from the body and are stimulated by some external, divine impulse (1.60-67; 1.114-15; 1.129-30). De divinatione is a resource of enormous significance for this study. In particular, its lucid depiction of natural divination is integral to comprehending conceptions of the divine spirit in the writings of Philo, Pseudo-Philo, and Josephus. Plutarch'' Plutarch, who was born approximately 46 CE, throughout his life maintained particularly close ties with the oracular shrine at Delphi and held a priesthood from 95 CE until his death sometime in the 120's CE. In light of this intimate relationship to Delphi, it is not surprising that he devoted several of his dialogues to topics related to Delphi. In De E apud Delphos, he interpreted the word EI at the shrine's entrance. In De Pythiae oracuLis, he sought to explain why the priestess no longer responded to queries in verse. And in De defectu oraculorum, he addressed the problem of diminished oracular activity at Delphi, "or rather the total disappearance of all but one or two; but we should deliberate the reason why they have become so utterly weak" (411E). To this question Plutarch proffered four significant answers and responses. (1) 412F-413D. Didymus the Cynic, nicknamed Planetiades, won ders why Divine Providence permits any oracular activity at all in light of human wickedness in general and, in particular, the shaming of the oracle with improper questions (e.g., about inheritances). After
Although I^utarch lived in central Greece, in the inauspicious city of Chaeronea, where he was lx)rn in approximately 46 CE, he visited cities such as Sparta, Corinth, and Alexandria, was studying physics, natural science, and rhetoric at Athens when Nero visited in 66 CE, and sojourned for a while in Rome in fulfillment of civic re sponsibilities. Under the emperor Hadrian, moreover, he was a citizen of Athens and procurator of Achaea. Plutarch's participation in public life took literary form in his ViUu, biographies of leading soldiers and statesmen, usually in pairs, first of a Greek, then of a Roman, accompanied by a comparison (twenty-three of which are extant). He wrote as well numerous dialogues and diatribes on a variety of topics including: critiques of superstition. Epicureanism, and Stoicism; discussions of Eros, divine justice, the task of virtue, musical forms, and cosmology; commentaries on Rato's writings; even reflections on his daughter's death. For further introduction, see 77u Oxford Classical LHctionaTy, s.v., "Plutarch;" and R. H. Barrow, IHutarch and his Tunes (Bloomington and London: Indiana, 1967) 1-50.
INTRODUCTION
11
Lamprias responds, first, that prophecy constitutes part of the continu ing nurture of a gentie god, and, second, that humans were wicked even at the inception of prophecy, Didymus departs silentiy. (2) 413D-414C. Before proffering his own opinion, Ammonius expresses two assumptions. First, "prophecy is something created by a god, and certainly no greater or more potent force exists to abolish and obliterate it." Second, the essential character of the activities of the gods is "moderation." On these bases, Ammonius argues that oracular activity has decreased at Delphi under divine direction due to depopulation, so that "the exercise of the prophetic art which continues at the present day is sufficient for all." Lamprias disagrees (414D-E), contending instead that the god may create many things, but that nature causes them to disintegrate. No god would abolish a prophetic shrine or oracle; this must be due to natural causes. He adds a word of caution to the discussion by remind ing his dialogue partners that prophecy is not a form of ventriloquism, as if the god "enters into the bodies of the prophets and prompts their utterances, employing their mouths and voices as instruments." Such inspiration results in the gods' becoming entangled in human need, a situation quite at odds with the gods' majesty. (3) 414F-418D (cf 431A-B; 435A; 436F-437A). Cleombrotus, be cause he agrees with Lamprias that the god is an agent, neither entirely uninvolved in all nor wholly responsible for all, introduces into the discussion a race of daemons or demigods who share both "human emotions and godlike power" and mediate between the gods and humankind. When these daemons leave a shrine, the oracles lose their powers, but when they return later, "the oracles, like musical instruments, become articulate" once again. (4) 431E-434C. Lamprias presents the Stoic position, beginning with the innate capacity of the soul to discern the future when it separates from the body through the impetus of an external influence, the divine pneuma (understood in Stoic terms), whether through the air or water. For a variety of physiological reasons, these lakes and springs and vapors, which contain the impetus of inspiration, dry up and disappear. Lamprias attributes the obsolescence of oracles at Delphi to just such a cause, to the intermittent activity of the famous vapor at Delphi.'®
See Plutarch, Pyth. Orac. 402B-C; Cicero, Div. 1.38; 2.117.
12
INTRODUCTION
Two important summaries follow. In 435A, Philip criticizes the interlocutors for transferring the prophetic art firom the gods to the daemons, and then for discarding these daemons in favor of "winds and vapors and exhalations." In 436D-438D, Lamprias summarizes the discussion, though favoring the Stoic position.'^ Plutarch's interest in matters of religion was not limited solely to Delphi. Possibly later in life, while he composed his dialogues on the Pythia at Delphi, Plutarch also penned De Iside et Osiride, in which he reported to the Delphic prieste^, Clea, an account of E^;yptian religion, with a particularly mystical flavor. Plutarch's preoccupation with reli gion characterized him even early in life, as the discussion of Socrates' inspiration in one of his earlier works, Lk genio Socratis, reveals. In this dialogue, De gemo Soaatis, from which I garnered the myth of Timarchus, Plutarch presented a detailed discussion of the nature of Socrates' inspiration. The narrative context of this treatise is the con spiracy that led to the liberation of Thebes from Sparta in 379 B C E . ' " Because the discussions of the conspirators when they gather are interrupted throughout by these events, discussions of Socrates' in^iration cluster in two distinct parts, with the second a continuation of the first: 580C-582C and 588B-589F. The catalyst for this discussion is news that an honorable Italian Pythagorean has waited for a sign at a grave (579D-580C). Galaxidorus the rationalist labek such an action superstition and refers approvingly to Socrates, who preferred simplicity to such humbug. This prompts Theocritus to ask if he believes that Socrates had no use for things divine. To Galaxidorus' contention that Socrates used philosophy to face life with sober reason, Theocritus counters, "but what, my dear sir, do we call Socrates' sign [TO 6aiji6viov]?" (1) 580C-F. Theocratus describes it generally as a "guide" which lent divine sanction to Socrates' decisions. (2) 580F-581A and 581F-582C. Galaxidorus interprets it as a sneeze, chance remark, or omen which tips the balance of a difficult, well-reasoned decision. When charged later with making sport, he counters that an omen such as a bird's song, in itself trivial, can be recognized as the sign of a great event to a mind, such as Socrates', expert in (artificial) divination.
" In Pyth. Orac. 402B-C, Plutarch proffers the further explanation that the Delphic priestesses failed to go to the proper ^)ot. ^ See also Plutarch's JUfe of Petopidas 6-13 and the introduction in die Loeb edititm.
INTRODUCTION
13
(3) 581A-D. The narrator's father supposes that it must be more than chance happenings because Socrates made decisions as "one guided by a higher authority and principle to noble conduct." (4) The second part of the discussion about the nature and activity of the daemonion continues with the view of Simmias (588B). (a) 588C-589F. Simmias conjectures that the daemonion is "the unuttered words of a daemon, making voiceless contact with his intelligence," which is free from bodily distractions and passions. He cautions that "the messages of daemons. . . find an echo in those only whose character is untroubled and soul unruffled...." Simmias recognizes that this interpretation of inspiration differs from popular belief, according to which people receive inspiration when asleep. (b) 589F-592F. As evidence for this interpretation, Simmias reluctandy summarizes the myth of Timarchus of Chaeroneia, in which the guiding daemon identifies those stars which float above the abyss as the daemons of understanding people whose souls are not entirely submerged in passions. Of these daemons, some float erratically because they are tethered to unruly souls. Other dae mons, however, are ordered because they are tethered to respon sive, obedient souls from which come the race of diviners and inspired people. Cicero and Plutarch The significance of Cicero and Plutarch, taken together, is impres sive, for their treatises comprise an unparalleled quarry of conceptions about religion in the Greco-Roman era. Several characteristics of the writings of Cicero and Plutarch, related both to the specific question of inspiration and to the nature of their writings as a whole, attest to their potential importance for understanding first century Jewish biblical interpretation. A Common Era. On the most basic level, Cicero and Plutarch bracket the era of our biblical interpreters chronologically. Cicero was bom on 3 January, 106 BCE, seventy miles southeast of Rome, and died 43 BCE, a few decades before the birth of Philo Judaeus in ca. 20 BCE. Plutarch was bom ca. 46 CE, possibly about the time of Philo's death and within a decade of Josephus' birth in 37 CE. A Common Academy. The importance of the writings produced by Cicero and Plutarch as a wimess to viewpoints prevalent in the first centuries BCE and C E swells even further when we recognize that
14
INTRODUCTION
both writers belonged to the New Academy, a cardinal principle of which was that judgment must be suspended because truth has two faces. The result of this commitment is that Cicero and Plutarch, be cause they defended even those opinions to which they did not adhere, shaped their treatises as a whole to present an expansive range of opinions other than their own.^' This attitude is evident in an inter change between the narrator of De defectu oracukrum and Demetrius. The narrator closes his comments with a note of caution: "But if in any other place we have recalled the Academy to our mind, let us do so here as well, and divest ourselves of excessive credulity. . . Demetrius agrees that facts cause j>eople to lose their footing "when ever we make bold to pronounce opinions about such matters as if we understood them" (43 lA).^ This commitment explains in part why Cicero was not satisfied merely to refute the Stoic position on divination; he instead offered it cogendy in book 1 of De divinatione before he refuted it equally forcefully in book 2. This commitment explains also why Hutarch presented four distinct answers, with a concluding synthesis, to the q u e s t i o n of the d e m i s e of Delphic activity.^' It explains also why Plutarch preserved several interpretations of Socrates' daemonion, such as a guide from youth, a sneeze, a divine authority, and a daemon's voice. The questions of Delphic inspiration and Socrates' inspiration are precisely the insoluble sort to which adherents of the New Acad emy were unwilling to proffer a definitive opinion; they preferred to present a range of alternatives. A Common Heritage. In addition to this commitment to refraining from definite opinions about thorny issues, both Cicero and Plutarch were careful also to solidify each point of view by collecting aUusions to and citations of their predecessors and contemporauies. Cicero's Quintus, for instance, in his discussion of dreams, begins by demon strating his familiarity with the treatises on dreams of Chrysippus and Antipater (Div. 1.39). He continues with a dream-story of Philistus, followed by relatively lengthy quotations from Ennius, an unknown author, and Accius. He then turns to foreign instances of dreams,
^' E.g., in Div. 1.7, Cicero writes of Panaetius, "At any rate, this praiseworthy tendency of the Academy to d o u b t . . . " Sec also 7 ^ £ 0/ Dett>hi 387F. ^ Sec further R. Flaceliere, nitarque: Star ta IXsparition des Oracles (Paris: Belles Lcttres, 1947) 50-52.
INTRODUCTION
15
citing several stories and their literary sources, such as a story about Cyrus in Dinon's Persian annals, or one about Hannibal in the writ ings of Coelius. When he turns his attention to the dreams of philo sophers and poets, his list includes Socrates, Xenophon, Aristode, and Sophocles. He continues by turning from Greek sources to Roman and proceeds in the same manner. When he shifts his argument to answer the question of why some dreams are untrustworthy, Cicero's Quintus begins not surprisingly with the words of Socrates in Plato's Republic [Div. 1.60). Plutarch's interlocutors display a similar respect toward their prede cessors. Cleombrotus, for example, quotes from Plato, Hesiod, Pindar, Euripides, Herodotus, Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Empedocles. He sum marizes Homer, Heracleitus, Orpheus, and Xenocrates. Integral to Cleombrotus' argument are the references to Hesiod's Works and Days 122, in which Hesiod delineates four classes of rational beings, in cluding daemons, and Plato's Symposium 202D-E, in which daemons are accorded an "interpretative and ministering nature" between the gods and humankind. Other interlocutors in De defectu oraculorum and De genio Soaatis employ a similar abundance of allusions, quotations, and references. Even the discredited Cynic Didymus refers to Hesiod and criticizes Pythagoras. The persuasive appeal of Cicero's De Divinatione and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum and De genio Soaatis, then, is based upon the citation of external wimesses to validate divination. This approach renders their treatises of extraordinary value for ascertaining perspectives prevalent both prior to and during the Greco-Roman era. A Common Perspective. Equally important, the writings of Cicero and Plutarch, though separated by more than a century, preserve similar perspectives on many aspects of inspiration. These similarities attest to the reliability of their treatments of the viewpoints which circulated during the period, approximately 50 BCE-100 CE, which found Philo, Pseudo-Philo, and Josephus engaged in the task of biblical interpre tation. For example, both Cicero and Plutarch distinguished between artificial divination—through the examination of omens, entrails, etc.— and natural divination—through direct inspiration and dreams. The level of reliability these treatises exhibit over the course of two centuries will become evident if we present in a thumbnail sketch their treatment of es^ntial features of inspiration, understood from the Stoic perspective. Lamprias, in Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum 431E-434C, and Quintus, in three separate but related sections of Cicero's De
16
INTRODUCTION
dwmati(m-~\.60-66, 110-115, 129-30—both represent the Stoic posi tion. Their presentations of this phenomenon exhibit similar features despite the passing of more than a century between their composition. (1) Innate capacity of the soul. Lamprias begins his explanation of the disappearance of oracles at Delphi by contending that souls, like the daemons, "possess the natural faculty of knowing and revealing fliture events before they happen" {Def. Orac. 43 lE).^* Quintus assumes as well that "the human soul has an inherent power of presaging or of foreknowing infused into it from without" {Div. 1.66). (2) Soul withdrawn from the body. Lamprias recognizes, however, that souls possess this capacity "to a slight degree while conjoined to the body" {Def. Orac. 43IF) and that souls must be withdrawn from the body and "released from their present state" (432C). Quintus recog nizes as well that "the human soul never divines naturally, except when it is so unrestrained and free that it has absolutely no associa tion with the body, as happens in the case of frenzy and dreams" {Div. 1.113; see 1.63, 66, 129). (3) Sleep and death. Both Lamprias {Def Orac. 432C) and Quintus (/)». 1.63-64) discuss together nearness to death and sleep as the states in which the inherent power of the soul is released. (4) An external in^ndse. Lamprias traces the withdrawal of the soul from the body to a "change which we call inspiration" which is brought about often by physical forces, whether "through the air or. . . running waters" {Def Orac. 432D-E), "that dispose souls to inspiration and impressions of the future" (433C). Quintus delineates several physical forces. Inspired souls "do not cling to the body and are kindled by many different influences," including vocal tones, groves and forests, rivers and seas {Div. 1.114). (5) Hot amifierysoul. The inspired soul is described by Lamprias as "hot and fiery" {Def Orac. 432F) and by Quintus as "inflamed and aroused" {Div. 1.114). Other elements of inspiration could be appended to this list, such as the need for proper preparation {Def. Orac. 438A; Div. 1.62), but this sketch should suffice to demonstrate the potential contribution Cicero and Plutarch make to our understanding of inspiration during the period, 50 B C E - 1 0 0 CE. Cicero and Hutarch provide a rich reser voir for understanding first century Jewish perspectives on the divine
See also Drf. Orac. 432A, C.
INTRODUCTION
17
spirit because their writings belong to the same era, because they devote serious attendon to explaining the phenomena of inspiration, because they base arguments upon the writings of their predecessors, because they offer a fair treatment of views other than their own, and because they reliably preserve potentially relevant viewpoints which span the century in which Philo, Pseudo-Philo, and Josephus com posed their own works.
Consulting Influential Antecedents Simmias prefaces his narrative of the Timarchus myth by recalling with clear disdain that Timarchus descended into the crypt, "consulting no one but Cebes and me . . . " (Gen. Soa. 590A). Although I have natu rally consulted many more, I am especially indebted to two studies, both neariy a century old but each of inestimable worth, in my attempt to navigate simultaneously the surging waters of Judaism and the expansive waters of the Greco-Roman world. P. Volz has provided a beacon from the Jewish shoreline, H. Leisegang from the GrecoRoman. In an effort to sail the waters between the two, I have become the beneficiary of both. Paul Volz and the Vitality of Early Judaism Paul Volz's study, Der Geist Gottes und die verwandten Erscheimmgen im Alten Testament und im anschliefienden Judentum, published in 1910 (Tubingen, Mohr), has exercised a centripetal force that has drawn my own studies into its orbit. The most fundamental of Volz's contributions is his willingness to stand among very few scholars who analyzed Israelite and early Jewish literature in their own right rather than as prole gomena to the interpretation of early Christian literature. The basis for this commitment is Volz's positive assessment of Early Judaism: Die Gewohnheit, das au^hende Judentum mit dem jungen Christentum zu ver^eichen, hat stets dazu gefiihrt, das erstere zu verkennen; das ist historisch ungcrecht, und aufkrdem ist cs viel wahrscheinlicher, daB die neue Religion aus einer religios beweglichen und tief empfindenden Zeit hervoipng als aus einer erstarrten und erstorbcnen. Vergleichen wir das Judentum etwa mit der heutigen Zeit oder sonst irgend einer Zeit der Menschheitsgcschichte, so bekommt man den Eindruck, daB ein verhaltnismafiig reiches Lebcn des Geistes in der jiidischcn Gemcindc der letzten vorchristUchcn Jahrhunderte sich kundgab und daB sich die
18
INTRODUCTION
Juden auch hierin als das Volk der Religion enviesen. Manchcs von dem was unter ihnen mit pneumatischcm BewuBtsein auftrat, muB als edle Frucht des Geistes anerkannt werden, und der MaBstab, mit dem das Judentum die pneumatischen Erscheinungen verwertetc, bezeugt selbst am besten die Echtheit seiner Religion.'^ Volz here provides the assumption from which the present book begins, namely, that conceptions of the spirit in Early Judaism are the product of a fertile spirituality that provided the soil for the fecundity of early Christian pneumatology. Following the lead of his predecessors, H. GunkeP and H. Weinel,^^ Volz analyzed the ejfects of the spirit in Elarly Judaism and Christianity by devoting a considerable section of the book to the effects (Wirkungeri) of the spirit, such as inspired speech, inspired poetry, prophetic and predictive speech, inspired writing and translation (LXX), and inspired wisdom. Those figures whom the spirit affects, "pneumatische Personen," extend from Moses in the distant past, to Philo, Ben Sira, the apocalypticists, the rabbis et al. in the present, to the messiah and the people of salvation in the eschatological future.^® What Volz succeeded in accomplishing as well, beyond the achieve ments of his predecessors, was to explore in detail not only the eficts of the spirit but also the nature of the spirit. Volz clarified this goal in his forward: "Die Beschreibung der Wirkungen bedarf der Erganzung durch die Geschichte der Vorstellungen. Manches, wie die Idee der Geisthypostase, erhalt bei der Uebersicht der Wirkungen nicht seinen voUen Wert."^ This commitment to apprehending both the effects and the nature of the spirit in Israelite and early Jewish litera ture led him to devote a sizeable portion of the book to "Die Geisthypostase.'"'' The first section of this analysis is diachronic, beginning with post-exilic texts such as Isa 63:7-14 and concluding with rabbinic literature. The second section consists of an analysis of related topics and sources, such as the spirit in Babylonian and Persian literature, or angels, Shekhinah, and logos. " Der Geist GoUes, 144. ^ Die PVirkungen des heiUgen Geistes nach der populdren Anschamng der apostoUschen ^eit und nach der Lehre des Apostels Paulus (Goltingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprccht, 1888). ET, The Influence of the Holy Spirit- the Popular View of the Apostolic Age and the Teaching of the ApostU Paul (?hi\2ide\phisi: Fortress, 1979). Die Wirkungen des Geistes und der Geister im nachapostolischen ^eitalter bis auf Irendus (I^ipzig and Tiibingcn: Mohr, 1899). Der Grist Gottes, 78-145. ^ Der Geist GoUes, v. ^ Der Geist Gottes, 145-94.
INTRODUCTION
19
The present book is the beneficiary of Volz's indispensable study. I shall follow Volz in devodng considerable attention to early Jewish conceptions of the nature of the spirit. I have also adapted Volz's diachronic approach to Israelite and early Jewish literature by incorpo rating several diachronic analyses of Israelite and early Jewish litera ture which illuminate various aspects of the spirit and first century Jewish biblical interpretation. The influence of Paul Volz's study of the spirit of God on this study, therefore, is inestimable. The originating impulse, emphases, and contours of the present book have been shaped by Volz's appre ciation of the vitality of Early Judaism, his attempt to apprehend early Jewish conceptions of the nature of the spirit, and his deft use of a diachronic approach to Israelite and early Jewish literature. Hans Leisegang and Popular Greco-Roman Religious fiiilosopkies Six years later, a book with nearly the same tide, Der Heilige Geist, was left with a publisher in Darmstadt, where it remained for three years, until 1919, while its author fought in and returned safely from the First Worid War. While Volz's appreciation of early Jewish spirituality has influenced the present book, Leisegang's positive assessment of Greek and Roman spiritualities has exercised a commensurate influence. Leisegang recog nized that the Greeks already had a developed notion of Jtvevna, so that Jewish and Christian conceptions of the holy spirit could not be conceived of as creations de rum?' To demonstrate this thesis, Leisegang selected a single author, Philo Judaeus, because Philo was situated ideally between the Greek, Jewish, and Christian worlds and in an eclectic period in which religion began to supplant philosophy, which had proven bankrupt in the experience of the masses, according to I-^isegang.^^ By analyzing Philo, Leisegang intended to reconstruct those Greek and Roman conceptions which proved of particular significance during the Greco-Roman era.^^
" Der Heilige Geist, 4. Der Heilige Geist, 12 H. " Leisegang {Der Heilige Geist, 12-13) chose Philo also because no other sin^e pre-Christian writer had such a developed conception of jtvev^a, and because all post-Chrisdan authors, including Greco-Roman writers, may have been influenced by Christian pneumatologies.
20
INTRODUCTION
These conceptions Leisegang did not discern in Platonic and Stoic philosophies per se but in later hellenistic mystery religions, which synthesized and distorted those philosophies in an eclectic blend of popular "folk" religiosity. Philo, contended Leisegang, embraced these conceptions, although he coated them with a veneer of philosophical vocabulary: Hiilons Anschauungen zwar tief im griechischen Volk^^uben wurzdten, dafi er aber die Volksvorstellun^n bcreits durchtrankt mit griechischer Philosophie ubemahm und den Prozess der Vcredelimg und Veigcistigung des urspriinglich recht ungefiigen und rohen Materials bis zu einer staunenswerten Verfeinerung fortfuhrte, so daB sich der Volksgiaube unter seinen Handen zu einer philosophischen Religion der Gelehrten umgestaltete.'* The analysis which we are about to undertake will provide evidence to support Leisegang's thesis. What he has discovered of Philo—that the key to Philo's conceptions of the spirit is to be discerned in the eclectic, popular religious philosophies of his own time—applies as well to Josephus' Antiquities and to Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Bibiicarum. Although I depart from Leisegang in not tracing these conceptions to the Dionysian, Orphic, and nature mystery religions, I shall often discover data to explain early Jewish exegetical move ments in the eclectic philosophical writings of Cicero and Plutarch, that is, in popular Greco-Roman conceptions contemporary with first century Jewish biblical interpreters. Leisegang's analysis has also influenced the tenor of this book by way of contrast. Leisegang queried, "Ist die Lehre vom Heiligen Gciste griechischen oder orientalischen Ursprungs?'"* Volz had sought the development of conceptions of the spirit of God in the "oriental" sphere of Israelite and early Jewish thought and experience; Leisegang located its origin and development entirely within the sphere of "Greek" thought and experience: Er schopft sie [speculations about the holy spirit] nicht aus der jiidischen, auch nicht aus anderer orientalischer Oberiieferung, sondem aus der Philosophie seiner Zeit, die bcstrebt war, einen alten und durch die Mysterienreligionen der hellenistischen Zeit neu belebten Volksglauben durch die Verbindung mit hauptsachlich platonischen und stoischen
»* Der Heilige Geist, 240. ^ Der Hei% Geist, 4
INTRODUCTION
21
PhUosophemen auch den GcbUdeten und Gelehrten schmackhaft und annehmbar zu machcn.'* In contrast to Leisegang, who maintained a rigid dichotomy between Jewish and Greco-Roman conceptions of the spirit, I shaU frequendy reject this disdncdon in favor of an eclecdc synthesis of Jewish and Greco-Roman influences on conceptions of the spirit in first century Jewish biblical interpretation. Leisegang's influence on this book, therefore, is not inconsider able. The distinction he drew between Greek philosophies and GrecoRoman popular eclectic philosophies will suggest itself in many of my discussions of Greco-Roman—as opposed to ancient Greek— milieux. Further, Leisegang's appreciation of Greco-Roman popular views riveted my attention upon similar potential influences. It is hardly surprising, in the shadow of M. Hengel, that I should depart from Leisegang in my preference for interpreting Jewish and popular GrecoRoman spheres of thought in tandem.
* Der Heilige Geist, 241. See also p. 238: . . . die gesamte Mystik des Juden Philon dem griechischen Gebtesleben entspringt... Es war also mdglich, dass in der Zeit, die dem Auftreten des Christentums unmittelbar vorau^ng, ein Jude sich von dem Geiste der Religion seiner V^tcr so wcit cntfcmte, dass der Chaiakter seiner Frommigkeit im innersten Kerne nicht von der judischen Religionslehre, sondem vom griechischen Mysdzismus bestimmt wurde " Even I ^ o ' s use of the Septuagint is related to Judakm "nur mit dem Wordaut, nicht mit ihrem Geist " For adher ence to the same preference for hellenbtic mysteries over against Judaian when xveO^a is interpreted as wind, sec p. 53; similarly when jtveOno is the ^irit of knowl edge or wisdom, see p. 75.
PART I
AN ANOMALOUS PROPHET
PROSPECT
According to Numbers 22^24, which contains the biblical story of Balaam and the ass, Balak, king of Moab, sent emissaries to Balaam, a noted seer, to obtain from him an oracle that would defeat Israel, Balak's enemy (22:7~21). Balaam set off on his ass, not without equivo cation, and was confronted on the way by an angel. Ironically, the ass perceived the angelic presence, but Balaam did not. Balaam, therefore, continued until the angel blocked the way, causing the ass to lie down. In anger Balaam struck the ass, which addressed him widi human language (22:22-30). Then "die LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the r o a d . . ." (22:31). The angel subsequendy permitted Balaam to con tinue on his journey to meet the king of Midian but commanded him to speak only what the angel would teU him to speak (22:35). Balaam delivered four oracular speeches, all of them extolling Israel, including the prediction that a star would come out of Jacob and crush the Midianites, with whom Balak was allied (24:17). Perplexing ambiguities beset this narrative. Though a travelogue of sorts, the journey is jagged, begiin with the putative approbation of God (22:20) but interrupted immediately by God's angel, who confronted Balaam disapprovingly in a walled path between two vineyards. This encounter introduces an element of ambiguity into the narrative, for now the process by which Balaam was capable of delivering oracles becomes confused. Originally God had commanded, "Do only what I tell you to do" (22:20); subsequendy the angel commanded, "Speak only what I tell you to speak" (22:35). The angel did not reappear, however, to spark Balaam's oracles; instead, God "put a word into his mouth" (23:16),' and, prior to the third oracle, die spirit of God "came upon him" (24:2). (LXX 23:7 adds a similar explanation prior to the second oracle as well.) Equally troubling is the focus of a tale, central to Israel's selfconsciousness as a blessed nation, upon a diviner (Josh 13:22) who hailed from the Euphrates (Num 22:5) and journeyed to Moab to
' See Num 22:38; 23:4-5, 12, 16, 26; 24:13.
26
AN ANOMALOUS PROPHET
deliver oracles at the request of a foreign king who ruled Israel's enemies. Further, the responsibility for sparing the Midianite women who seduced Israel, led them to idolatry, and consequendy brought about a plague which killed 24,000 (Num 25:1-9) is attributed to Balaam in Num 31:16. How could it be that the angel of God would instruct Balaam (22:35), or that the spirit of God would come upon him (24:2), or that God would "put a word into his mouth" (23:16)— an experience promised the true prophet in Deut 18:18 and denied diviners and soothsayers (18:9-14)? This jarring dissonance which so violates the principle of prophecy espoused in Deuteronomy 18 led the author of Deuteronomy to another explanation of Balaam's bless ing. Balaam cursed rather than blessed Israel, but God thwarted Balaam's efforts by refusing to listen to the curse and by transforming it (^Sn) into a blessing: "the LORD your God turned the curse into a blessing for you, because the LORD your God loved you" (Deut 23:6).^ The author of Deuteronomy makes no attempt to salvage Balaam; Balaam cursed, God blessed. Other explanations of Balaam's experience arose during the postbiblical era. The conundrums of the source of Balaam's oracles and the incorrigible character of this seer^ led first century Jewish biblical interpreters in two distinctive directions, both of which very nearly burst the old wineskin of the biblical text with robust new wines that matured during the Greco-Roman era. The products are indeed intoxicating, celebrations of exegetical creativity.*
* Slightly more ambiguous but along the same lines is Josh 24:9-10, in the context of Joshua's summary of Israelite history: "Then King Balak son of Zippor of Moab, set out to fight against Israel. He sent and invited Balaam son of Beor to c u i ^ you, but I would not listen to Balaam; therefore he blessed you; so I rescued you out of his hand." See further, particularly on LXX Josh 24:9-10, J. R. Baskin, name's Counsellors: Job, Jetkro, and Balaam in Rabbinic and Papistic Tra^tition (BJS 47; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983) 75-77. ' For a brief survey of the various levels of culpability attributed to Balaam by early Jewish authors, see G. Vermes, Scripture <md Tradition in Judaism (SPB 4; 2nd. ed.; Leiden: BriU, 1973) 173-75. * Some of the more important secondary discussions of early Jewish interpretations of Balaam include: Vermes, Scripture and Trattitum, 127-77; B a ^ n , naraoh's Counsel lors, 75-113; O. Betz, "Die Bileamtradidon und die biblische Lehre von der In^iration," in Religion im Erbe Agyptens: Beiirdge zur spatantiken Rebpon^cfuchte ZM^ Ekren Alexander Bdhlig, ed. M. Gorg (Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz, 1988) 18-53; L H. Feldman, "Josephus' Portrait of Balaam," SPhA 5 (1993) 48-83; J. T. Greene, Balaam and His Interpreters: A Hermeneudced History of the Balaam Traditions (Adanta: Schc^ars Pre», 1992).
CHAFFER T W O
THE SPIRIT AS AN INVADING ANGEL
Exegetical Movements Philo and Josephus modify Numbers 22-24 by means of different methods.' Philo moves seriadm, adapting and altering details as they arise in the biblical text. Josephus takes his more typical tack, placing a speech into Balaam's mouth which announces Josephus' point of view.^ Despite these differing methods of modifying the biblical text, the interpretations of Josephus and Philo concur remarkably about both the source of Balaam's oracles and the state in which he found himself when he delivered his oracular blessings of Israel. Both authors
' HiUo derived his detailed interpretarions from the Septuagint, which he regarded not as an unfortunate step away from the Hebrew but as an inspired translation (e.g., Vu. Mos. 2.37-40). See Y. Amir, "Authority and Interpretation of Scripture in the Writings of Hiilo," in Mikra, Text, Translation, Reading and Interpretathn of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Qmstiamfy, ed. J. Mulder and H. Sysling (Compendia Rerum Judaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 2.2; Assen: van Gorcum, 1988) 1.2.440-44. Josephus probably had access to a Hebrew text since, according to his own account, he had received a first-rate education in Palestine, and even in Rome he had access to Jewish communities. He may also have consulted a Greek text, since this would have facilitated his Greek paraphrases of the biblical texts, particulariy in the Antiqmties. In the proemium to the Antiquities (1.10-12) he did in fact cite the Septuagint, and he devoted considerable space in Ant. 12.1 - 5 9 to a paraphrase of the Letter of Aristeas, the apologetic and imaginative rendition of the translation of the Hebrew into Greek. In addition to a Hebrew and Greek version, Josephus may possibly have consulted an Aramaic targum, itself a paraphrase of the Hebrew, since he would have spoken Aramaic in Palestine. The language and exact character of the Vorlage ofJosephus' biblical paraphrase, however, remains a desideratum of Joscphan studies. See L. H. Feldman, "Use, Authority, and Exegesis of Mikra in the Writings of Josephus," in Mikra, ed. Mulder and Sysling, 1.2.455-60. For an introduction to Greek versions of the Bible, see E. Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 BC-AD 135), rev. ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman. 3 vok. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986) 3.1.474-504. ' On Jc»ephus' historiographical techniques, sec H. W. Attridge, The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Jos^>hus (HDR 7; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976), passim; for further discussion of Greco-Roman historiographical techniques, see the introduction in the Loeb edition of Dionysius of Halicamassus, The Roman Antiquitus, xvi-xviii and xxxv-xxxviii; and F. W, Walbank, fblybius (Berkeley: University of California, 1972) 43-46.
28
AN ANOMALOUS
PROPHET
identify the angel of Num 22:35 with the spirit of Num 24:2 (or LXX 23:7)^ and characterize Balaam as having lost mental control.* The Angel and the Spirit Philo eliminates the ambiguity of the multiple sources of Balaam's oracles which inheres in the biblical text by drawing an integral rela tionship between the prediction of the angel and its fulfillment by the spirit. The prediction of the angel in Vit. Mos. 1.274 and its accom plishment by the prophetic spirit in Vii. Mos. 1.277 describe the same event, the former in anticipation and the latter in retro^ct. In an ejq^anded version of Num 22:35, the angel predicts: " . . . I shall prompt the needful words without your mind's consent, and direct your organs of speech as justice and convenience require. I shaU guide the reins of speech, and, though you understand it not, employ your tongue for each prophetic utterance."^ This prediction is fulfilled when Balaam "advanced outside, and straightway became possessed, and there fell upon him the truly prophetic spirit which banished utterly from his soul his art of wizardry."* Philo creates this direct correspondence between the prediction of the angel and its fulfillment by the divine spirit by eliminating the intervening references to God in Num 22:38 and 23:5, according to which God placed a word in Balaam's mouth. In Philo's version the angel who had promised to prompt Balaam's words, direct his vocal organs, guide the reins of speech, and employ his tongue actually accomplished this when it reappeared, designated appropriately in this new context as the prophetic spirit. This identification of the angel with the prophetic spirit is confirmed by means of two subde exegetical modifications. Philo relates how Balaam, having turned aside and been overpowered by the prophetic
' Num 24:2 reads, "Balaam looked up and saw Israel camping tribe by tribe. Then the spirit of God came upon h i m . . . . " LXK Num 23:7 reads, "And the ^irit of God came upon him . . . " (icoi ^yevf|6Ti irveviia %eoK> kx' avt^). * Some of the material in this chapter has been published in "The Debut of the Divine Spirit in Josephus's Antiquities" HTR 87 (1994) 123-38 and "The Prophetic Spirit as an Angel According to Philo," HTR 88 (1995) 189-207. * Riilo Vu. Mos. 1.274. Greek, Eiioti t o "kexxka tncincovvtog ovew TT^ IOVOI9EI^ e^{9vnq SEo^opeitai KOI utiSev ovvieC^, oSonep nerovurtcmivov xov Xoyionov, xa vnoPoXXojicva d^eXoXei Kpoortant elements of this first century interpretation: an explicit affirmation that Saul lost his mental faculties in the pres ence of the good spirit of God (Saul's exj>erience in 1 Samuel 19 may be attributable to the evil spirit); the distinction between omens (arti ficial divination) and possession (natural divination); and the most basic ingredient, oracular speech itself Socrates in Hato's dialogues generates additional insight into the exegetical movements of Philo and Josephus by attributing to poets and seers a form of inspiration that requires the loss of mental faculties and by describing daemons (which Philo centuries later identifies as angels) as mediating beings between the divine and human worlds. What Plato does not attempt to do, however, is to combine these two ingredients into a smooth consistency—which is precisely what Philo and Josephus accomplish.
** In "Angelic Spirit," 474-80, I have analyzed the tendency to depict the i^irit of God as an angelic spirit in Septuagintal transladons: LXX Jdg 13:24-25; LXX 1 Kgs 22:19-24; LXX Isa 63:7-14; LXX Mic 2:7 and 11, 3:8; LXX Hag 2:5; and Judith 16:14. Although these Greek transladons demonstrate that the interpretadon of the spirit of God as an angelic being existed in the Greco-Roman era, I do not include those discussions here because these transladons do not associate this angelic spirit of God with the loss of mental control. In general, it should be recognized how easily a "spirit" could be idendfied as an "angel". The Enoch cycle of literature contains over one hundred references in which the phrase "Lord of spirits" displaces the more biblical "Lord of hosts" as a reference to the lordship of God over angelic beings (e.g., 1 En 39:12; 40:1-10; 46:3-8). Angelic beings, both evil and good, are depicted as "spirits" p T T T I or rrfTTI; ?cvev)uxTa, etc.) in many other eariy Jewish documents: Jubilees (e.g., 1:25; 2:2; 10: 1-11:14); TAbr (B) 13.7; (A) 4.7-10 (Michael says, "Lord, aU die heavenly spirits are incorporeal, and they neither eat nor drink"); the Testaments of the Twclw Patriarchs (e.g., TReub 2:1-3:7; TSim 3:1, 5; 6:6; TLevi 3:2-3; 9:9; TJud 13:3; 14:2, 8; TIss 4:4; TGad 1:9; 3:1; 6:2; TAsh 1:9; 6:1-5; TBen 5:2. On BeUar's [Satan'sl spirits, see: TJud 25:3; TIss 7:7;TZeb 9:7-8; TDan 1:6-8; 3:6; 4:5; 5:5-6; 6:1; TJos 7:4; TBen 3:3-4; 6:1); and approximately fifty occurrences in the nont»Uical Hebrew Qumran scroUs (e.g., IQM 13.10; ICIH 3.18). Sekki {Meamng, 145-71) con tends that this identihcadon occurs fifty-eight times. For the consensus view, set 148 n. 11. See also the index on pages 225-39. This linguistic interchangeability would have facilitated the identification of the angel of Num 22:35 with the ^irit of 24:2 (and LXX 23:7).
T H E S P I R I T AS A N
INVADING
ANGEL
47
Although the discrete elements of Philo's and Josephus' exegetical movements have precedent, to varying degrees, in relevant Israelite and Platonic milieux, these milieux do not, then, adequately illumi nate the particulars and details of that combination of those elements into a consistent conception of inspiration. For that clarification Plu tarch's De defectu oraculorum is indispensable. In the spirit of the New Academy, Plutarch does not finally answer the question of why there was less oracular activity at Delphi than in prior eras but instead proffers several points of view. Two of these are critical for under standing the exegetical movements of Philo and Josephus. One of the participants in the discussion, Cleombrotus, attributes the obsolescence of oracles at Delphi to the departure of the mediat ing demons, the divine messengers. This is, he observes, a longstanding view that was claimed by adherents long in advance of Cleombrotus himself:*^ Let this statement be ventured for us, following the lead of many others before us, that coincidcndy with the total defection of the guardian spirits assigned to the oracles and prophetic shrines, occurs the defection of the oracles themselves; and when the spirits flee or go to another place, the oracles themselves lose their power.** Later in the discussion, Lamprias*^ criticizes Cleombrotus' explana tion, but before he does he summarizes it: "For what was said then [i.e., earlier], that when the demigods withdraw and forsake the oracles, these lie idle and inarticulate like the instruments of musicians. . . Cleombrotus' attribution of oracular, prophetic power to daemonic beings can be profitably pressed into service to elucidate one of Philo's
The view propounded by Cleombrotus may represent Plutarch's own view. See Flaceliere, Dispariium des Oracles, 48; E. de Fayc, Origene: sa vie, son onivre, sa pensee. II: Vambiance pkilosopkique (Paris: Librairie Ernest Leroux, 1927) 110. ** 4 I 8 C - D . Greek, icai TeToX4iTia6to ^etd xoXXotM; etpi^odai Kal T\M^V, oti TOI^ Kcpi td navteia KOI xpilotTjpux TrtoyiiEvoi^ 6oi^ovioi(; eKXciitowi TE KomSfi ovvEKXciJiei t a v t ' avtd Kal (jmydyttov f\ imooravtcov OKOPOXXCI TT^V Svvaniv. . . . *^ Lamprias holds to the opinion, based upon the Stoic theory of secondary causes, that a vapor rises from the ground and inspires the Delphic prophetess, and that changes in sun and earth led to the cessation of this vapor, resulting in the obsoles cence of oracles {Def. Orac. 431E-434C). On the theory of the vapors, see J. Fontenrose, The Delphic Oracle: Its Responses and Operations (^rkeley/Los Angeles: University of California, 1978); H. W. Parke and D. E. W. Wormell, The Delphic OracU I: The His tory (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1956) 19-26; Flaceliere, Disparition des Oracles, 42-46. ** 431A-B. Greek, tdydp d^ioto^tevcov Kal dxoXemovTtov t d xp^iorfipia t&v 5aHi6vcov c6cmep opTfava T€xvit«v dpyd wxl dvavSa KCIO^I Xcjfikv rcepov Xoyov kytipti tov jtcpl xi\q aitio^ ^cC^ova Kal Svvdiieo)^.
48
AN ANOMALOUS
PROPHET
and Josephus' exegetical movements, namely, the attribution of Ba laam's inspiration to the angelic spirit rather than direcdy to God, although in Numbers 22-24 God is the dominant source of inspi ration. Throughout his version of Balaam, Philo wrests this inter pretation from Numbers 22-24 by identifying the angel (VU. Mos. 1.274) and the prophetic spirit (1.277) while simultaneously excising the direct references to God which punctuate Numbers 22-24. In his version of Num 23:12, Philo replaces the reference to God in Balaam's retort to Balak following the first oracle with a vague ref erence to "the divine" (xoSeiov) {VU. Mos. 1.281). In Philo's version of Num 23:16, the source of the second oracle is not God. Instead, Philo writes that Balaam prophesied "what was cast" into him {VU. Mos. 1.283). This passive participle indicates that the source of the first and second oracles is the same. Just as Balaam prophesied what was put in his mouth by another (vjtopdXXovro^ erepou) in the first oracle, so the content of the second oracle consists of "what was cast," xa imopaXXo^eva, once again, presumably, by this "other," erepoq, whom Philo has already identified as the prophetic spirit.*® In his version of Num 23:26, Philo omits Balaam's response to Balak following the second oracle, that he will do only what God says. In his version of Num 24:2 {VU. Mos. 1.288), the reference to the "spirit of God" prior to the third oracle is replaced by the words, "became inspired" (ev0ov^ Yev6^£vo dciov, Balaam has already unequivocally attributed his words to the grasp of the spirit of God: " . . . when we are possessed by the spirit of God [TO TOV Seen)... xveO^a] . . . " which "gives utterance to such language and words as it wiU." Josephus' subsequent reference to "speaking that which the Deity [toOeiov] suggests" o u ^ t then to be understood as this same divine spirit. This exegetical movement is consistent with Josephus' theological commitments. He espoiises a view of God as one who is "perfect and blessed, self-sufficing... the beginning, the middle, and the end of all things. By His works and bounties He is plainly seen . . . but His form and magnitude surpass our fxtwers of description . . . " {CA 2.190). Josephus writes in the proemium to Antiqtdties that God "possesses the very perfection of virtue" {Ant. 1.23). ^ This polite conclusion often accompanies accounts that might be difficult for Josephus' readers to swallow. E.g., Ant. 1.108, 2.347-48, 3.81, 10.281, 17.354.
50
AN ANOMALOUS PROPHET
corresponds remarkably well widi the motivation for Cleombrotus' view in the first place, suggesting the appeal a view such as Cleombro tus' may have held for them. Cleombrotus contends that the purpose of this view, which he himself adopts, is to keep God from becoming entangled in the morass of human existence. He explains that "those p>ersons have resolved more and greater jjerplexities who have set the race of demigods midway between gods and humans, and have dis covered a force to draw them together, in a way, and to unite our common fellowship . . ."^^ The force of this explanation becomes evident when we recognize that it follows on the heels of another explanation of inspiration, in which gods themselves possess people direcdy. Prior to Cleombrotus' statement, Lamprias caricatures this form of inspiration as ventriloquism, criticizing it because it is incon sistent with the need to draw sufficient space between the divine and human worlds: "For if he [a god] allows himself to become entangled in people's needs, he is prodigal with his majesty and he does not observe the dignity and greatness of his pre-eminence" (Def. Orac. 414E). Cleombrotus proflfers his view of inspiration, therefore, to pro vide an alternative to Ammonius' view which, according to Lamprias, inappropriately entangles the god in human affairs. Although Philo, Josephus, and Cleombrotus are three quite different personalities, all three esf)ouse a mode of inspiration in which an angelic or daemonic being inspires oracular speech. Moreover, the motivation for attributing inspiration to an angelic or daemonic being rather than direcdy to gods is in all three uncommonly similar. Each is concerned to disentangle their god from a form of inspiration which violates the necessary distance between the divine and human realms. Thus Cleombrotus' view, both with respect to content and motivation, was appealing to these first century Jewish interpreters. These observations do not exhaust the kinship of Cleombrotus' view with Philo's and Josephus' versions of Balaam. The means of inspiration is also analogous: the recipient of inspiration remains passive in the presence of the inspiring angel. Balaam, in Josephus' Antiquities, says, "For that spirit gives utterance to such language and words as it will, whereof we are all unconscious (4.120). In Philo's De vita Mosis, the angel predicts, "I shall prompt the needful words without your
" Def. Orac. 4 1 5 A . Greek, RXCCOVOU; Xvoai KOI jici^ovoi; dtnopio^ oi to xoiv Saijiovcov y^vo^ cv ^iocp 9evTC(; Oe&v Kai dvOpomov Kai Tponov tivd rnv Koivcoviav r\\iviv (ruvdyov eiq tauTo Kal OMvamow e^evpovre^. . .
T H E S P I R I T AS A N
INVADING
ANGEL
51
mind's consent" (1.274). In De defectu oraculorum, Cleombrotus accen tuates this passivity by adopting the simile of musical instruments. When the daemons return, "the oracles, like musical instruments, become articulate, since those who can put them to use are present and in charge of them" (4180).^*^ This image occurs as well in the philonic corpus, in a related descripdon of the prophedc phenomenon. Philo equates the onset of ecstasy with the arrival of the divine spirit: "This is what regularly befalls the fellowship of the prophets. The mind is evicted at the arrival of the divine Spirit, but when that departs the mind returns to its tenancy."^^ Philo continues by connect ing this interpretation of ecstasy in Gen 15:12 with the words, "it was said to Abraham," in Gen 15:13: "For indeed the prophet, even when he seems to be speaking, really holds his peace, and his organs of speech, mouth and tongue, are wholly in the employ of Another, to shew forth what He wills. Unseen by us that Other beats on the chords with the skill of a master-hand and makes them instruments of sweet music, laden with every harmony.""^ The elements of inspi radon integral to Philo's version of Balaam—the spirit, the loss of mental control, the mutual exclusiveness of mortal and immortal,^^ the prompting of the vocal organs, and the passivity of the prophet— coalesce in this definition of prophecy. The use here of the metaphor of music links this definition of prophecy to the view held by Cleom brotus, according to which, "when the spirits return many years later, the oracles, like musical instruments, become articulate, since those who can put them to use are present and in charge of them" (Def. Orac. 418D). Cleombrotus' explanation of Delphic inspiration, then, sheds extra ordinary light on the exegetical movements of Philo and Josephus. All three preserve the boundaries between the spheres of gods and ^ 4 1 8 D . G r e e k , cito napovteov auT&v 6id zpovou KOXXOO KaOdxep opyava ^ c y y e r a i Twv xpco^evcDv aiioTdvtwv Kai napovrwv. " Her. 265. Greek, 6e npocpiTtiK^ yevei iX€i t o v t o o v ^ ^ i v E i v • e^oiKi^Etai ^lb/ yap ev njiiv 6 vov^ Katct tx\v tov Oeiov nvtviiaroq a mjoh rvn crrf7« Tar Analogously, in 2 Kgs 13:23, it is written of Israel that God "would not destroy them; nor has he banished them from his presence undl now." Of the false prophet, according to Jeremiah, God says, " . . . I will . . . cast you away from my presence, you and the city that I gave to you and your ancestors. And I will bring upon you everiasting disgrace and perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten" (23:39-40).
THE
SPIRIT AS LIFE ITSELF
67
imminence of death when he recognizes the loss of that holy spirit.'^ Although the lack of other more concrete echoes renders a final appraisal injudicious, the appearance of the same vocabulary and a similar association with death suggest the possibility that Pseudo-Philo adopted the language of this psalm to depict the spirit of Balaam. It is not surprising that we cannot yet pinpoint with total accuracy Pseudo-Philo's exegetical movements. Pseudo-Philo tends to gather expressions and phrases from a variety of contexts. Echoes are often fleeting, collected in a cornucopia of expressions from other passages. Moreover, these allusions are not always pristine; often they are forged on the anvil of the Greco-Roman era, including concepts Jewish and Roman. Our quest for illumination cannot be completed, therefore, until we have wrung from the Greco-Roman era potentially relevant texts.
Greek and Latin Literature Stoicism and the Spirit The four references to the spirit in Psalm 51 were, of course, trans lated into Greek during the Greco-Roman era. The Septuagint transla tion of Psalm 51:12-14 is sufficiendy interesting to deserve citation: KapSiav Ka9apav KTIOOV ev ejioi, 6 8e68e; e y K a i v i o o v ev toiq eyxaToi^ \io\). o c K o p p i y p c ; \ie aiu> tov npoaomo'o oo\) Kttl TO JtveOjia to ayiov aov ^ii avtaveXfic; otji' e^ov. otKoSoc; ^ioi xr\v ayaXkiaaiv tot) omr\pio\) OOD Kttl nve^nati % e n o v i K ^ onipioov ne ( L X X Ps 50:12~14).
" The similarity o f expression that unites Ps 51:12 and LAB 18:11, including t h e analogous relationship betv^reen the holy spirit and life or death, does not surest that these two t e x t s c o n t a i n i d c n u c a J c o n c e p t i o n s o f t h a t h o l y spirit. I n t h e p s a l m , anthropological terms are preceded by adjectives: "clean heart" or "ri^t spirit" or "willing spirit" or "broken spirit" or "broken and contrite heart." In this psalm, terms such as heart and spirit connote something other than the spirit given t o sustain physical life. The psalm reflects rather the notion of renewal, even national renewal, that is found in exilic prophetic texts. According to Ezekiel, for instance, God promises Israel: "A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you . . . I will put my spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances" (36:26-27; see ll:19;Jer 31:33). In contrast, in LAB 18, two allusions to Gen 6:3, followed by a clear association of the loss of the holy spirit with the imminence of death, suggest that Pseudo-Philo understands the holy spirit as that which sustains human life, quite a p a r t from conceptions of cleansing, brokenness, and contrition.
68
AN ANOMALOUS
PROPHET
This translation conveys the ambiguity that characterizes its Hebrew Vorli^ vis-a-vis the holy spirit, which can be taken to mean the human spirit-breath or, alternatively, the spirit as an endowment granted in addition to this life-breath. The identification of the holy spirit with the life-breath is supported perhaps by the translation of the Hebrew verb, n p b , by the Greek verb, dvtaipeiv. Though this verb occurs only ten times in the Sep tuagint, eight of them in the psalms, two of these are situated in contexts in which life and death are at issue. Of the animals it can be said that when God takes away their spirit (ovtaveXeiq TO icvev^a avxwv), they are cut oflfand return to the ground (LXX Ps 103:29). Further, the psalmist implores God not to take away his life or soul (\ir\ dvTaveX^q TT^V Y\)xf\v \io\i) in LXX Ps 140:8. In both instances, the verb, avtaipeiv, is associated with the presence or loss of life. If the choice of this verb in LXX Psalms 103 and 140 provides any clue, then the psalmist in LXX Ps 50:13 is presumably begging God not to take away the holy spirit—understood as that which sustains life and prevents return to the earth. The translation in LXX 50:14 of the third reference—to the willing or generous spirit—could also be construed as a reference to the human spirit.'® The words, jcvevjuxtifiYEjioviK^, may refer to the human spirit which steadies the psalmist by ruling over the human soul.'^ This interpretation approximates the understanding of the holy spirit as the vivifying force of life, such as in Gen 6:3 or LAB 18, although this conception of the spirit is interpreted along the lines of Stoicism as the rational component of a human being. Apart from the conceptual distinction between the Uber Antiquitatum Biblicarum and LXX Psalm 50, this reference nonetheless provides significant evi dence of the willingness of post-biblical Jewish interpreters to identify the human spirit as the holy spirit.
'* On the other hand, the words, icvev^axt iryEjioviic^, may refer to the spirit which exists independendy of a human being and strengthens or rules the psalmist by leading, in a manner similar to the spirit's leading in LXX Ps 142:10, to xvEv^ia <xn> to dyo^v oSinrnoei jie ev yp ziAtvq.. Tliis understanding of the holy ^irit, we have seen, characterizes as weU Isa 63:9-14, where the holy spirit can be grieved and, like God's glorious arm, set in Israel's midst. This ^^\T\t of the LORD leads or giv^ rest to Israel. " See, for example, Sextus Empiricus 8.400, hxi o5v ^rvx^i m i t o TIYQIOVIKOV jTvnJMXx earIV r{ X o m ^ p e o t e p o v TI jrvcunaToq, ox; 90KJIV. . . . See also the index entry, to irmtoviKov, in H. von Amim, Stokorum Vetenm Fragmenta, 4 vols. (Tcubncr, 190324) 4.65.
T H E SPIRIT A S LIFE ITSELF
69
An equally evocative reference to dyiov Ttvevjia constitutes a por tion of the opening lines of the first century BCE Alexandrian tract, Wisdom of Solomon: ayiov yap itvev^ux miSeiou; (pru^etai 56Xov (1:5). Although some interpreters have construed the words, dyiov jwev^ia, as a reference to the spirit which exists apart from human beings rather than as the human spirit which all possess by virtue of human existence,^ these words have also been interpreted as a reference to the human spirit which all people possess. The words, ayiovrevdijux,in WisSol 1:5 may then constitute another instance of the designation, holy spirit, to describe the spirit that is constitutive of human life. This similarity of vocabulary, however, does not mean that the conceptions of the spirit in Wisdom of Solomon and Uber Antiquitatum Biblicarum are similar. Actually they diverge dra matically. First, the holy spirit in WisSol 1:5 comprises part of the triad of anthropological components of a human being, the first two of which have already been mentioned in the preceding lines of Wisdom of Solomon: " . . . because wisdom will not enter a deceitful soul, or dweU in a body enslaved to sin. For a holy and disciplined spirit will flee from deceit.. (1:4—5a). This holy spirit can be con trasted with a soul characterized by deceit (1:4a) and a body enslaved to sin (1:4b), into which wisdom will not enter. This conception of the spirit as an integral component of a person does not allow for the spirit to be lessened or forfeited prior to death.^' One simply cannot have "litde left" of this component while alive, as Balaam did accord ing to LAB 18:11. Second, the adjective dyiov appears to be used non-technically to describe the spirit that is pure through the instruction characteristic of the wisdom schools. The words, dyiov Jtvev^ia, are followed by the
™ E.g., D . W i n s t o n , The Wisdom of Solomon ( G a r d e n C i t y , NY: D o u b l e d a y , 1979) 99. E. G. Clarke {The Wisdom of Solomon [Cambridge: University Press, 1973] 17), for example, translates this sentence, "The holy spirit, that divine tutor, will fly from cunning stratagem." According to this interpretadon, the holy spirit is to be idend fied in its context with wisdom that will not enter a deceitful soul (1:4), with wisdom understood as a philanthropic spirit (1:6), and with the spirit of the Lord that "has filled the worid" and "holds aU things togedier..." (1:7). " In WisSol 15:7-13, the breath of life of Gen 2:7 is interpreted similariy as an integral anthropological component which characterizes a human being from birth to death. People die "when the time comes to return the souls that were borrowed" (15:8). Idolators in particular have no hope "because they failed to know the one who formed them/and inspired them with active souls/and breathed a living spirit into them."
70
AN ANOMALOUS PROPHET
genitival adjective, TiaiSeia^, suggesting that the human spirit becomes holy through instruction. Such an understanding differs even from other occurrences of this expression in Wisdom of Solomon, such as 9:17, in which God's "holy spirit" is sent from on high to grant wisdom to people such as Solomon. There exists still a third conceptual difference that divides WisSol 1:5 from LAB 18:10: this reference to the human spirit (if WisSol 1:5 refers primarily to the human rather than cosmic spirit) is set within a context defined by Stoic terminology. A few lines later, the spirit of the Lord is depicted as that which "filled the world, and that which holds all things together. . ." (1:7). These spirits appear to be related, for the relationship between them is anchored by an analogous resistance to unrighteousness. Just as the holy spirit is "ashamed at the approach of unrighteousness," so the cosmic spirit of the Lord will not permit "those who utter unrighteous things" to escape notice (1:5, 8). The close relationship between the human spirit and the cosmic spirit presupposes the Stoic conception according to which the human spirit is a portion of the cosmic 7cveij|ia. Conse quently, as w a s the case with I.XX Psalm 50, the spirit is interpreted in a manner fundamentally different from LAB 18:11. Thus LXX Psalm 50 and WisSol 1:5 provide important evidence that the human spirit, understood as that which is constitutive of life itself, could be designated the holy spirit, as is the case in LAB 18:11. However, in both texts the spirit is understood along Stoic lines as a portion of the human being, in LXX Psalm 50 as the "ruling spirit" and in WisSol 1:5 as the instructed spirit that, like the cosmic spirit, resists unrighteousness. The chasm which separates the conception of the holy spirit in LAB 18:11 from Stoic conceptions of Ttvevna can be brought into starker focus by comparing LAB 18 with a poignant letter of the Roman Stoic statesman, Seneca, penned perhaps during the years, 63-65 CE. Seneca commends Lucilius in this letter for aspiring to sound understanding by looking to himself rather than to gods and idols external to humankind. In this context, Seneca refers to a "holy spirit" which indwells within human beings: We do not need to uplift our hands towards heaven, or to beg the keeper of a temple to let us approach this idol's ear, as if in this way our prayers were more likely to be heard. God is near you, he is with you, he is within you. This is what I mean, Lucilius: a holy spirit in-
T H E SPIRIT AS LIFE ITSELF
71
dwells widlin us, one who marks our good and bad deeds, and is our guardian." As we U^at this spirit, so are we treated {Epistulae morales 41.2). The person who fulfills the Stoic ideal of being unterrified by dangers, untouched by desires, etc. does so by virtue of a spirit which, while abiding within, remains first of all allied with its heavenly origin: When a soul rises superior to other souls, when it passes through every experience as if it were of small account, when it smiles at our fears and at our prayers, it is stirred by a force from heaven. . . . Therefore, a great part of it abides in that place from whence it came down to earth . . . the great and hallowed soul, which has come down in order that we may have a nearer knowledge of divinity, does indeed associate with us, but sdll cleaves to its origin .. . (41.5). What marks this perfect soul is not external accoutrements which can be passed on to someone else but a life lived according to reason, a life lived according to one's nature: Praise the quality in him which cannot be given or snatched away, that which is the peculiar property of the human. Do you ask what this is? It is soul, and reason brought to perfecdon in the soul. For a human is a reasoning animal. Therefore, one's highest good is attained, if he has fulfilled the good for which nature designed him at birth. And what is it which this reason demands of him? The easiest thing in the world—to live in accordance v^th his own nature (41.8-9). In this eloquent essay, the task and character of the holy spirit, understood in Stoic terms, are explained with exceptional clarity: living according to reason (the Stoic ideal) and living according to one's own nature are synonymous because one's own nature consists in part of a spirit, the god within, which has descended from the di vine, rational world and continues, though embodied in humans, to seek association wdth the divine world. Although the holy spirit is analogously identified with the human spirit, as sacer spiritus by Seneca and sanctus spiritus by Pseudo-Philo, the characteristic earmark of the human spirit, interpreted from this first century C E Stoic perspective, is notably absent from LAB 18. Balaam does not claim to have lost the holy spirit because he failed to live in accordance with reason, with his true nature, but because he was persuaded by Balak and transgressed what God had spoken
^ Ladn, sacer intra nos spiritus sedet, malorum bonorumqtu nostrorum observator et custos.
72
AN ANOMALOUS
PROPHET
to him earUer at night: "But I will gnash my teeth, because I have been led astray and have transgressed what was said to me by night" (LAB 18:12). This emphasis upon the reception of external instruc tion by some revelatory means, upon divine revelation from without, violates the thrust of Seneca's essay that, because the human spirit never forfeits its character as divine rationality, one need look nowhere else than to oneself for guidance. Substantive evidence emerges, therefore, from LXX Psalm 50, WisSol 1:5, and Seneca's forty-first Episde, to illuminate Pseudo-Hiilo's application of the term, holy spirit, to the human spirit. Apart from this common vocabulary, however, the similarities evaporate. Although Pseudo-Philo may not necessarily resist hellenization with respect to his conception of the spirit, his interpretation of the spirit in LAB 18:11, apart from the similarity of vocabulary, has litde in common with the Stoicized interpretations of the spirit that characterize LXX Psalm 50, WisSol 1:5, and Seneca's forty-first letter to Lucilius. These texts, however, do not circumscribe the totality of references to the human spirit as the holy spirit during the Greco-Roman era. Greek Danielic Literature Further instances in which the human spirit is referred to as the "holy spirit" occur in the Greek literature of the Danielic cycle. In Theodotion's version of Susanna 45, the idiomatic reference to the stirring of a person's spirit which occurs with relative frequency in post-exilic literature^^ is modified slighdy by the addition of the adjec tive, dyiov. God is said to have stirred up the holy spirit of a young lad named Daniel: e^fiyeipev 6 8e6rtant Edomite tribe. The cave of Kenaz thus constituted the Idumean response to the cave of Machpelah, the grave of the patriarchs near Hebron." ' LAB 27:9. Latin, Et surrexit Cenez, et induit eum spiritus Domini, et evagmavit rompheam suam. * Jdg 6:34. Hebrew, |TP13"nn mi±> mrp n m . ' LAB 27:5 and Jdg 7:8 (see LAB 36:1). ^ LAB 27:6 and Jdg 7:9-18 (see LAB 36:1-2).
86
AN ECLECTIC
ERA
while spying on the enemy camp;' the request for a sign;® the ambush of the enemies' camp;^ and the confused detail that Kenaz killed forty-five thousand and that they killed one another.'° Pseudo-Philo has, then, expanded Jdg 3:10 by establishing an association with Jdg 6:34 and its context. This exegetical expansion is far more suggestive of the palpable and jx)werful presence of the spirit of God than is the formula in Jdg 3:10. The bestowal of power for military victory is indeed the central function of the spirit in LAB 27:9-10, as the designation "spirit of power"" in the second reference to the spirit, in LAB 27:10, indi cates. Pseudo-Philo recounts how the spirit inspired Kenaz again when he was privy to the Amorites' intent to destroy Israel: "And when Kenaz heard their words, he was clothed with the spirit of power and was changed into another man, and he went down to the Amorite camp and began to strike them down.'"^ Once again, the parallel with Gideon is obvious: just as Gideon was propelled to batde by over hearing his enemies' words (Jdg 7:13-15), so the catalyst for Kenaz's attack proved to be the words of his enemies. However, the particular effect of this powerful spirit, expressed vaguely in Jdg 3:10, "he judged Israel; he went out to war," PseudoPhilo heightens by importing still another expression that occurs even farther afield than Jdg 6:34 or 7:15: Kenaz was "changed into another man. . . ." This description echoes 1 Sam 10:6, in which Samuel addressed Saul: "Then the spirit of the LORD will come mightily upon you, and you shall prophesy with them and be turned into an other man.'"^ Pseudo-Philo's application of this expression obfuscates the original context of I Sam 10:6, in which transformation is related to prophecy, "Then the spirit of the LORD will come upon you.
' LAB 27:7-12 and Jdg 7:14, 20 (see LAB 36:2). « l A B 27:7 and Jdg 6:36-40 (see LAB 35:6-7). ' LAB 27:10 and Jdg 7:19-23 (see LAB 36:1-2). '° LAB 27:10 and Jdg 7:22. " Although this expression may be traced to Isa 11:2, "^irit of counsel and might," it is perhaps as likely that Pseudo-Kiilo is underscoring, without slavishly following any biblical antecedent, the powerfiil nature of the spirit Frequendy, of course, the word, spirit, is accompanied by genidval nouns, as in the remainder of Isa 11:2-4 (see also 1 En 49:3) and texts such as Z^ch 12:10 (spirit of compassion). In the Pastoral Episdes, Timothy is said to have received, not "a ^irit of cowardice, but rather a spirit of power and of love and of self-discipline" (2 Tim 1:7). 27:10. Ladn, EU factum est ut mutiuU Cenez verba mum, indutus est spirit virtutis et transmutatiis in vinm ahum, desceruUt m castra Amorreorum et cefnt percutere eos. Hebrew, T ! H BJ^*? rOBTm. Vulgate reads, et mutaberis in virum ahum.
T H E S P I R I T AND
HUMAN
TRANSFORMATION
87
and you shall prophesy along witli t l i c i n a n d b e c o m e another p e r s o n . " Pseudo-Philo instead bends this transformation b y the spirit to extra ordinary military prowess, the focus of this portion of his narrative. The disregard for original context which is apparent in PseudoPhilo's application of the expression, "another person," to military f)ower rather than prophetic abilities becomes even more evident in comparison with LAB 20:2, where he employs the same expression to depict Joshua's prophetic—not military—abilities. God said to Joshua, "Take his [Moses'] garments of wisdom and clothe yourself, and with his belt of knowledge gird your loins, and you will be changed and become another man" (20:2). Joshua then proceeded to prophesy to the Israelites. These two very different applications of 1 Sam 10:6— transformation into another person—reveal the freedom Pseudo-Philo exercises vis-a-vis the original context of biblical expressions. In LAB 20:2, the topic is Joshua's prophetic power, in LAB 27:9-10, Kenaz's military prowess. The same phrase, culled from 1 Sam 10:6, is assim ilated to these respective contexts: Joshua speaks prophetically and Kenaz fights powerfully. The same exegetical freedom Pseudo-Philo displays when he supple ments Jdg 3:9-11 with allusions to 1 Sam 10:6 and Jdg 6:34 will be come evident further if we juxtapose his interpretation of Num 24:2 with his interpretation of Jdg 3:9-10. Both in his tale of Balaam and his tale of Kenaz, Pseudo-Philo encounters nearly identical formula tions of the spirit's effect upon an individual: Num 23:7: c m ^ mi rhs 'nm'* Num 24:2: crrfTK rm rbs
Tm
Jdg 3:10: m r m n rbs Ttm We have observed already that this expression occurs in the tale of Balaam and that Pseudo-Philo adds the negative, non, in flagrant violation of the biblical text, to make clear that what Balaam lost was not the temporary endowment of the prophetic spirit but the life-sustaining spirit which is the possession of all. In contrast, when Pseudo-Philo encounters the nearly identical expression in the tale of his central hero, Kenaz (biblical Othniel), he stretches the limits of the text in another direction to emphasize the special capacity of the spirit to transform Kenaz into a successful military leader. One biblical formula yields two extraordinarily divergent interpretations. '* My reconstruction, based upon LXX Num 23:7, icai eyevfiOn nve^»^aft^ov) in' avx^.
88
A N ECLECTIC
ERA
Despite these enormously divergent exegetical departures firom scrip ture, Pseudo-Philo adheres in both cases to a consistent exegetical method. Pseudo-Philo underscores the absence of the spirit from Balaam by introducing allusions to another biblical text that refers to the spirit—Gen 6:3—alongside a statement which denies to him that spirit. He underscores the presence of the spirit with Kenaz by introducing allusions to other biblical texts that refer to the spirit—Jdg 6:34 and 1 Sam 10:6—alongside the explicit designation, "spirit of power." Gideon's Military Prowess These observations do not deplete Pseudo-Philo's exegetical cache. Pseudo-Philo further underscores the association of the spirit and military power in his characterization of Gideon, whose biblical story, as we just saw, is the anvil on which Pseudo-Philo forges his relatively expansive portrait of Kenaz. In contrast to his amplification of Kenaz's tale, however, in which Pseudo-PhUo generously supplements the bibli cal text, he omits elements of the biblical version of Gideon's story which tend to attenuate the association of the spirit with leadership in batde. Jdg 6:34 reads: "But the spirit of the LORD clothed [took possession of] Gideon; and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiczrites were called out to follow him." The ensuing episodes in Judges 6-7 interrupt the segue from Gideon's reception of the spirit to battle. The advent of the spirit (Jdg 6:34) is followed, not by batde, but by the gathering of people from the Abiezrites, as well as the tribes of Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun, and Naphthali, who "went up to meet them" (6:33-35). The next episode, in which Gideon laid a fleece to determine whether Israel would be victorious, further delays the batde with the Midianites and functions, moreover, to undermine the im pression that Gideon possessed an unusual endowment of the spirit to lead his people into batde (6:36-40). Nor is the subsequent whitding down of the soldiers to three hundred given a military rationale (7:1-8); the task was undertaken simply because the "LORD said to Gideon" (7:2, 4). The delay occasioned by the episodes in Jdg 6:357:8, then, weakens the association between Gideon's reception of the spirit (6:34) and God's proclamation of Gideon's impending military success (7:9). The principal effect of the omission of these elements from Judges 6:34b-7:8 is the characterization of the spirit as the defining factor of leadership in batde. Consequendy, in contrast to the biblical text.
T H E SPIRIT A N D H U M A N T R A N S F O R M A T I O N
89
in which the association between the spirit and military success lessens with each intervening episode, according to LAB 36:2, the direct re sult of Gideon's reception of the spirit is military success.'^ Accordingly, Pseudo-Philo's abbreviated version reads: And as soon as Gideon heard these words, he put on'^ the spirit of the Lord and was strengthened and said to the three hundred men, "Rise up, let each one of you gird on his sword, because the Midianites have been delivered into our hands (LAB 36:2). In this version, the juxtaposition of Jdg 6:34, which recounts the reception of the spirit, with Jdg 7:14—15, the story of the Midianites in their tents, characterizes the spirit as the impetus for batde. Pseudo-Philo's versions of Kenaz (Othniel) and Gideon, therefore, accentuate the relationship between the spirit's presence and military success which is implicit in Jdg 3:9-11 and muted in Jdg 6:34. He accentuates this association through creative exegetical movements including: (I) the incorporation of expressions from other biblical texts about the spirit (Jdg 6:34 in LAB 27:9; 1 Sam 10:6 in LAB 27:10); (2) the introduction of explicit references to power ("the spirit of power" in LAB 27:10 and possibly "was strengthened" in 36:2);'^ and (3) re casting the biblical text by means of imaginative expansions of Kenaz's heroic military feats (Jdg 3:9-11 and LAB 25-28) and omissions of biblical elements that obfuscate the association of the spirit with mili tary success (Jdg 6:34b-7:8 and LAB 36:1-2).
The tautness of this association is apparent furthermore in the way Pseudo-Philo subdy re-orders the biblical text. Had Pseudo-Hiilo simply omitted Jdg 6:34b-7:8, Gideon's reception of the spirit would praxde what he hears from the Midianite camp in Jdg 7:14. In other words, Jdg 6:34 would precede 7:14-15. In LAB 36:1-2, how ever, the divine spirit clothes Gideon efier he has heard the Midianites predict his victory and immediately prior to batde. H a r r i n g t o n {OTP 2.349 n. 36b) s u g g e s t s the possibility of emending mdtdt spiritum ("he put on the spirit") to indtdt spiritus ("the spirit clothed [him]"). This minor emendation produces greater consistency between LAB 36:2 and Jdg 6:34. Despite the ^ p c a l of this emendation, it is unnecessary for two i^asons. First, according to Pseudo-Hiilo's version ofjo^ua's commissionii^, Joshua is depicted as clothing hiinself in Moses' garments of wisdom, an act which, I ("Prophetic In^iration," 314-16) have argued, is tantamount to the reception of the spirit (LAB 20:2-3). The image of clothing oneself with the spirit is not, then, an isolated image in the tale of Gideon. Second, this point of view is not without biblical precedent, for Elisha's clothing of himself with Elijah's mande is associated with the presence of the spirit of EUjah on Elisha (2 Kgs 2:13-15). The word, virtut^catis, occurs only in those manuscripts grouped under R in the edition of Sources chretiennes.
90
AN ECLECTIC
ERA
Uber Antiquitatum Biblicanm is not constricted by its biblical Vorlage. Rather, Pseudo-Philo allows the context of the passage into which he imports biblical expressions from other contexts to overshadow domi nant biblical associations. The expression, "changed into another per son" (1 Sam 10:6), for example, loses its association with prophesying in a context devoted to Kenaz's military success, although the same expression in LAB 20:2, which is concerned with prophetic activity, retains the biblical association with prophecy. Nonetheless, PseudoPhilo's generous measure of exegetical freedom is still confined to expressions and fragments of biblical texts; there is in LAB 27 no apparent adoption of Platonic turns of phrase or fundamental Stoic conceptions of the spirit. In contrast, the kinds of Greco-Roman con ceptions which Uber Antiquitatum Biblicarum lacks are indispensable to many of Philo Judaeus' descriptions of human transformation by the divine spirit.
Philo Judaeus' Exegetical Movements In a lengthy encomium on the virtues of Abraham, Philo pauses to explain how Abraham could have been noble despite his being the son of idolatrous parents. Central to this explanation of Abraham's nobility is Abraham's transformation into an eflfective orator by means of the spirit: Thus whenever he was possessed, everything in him changed to some thing better, eyes, complexion, stature, carriage, movements, voice. For the divine spirit which was breathed upon him ft-om on high made its lodging in his soul, and invested his body with singular beauty, his voice with persuasiveness, and his hearers with understanding. Would you not say that this lone wanderer without relatives or friends was of the highest nobility, he who craved for kinship with God and strove by every means to live in familiarity with Him, he who while ranked among the prophets, a post of such high excellence, put his trust in nothing created rather than in the Uncreated and Father of all, he who as I have said was regarded as a king by those in whose midst he settled {Virt. 217-18). Slender indeed is the biblical basis of this description. Philo's prior description of Abraham as the first to believe in God is probably based upon Gen 15:6: "And Abraham believed G o d . . . " {Virt. 216). The description of Abraham as a king can be traced to Gen 23:6, in
T H E SPIRIT A N D H U M A N T R A N S F O R M A T I O N
91
which the Hittites say to Abraham, " . . . you are a king from God among us."'® The segue from Abraham as king to the focus of Philo's descripdon, Abraham as ideal orator, is hardly explicable from the perspective of the biblical portrait of Abraham. For example, the issue in Genesis 23, the text which provides the biblical pretext for Philo's characteriza tion of Abraham as king, is the purchase of burial caves from the Hittites, in which Abraham's request to purchase a field in Machpelah (Gen 23:8-9, 13) hardly constitutes a rhetorical tour de force. Abraham's Ancestral Character Although the source of this emphasis upon Abraham's ability to per suade cannot be located in the biblical text, it can be explained in part as the product of Philo's apologetic aim of extolling the ances tors of Israel—in this instance, the first proselyte to Judaism. Philo's emphasis upon both internal and external beauty—"the divine spirit which was breathed upon him from on high made its lodging in his soul, and invested his body with singular beauty"—is not unique to Abraham, for it reappears in other contexts devoted to the praise of Israel's ancestors, such as in Philo's portrayal of the first human: That first man, earth-born, ancestor of our whole race, was made, as it appears to me, most excellent in each part of his being, in both soul and body, and gready excelling those who came after him in the tran scendent qualities of both alike; for this man really was the one truly "beautiful and good" {Ofnf 136). Gen 2:7 supplies Philo with the exegetical toehold for this construal of Adam's superiority. On the one hand, Philo contends that God used consummate skill and the finest of clay to form Adam's body. On the other hand, God breathed into the first human a breath that was patterned after the image of Gen 1:27, and thus became in Philo's hands the infusion of a perfect soul into a perfect body. Thus, the comf>osition of the first human was "a composite one made up of earthly substance and of Divine breath [jtv£v^iatoendendy is unbiblical. The verb, insiUre, we have seen, recalls Saul's experience of the spirit. The notion of a spirit that indwells an individual is also at home in numerous texts that speak of wisdom, such as Gen 41:38, Exod 31:3, Num 27:18-20, Deut 34:9, Job 27:3, 32:7-8 and 18, and MT Dan 4:5-6, 4:15, 5:11-14.'^ However, what distinguishes Kenaz's experience from these potential biblical antecedents is the juxtaposi tion of these two very different conceptions of the spirit: the spirit both sprung upon Kenaz and indwelt him. Tliis close sequencing of the advent and indwelling of the spirit should probably not be con strued as a coalescence of biblical aUusions because, while insilire echoes 1 Samuel 10-11, a verb equivalent to habitare does not occur in these '* In Ezek 1:28-2:3 and 3:24 the spirit is said to have come in Ezekiel (*3 O i l ) ; this expression corresponds neither to insiHre nor to halntare.
T H E SPIRIT A N D P R O P H E T I C T R A N S F O R M A T I O N
107
biblical texts. The absence of specific vocabulary that would permit us to discern a biblical allusion suggests that the impetus for PseudoPhilo's exegedcal movement ought to be sought elsewhere. Third, alongside the elements of an inspired vision prior to death, as well as the springing and indwelling of the spirit, Pseudo-Philo's descripdon of the impact which the spirit had upon Kenaz lacks substantial biblical precedent: extulit sensum eius. The mode of this experience in general may be inferred, once again, from a biblical allusion. The setting of Kenaz's vision amongst the elders, which echoes Ezek 8:1, may suggest as well that the depiction of the spirit's eflfect—the elevation of Kenaz's mind—was prompted by the elevation of Ezekiel by the spirit in Ezek 8:3 (cf 3:12, 14). Although the verb in LAB 28:6, effero, differs from the verb, elevare, in Vulgate Ezek 8:3, both have the semantic range to suggest the action of lifting and ascent. Three elements—the setting, the spirit, and elevation—combine, therefore, to suggest that Kenaz, like Ezekiel before him, was lifted by the spirit to receive a vision.'^ Despite the occurrence of these elements in both texts, the descrip tion of Ezekiel's experience lacks the specificity of Kenaz's experience, in which the spirit performed three actions: it leapt; it inhabited; it elevated Kenaz's sensus. Ezekiel recalls that "the spirit lifted me up between earth and heaven, and brought me in visions of God to Jerusalem." The words Ezekiel chooses, UVh^ TOTDD, hardly pinpoint the characteristics of his experience. In contrast, Pseudo-Philo proffers significant details, which go beyond what Ezekiel evinces, to depict the characteristics of Kenaz's vision. This vision began when the spirit caused Kenaz's mind to ascend {extulit sensum eius in LAB 28:6) and concluded when Kenaz's mind returned to him {reversus est sensus eius in eum in 28:10).'^ Kenaz's experience, therefore, is depicted as the ascent and descent of his mind immediately prior to his death. '* For these reasons, this interpretation is preferable to those in which the spirit is believed to have ousted Kenaz's mind (Harrington's translation in OTP, "put him in ecstasy") or lo have constrained Kenaz's physical senses (James' translation in &blical Antigmties, "... took away from him his bodily sense"). The verb, remto, usually denotes a return from a variety of journeys (6:12; 10:3; 15:1; 18:14; 20:6; 27:6, 12; 31:6, 7, 9; 39:10; 40:1, 3, 8; 41:1; 47:10; 58:4; 61:1), return to one's tent after a burial (24:6), or return to the ground at death (39:5). This denotation of remto elsewhere in LAB supports interpreting Kenaz's inspired experience in 27:6, 10 as the aw:ent and subsequent descent of his mind. According to this interpretation, Kenaz's mind travelled in its vision and returned to Kenaz upon completion of his vision.
108
A N ECLECTIC
ERA
The fourth extra-biblical detail is the associadon of the return of Kenaz's mind with an awakening: " . . . he was awakened," and his sense came back to him" (expergefactus est et reversus est sensus eius in eum). Kenaz was obviously in a trance-like state from which it was neces sary to awaken him. Like the others, this detail of Kenaz's experience lacks firm biblical precedent. The closest is found, oddly enough, in the account of Nebuchadnezzar, when he returned to normalcy follow ing his illness. Nebuchadnezzar recounted, "At that dme my reason returned to m e . . . " (Dan 4:36).'® The Vulgate translation (Dan 4:33), sensus meus reversus est ad me, is strikingly similar to LAB 28:10, et reversus est sensus eius in eum. However, for several reasons this text, even if it provides the vocabulary, hardly contains the scaffolding of Kenaz's vision. (1) The return of Kenaz's mind cannot be taken in isolation, for in LAB 28:6-10 it is integrally related to the ability to prophesy: et extulit sensum eius, et cepit prophetare dicens... expergefactus est et reversus est sensus eius in eum. Nebuchadnezzar did not prophesy. (2) Return to normalcy follows different experiences. Nebuchadnezzar was ill, while Kenaz is in some sort of trance. (3) Kenaz is the quintessential Israelite military hero; the elevation and restoration of his mind make
Other references are more ambiguous. The occurrence of the verb in LAB 10:6 combines the notions of return and restoration and therefore can be translated either to mean loss and restoration—"The LORD commanded the sea, and it started flowing again" (Harrington in OTP)—or movement elsewhere and return—"and it returned to its course" (Jacobson). The occurrence of the verb injephthah's query, "Does love so return after hatred . . . " (39:4) may imply either that love has retreated in the face of hatred only to return when hatred disappears or that love is extinguished by hatred and then restored. The former interpretation suggests the image of retreat and return (similar to Kenaz's ascent and descent), while the latter suggests the con ception of vitiation and restoration (similar to Kenaz's ecstasy and return to sense). The use of this verb to describe iron in LAB 30:6 may support the view that Kenaz's mind, originally intact, was extinguished until it was once again restored: ".. . iron cast into the fire, which when made molten by the flame becomes like water, but when it comes out of the fire it reverts to its original hardness." Here the emphasis lies rather more on lews-restoration than on return from a journey. Therefore, although the predominant occurrence of the verb, reverto, describes the return from a journey, the verb suggests in some contexts restoration to an original state. I have contended that allusions to the experience of Ezekiel, as well as Kenaz's vision itself, which entails a visionary journey throughout cosmos and chronos, suggest that the verb in LAB 28:10 should be interpreted to mean that Kenaz's mind has returned following its ascent in a visionary journey. " Although this verb usually denotes physical awakening from sleep (6:15; 27:14; 31:5, 6; 32:8; 53:3), it can be used metaphorically to describe springs awakened from their sleep (28:7; 32:8). Whether Kenaz awoke from physical sleep or from a trance is, therefore, unclear. "« Sec also Dan 4:34.
T H E SPIRIT A N D
PROPHETIC TRANSFORMATION
109
of him as well a visionary who foretells the future. Nebuchadnezzar was a misled, proud foreign ruler who "ate grass like oxen . . ." (Dan 4:33). (4) Pseudo-Philo emphasizes the role of the divine spirit in Kenaz's experience, while in Daniel 4 Nebuchadnezzar simply returned to health. It is unlikely, in light of these differences, that Pseudo-Philo intends an echo of Nebuchadnezzar's woeful loss of mind. Even if he does extract this expression from the biblical tale of Nebuchadnezzar, the associadon of it with the holy spirit, the mind's elevation, and prophesying suggests how readily he exports this vocabulary from Daniel 4 to an entirely new context in his own re-telling of Israelite history. As if this were not adequate to circumscribe Kenaz's vision, PseudoPhilo includes in his embellishment a fifth detail: "But he did not know what he had said or what he had seen" (LAB 28:10). This conclusion to Kenaz's prophetic vision, we have seen, characterizes Saul's expe rience as well (LAB 62:2). We have seen as well that it cuts against the grain of its bibUcal precedent. An extraordinarily rich collection of details, therefore, distinguishes the eflfects of the spirit on Kenaz from bibUcal accounts of the spirit's effects. The spirit springs upon Kenaz, indweUs him, and elevates his mind just prior to his death. A vision ensues in which Kenaz's mind traverses the cosmos to see the judgment that will transpire far in the future. Once he is awakened and his mind returns from its travels, Kenaz is unable to recollect what he saw. Compared with bibUcal accounts of "visions of God," Pseudo-Philo's description of Kenaz is remarkably lucid, detailed, and consistent. The contours of the spirit's eflfect upon Kenaz are clear and well-conceived, and they are most decidedly not the contours suppUed readily by the bibUcal story he purports to re-teU. These elements are explicable rather within the early Jewish and Greco-Roman miUeux in which the Uber Antiquitatum Bibiicarum was composed.
Relevant Milieux Early Jewish Accounts of Ascent Although not entirely bibUcal in character, Pseudo-Philo's portrait of Kenaz's prophetic experience shares in many respects the hues of other early Jewish portrayals of visionary experiences. The depiction
110
AN ECLECTIC
ERA
of Kenaz, therefore, is not altogether alien to Pseudo-Philo's early Jewish milieu. The placement of this vision just prior to Kenaz's death (LAB 27:1) aligns it with the experiences of many other Israelite figures in early Jewish literature who receive visions prior to death. Early Jew ish descriptions of Enoch's ascents, for example, were occasioned by the biblical account of Enoch's departure from the earth: "Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him" (Gen 5:24). The summary of his ascent at the conclusion of the SimiHtudes (70-71) accordingly places Enoch's vision at the end of his earthly life: "(Thus) it happened after this that my spirit passed out of sight and ascended into the heavens" (71:1). Further, in the Testament of Abraham, Abraham's ascent is part of God's desperate effort to convince Abraham that he must die, an experience in which Abraham intransigendy refuses to participate ([A] 8-10; [B] 7-8). The depiction of Kenaz's vision in LAB 28 suits such a milieu in which Israelite heroes were believed to have had visionary experiences prior to death. Kenaz receives this vision in a state from which he must be awak ened (28:10: expergefactus est). Although the significance of dreams and visions is evident in Israelite literature,^ there occur far more numerous instances of dreams and visions in the literature of Early Judaism. Many IsraeHte heroes were accorded their own visionary experiences, including, among others, Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Levi, Elijah, Baruch, Ezra, and Daniel.^' Just as the catalyst of the vision (impending death) and Kenaz's condition (a state from which he is awakened) are at home in Early Judaism, so also is the elevation of Kenaz's mind apart from his body, though perhaps to a lesser extent because more frequendy an ascent is depicted either as a bodily experienced^ or as an experience
Impending death is not always the impetus for ascent: Adam's ascent occurs after the expulsion from paradise, although its contents are withheld from Seth until just prior to Adam's death {VUaAdae 25.1-30.1). Levi's vision occurs when he is yet youthful (TLevi 2.3). Abraham's ascent in the Apocalypse of Abraham 15-32 occurs in the context of his evening sacrifice (Genesis 15). Baruch ascends shordy after the destruction of Jerusalem (2 Bar 6:1). ^ E.g., Num 12:6-7; 1 Samuel 3; 1 Kgs 3:5-15; MTJoel 3:1 2. " Many visionary ascents arc uranslated in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Daniel's visions, of course, are contained in the Hebrew Bible. One of Adam's visions is recounted in VUaAdae 25-29, and Levi's in Testament of Levi 2. " In many early Jewish accounts of visions, ascent is portrayed as occurring in
T H E SPIRIT A N D
PROPHETIC
TRANSFORMATION
111
the nature of which is inchoate.^^ Nonetheless, other early Jewish authors can depict the experience of ascent without the body. In the Enoch Cycle, for example, Enoch was translated in his vision only in spirit: "He [the angel Michael] carried off my spirit, and I, Enoch, was in the heaven of heavens" (71:5). These extra-biblical characteristics of Kenaz's ascent vision are at home in the world of Early Judaism. To say this, however, is not to suggest that these details are peculiarly Jewish and not Greco-Roman. On the contrary, these extra-biblical elements—the imminence of death, the condition of sleep, and the separation of the sensus from the body—correspond to popular Greco-Roman conceptions of the ascent of the soul. Cicero's De divinatione contains an illuminating precis of the inspired prophetic ascent of the soul: When, therefore, the soul has been withdrawn by sleep from contact with sensual ties, then does it recall the past, comprehend the present, and foresee the fiture. For though the sleepir^ body then Ues as if it were dead, yet the soul is alive and stong, and will be much more so after death when it is wholly free of the body. Hence its power to divine is much enharued by die approach of the body. Adam recalls to Seth, " . . . while wc [Adam and Eve] were praying, Micliael the archangel and messenger of God came to me. And I saw a chariot like the wind and its wheels were fiery. I was carried off into the Paradise of righteousness" {VitaAdae 25.2). After his vision, recalls Adam, Michael had to freeze the waters that surround paradise so that Adam might not cross and bc taken by Michael "to the place from where he had seized me" (29.3). In 2 Enoch, Enoch actually leaves his house and shuts the doors behind him (2 En [J] 1:10), and Methuselah is able to hear Enoch's return to his bed: "And he was terrified when he heard my arrival" ([J] 38.3; see also 2 En 3:1). Comparable depicdons of Abraham include physical ascent. In the Apocalypse of Abraham, he ascends physically to Mount Sinai; then the angel, recalls Abraham, "took me with his right hand and set me on the right wing of the pigeon and he himself sat on the left wing of the turtledove, (both of) which were as if neither slaughtered nor divided. And h e carried me up to the edge of the fiery flames. And we ascended as if (carried) by many winds to the heaven that is fixed on the expanses .. ." (ApAbr 15.2 4). A similar experience transpires for Isaiah when an angel grasps his hand in Asclsa 7.3. Abraham's ascent is physical as well in the T e s t a m e n t o f A b r a h a m , in w h i c h A b r a h a m pleads, "I b e s e e c h you, lord, if I am t o leave my body, I want to be taken up bodily, in order that I may see the things of creation which the Lord my God created in heaven and on earth" (TAbr 7.18 [B]). In response, " . . . the Lord answered Michael, 'Go and take up Abraham in the body and show him everything'.... Then Michael left and took Abraham up onto a cloud in the body and bore him up to the river Oceanus" ([B] 8.1~2; see [A] 9.8-10.1). Baruch's vision of the ruined temple, which is modelled after Ezekiel's ascents, appears also to be physical, "And behold, suddenly a strong spirit lifted me and carried me above the waill of Jerusalem" (2 Bar 6:3). " The aposde Paul, for instance, during the mid-first century, though aware of the distinction between body and soul, could not specify which aspect(s) of his per son ascended: ". . . whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows" (2 Cor 12:2).
112
A N ECLECTIC
ERA
(kath. For example, those in the grasp of a serious and fatal sickness realize the fact that death impends; and so, visions of dead people generally appear to them and then their desire for fame is strongest; while those who have lived otherwise than as they should, feel, at such a dme, the keenest sorrow for their sins.^* Following this summary, Quintus provides an example from Posidonius "of the power of dying people to prophesy" (1.64). Kenaz of the Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum could equally provide another example of such an inspired figure. Just prior to his death, Kenaz enters a state akin to sleep, from which he must be awakened, when his sensus is elevated in a vision. Although Kenaz confesses that his eye does not know what it sees, his vision nonetheless extends from the abyss to the mountaintops and encompasses the endre seven thousand years of human existence. The chronological span of this vision, therefore, as in Cicero's precis, encompasses the creation (past) and the consum mation (future) of the world, providing the basis for an exhortation to his hearers (present). A similar description of inspired ascent from the first century CE is proffered by Rutarch who, in his interpretation of Hato's Ttmaeus 11E, contends that soub exercise their innate capacity "in dreams, and some in the hour of death, when the body becomes cleansed of all impurities and attains a temperament adapted to this end, a temperament through which the reasoning and thinking faculty of the souls is relaxed and released from their present state as they range amid the irrational and imaginative realms of the fiture.''^^ This description circumscribes the experience of Kenaz, whose sensus is raised in a sleep-like state to range the future just prior to his death.^® ^* Die. 1.63; see also 1.64-65. Italics mine. » Def. Orac. 432C. ItaUcs mine. " The content of Kenaz's vision also reflects a segment of Judaism that shares with Greco-Roman Antiquity a concern with the afterlife. The scene extends from the creation, prior to sin, to judgment, an hour which some "saw even before the earth was corrupted" (LAB 28:6). After he was awakened, Kenaz delivered a precis of his vision: "If the repose of the just after they have died is like this, we must die to the corruptible worid so as not to see sins" (28:10). The elements of this vision, spanning creation to judgment and extending from the abyss to the heavens, do not occur in Pseudo-Philo's biblical sources. The centrality of death explains as well the content of Kenaz's vision, the climax of which lies in future judgment and could therefore be summarized by Kenaz with the words, "If the repose of the just after they have died is like this, we must die to the corruptible worid so as not to see sins" (LAB 28:10). Thb emphasis upon judgment characterizes many other examples of early Jewish literature. Each portion of the Enoch cycle, for instance (1 Enoch 1-36; 37-71; 72-82; 83-90; 91-104) contains visions of judgment. Enoch prefaces
THE
SPIRIT A N D PROPHETIC TRANSFORMATION
Tkis coalescence of elements of inspirafion suggesh Ait
113
Mft-
tours of Kenaz's visionary experience were shaped in a Jewish milieu which incorporated, consciously or unwittingly, fundamental elements of pc^ular Greco-Roman views on the ascent of the soul. That PseudoPhilo's portrait reflects popular rather than esoteric thinking on the subject is evident in a detail such as the need for Kenaz to be awak ened. One of the interlocutors in Plutarch's De genio Socrads, Simmias, observes with disdain that, "In popular belief, on the other hand, it the vision which comprises much of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36), for example, by describing his own commission l o reprimand the angels who had sexual intercourse with human women (Gen 6:1-4). To diem Enoch said, "From now on you will not be able to ascend into heaven unto all eternity, but you shall remain inside the earth, imprisoned all the days of eternity" (1 En 14:5). According l o the Similitudes of Enoch, the day of judgment will arrive, "and the power, the punish ment, and the judgment, which the Lord of the Spirits has prepared for those who do not worship the righteous judgment... it will become a day of covenant for the elect and inquisition for the siiuiers" (1 En 60:6). The emphasis upon jut^ment is particulariy strong in eariy Jewish interpretations of Abraham's ascents. In the Tes tament of Abraham, Abraham is witness to a vivid jut^ment scene in which souls after death are evaluated in three ways: by fire, by a written record, and by a balance (TAbr [A] 11-14; [B] 8-12). The scene emphasizes the value of good works, the possibility of repentance, and the tension between God's justice and mercy. In the many viaonary experiences of the Apocalypse of Abraham, the underiying issue is the status of God's people who arc "humiliated by the heathen" (ApAbr 31.1). Abraham's vision guarantees that oppressors and idolators will be punished and shall "putrefy in the belly of the crafty worm Azazel," their evil leader who de ceived Adam and Eve (31.5; 23.11). Even where the purpose o f an ascent is not primarily to receive a vision of judgment, such as Levi's in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (TLevi 2 5), the Israelite hero receives nonetheless a word about the status of Israel. Unbelievers "shall be condemned with pimishment" (4.1), and God will dwell in Israel's midst. Pseudo-Philo, therefore, places Kenaz in good company by imputing to him a vision of universal judgment.
respite these numerous examples, this interest in the afterlife ought not to be construed as peculiarly early Jewish but as part o f a fundamental characteristic o f heavenly ascents in many cultures of the ancient worid, in which such ascents were an anticipation o f the ascent o f the soul after death. Basing his analysis upon W. Bousset's important study, Die Hmmelreise der SeeU (Darmstadt: WisscnschafUiche B u c h g c a c l l s c h a f l , 1^0, sp>ccial e d i t i o n ) , A . S e g a l ( " H e a v e n l y A s c e n t in H c U c n i s t i c Judaian, Eariy Christianity and their Environment," in AitfsH^ und M^rgtmg der romiscfm WeU 2.23.2: Vorhmstantmisches Christentum: Verhalbns zu romischem Stmt und heidmscher Rebgion, ed. W. Haase [Beriin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1980] 1341) writes, "His [Bousset's] perception o f the parallel between ecstatic trance journeys to heaven and the suppcMcd journey o f the soul after death is a remarkable intuition into the almost universal structure o f the ascent myth. Though there are a f e w crucial cases in which the heavenly journey is not explicidy interpreted as a prefiguration o f a particular soul's journey after death, the structural similarity between the ecstatic journey and the final journey o f humans after death is so widespread as to be crucially important." Sec also M. Dean-Otting, Heavenly Journeys: A Study of the Motif in Hellenistic Jewish Literature (Frankfurt/New York: Peter Lang, 1984) 8-20. O f foundational significance is the myth of Er found in Halo's Republic 614B-621D.
114
AN ECLECTIC
ERA
is only in sleep that people receive inspiration from on high; and the nodon that they are so influenced when awake and in full possession of their faculdes is accounted strange and incredible" (5890).^'' This analysis of Kenaz's visionary experience has satisfactorily ex plained many of Pseudo-Philo's exegetical movements concerning the spirit. The locus of the vision within the community, the image of the spirit's leaping, and its designation as holy spirit reflect PseudoPhilo's exegetical tendency to import biblical texts from several other contexts (Ezekiel 8; 1 Samuel 10; Isaiah 63 and Psalm 51, though the designation, holy spirit, was even more popular in Early Judaism) into the primary text underlying his revision (Jdg 3:9-11). Although these exegedcal movements are explicable in light of Pseudo-Philo's biblical text, most are not. The details that Kenaz was facing death, that he had to be awakened, and that his mind was elevated reflect rather a Palestinian Jewish milieu which was, at least in its views on the holy spirit, deeply influenced by popular Greco-Roman culture. Kenaz's experience provides a quintessential example of the ascent of the soul, as it was discussed in Cicero's De dmnaHone and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum^ as well as numerous other Greco-Roman literary works. However, even these observations do not adequately explain the totality of Pseudo-Philo's exegetical movements. The attribution of the ascent of Kenaz's mind to the spirit's leaping and indwelling can be matched neady neither with biblical antecedents nor with other early Jewish literature. Further, the concluding detail that Kenaz cannot re collect his prophetic experience—an inability he shares with Saul—cuts against the grain of its biblical antecedents, in which recollection is integral to visions, and finds no substantive counterpart in other early Jewish Hterature. Finally, the ir^ammation and agitation of Joshua's mind and spirit similarly leads not to the biblical text but to PseudoPhilo's Greco-Roman context, as do all of these otherwise inexplicable exegetical movements. Popular Greco-Roman Culture To ascertain the contours of prophetic inspiration as it could be under stood during Pseudo-Philo's era, we tiun again to De dumatione, in which Cicero's brother and stalwart proponent of Stoic thought, Quintus, Sec also Rato, Timaeus 7IE; Cicero, Dio. 1.129.
T H E SPIRIT A N D P R O P H E T I C T R A N S F O R M A T I O N
1 15
describes the inspiradon of Cassandra, "who prophesied . . . under a heaven-inspired excitement and exaltadon of soul" (1.89). This thumb nail descripdon of Cassandra's abiUdes presupposes a lengthier descrip tion in which she illustrates how the human soul's ability to foreknow the future can be abnormally developed: "Therefore the human soul has an inherent power of presaging or of foreknowing infused into it from without, and made a part of it by the will of God. If that power is abnormally developed, it is called 'frenzy' or 'inspiration,' which occurs when the soul withdraws itself from the body and is violendy stimulated by a divine impulse."^^ The point that Quintus wishes to make with such illustrations from the prophetic experiences of Cassandra is "that true prophecies arc made during frenzy. . ."^ In a later discussion of prophetic ecstasy, Quintus resumes the argument that, "In fact, the human soul never divines naturally, except when it is so unrestrained and free that it has absolutely no associa tion with the body, as happens in the case of frenzy and of dreams."^ He develops, on the basis of naedrus 246A-47E, the Platonic image of the ascent of the soul: T h o s e then, whose souls, spuming their bodies, take wings and fly a b r o a d ^ i n f l a m e d and aroused by a sort of passion—these, I say, certainly see the things which they foretell in their prophecies. Such souls d o not cling to the body and are kindled by many diflferent influ ences. For example, some are aroused by certain vocal tones, as by Phiygian songs, many by groves and forests, and many others by riv ers and seas. I believe, too, that there were certain subterranean vapours which had the effect of inspiring persons to utter oracles.^'
Of this form of inspiration, the signal example is, once again, Cassandra, who illustrates the principle that "the frenzied soul sees the future long in advance.. ."^^ ^ Div. 1.66. Larin, Irust i^tur in animis praesc^itio extrinsecus iniecta atque inclusa diinnitus.
Ea, si exarsit acrius, Jum appellatur, cum a corpore animus abstractus divino msHnctu concitahtr. For Cassandra, that divine impulse is unwanted possession by Apollo and Paris. ^ Div. 1.67. Ladn, vaticinari Jitror vera soUai. ^ Div. 1.113. Ladn, .Nec vero umquam animus hominis naturaUter divinat, nisi am ita solutus est et vacuus tU ei pUme nihil sit cum corpore, quod end vatibus contingit aut dormientibus. Div. 1.114. Ladn, Ergo et ei, quorum animi spretis corporibus evolant atque excummt foras, ardore aiiquo inflammati atque incitati, cemunt ilia prqfecto quae vaticinantes pronuntiant; rmMsque rebus ir^ammanUir tales ammi qui corporibus non inhaerent, ut ei qui sono quodam vocum et Phry^ cmtibus iruitmtur. MuUos nemora sikaeque, multos amnes aut maria commovent. Credo etiam carduUtus quosdam Jmsse terrarum quibtis ir^atae mentes oracla jimderent. The sub terranean vapors are probably to bc associated with Delphi. Div. 1.114. Latin, Juribunda mens videt ante midto, quae sint Jutura.
1 16
AN ECLECTIC
ERA
Characteristic features of the prophetic exf>erience can be garnered from Quintus' accounts of Cassandra: (1) the ascent of the soul apart from the body; (2) a frenzied condition of inflammation and excite ment; (3) the impetus of external arousal by a violent divine impulse or tones, forests, vapours, etc.; (4) knowledge of the future. These features reappear in less anecdotal and more philosophical form in Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum, in which Lamprias, another ardent proponent of Stoicism, explains Delphic inspiration in very similar terms. Like Quintus in Cicero's De dimnatione, Lamprias shares the Stoic conviction that the soul's innate capacity to divine the future is hampered by its association with the body. When, however, the soul is free of the body's impurities and of mental control, it can range the realms of the future: Souls therefore, all possessed of this power, which is innate but dim and hardly manifest, nevertheless oftentimes disclose its flower and radiance in dreams, and some in the hour of death, when the body becomes cleansed of all impurities and attains a temperament adapted to this end, a temperament through which the reasoning and thinking faculty of the soul is relaxed and released from their present state as they range amid the irrational and imaginative realms of the future.'' The absence of mental control is so important that Lamprias reiter ates the point that the condition of enthusiasm (evBotKnaanov) requires release from intellectual eflfort: But that which foretells the future, like a tablet without writing, is both irraUonal and indeterminate in itself, but receptive of impressions and presentiments through what may be done to it, and inconsequendy grasps at the future when it is farthest withdrawn from the prc^nt. Its withdrawal is brought about by a temperament and disposition of the body as it is subjected to a change which we call inspiration.'* Lamprias continues by proflfering examples of the catalysts which bring about this change in condition, opting himself for the final example:
Def. Orac. 432C. Greek, tautriv ouv Ixovoai TTIV Suvo^iiv a i yvxaiCTVjMpwovjicv d|i\)5pav 5e Kal SvofpdvtaoTov, o^ctx; i^ovdovai icoXXdKiq Kal dvaXa^Kq ditoKei^evoxx; Kal XavOdvovta^ ditoKoXuictei- t o ydp PaKxewnjiov KOI t o ^avi&Sei; navtiKTjv xoXXfiv Ititx Kot* EvputiSnv, orov bStpv^ r\ yuxn yevojievri Kal in>pca$n^ d}i«boT|tai tf|v evXd^eiav, t^v dvritri (pp6vT|oi^ IxdYouoa icoXAdKi^ dxootp£(pei Kal K a t a o p c v w o i tov ^v6ovoutO)i6v. Lamprias continues (433A) that the dryness engendered by such heat purifies the spirit of prophecy.
118
A N ECLECTIC
ERA
anything to excite amazement if, although the earth sends up many streams, it is only such as these that dispose souls to inspiradon and impressions of the future. Certainly the voice of legend also is in accord with my statement. . . Lamprias then relates one of the legends surrounding the discovery of Delphi, according to which a shepherd fell into the Delphic crevice and later was inspired (433C-D), concluding his discussion of the prophedc spirit by reiteradng once again the principle that this spirit and the soul have a peculiar affinity with one another (433D-E). This discussion of Delphic inspiradon does not stand alone among Plutarch's wridngs. In a discussion indebted to Plato's enumeradon of the four forms of ^lavia {Phaedrus 265B), Plutarch delineates four kinds of inspiradon. The second, he observes, entails the loss of mental control: "There is a second kind, however, which does not exist without divine inspiradon. It is not intrinsically generated but is, rather, an extrinsic afflatus that displaces the faculty of rational inference; it is created and set in motion by a higher power. This sort of madness bears the general name of 'enthusiasm' [evGovaiaaTiKov]" {Amatorius 758E). Such an explanation reveals that the Stoic interpretation of Delphic inspiration is actuaJly anchored in a more general understand ing of enthusiasm which can, in turn, be traced to Plato's discussion of jittvia. What is indeed striking about Plutarch's explanations is that, though they rely far more on philosophical conceptions and vocabular^r— Cicero's is self-consciously more reliant upon illustrations (e.g., Div. 1.68)—they follow the same contours as Cicero's in their effort to explain the prophetic experience. Unifying features of these discus sions of Cicero and Plutarch include: (1) a soul that withdraws from the body and ranges amidst the realm of the future; (2) a frenzied condition of inflammation and excitement, a hot and fiery soul; (3) external arousal by a divine impulse, usually in the form of physical phenomena, of which the vapor of Delphi constitutes the best exam ple; (4) knowledge of the future. In light of the diflferent approaches employed by Cicero and Plutarch, the similarities between their dis cussions are astonishing, creating a conceptual umbrella of sorts, span ning the period from ca. 50 BCE to ca. 100 CE, during which time Pseudo-Philo probably composed his Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum. In light of the popularity Stoicism experienced during the first century, as well as the fame of Delphi, the incorporation of these popular Stoic elements into Pseudo-Philo's rewritten Bible is hardly surprising.
T H E SPIRIT A N D PROPHETIC TRANSFORMATION
1 19
When Pseudo-Philo writes, then, that the spirit leapt upon and indwelt Kenaz, elevadng his sensus, he adheres closely to the GrecoRoman conception of prophedc inspiration espoused by popular Stoicism during the Greco-Roman era. It may have been more typi cal to recount that an angel led Kenaz in this ascent, for in many other accounts of ascent in early Jewish literature, an angel descends in order to guide the visionary into the heavenly world. Adam was taken to and expelled from paradise by Michael {VitaAdae 25.1; 29.2). In the Book of the Watchers, Enoch was accompanied by the angel Uriel, who explained to him what Enoch saw (1 En 19:1). In the Similitudes, Enoch was accompanied by two angels (1 En 60:11). Abraham too was accompanied by the angels, laoel (ApAbr 10.3) and Michael (TAbr 2.1; 10.1).^' What Pseudo-Philo presents, in con trast, is an experience of possession in which the mind ranges the realms of the future.'^ The level of detail employed to depict the spirit also distinguishes Pseudo-Philo's from other early Jewish accounts of inspiradon, such as TLevi 2.3, where Levi recalled, "As I was tending the flocks in Abel-Maoul a spirit of understanding from the Lord came upon me, and I observed all human beings making their way in life deceit fully." Precisely what eflfect the spirit exercised over Levi, or what he saw about human beings that he could otherwise have not, is un clear. The precision with which Pseudo-Philo pinpoints the means of ascent—leaping upon and indwelling Kenaz so that his mind is ele vated to gain a grasp of the future—is far more lucid and charac terized by far more detailed contours than most other early Jewish descripdons of inspiradon.
" According to the book of Ezekiel, ascent did not take place by the spirit's possession of Ezekiel but by lifting him (3:12) in a manner parallel to the hand of God, which lifted him by his hair (8:3). When the spirit entered Ezekiel, it was to revive him and to set him on his feet (2:2). ^ It would not be implausible to suggest that Pseudo-Philo and these other early Jewish authors are simply using different terms for the same agent of ascent; we have seen that "spirit" and "angel" were readily and frequendy used interchangeably in Early Judaism. According to this view, the holy spirit of LAB 28 would be Kenaz's accompanying angel. Despite its appeal, this interpretation is not possible because the spirit is said not to accompany Kenaz but to dwell in him {habitans in Cenez)- Al though the participle, habitans, is difficult to interpret in relation to its coming upon {insihtit) Kenaz, as Jacobson {A Commentary, 810-11) observes, it refers nonetheless to the indwelling of the spirit within Kenaz and not to the spirit's accompanying him. ^ Details are unclear as well in 1 Enoch 14, where Enoch recalls laconically, "I saw in my sleep what I now speak with my tongue of flesh..." (I En 14:2). The
120
AN ECLECTIC ERA
Those contours match closely those traced by Cicero and Plutarch. Fundamental to the experience of Kenaz in the Liber Antiquitatim Bib licanm is the concomitant attack and indwelling of the spirit. Cicero's Quintus contends that frenzy occurs only *Svhen the soul withdraws itself from the body and is violentfy stimulated by a divine in^ndse" (Div. 1.66); the soul is "kindled" by such influences, inspired to fly abroad {Eyb. 1.114). Plutarch's Lamprias concurs, emphasizing as well the indwelling presence of the divine vapor: "But the prophedc current and breath is most divine and holy, whether it issue by itself through the air or come in the company of running waters; for when it is instiUed into the body, it creates in souls an unaccustomed and unusual temperament" (Def. orac. 432D-E). Enthusiasm is occasioned by "an extrinsic cfflatus that displaces the faculty of radonal inference" (Amat. 758E). Although Pseudo-Philo identifies this external divine impulse with the spirit of God, conveyed in biblical terms by the designation, "holy spirit," by the image of transformation of someone into another person (TTK in 1 Sam 10:6), and by means of the verb insilere ( t t e in 1 Sam 10:6, 10; 11:6), the actions and eflfect of this holy spirit— leaping and indwelling and elevating Kenaz's mind—have their devest affinities with descriptions of inspiration in the writings of Cicero and Plutarch. So too does Pseudo-Philo's depiction of Joshua's mind as inflamed and his spirit agitated (incensa est mens eius et spiritus eius commotus est) share its strongest aflfinities with precisely these passages in Cicero's De divirmtione and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum. The combination of inflammation and agitation echoes the familiar juxtaposition of images employed to characterize the ecstatic soul in the precis of Quintus in Div. 1.114, in which prophecy is attributed to people "whose souls, spuming their bodies, take wings and fly abroad—inflamed and aroused by a sort of passion . . . who see the things which they foretell in their
ascent takes place, not as Kenaz's, al the onset of a vision, but as part of the vision which b already taking place. Enoch sees himself, within the vision, ascend: "And behold I saw the clouds: And they were calling me in a vision; and the fogs were calling me; and the course of the stars and the lighmings were rushing me and causing me to desire; and in the vision, the winds were causing me to fly and rushing mc high up into heaven" (14:8). How Enoch came to have a vision in the first place is explained as sleep and sight. The disappearance of EUioch at the end of his earthly existence is attributed also to winds: "From that day on, I was not counted among them. But he placed me between two winds, between the northeast and the west, where the angels took a cord to measure for me the place for the elect. . ." (70:3).
T H E SPIRIT A N D P R O P H E T I C T R A N S F O R M A T I O N
121
prophecies." This coUocation of frenzy and fire appears as well in anodier discussion familiar to us in which Plutarch's quotation of Euripides to support his view of the necessity of the frenzied mind is followed immediately by a description of the enthusiastic state in which the "soul becomes hot and fiery, and throws aside the caution that human intelligence lays upon it" (Def. orac. 432E-F). That this was indeed a popular view, and not a matter of esoteric interest, is evident in the presence of this juxtaposition of fire and frenzy in popular portrayals of prophetic inspiration. Cicero's Quintus proflfers a citation from the tragic poets in which Cassandra's frenzy is depicted first and foremost by "those flaming eyes, that sudden rage.'"*^ The eflfect of Apollo's invasive inspiration of the priestess is depicted even more vividly as inflammation and severe agitation by Lucan, who was bom in Spain in 39 CE and died in Rome in 65 CE: Frantic she careers about the cave . . . she scatters the t r i p o d s . . . she boils over with fierce fire, while enduring the wrath of Phoebus. N o r does he ply the whip and goad alone, and dart flame into her vitals: she has to bear the curb as well, and is not permitted to reveal as much as she is suffered to know.*'
In this vivid account, inspiradon is a fire, and the metaphor of plying the whip probably a metaphor for agitation, for in the Sibylline Oracles the sibyl cries, ". . . and why is my spirit lashed like a whip?" (3.4-5). Cicero's De divinatione and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum, then, contain the conceptions of prophetic inspiration that explain PseudoPhilo's expansions of Deut 34:9 and Jdg 3:9-11. The juxtaposition of inflammation and agitation that characterizes the eflfects of the spirit upon Joshua is expressed tersely in both. Similarly are the fundamental elements of Kenaz's experience located in summary definitions of prophetic inspiration in these two texts: the imminence of death; the leaping and indwelling of the spirit; the elevation of
lyiv. 1.66. Ladn, oadis rabere visa est derepente ardentibus. Although Cicero says that he relies on the tragic poets for iUustradons (1.68), it is not clear whether this quo tation is from the Heaiba of Accius or the Alexander of Ennius. *' De beUo dvUi 5.169-77. Latin, Bacchatur demens ediena per antrum. . . Obstantes tripodas maffwque exaestuat igne Iratum te, Phoebe, ferens. Nec verbere solo Uteris et stimulos flammasque in viscera mergis: AccipU et Jrenos, nec Umtum prodere vati Quantum scire licet.
122
AN ECLECTIC ERA
Kenaz's mind by the spirit; and a sleep-like state from which Kenaz must be awakened. The extent to which the key extra-biblical ingre dients of Pseudo-Philo's understanding of prophetic inspiration should be traceable to two Greco-Roman texts is stunning yet comprehen sible, for Cicero and Plutarch alike purport to describe views of pro phetic inspiration that were particularly popular during Pseudo-Philo's lifetime and before. There remains one further element, introduced into the final lines of Kenaz's experience, which exhibits extraordinarily close aflfinities with Pseudo-Philo's Greco-Roman milieu: "And when Kenaz had spoken these words, he was awakened, and his senses came back to him. But he did not know what he had said or what he had seen." Saul, too, after his exi>erience, "went away and did not know what he had prophesied." This inability to remember, we may recall, can not be explained by adducing biblical antecedents. Such an impact of inspiration was, on the other hand, integral to several accounts of oracular ecstasy during the Greco-Roman era and later. The headwaters of this interpretation are Plato's Apology 22C and Meno 99C, in which Plato contends that inspired poets (oi 6eop,dvtei^ and 0 1 XPTIOM^(p6oi) do not know what they are saying (loaoiv 6e ovSev ©V AiYou0i[v]). This view spawned interpretations in which the inability to recall what was experienced during a period without mental con trol signalled the authenticity of the prophetic condition. Already during the late first or early second century GE, the pseudo nymous Jewish author of 4 Ezra reveals an awareness of this inter pretation in a description of an inspired experience in which Ezra allegedly dictated ninety-four books. During this period, Ezra's heart poured forth understanding, and wisdom increased in his breast because {nam) his own spirit retained its memory (14:40 Nam spiritus meus conservabat memoriam). The need to explain that Ezra retained his memory suggests that the author is aware of a form of inspiration that entailed the loss of memory.*^ The conviction that inspiration may bring a loss of recoUection app)ears more explicidy in the writings of the second century GE public
*^ M. E. Stone (Fourth Ezra: a amanetUary on the book of Fourth Ezra [Hemieneia; Minneapolis: Foitress, 1990] 120) contends correcdy that this statement about the retention of memory constitutes a "deliberate" reversal of this t(^, i.e., the loss of memory. For a detailed discussion of this conception in the context of 4 Ezra, see chapter eight below, pages 204-07.
T H E SPIRIT A N D P R O P H E T I C T R A N S F O R M A T I O N
123
speaker and man of letters, Aelius Arisddes. Following his defense of the Delphic priestesses of Apollo, Aelius Arisddes discusses the inspi radon of the priestesses of Zeus in Dodona, "who know as much as the God approves, and for as long as he approves." These inspired priestesses have no knowledge of Zeus's oracles prior to inspiradon, "nor afterwards do they know anything which they have said, but all inquirers understand it better than they."*^ The second or third century Chrisdan author, Pseudo-Jusdnus, in his Cohortatio ad Graecos, discusses Plato's admiration for the Sibyl because her prophecies came to pass. To support his case, Ps-Jusdn paraphrases Plato's Meno, in which prophedc persons are said to be divine. Twice in this paraphrase, Ps-Jusdn expresses the opinion that the Sibyl cannot recall what she said while inspired: For, unlike the poets who, after their poems are penned, have power to correct and polish . . . she was filled indeed with prophecy at the dme of the inspiration, but as soon as the inspiration ceased, there ceased also the remembrance of all she had said. . . (37.2) . . . they said also that they who then took down her prophecies, being illiterate persons, often went quite astray from the accuracy of the metres; and this, they said, was the cause of the want of metre in some of the verses, the prophetess having no remembrance of tvhat she had said, after the possession and inspiraUon ceased, and the reporters having, through their lack of education, failed to record the metres with accuracy (37.3).** This conviction concerning inspiration characterizes as well a passage in the Collationes or Institutes for monastic orders written by John Cassian, who lived during the late fourth and early fifth centuries. In the context of a discussion of demon possession, he contrasts two types of possessed people, those who "are affected by them [demons] in such a way as to have not the slightest conception of what they do and say, while others know and afterwards recollect it."*^
*' In Defense of Oratory, 43. Greek, ot^' tknepov ouScv ©v einov loaoiv aXka xdvteoUdcal benefits. Iphigenia knew that she was the one who "in death . . . gave to Hellas freedom . .." (1383-84);^^ Sella said, "And who is there who would be sad in death, seeing the people free" (LAB 40:2). Both daughters also compared their impending deaths to marriage. Seila lamented that "Sheol has become my bridal chamber (40:6)." Iphigenia her self implored, "Sacrifice me, raze ye Troy; for this through all the ages is/My memorial: children, marriage, glory—all are mine in this" (1398-99)." This comparison between death and marriage, between Hades and the bridal chamber, in laments for the death of young women was not untypical in Greece and Rome.^ The associadon appeared in other Greek tragedies. Cassandra, in Euripides' Daughters of Troy, lamented, "On, that I may haste to wed my bridegroom. Hades' spousal-plight" (445). Antigone, in Sophocles' Antigone, cried, "O grave, O bridal bo wer, O prison house . . . " (891). This imagery was not, however, lim ited to Greek tragedies. The seventh book of the Palatine Anthology contains funeral epigrams for those who died young. One from the sixth or fifth century BCE reads, "Without having seen the marriagebed, I, Gorgippos, descended to the bridal chamber of blonde Perse phone." An epigram from the late fourth century BCE for a betrothed girl Baucis says that Hades is jealous of her fate, "how with the very torch that accompanied her bridal song her father-in-law lit the fimeral pyre/that consumed her. And you yourself, Hymenaeus, transformed the harmonious wedding-chant into the sound of wailing threnodies."
^' On the popularity of Euripides during the Greco-Roman era and Josephus' knowledge of his plays, including Ifdagmia at Autis, see L H. Feldman, "Josephus as a Biblical Interpreter: The Aqedah," JQJt 75 (1984--85) 219-22; 231-32; 235-36; 239-46; more generally, F. L lAicas, Euripides arui His li^btmce (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1928) 39-81. " She refers repeatedly to this aspect of her death on behalf of Greece (1375; 1382-84; 1420; 1473). " Agamemnon laments Iphigenia's death, "Hades meseems shall take her soon for bride" (461). The following examples are from Alexiou and Dronke, "Lament," 825-41, 846-47.
T H E SPIRIT A N D P R O P H E T I C T R A N S F O R M A T I O N
127
A second or first century BCE epitaph begins, "No marriage, but be trothal to Hades." Funerary inscripdons of a less literary and more popular nature also mirror Seila's lament. An inscription from Syros, for example, reads, " . . . having taken my fill neither of my dear parents nor of my friends but of the bitter couch of Hades that is now upon me." Even Seila's regret that she has "not used the sweet-smelling ointment" is parallelled by a second century CE inscripdon from Gyrene: "Alas for your ashes . . . they fell alike on wedding-robes, on wedding garlands not steeped in unguents . . . Alas, wedding-song that is loud with lamentation. . . ." Seila concluded her lament with a plea to the trees and beasts to lament her virginity, "for my years have been cut oflf." Similar is an inscription from Larisa from the second to sixth centuries CE, I, Leonto, died a maiden, like a young flower when it bursts its bud and first shows its petals fifteen years old, just ready to be joined in wedlock, I have come to lie among the dead in a long sleep.
Even Greek folk songs associated death with marriage: "yesterday was my wedding-day, late last night I married./Hades is my husband, the tombstone my mother-in-law." This preponderance of parallels between the situation of Seila and tragic figures such as Iphigenia, between the image of death as marriage in LAB 40 and Greek tragedy, funerary epigrams, funerary inscriptions, even folk songs, and between specific details, such as the lament over not using oils and over years cut off, oflfer substantial grounds for Alexiou's and Dronke's "certainty that the pseudo-Philo knew a Greek tradition of laments for girls who had died young, in which the elegiac language was deeply imbued with the language of epithalamia."^^ This evidence from another context altogether lends considerable credibility to the conclusion that Pseudo-Philo was by no means imper vious to Greco-Roman traditions and culture. Although the scriptures place no lament in the mouth of Jephthah's daughter, Pseudo-Philo does. Alexiou and Dronke have substantiated that, set in the context of Seila's tragic situation, the materials of this lament, including the metaphor of Sheol as bridal chamber, as well as the emotional style and discrete images of the lament, would have suggested to PseudoPhilo's readers that here was a tragic figure, like Iphigenia, who had " "Lament," 851.
128
AN ECLECTIC ERA
her life snatched in its prime for polidcal expediency. Here was a young girl, like so many, who died before she could lie on the marriage bed; thus Hades became her bridal chamber. Seila's lament also illuminates Pseudo-Philo's portrayal of the spirit because the sorts of tradidon they incorporate are similar. The tradi tions embodied by both are longstanding Greek ones: Plato and Delphi provided the primary sources of Greco-Roman views of inspiration, just as the literary Greek dramas provided the headwaters of the lament tradition for girls who died young. The traditions of both Seila's lament and Kenaz's vision, moreover, were not solely literary but popular: Cicero, Plutarch, Vergil et al., quite apart from Philo and Josephus, popularized Greco-Roman interpretations of Plato and Delphi, while laments for young girls appeared in a variety of con texts, including funerary epigrams, funerary inscriptions, and folk songs. It is difficult to imagine that Pseudo-Philo's readers would have failed to interpret Seila's lament and Kenaz's vision (perhaps ako the pro phetic experiences of Joshua and Saul) through the perspective of Greco-Roman perceptions. It is, further, difficult to imagine that Pseudo-Philo, who composed these lengthy extra-biblical portions, would have included them if he had been intransigendy resistant to Greco-Roman influences, since the portrayals of the spirit and Seila in Uber Antiquitatum Biblicarum evoke so powerfully these Greco-Roman traditions.
Summary A strikingly consistent exegetical method has emerged from these analyses of Pseudo-Philo's descriptions of inspired experiences. PseudoPhilo follows the order of the biblical narrative, interpreting primary texts in sequence: Deut 34:9 (Joshua in LAB 20); Jdg 3:9~11 (Kenaz in LAB 25-28); and 1 Sam 19:20-24 (Saul in LAB 62). Pseudo-Philo tends to supplement these primary texts with elements from other biblical texts in a manner which renders to those imported texts a fundamental role in his own version of bibhcal stories. (1) He imports to Deut 34:9 (LAB 20:2) the metaphor of clothing from Jdg 6:34, as well as the phrase, "into another person" from 1 Sam 10:6. (2) He creates in part the substance of Saul's prophecy, which has no content in 1 Sam 19:23, by garnering elements from other portions of Saul's life, such as the question "whom do you pursue" from M T
T H E SPIRIT A N D
PROPHETIC
TRANSFORMATION
129
1 Sam 24:15, the description of Saul's pursuit of David as "in vain" from Jonathan's words to Saul in 1 Sam 19:5, and the simultaneous death of Saul and his son(s) from 1 Sam 31:6 (LAB 62:2). (3) He embellishes the life of Kenaz by attributing to him a vision which, like Ezekiel's, transpired amongst the elders (Ezek 8:1) when the holy spirit leapt upon him {insiluit; r^KTl) in a manner reminiscent of Saul (1 Samuel 10-11). Further details of the content of Kenaz's vision and the condition in which Kenaz was inspired, from which he was awakened, are compatible with many other early Jewish expansions of the experiences of Israelite ancestors, such as Adam, Enoch, and Abraham. Pseudo-Philo's exegetical method contains another ingredient; he incorporates extra-biblical Greco-Roman conceptions within this com bination of primary and secondary biblical texts. The effect of the spirit upon Joshua was to cause his spirit to be inflamed and agitated. Kenaz's mind ascended to range the past, present, and future, after the spirit leapt upon him and inhabited him. His mind accomplished this when he was in a sleepnlike state from which he had to be awak ened. After awakening, Kenaz was unable to remember what he had seen in this prophetic vision, even as Saul, in LAB 62:2, could not recall what he had prophesied. Some of these extra-biblical elements are similar to elements in other early Jewish writings, such as the placement of Kenaz's vision prior to death, the sleep-like state from which Kenaz was awakened, even the elevation of Kenaz's mind without his body. However, these elements can be identified in Early Judaism only in disparate contexts in a variety of literary texts. In marked contrast, these extra-biblical elements are found together and in remarkable concurrence only in Greco-Roman descriptions of prophetic inspiration. Further, the other extra-biblical elements for which early Jewish counterparts cannot be identified are counted among the primary, essential characteristics of prophetic inspiration in Cicero's De dimnatione and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum. These include the combined leaping and inhabiting of the spirit to cause Kenaz's mind to ascend and the inflammation and agitation of Joshua's mind. These observations suggest that the form of Judaism with which Pseudo-Philo's conception of prophetic inspiration shares so much was influenced by its Greco-Roman milieu, for the extra-biblical ele ments that do not exhibit strong correspondences to other early Jewish literary works can be traced easily to Greco-Roman discussions of
130
A N ECLECTIC
ERA
inspiration. Indeed, with but one exception, extra-bibhcal additions in PsmdoPhilo's interpretation of the spirit's effects t^ton Joshua and Kenaz occur leather in unified discussions of prophetic inspiration in Cicero's De divinadone and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum: the inflammadon and agitadon of Joshua; Kenaz's impending death; the leaping cmd inhabidng of the spirit in Kenaz; the elevadon of Kenaz's sensus by this recepdon of the spirit; and Kenaz's sleep-like state. The extra-biblical detail which cannot be traced to Cicero's De diomatione and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum—the inability to recall one's prophetic ejq^erience—lies aloi^ a Platonic trajectory. John Cassian, Pseudojustinus, and the author of the prologue to the Sibylline Oracles attributed this point of view to Plato, and one adherent of this view was the Roman statesman, Aelius Aristides. This detail, then, is also an indication of the impact of Pseudo-Philo's Greco-Roman milieu upon his interpretation of Israelite history.
CHAPTER SIX
THE SPIRIT AND PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSFORMATION: DIASPORA PERSPECTIVES
Although Philo and Josephus assimilate Greco-Roman culture more pervasively and explicidy than Pseudo-Philo, although their versions of the biblical text are nuanced by Greco-Roman conceptions and peppered with allusions and references to Greek and Roman literary texts, although Philo and Josephus write in Greek rather than Hebrew, they also exhibit throughout their writings an awareness of the limits of Greco-Roman culture and an unwillingness finally to accept that culture uncridcally. Both authors bend adventurously over the preci pice which divided Early Judaism from Rome, appearing to adopt wholeheartedly the concepdons and vocabulary of their Greco-Roman era, with the result that the spirit of their biblical tradidon appears to blend into the landscape of first century Greco-Roman culture. This uncridcal assimilation is, however, only apparent. On closer scrudny, the spirit is integral to Philo Judaeus' subtle but certain critique of that culture, while the appearance of the spirit in Josephus' Antiquities serves exquisitely his own program of rebutting the antiJewish chaise of misanthropy.
Josephus and Jewish PhiUmdiropy Exegetical Movements Josephus justifiably responds often to the anti-Jewish charge of mis anthropy. Hecataeus of Abdera, writing approximately 300 BCE, and Aelius Aristides, during the second century CE, for instance, depicted the Jews as unsocial (cxTtdvOpciwov) and hostile to foreigners (nioo^evov),'
' See Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 125-49; also P. Spilsbury, Contra Apionem and Antiqtdtates Judakat. Points of Contact," in Josephus' Contra Apiomm: Studies in its Character arui Context with a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing in Greek, ed. L. H. Feldman and J. R. Levison (AGAJU 34; Leiden/New York/Koln: Brill, 1996) 356-59.
132
A N ECLECTIC ERA
while Apion, according to Josephus, accused the Jews of taking "an imaginary oath . . . to show no goodwill to a single alien, above all to Greeks" {CA 2.121-24). This libel had its more particular and vivid manifestadons in specific libels about the temple. The and Jewish Ubel that the Jews annually sacrificed a gentile in the temple, for exam ple, provides a signal illustration of alleged Jewish misanthropy {CA 2.89-111). The care Josephus exercises to dispel such a libel as this, as well as his detailed refutation of the libel that the temple contained an ass's head,^ reflect his commitment to present the temple in the most positive light possible. He cannot therefore bypass the account of its dedication. Josephus is nonetheless aware that he confronts here a biblical text with the potential to bolster the charge of Jewish misan thropy because of its implication that God dwells in the temple. He must discern a way both to aflRrm God's presence in the temple and to avoid oflfending the sensibilities of the Romans, who were respon sible for the temple's destruction in 70 C E and under whose patron age he now writes the Antiquities. Josephus accomplishes this program in the first place by raising doubt about the conviction that God dwelt in the temple in Ant. 8.102 with the words, "according to human befief:" ". . . this was a sign of God's being present and dwelling—according to human belief—in the place which had been newly built and consecrated to him" {Ant. 8.102). Josephus also exercises creative exegesis by removing aU traces of exclusivism from Solomon's prayer, particularly references to war and enemies in 1 Kgs 8:44-51, and by fanning the spark of the positive reference to foreigners in 1 Kgs 8:43 into a flame, at the prayer's conclusion: "For so would all know that Thou Thyself didst desire that this house should be built for Thee in our land, and also that we are not inhumane by nature nor unfriendly to those who are not of our country, but wish that all equally should receive aid from Thee and enjoy Thy blessings" {Ant. 8.117). The significance of a reference to the spirit in this explicidy apo logetic context cannot be overestimated because Josephus' tendency ' CA 2.80-88, 112-20. This libel circulated in no less than three versions, on which see the following discussions in Feldman and Levison, Josefdms' Contra Afnonem: B. Bar-Kochva, "An Ass in the Jerusalem Temple—The Origins and Develc^mcnt of the Slander," 310-326; R. Bauckham, "Josephus' Account of the Temple in Q^a Afrionm 2.102-109," 327-47; and J.-W. van Henten and R. Abusch, "The Jews as Typhonians and Josephus' Strategy of Refutation in Conta Apionem" 284-88.
T H E SPIRIT A N D PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSFORMATION
133
is to omit references to the spirit. Abandoning this tendency, Josephus sandwiches between Solomon's reference to the promise of heirs (ArU. 8.113 = 1 Kgs 8:24-26) and the question of whether God lives on the earth {Ant. 8.114b = 1 Kgs 8:27) a request for a portion of the spirit: "Beside these things I entreat Thee also to send some portion of Thy spirit to dwell in the temple, that Thou mayest seem to us to be on earth as well."^ Josephus subsequendy records, in a paraphrase of 2 Chron 7:1, that " . . . a fire darted out of the air and, in the sight of all the people, leaped uf>on the altar and, seizing on the sacrifice, consumed it all."* That request, this response, and their context in Josephus' version of the dedication of the temple are permeated by Stoic hues. Otherwise
TTie Relevant Stoic Milieu
Josephus' tendency to adopt Stoic conceptions and vocabulary^ explains in general his wilHngness to employ them to transform the dedica tion of the temple from fodder for the charge of misanthropy into an exemplar of Jewish philanthropy. The Stoic conception of jcvevna, in particular, provides a window of opportunity which, in a context re plete with Stoic conceptions, Josephus gladly opens in Ant. 8.114. These Stoic conceptions encompass epistemology, theology, and cosmology. Josephus employs foundational elements of Stoic epistemology to recast the priests' response to the dark cloud which filled the temple. 1 Kgs 8:10-11 states vaguely that the priests could not perform their service because of the cloud: "And when the priests came out of the holy place, a cloud filled the house of the LORD, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud; for the glory of the LORD filled the house of the LORD." Josephus modifies this description of the cloud: ". . . and it produced in the minds of all of them an impression and belief that God had descended into the temple and had gladly made His abode there" {Ant. 8.106). This descrif>tion contains two related Stoic concepts, "impression" (cpavTaoia) and "opinion" (66^0), which Josephus incorporates in order to undermine the view that God began then to dwell in the temple. * Ant. 8.114a. Greek, npbq 8fe TOUTOK; iKExevo) ical jioipdv tiva xov oov K v e u n a t o q tic, tov vaov dxoiKioai, ax; av Kal o t l yn^ fmiv etvai SoKfiq. * Ant. 8.118. Greek, iriip yap depoq 5ia5pa^6v Kal navtcov 6fm/xm hX xov ^CIHIOV ^tfyiyf aitaoav tfiv duotav dviipxaoe Kal KaxeSaiooxo. * For examples and bibliogrj^hy, see my "Josephus' Interpretation," 241 n. 34.
134
AN ECLECTIC
ERA
The conception of "impression" is foundational to Stoicism. Dio genes Laertius, quoting Diodes the Magnesian, writes, "The Stoics agree to put in the forefront the doctrine of presentation [(pavtaaia] and sensation, inasmuch as the standard by which the truth of things is tested is generically a presentation. . . . For presentation comes first; then thought..." (7.49; see 7.54).^ Integrally related to the concept, impression, is opinion, which, according to the Stoics, is always false.' Sextus Empiricus notes that the Stoics distinguish between knowl edge, opinion, and apprehension: ". . . knowledge is the unerring and firm apprehension which is unalterable by reason, and opinion is weak and false assent, and apprehension is intermediate between the t w o . . . of these, knowledge subsists only in the wise, and opinion only in the fools, but apprehension is shared alike by both, and it is the criterion of truth" (Adversus mathematicos 7.151). Sextus Empiricus' explanation indicates that impression (i.e., apprehension) can be mis construed and, when it is misapprehended, the result is an opinion, which is always false.^ l l i e effect ofJc«ephus' incorporation of the Stoic concepts of impres sion and (false) opinion is to c o u n t e r a c t the view that God dwells in the temple and thereby to avoid the charge of misanthropy. The priests received an impression of the dark cloud and misconstrued its meaning, arriving at the false opinion "that God had descended into the temple and had gladly made His abode there." Josephus invalidates this interpretation of the impression, (jKxvtaoia, not only by describ ing it as a false opinion, 66^a, but also by contrasting this false opinion with Solomon's claim that the purpose of the temple is more modest:
* Sextus Empiricus Adversus rruitherrmtUos 7.227 (= Adversus dogmatkos 1.227) writes: "These [Stoics], then, assert that the criterion of truth is the apprehensive presen tation [riiv KatoXnittiicfiv <pavTaoiav]." He (7.426 = Adversus dogmaHcos 1.426) defines it as "That which is imprinted and impressed by a real object.. ." Aedus (4.12.2) agrees that an impression "is an affecdon occurring in the soul, which reveals itself and its cause." (Quotation from A. A. Long and D. N. Sedlcy, The Hellenistic HtHosophers, 2 vols. [Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1987] 1.237; see texts and notes on Stoic epistemology in 2.238-59.) Cicero {Academica 1.40) summarizes the changes Zcno made in logic, the first of which concerns impression. ' Long and Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers, 1.258. ' Plutarch, in De Stoicorum repugrumtds 1056E-F, parallels three negadve terms, induding opining, in his discussion of inconsistent or contradictory impressions: Kponmrovtou;, 6layeu8o^l£vovuoei K(M^K)v 6 vov^ &v ouK EffcXa^pi^etai Kal np6(; JITIKICTTOV vyo^ i^iptxax.
140
AN ECLECTIC
ERA
This identification permits Philo the opportunity to discuss the three sorts of souls he delineates frequendy in his wridngs: those which are pure and free from the flesh, which "have never deigned to be brought into union with any of the parts of the earth;" those which escape and become free from the flesh, that is, "the souls of those who have given themselves to genuine philosophy;" and those which remain entangled in the flesh, "souls which have sunk beneath the stream . .." {Gig. 13-15).» This division of souls allows Philo further opjx»rtunity to loop away from the literal interpretadon of Gen 6:3. The angels of Gen 6:1-4, understood from the perspective of this three-fold classification of souls, represent the incorrigible class of people among whom the spirit cannot dwell: "Among such as these then it is impossible that the spirit of God should dwell and make for ever its habitation, as also the Law giver himself shows clearly. For (so it runs) 'the Lord God said. My spirit shall not abide for ever among people, because they are flesh.'"^' According to Philo, then, the eflfect of this spirit is not life itself, which is apportioned equally to the entirety of humankind for only ^ An illustration of the kind of disdnction that allows Philo to identify stars, demons, and souls with one another and then to distinguish between the three classes of them is not difficult to locate. We may recall the myth of Timarchus, who entered into a crypt and received a vision of the cosmos. In the course of this vision, Timarchus observes the movement of the universe, including sun, moon, and stars. His guiding daemon explains that Timarchus is observing some souls which are able to ascend to the moon (which belongs to terrestrial daemons) and be rescued from the cycle of rebirth, as well as other souls which are forbidden by the moon to approach and thus must descend into the cycle of rebirth. After identifying these as daemons {Gen. Socr. 59ID), the guiding daemon proceeds to describe three classes of daemons. First, the stars which are extinguished are souls that have sunk entirely into their body and become distracted by their passions. Second, the stars which arc lit again, reappearing from below, represent souls which are freeing themselves from the body and participating once again with understanding, which is like a buoy that keeps the soul from being entirely submerged in the body. Third, "the stars that move about on high are the daemons of persons said to 'posses understanding'" {Gen. Socr. 591F; Greek, oi 5e avca Siaep6|ievoi 5a{(iove^ eioi xm/ vouv Ix^tv Xeyo^evtov dvOpoMceyv). This explanation corresponds to Philo's discussion, both with re^)ect to the identi fication of stars with daemons and with re;^X!Ct to the classification of souls. Based upon the identification of angels with daemons and souls, Fhilo attempts to persuade his readers that both good and bad angels exist {Gig. 16) and that they can be distinguished on the basis of the extent to which they participate in or avoid the irrational life of the flesh. The "angels of God" which PhUo discerns in Gen 6:2 are evil angels who occupy themselves with physical pleasures, such as sight, heating, food, and sex. " Gig. 19 20. Greek, Ev Sfj toiq TOIOVTOK; dnT^X«vov t o toti 6tou Katajieivai KAI Siaitoviooi itvevna, atq 8r(k6i KAI a u t o ^ 6 vofioOern^. "eijic" ydp ^n^oi "KUpio^ 6 de6q- orb KATA^evei t o icvev^d ^ov ev toi^ dv6pon, distinguishes as well this interpretation of the spirit's modus vioendi from his own view of pro phetic inspiration. In prophetic inspiration, the mind is "evicted at the arrival of the divine Spirit..." {Her. 265) and surrenders "to a new visitor and tenant" {Spec. Leg. 4.49) which prompts whatever words are necessary {Spec. Leg. 1.65). Balaam's voice, for example, became an instrument upon which the divine spirit played without his aware ness. When the mind, in contrast, is in the process of obtaining wisdom and knowledge, there is no such eviction, no violent possession, no ventriloquism. The spirit rather rests upon the sage, grandng wisdom, knowledge, and understanding. A chasm divides the experiences of Balaam and Bezalel. This experience of the spirit, therefore, is of a different sort from both popular Stoic conceptions of prophedc inspiradon and Philo's own concepdon of prophedc inspiradon. It seems, on the other hand, to have much in common with the Stoic statesman Seneca's descrip tion of the god within in his forty-first letter to Lucilius: "If you see a p>erson who is unterrified in the midst of dangers, untouched by desires, happy in adversity, peaceful amid the storm . . . Will you not say: 'This quality is too great and lofty to be regarded as resembling this petty body in which it dwells? A divine power has descended upon that person'" (41.4). This power "upon" a sage is nothing other than "a holy spirit" which "indwells within us, one who marks our good and bad deeds, and is our guardian. As we treat this spirit, so are we treated by it" (41.1-2). This descripdon of the strength which characterizes the Stoic sage—a transcendent divine power which is none other than a holy spirit—exhibits extraordinary affinities with Philo's contention that the spirit comes upon the elders and Bezalel. Nonetheless, a fundamental difference separates Philo's view of the spirit from Seneca's; for Seneca, this transcendent power is not a
THE SPIRIT AND PHILOSOPHICAI. TRANSFORMATION
147
supplement or aid that comes at various intervals but the human soul itself: W h e n a soul rises superior to other s o u l s . . . when it smiles at our fears and at our prayers, it is stirred by a force from heaven. A thing like this cannot stand upright unless it be propped by the divine. There fore, a greater part of it abides in that place from whence it came down to earth. Just as the rays of the sun do indeed touch the earth, but still abide at the source from which they are sent; even so the great and hallowed soul, which has c o m e down in order that we may have a nearer knowledge of divinity, does indeed associate with us, but sdll cleaves to its origin . . . (41.5).
In other of his biblical interpretadons, Philo would appear to find no difficulty in concurring wdth Seneca. In Opif. 135, for instance, he proflfers a Stoic interpretadon of Gen 2:7—remarkably similar to Seneca—when he describes the rational part of the human soul: . . for that which He breathed in was nothing else than a Divine breath that migrated hither from that blissful and happy existence for the benefit of our race. . . ."^^ In De gigantibus, in contrast, Philo contends that the spirit which comes "upon" the elders and Bezalel is not the human soul itself but a transitory supplement which brings knowledge, wisdom, and under standing. After proflfering his detailed definidon in Gig. 27, Philo sum marizes, "And so though the divine spirit may stay awhile in the soul it cannot abide there, as we have said" {Gig. 28). With this affir mation Philo turns full circle to his interpretation of Gen 6:3, prior to his introduction of Bezalel: "The spirit sometimes stays awhile, but it does not abide for ever among us . . . even over the reprobate hovers often of a sudden the vision of the excellent, but to grasp it and keep it for their own they have not the strength" {Gig. 20). For Philo this is a biblical proposition: "And Moses himself aflfirms this when he says that 'because they are flesh' the divine spirit cannot abide" {Gig. 29). In Gig. 19-31, then, Philo appears to be on the verge of a whole hearted, uncritical assimilation of Stoic conceptions of the cosmic spirit and the human soul.^ He does not, however, finally identify this Greek, o ydp evwpwnioev, ov8cv ^v erepov TI nvev^a Seiov, djto tnq t^aKapiou; Kal evSai^ovo^ ^iiatmq iKt\vr\q dnoiKlav riiv ev8d5e oteiXdnevov kn axpeXei^ toti yevo\)(; rm&v... For example, Kiilo's discussion of the order of creation in ImmuL 3 5 is composed of Stoic vocabulary, including "rational soul," "cohesion," and "breath."
148
A N ECLECTIC ERA
spirit with the human soul, a fragment of the divine spirit, for the human soul is not in itself capable of producing an uninterrupted life of virtue, beset as it is by daily cares and, in the case of most, mired in the flesh. The soul needs the aid of the wisdom and knowledge imparted by the spirit which can come upon it. The unfortunate reedity is that "though the divine spirit may stay awhile in the soul it cannot abide there." An analogous reluctance to adopt Stoic conceptions uncritically underlies also Plant 18-26, in which Philo introduces the spirit in the context of an overt polemic against the Stoics. Philo begins by unequivocally distinguishing himself from the Stoics: "Now while others, by asserting that our human mind is a particle of the ethereal substance, have claimed for humankind a kinship with the upper air. . ."^^ Although the Stoics were not unanimous on this point, in general aether was, like spirit, related to or identified with the ratioprinciple which unifies the world. Diogenes Laertius attributes this view to the Stoic Antipater of Tyre: "Thus, then, the whole world is a living being, endowed with soul and reason, and having aether for its ruling principle."^® Philo interprets the breath of life from Gen 2:7 in similar terms: "The body, then, has been formed out of earth, but the soul is of the upper air, a particle detached from the Deity: Tor God breathed into his face a breath of life, and the human became a living soul'. . . the soul being a portion of an ethereal nature has on the contrary ethereal and divine food. . . ."^^ As in Opif. 135, Philo is willing here to define the rational portion of the human soul in Stoic terms when he describes the composite nature of human beings as consisting of body and soul. Contrasted with the " Plant. 1 8 . Greek, dXX'oi ^ev aAAoi xfiq aiOepiou ^vaecoq xov fi^etepov vovv (loipav einovxeq elvaiCTwyyeveiavdv6pam(p npoq aiOepa owtiyav. Diogenes Laertius, in the context of a summary of Stoics ( 7 . 1 4 3 ) , including Chrysippus, Zeno, Apollodorus, and Posidonius, attributes to Stoicism the view that the world is "a living being, rational, animate and intelligent," which is "endowed with soul, as is clear from our several souls being each a fragment of it." Cicero, quoting Chrysippus, describes the human being as "a small fragment of that which is perfect" {N(U. Deor. 2 . 3 8 ; see De senectute 2 1 . 7 8 . O n this Stoic language, see the notes on Div. 2 . 3 8 in A. S. Pease, De Divinatwne 2 . 6 3 1 . ) Epictetus describes human souls as "parts and portions" of God's being ( 1 . 1 4 6 ) .
^ Diogenes Laertius 7 . 1 3 9 . Greek, ovrco 8TI Kal xov oXov KOO^IOV ^SOV ovxa Kal en\|n)xov Kal XoyiKov, exew fiyeixoviKov \ih/ xov aiOepa. L^. AU. 3 . 1 6 1 , based upon Gen 3 : 1 4 . Greek, TO jiev oSv o©na EK ynq 5e8Tmioupynxai, tl 5£ \|n)XTi aidipoq eaxiv, dicoanaona 0eiov • "evetpvorioe ydp eiq TO Jipooowiov amofb nv^\ux CcOTig 6 Oeoq, Kal eyeveTo 6 wSpamoq eiq \|n)XTiv ^fioav". . . . fi 5e aiOepiov ipvaeioq ^oipa o^oa vuxn ndA.iv aidepiou^ Kal Oeia^.
THE SPIRIT AND PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSFORMATION
149
body, a soul which consists of aether or the fire and air of jcvev^a is of a much diflferent nature. Ultimately, however, Philo is not satisfied with this viewpoint. In Spec. L^. 4.123, for example, he reproduces the stoicized interpreta tion of Gen 2:7 but supplements it with his own suggestion that the radonal pordon of the soul is composed of something better than aether: For the essence of substance of that other soul is divine spirit, a truth vouched for by Moses especially, who in his story of the creadon says that God breathed a breath of life upon the first human, the founder of our race, into the lordliest part of his body, the face.... And clearly what was then thus breathed was ethereal spirit, or something if such there be better than ethereal spirit, even an eflfulgence of the blessed, thrice blessed nature of the Godhead.**' In Plant. 18, where the polemical edge is sharper, Philo's own con ception of the spirit functions neither as an affirmation of Stoicism, as in Opif. 135, nor as a qualification of Stoicism, as in Gg. 27 and Spec. Leg. 4.123, but as a refutation of Stoicism: Now while others, by asserting that our human mind is a particle of the ethereal substance, have claimed for humans a kinship with the upper air; our great Moses likened the fashion of the reasonable soul to no created thing, but averred it to be a genuine coinage of that dread [unseen] Spirit, the Divine and invisible One, signed and im pressed by the seal of God, the stamp of which is the Eternal Word. His words are "God in-breathed into his face a breath of Ufe" [Gen 2:7]; so that it cannot but be that the one that receives is made in the likeness of Him Who sends forth the breath. Accordingly we also read that a human has been made after the image of God [Gen 1:27], not however after the image of anything created.*'
Greek, EKEIVTI^ ydp oinsia KveO^a 6eiov icoi ^dXicna icaxd Monxiiiv, ev tfi Koo^oicoiic^ ^pT^iv dvOpcoRtp nparrcp KOI dj^cnyrqi toO yev^ tineav eMerson"). Into this context Philo introduces the divine spirit. Philo's exegetical movements suggest, on the one hand, that Moses' oracles concerning the sabbath were the product of an ecstatic form of prophecy. According to LXX Exod 16:15, Moses responded to the Israelites' question about the manna with a straightforward de scription of it as bread, prefaced by the simple words, "Moses said [elwev] to them." PhUo records that Moses commanded under inspiration (e«i0£iaoa^) that the IsraeHtes should gather only enough for each day {Vu. Mos. 2.259). According to LXX Exod 16:23, Moses merely "said [elicev] to them" that they should rest on the sabbath. Philo writes instead that Moses "under God-sent inspiration, made announcement [eeo<popii8eic Bianiae] of the sabbadi" (2.264). According to LXX Exod 16:25-26, Moses said (elicev) that the people should eat what was preserved from the prior day rather than searching in the field on the sabbath. Philo transforms this statement in Vit. Mos. 2.268-69 into prediction by emphasizing that it transpired, not on the sabbath, but on the day prior to the sabbath (tfi. . . 7ipotepa(<ji), by describing the oracle as "most portentous" (xptiajioy tepaTCD5eataTov), and by replacing "said" with "prophesied" (Oeoni^ei).'^ The result of these This exegetical movement is part of a larger pattern that is characteristic as
174
AN EXTRAORDINARY MIND
sabbath predictions, Philo records, was Israel's acknowledgement o f Moses "the prophet as a true seer, an interpreter of God, and alone gifted with foreknowledge of the hidden future.'"' As if this exegedcal recasting were not enough, Philo includes three narrative transitions in the sabbath story that accentuate Moses' in spired state. He begins by characterizing Moses' prior utterance at the Red Sea as the begirming of Moses' prophetic work, implying by this that the subsequent oracles concerning the sabbath would be its continuation: "It was thus that Moses began and opened his work as a prophet possessed by God's spirit" {Vit. Mos. 2.258). After the first sabbath oracle about the manna, he then writes, "Not long after, Moses delivered a second inspired pronouncement concerning the sacred seventh day" (Vit. Mos. 2.263). Before turning to the subsequent biblical episode, Philo recapitulates: Moses' explanation of manna was "his pronouncement under divine inspiration [Katexo^Evo^eOeoicioev]" {Vit. Mos. 2.270). Thus Moses' utterances concerning the manna and the sabbath, described consistendy in LXX Elxodus 16 with the simple verb, elnev, are transformed by Philo into instances of prophetic inspiration. Moses was a prophet who spoke "when possessed by God and carried away out of himself" {Vit. Mos. 2.188).'* In this context—in which Philo consistendy replaces the bibhcal word, said, with synonyms for inspiration that were at home in GrecoRoman discussions of inspiration, in which Philo three times adds summaries of Moses' condition with words that would suggest an ecstatic condition, and which is intended to provide an illustration of "that divine possession in virtue of which he is chiefly and in the well of the other biblical illustrations of Moses' prophetic work "in the strict sense:" crossing the Red Sea {Fu. Mos. 2.246-57); die golden calf (2.270-74); and Korah's rebellion (2.275-87). Where the biblical story recounts simply that Mc^es said (elitev) something, Philo embellishes the utterance of Moses with a high concentration of vocabulary to signal presumably the onset of ecstasy. For detailed analysis, see my "Philo Judaeus." 310-12. " Vit. Mos. 2.269. Greek, dXnSonavtiv 5e ical 9eon
[Vuagts 128EK129D). ^ Socrates supphes the precedent for the conviction in De dwinathne that "the power of divination exists" (1.124): "It is this purity of soul, no cbubt, that e}q>lain8 that famous utterance which history attributes to Socrates and which his disciples in their books often represent him as repeating: 'There b some divine influence [dioinumy—Sai^oviov, he called it—'which I always obey, though it never urg^ me on, but often holds me back'" (1.122). Phdosophumem 8. ^ In his Lives of the t^tdosophers 2.32, he mentions that Socrates "used to say that his supernatural sign warned him beforehand of the future." ^ Greek, x\ 5ai|l6viov avtqp oimaiveiv. My translation.
THE
SPIRIT A N D
EXTRAORDINARY
INSIGHT
185
. . . but what, my dear sir, do we call Socrates' daemon [sign]? For my part, nothing reported o f Pythagoras' skill in divination has struck me as so great or so divine; for exacdy as Homer has represented Athena as "standing at" Odysseus' "side in all his labours," so heaven seems to have attached to Socrates from his earliest years as his guide in Hfe a vision of this kind, which alone "Showed him the way, illumining his path," in matters dark and inscrutable to human wisdom, through the frequent concordance of the inspiring daemon with his own decisions.**' Several elements in this conception of inspiration are similar to Philo's description of communication from the spirit in Vit. Mos. 2.265 and Praem. 55. First, Theocritus designates the daemonion a guide {nponodi]yov); Philo uses the cognate verb, TtoSTiYExeo), to describe the guidance of the divine spirit in Vit. Mos. 2.265. Second, the primary function of Socrates' daemonion in this introduction corresponds to the primary function of inspiration in the introduction to Philo's treatment of Moses' prophetic gift in Vtt. Mos. 2.187-292, of which Vit. Mos, 2.265 is an illustration. The daemonion illumined matters inscrutable to human wisdom; Moses as prophet was to "declare by inspiration what can not be apprehended by reason" (2.187). Third, the contention that Socrates' daemonion confirmed his decisions—it d o e s not initiate them or overcome him to eflfect them—is surprisingly similar to Philo's assertion that Moses spoke "in his own person" (2.188), in possession of his o w n mind (2.265). The impetus for Moses' prediction of the sabbath, in fact, was not initially the advent of inspiration but Moses' own response of ameizement {Kaxanhxyex(; in 2.264) at seeing and hear ing of the manna. Fourth, inspiration is described by the same verb. The "inspiring daemon" (Saijioviov ejciGeia^ov) confirmed Socrates' decisions; the sabbath prediction (2.263) was a product of Moses' inspiration (inSemaaq). The details which Plutarch's portrayal of Socrates and Philo's depiction of Moses have in common are impres sive. As the daemonion w a s a guide to Socrates, inspiring him to compre hend inscrutable matters, so did the spirit guide Moses to comprehend truth unknowable. The conversation in De genio Socratis does n o t conclude with this query a n d initial response. After a lengthy interruption, it returns to ^ Gen. Socr. 5 8 0 C - D . Translation mine. Greek, TO 6e 8ain6viov, w ^eXxiaxe, TO ZcoKpdxouq \|/£i)8o(; ii xi (pa|iev; e^oi ydp ov8ev omax; \iiya Ttov rcepl JlvGayopo-u Xfyoiievwv eiq (lavTiicfiv ESO^C Kai 0eiov dTexvw^ ydp owxv "Ojiiipoq 'O&uaaei iteTcoiKe TT^V 'A0r|vav 'ev ndvtEooi Jiovoioi napioTanevnv,' xoiavTriv EOIKE ZwKpdTEi TOV pCot) icporeoSnyov e^ dpxnq Tiva o u v d y a i TO 8ai|Li6viov o^iv, 4]' novti 'oi npooOev iovoa tOei (paoq' EV TCpdyfiaoiv a&i\h}iq Kai npix; dvOpcwrivriv do-uXXoyiOTOK; (pp6vr|oiv, olq avx^ owve7tx(ov] from the upper air. . (3.2) correspond to "Behold me d a r i n g . . . to peer into [8iaia)jcTEiv] each of them [the sacred messages of Moses] and unfold . . ( 3 . 6 ) . * Undergirding this entire discussion is the value of learning. As the ascent of the philosopher is made possible by the contemplation of divine themes and truths (3.1), so Philo's ascent as interpreter is pos sible because of his yearning for education (jiai5e{a \T?\ are similar to Sir 39:6-7. For a detailed analysis, see Orton, Understanding Scribe, 122-24. Translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls are from F. Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English (2nd. ed.; Leiden/New York and Grand Rapids: Brill and Eerdmans, 1996). I have modified this translation once again to avoid exclusively male lan guage in reference to humanity. For this text see p. 309. D . Aune ("Charismatic Exegesis in Early Judaism and Early Christianity," in The Pseudepigrapha and Early Biblical Interpretation, ed. J. H. Charlesworth and C. A, Evans [JSPSS 14; Sheffield: J S O T , 1993] 137) understands IQS 8.15 as an indication that "the true meaning of Scripture was not based on a single revelation, but rather on a continuing series of revelatory insights." He prefers the translation: "This (way) is the study of the law [which] he commanded through Moses, that they should act in accordance with all that has been revealed from time to time and in accordance with what the prophets revezded by his holy spirit." However, the critical phrase, "from time to time" (ni?3 Di?), is ambiguous and can be translated, "from age to age," with Garcia-Martinez [Dead Sea Scrolls, 12), and thus refer not to occasions in the history of Qumran but to moments of revelation in the history of Israel. IQpHab 7.4. See zJso 2.7-9. Unfortunately a lacuna renders two reconstructions of I Q p H a b 2.7-9 possible. Garcia-Martinez {Dead Sea Scrolls, 198) translates, "the Priest whom God has placed wi[thin the Community,] to foretell the fulfilment of all the words of his servants, the prophets. . . ." G. Vermes {The Dead Sea Scrolls in English [3rd. rev. ed.; London: Penguin, 1987] 284) translates, "The priest [in whose heart] God set [understanding] that he might interpret all the words of His servants the Prophets. . . . " Only the second translation, which fills the lacuna with the words, "into whose heart" rather than "in the Community," suggests overtiy the presence of revelation to the Priest. For a fuller analysis of inspired exegesis at Qumran, see O. Betz, Offenbarung und Schriftforschung in der Qwnransekte ( W U N T 6; Tubingen: Mohr, 1960).
T H E SPIRIT A N D
I N S P I R E D EXEGESIS
201
For this community, the spirit plays an integral role. Several ref erences to the spirit occur in the psalms of the community, some of which may have been composed by the famed Teacher of Righteous ness. In particular, IQH 12.11-13 associates the spirit with revelation: And I, the Instmctor, have known you, my God, through the spirit which you gave to me, and I have listened loyally to your wonderful secret through your holy spirit. You have opened within mc
knowledge of the mystery of your wisdom, the source of your power. .. . The vocabulary of this psalm exhibits an intriguing collocation of words which reflects a context of study. First, if E. Lohse's reading is correct, the psalmist refers to himself as ':'''D(DD,'^ a noun built from the same verbal root, ^DD, which we encountered in Neh 8:8, 13, and 9:20 to describe both the instruction given by the scribal leaders in the period of restoration and the function of the good spirit.'^ Second, the description of the spirit as that which is placed within a person p ]ra)20 echoes Ezek 11:19, 36:26-27, and 37:14. The first two of these references in Ezekiel associate the gift of the spirit with obedience to Torah: I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them; I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, so that they may follow my statutes and keep my ordinances and obey them. Then they shall be my people, and I will be their God (11:19-20).
A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my spirit within you, and make you follow my statutes and be carefiU to observe my ordinances (36:26-27). Third, the second reference to the spirit (the "holy spirit") in IQH 12.11-13 is wedged loosely between references to HDt^'PB TO and P D r u n . Although the meaning of neither reference is certain,^' we may recall nonetheless that the word, D, refers in IQpHab 7.5 to Die TexU aus Qumran: Hebrdisch und deutsch (Munich: Kosel, 1964) 158. According to S. Holm-Nielson {HodqyoL Psalms Jrom Qumran [ATD 2; Aarhus: Universitctsforlaget I Aarhus, 1960] 204 n. 36), this text is "so erased that it is impossible to come to any real decision with regard to the spelling." See also IQS 9.12; IQH 11.10. ^ See also IQH 13.19; 16.11; 17.17. ^' On T D , see S. Mowinckcl ("Some Remarks on Hodayot 39.5-20," JBL 75
202
AN EXTRAORDINARY
MIND
"the mysteries of the words of his servants, the prophets," that is, to prophetic biblical texts which the Teacher of Righteousness interprets with divine aid. h would be unjusdfiable to wring from these texts an explicit asso ciation between the spirit and interpretadon. Indeed, the absence of such explicit affirmations is significant in light of how readily the au thor of the Community Rule, in contrast, attributes ancient prophetic revelation to the holy spirit (IQS 8.15). Nonetheless, for a commu nity so steeped in the biblical tradidon that truth cannot be conceived of without recourse to biblical concepdons and phraseology- a com munity in which the holy spirit can be a means of knowing God and God's mysteries (IQH 12.11-13),^^ a community whose inidates are obligated to follow Torah as it is interpreted peculiarly by its priestly leaders (IQS 5.9), a community whose central figure receives divine aid to interpret prophetic texts (IQpHab 7.4)—for this community, it is not difficult to envisage that biblical interpretadon by authorized, learned leaders was indeed attributed to the spirit.^^ No less relevant despite his quesdonable motive is Josephus' selfexonerating account of why he surrendered to the Romans: . . . and Josephus overheard the threats of the hostile crowd, suddenly there came back into his mind those nighdy dreams, in which God had foretold to him the impending fate of the Jews and the desunies of the Roman sovereigns. He was an interpreter of dreams and skilled
(1956) 272 73), according to whom this word refers to the council (gathering) or more basically a foundation (e.g., of truth). " Sec also IQH 9.32: ". . . and with certain truth you have supported me./You have delighted mc with your holy spirit,/ and undl this very day you have guided mc" (translation, Garcia-Mardnez, Dead Sea ScroUs, 349-50). Although the concate nation of references to truth, the holy spirit, and guidance may conceivably refer to instruction from ancient texts, these words more likely refer to truth and guidance in general, for they echo Psalm 51, which is occupied less with issues of Torah study than with deeply personal repentance: n » and Ps 51:8; yOl and Ps 51:12; "fOD and Ps 51:14; and TCfOnp im and Ps 51:13. References to foi^veness, a Leitmotiv of Psalm 51, occur in IQH 9.13, 33-34. Josephus' description of the Elssenes, though it too offers litde insight into the particular mode of inspiration, associates an uncanny ability to predict the future with knowledge of the sacred texts of Israel: "There are some among them [the Essenes] who profess to foretell the future, being versed from their early years in holy books, various forms of purification and apophthegms of prophets; and seldom, if ever, do they err in their predictions." The emphasis upon reliability, coupled with the positive descriptions elsewhere of Essenes who reliably predicted the future (Judas in BeU. 1.78; Simon in BelL 2.113; and Menahem in Ant. 13.311), .suggests that Josephus' belief in the ability to predict rests at least in part up>on a need for knowledge of the holy books.
THE SPIRIT AND INSPIRED EXEGESIS
203
in divining die meaning of ambiguous utterances of the Deity (oDjipaX-eiv Tot dM.pular belief" that people become inspired in sleep rather than when they are "awake and in full f>ossession of their faculties." People who adhere to such false notions, claims Simmias, are themselves troubled, incapable of hearing the messages of daemons which '*find an echo in those only whose character is untroubled and soul unruflfled" {Gen. Socr. 589D). The extent of Socrates' shadow during the Greco-Roman era, as well as a particular interest in his daemonion, attest to the vitality and persistence of discussions about the role of the intellect {Gen. Socr. 588I>-E), about the pre-eminence of purity of soul (Cicero, Dw. 1.122), about the enviable possession of wisdom (Diogenes Laertius 2.37; Philo, Plant. 65). This thrust alone could go a long way to explain the abundance of vocabulary related to philosophical reflection, education, instruction, knowledge, wisdom, and insight in the writings of Hiilo. But Hiilo sits on the shoulders of a tradition in which knowledge was prized, insight cherished. A wisdom attributable to the spirit inspired Joseph, Joshua, Bezalel, and Daniel to tasks as varied as architecture, dream interpretation, and the succession of Moses. And in Philo's era other ' Cicero, Div. 1.66-67. ' Lucan, De beUo civih 5.169-77. ^ Sibylline Oracles 3.3, 7. * This is the title of an important chapter in E. R. Dodds' The Greeks and the Irrational (Berkeley: University of California, 1951).
RETROSPECT
213
great figures of the past were brought into this compass of the spirit: Enoch, Jacob and Rebekkah, Levi, and Solomon possessed wisdom, discernment, and knowledge of the future by virtue of their reception of the spirit. The messianic servant of Isaiah 11, though initially defined primarily by knowledge and wisdom, came to be ever more associated with justice during the exihc period. Nonetheless, a renewed empha sis upon the spirit-induced wisdom of this figure emerged in Judaism of late Antiquity in association with the figures of the Elect One and the messiah. What is particularly noteworthy is that Philo does not collect these elements haphazardly when he reflects upon the inspiration of the mind. On the contrary, a consistent, unified conception of the inspi ration of the mind is evident in a variety of contexts with a variety of objects. Joseph interpreted dreams when prompted by the divine voice. Moses interpreted events when prompted from within. Philo himself interpreted Torah when he heard the voice of the spirit, his customary friend. Each of these figures of Judaism is directed with mind intact to knowledge which he would not otherwise perceive. Each of these lays claim to the spirit. There is indeed a remarkable consistency in the philonic corpus, the product of considered reflection upon the ways in which the spirit guides the mind to truth. E^specially unique to Philo is the way in which he weaves together the spirit and the interpretation of Torah. To be sure, this associa tion is by no means unique. In a wide variety of bibhcal and early Jewish literary texts, the spirit is believed to inspire interpretation and to instruct. The association of Torah interpretation and the spirit which is perceptible in Nehemiah 9 reappears in Sirach, Josephus' BeUum Judaicum, writings from Qumran, and 4 Ezra. Despite this chorus of compatriots who with Philo claimed inspired insight, Philo's understanding of the relationship between the spirit and bibhcal interpretation cannot entirely be understood from within the Israelite and early Jewish tradition. Though the association is there established, the particular conceptual cache into which Philo reaches to describe what is admittedly indescribable is discernible in hterary texts from along the platonic trajectory. When Philo correlates the philosophical ascent of the mind with the ascent to interpret Torah on the winds of knowledge, he situates inspired exegesis within the boundaries of the philosophical pursuit of knowledge. When he por trays the spirit as that which guides or prompts the mind, he reflects discussions of Socrates' daemonion and the daemonic race of people of
214
AN EXTRAORDINARY MIND
pure intellect. Such folk hear what lesser people miss: the echoes of the daemons, who communicate mind to mind, voice to inner ear. This accompanying presence guided Moses to predict the sabbath, prompted Joseph to proffer advice to Pharaoh, and now, claims this Alexandrian philosopher, speaks to him, instructs him, leads him to knowledge otherwise inaccessible, when he stumbles upon a text he cannot understand. A remarkable and ironic claim of authority, in deed, to attribute an authoritadve interpretadon of Torah to a being, a presence, a "customary" friend which bears a rather strong famihal resemblance, not to the spirit poured out, breathed in, or filling up, as we find it in the biblical and early Jewish tradition, but to the daemonion of Socrates, that "customary" daemonic presence which accompanied him from his earliest days and made voiceless contact with his intelligence! What of Josephus, who has rather more historical and somewhat less philosophical proclivities than Philo? In his version of the tale of Daniel, Josephus shies away from the biblical belief that the spirit actually indwelt Daniel, preferring instead the view that the spirit, which was only believed to indwell Daniel, accompanied him. The result is patent: Daniel is lauded for the wisdom which sets him apart from the sages of Medo-Persia. Josephus does not detad the process of inspiration—^whether prompting, guiding, echoing—but his revisioning of the biblical text to present the spirit as an accompanying rather than indwelling presence suggests that he depicts the spirit here in hues similar to a certain daemonion which, he contends, communicated to Socrates. The chasm which separates Bezalel's architectural abilities from Philo's interpretative ones or the anointing of the messianic servant from the higher voice which Philo hears appears to be crossable only with herculean eflfort. When we recall, however, that Judaism of late Antiquity valued both the presence of the spirit and the attainment of knowledge, and that several authors attributed extraordinary insight to that spirit, then Socrates' daemonion seems surprisin^y suitable for bridging this gap, for here, circhng within the philosophical orbits of the Greco-Roman era, is an inspired figure of unimpeachable mind whose commitment to truth and reputation for insight rendered him comparable to Moses and other bright stars of Israel's past and present who, like Socrates, were enraptured by the beauty of wisdom.'' ^ Plant. 65.
RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT
CHAPTER NINE
RETROSPECT
A variety of interpretations of the spirit have emerged in the course of this study. Though we now must inspect the most conspicuous of them individually, I do so reluctandy, for it is pre-eminendy the combinadon of colors and not the dissection of distinctive hues that confounds the rainbow gazer. Still, this is a responsibility incumbent upon the author of a book, at least a book of this sort. We revisit, therefore, in this retrospect the various interpretations of the spirit which emerged in first century Judaism. To facilitate this review, most sub-topics are patterned after the methodological steps that have unfolded throughout most of this book, that is, the identifica tion of exegetical movements followed by analysis of the relevant general and specific milieux which serve ultimately to explain these exegetical movements.
The Spirit and the Human Spirit Pseudo-Philo's ascription of the human spirit to Balaam would be inordinately ordinary, hardly worth mention, were it not for the extra ordinary transformation of the spirit that occurs in his version of the story of Balaam. Pseudo-Philo was presented with a simple formula, "the spirit of God came upon him [Balaam]," that appears undeni ably to portray Balaam as the recipient of that spirit which, on momentous occasions, inspires oracular utterances of particular import. In thb instance, Balaam succeeded in oflfering one of scripture's greatest testimonies to the stellar place of Israel among the nations. Not so in LAB 18, where, by expending considerable exegetical energy, PseudoPhilo not only denied Balaam that spirit which inspires prophetic oracles but also portrayed him as one who lost, by obeying a foreign king, even the spirit that gives life to all people. The exegetical move ments required to complete this transformation are worth recalling. Rrst, in an otherwise abbreviated account, Pseudo-Philo introduced several references, by way of allusion and citation, to Genesis (12:3;
218
RETROSPECT AND
PROSPECT
18:17; 22:17; 32:24-27) into Balaam's story. In this context, he intro duced an echo of Gen 6:3; Balaam stated clearly that Balak "does not realize that the spirit that is given to us is given for a dme" (LAB 18:3). With the introducdon of this allusion to Gen 6:3, the spirit could begin to be understood less as the prophedc spirit which comes upon one in extraordinary moments than as the living breath, the spirit "given to us"—all human beings—^for a hmited time. The second exegetical movement, though related to the first, is even more noteworthy. Pseudo-Philo contradicted Num 24:2 by re cording that "the spirit did not abide in him." Moreover, the verb used, permaneo, echoes Gen 6:3 rather than Num 24:2, of which it is the paraphrase (LAB 18:10). This second allusion to Gen 6:3 in LAB 18 is less innocuous than the first, for this time the allusion contradicts the biblical text. Third, Pseudo-Philo articulated the imphcit association between this spirit and death which the two allusions to Gen 6:3 had evoked. Balaam lamented, "I am restrained in my speech and cannot say what I see with my eyes, because there is litde left of the holy spirit that abides in me. For I know that, because I have been persuaded by Balak, I have lessened the time of my life. And behold my re maining hour" (LAB 18:11). The inteipretation of the spirit as lifebreath, which Pseudo-Philo expended considerable exegetical energy to create through allusions to Gen 6:3 in LAB 18:3 and 18:10, would seem to obtain here as well. To lay claim to the conviction that the energizing breath within is the divine breath is to remain comfortably within the parameters of the biblical purview. The "breath of life" is the vital force in all beings, human and beast (Gen 6:17; 7:15). It is coterminous with life, as Job in the face of death acknowledged: . . . as long as my breath is in me and the spirit of God is in my nostrils, my lips will not sj>eak falsehood, and my tongue will not utter deceit (Job 27:3-4). The psalmist, in reflecting upon creation, realized that God gives that same breath to the beasts: When you hide your face, they [non-human created beings] are dismayed; when you take away their breath, they die and retum to their dust.
RETROSPECT
219
W h e n you send forth your spirit, they are created; and you renew the face of the ground (Ps 104:29 30).
This conception of the spirit persisted into the Greco-Roman era. In the context of a reflecdon upon "the God of heaven . . . who makes everything upon the earth, and created everything by his word," one Palestinian author asked, "Why do you worship those who have no spirit in them?" (Jubilees 12.5). In the Testament of Reuben, the first of seven spirits given to human beings at creation "is the spirit of life, with which a human is created as a composite being" (2.4). Similarly for Philo is a human being "a composite one made up of earthly substance and of Divine breath" (Opif. 135). Elsewhere Philo queried of Gen 2:7, "why God deemed the earthly and body-loving mind worthy of divine breath at all. . ." (Leg. All. 1.33). What presumably cannot be explained by this milieu, however, is the application of the words, "the holy spirit," to the human spirit— although this is precisely the interpretadon demanded by the allu sions to Gen 6:3, the denial of the spirit to Balaam, and the associa don of the loss of this spirit with impending death. Nor can the designadon be explained satisfactorily by its biblical antecedents, Isa 63:10 and Ps 51:13, or by the Greek translation of Psalm 51 and Seneca's forty-first letter to Lucilius. Valuable precedent for this conception of the holy spirit can be discerned pre-eminendy in the manuscripts of the Qumran sectaries. The expression, "defihng his holy spirit," in CD 5.11 and 7.4 is analo gous to "defiling one's soul" in CD 12.11-13. Furthermore, the bib hcal sources of these texts are Lev 11:43 and 20:25, in which one can "defile one's soul." From the perspective of the Damascus Docu ment, Balaam's contention that "there is litde left of the holy spirit that abides in me" in LAB 18 constitutes his recognition that his self, his life-breath, has diminished to the point of death. Therefore, admitted Balaam, "I have lessened the time of my life. And behold my remaining hour." The transformation Numbers 22-24 undergoes in LAB 18 is re markable. The spirit of God of the biblical account appears clearly to be something which came upon Balaam at a particidar moment and caused him to prophesy blessings on Israel's behalf Pseudo-Philo, however, was determined to deny such inspiration by the holy spirit to Balaam, whom he portrayed as the architect of the plan to seduce Israel by means of Midianite women (LAB 18:13-14). Consequendy,
220
RETROSPECT
AND
PROSPECT
he interpreted the spirit of N u m 24:2 as the human spirit of Gen 6:3, referring to "the holy spirit" to depict the hfe Balaam forfeited through disobedience or, in vocabulary characteristic of the Damas cus Document, to display to his readers what happens to the person who "defiles his or her holy spirit" through obedience to foreigners rather than to God.
The Spirit and Extraordinary Power On some occasions in the course of this study, we have encountered interpretations in which the nature of the spirit is not edtogether clear but the effects are. Within the diversity of those effects, one salient characteristic is the awesome, transforming power of that spirit.
The Spirit and the Military Hero In Pseudo-Philo's version of Gideon's mihtary feats, Gideon's recep tion of the spirit resulted in an immediate rout of the Philistines: "And as soon as Gideon heard these words, he put on the spirit of the Lord and was strengthened and said to the three hundred men, *Rise up, let each one of you gird on his sword, because the Midianites have been delivered into our hands'" (LAB 36:2). This association between the spirit and the ensuing batde was accomplished through an important exegetical movement. In Judges 6, Gideon's reception of the spirit and the rout of the Midianites are separated by inter vening stories about the gathering of the Abiezrites, the setting out of fleece, and the reduction of the soldiers to three hundred. By omitting all three intervening stories, Pseudo-Philo juxtaposed Gideon's reception of the spirit with the batde. The resulting impact was an emphasis upon the power of the spirit as the impetus for batde. If the emphasis upon the spirit's power was accomphshed by omis sion in the story of Gideon, it was achieved by extensive exegetical expansion in the tale of Kenaz, where it was spun from the lacklustre bibhcal formula, "And the spirit of the L O R D was upon him." Around this expression, Pseudo-Philo clustered other expressions related to the spirit's power (LAB 27:9-10). He echoed Gideon's reception of the spirit in Jdg 6:34 with the verb, "clothed." He described the spirit as "the spirit of power" and connected this description with a second occurrence of the verb, "clothed," recalhng agzdn the story of
RETROSPECT
221
Gideon's rout of die Midianites by the impetus of the spirit. Finally, from the story of Saul's initial reception of the spirit in 1 Sam 10:6 he extracted the words, "was changed into another person" and ap plied them to Kenaz's military prowess. By expanding Jdg 3:10 in relation to Jdg 6:34 and 1 Sam 10:6, and by adding the genitival phrase, "of power," Pseudo-Philo transformed the colorless formula, "the spirit of the LORD was upon him," into an impressive affirma tion of the spirit's power in a mihtary context. TTie Spirit and the Prophet The equally ordinary, formulaic words, "Joshua son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom," Pseudo-PhUo wove with other bibhcal threads into a vivid tapestry of inspiration. These words from Deut 34:9 (the spirit) were conjoined with expressions from 1 Sam 10:6 (transfor mation into another person) and Jdg 6:34 (clothing). But that does not encompass the entirety of Joshua's experience, for, when he took up the garments that symbohzed the spirit, Joshua's "mind was afire and his spirit was moved, and he said to the people . .." Despite numerous biblical instances of terror, emotional agitation, and trembhng which constituted a significant slice of the milieu that shaped Pseudo-Philo's beliefs about the spirit, we may still ask where the specific bibhcal precedent is for Pseudo-Philo's attribution of Joshua's inflamed mind and agitated spirit to the divine spirit. Analogously, the formulaic biblical expression, "The spirit of the LORD came upon him" (Jdg 3:10), would provide the smoldering embers from which Pseudo-Philo would fan the flames of prophetic inspiration in his central character: the holy spirit leapt upon Kenaz, indwelt him, altered the state of his mind (probably by elevating it), with the result that he began to prophesy (LAB 28:6) and to obtain a cosmic vision, after which his mind was restored (28:10). Once again, the whole of this unified portrait cannot be explained satisfac torily by the sum of its biblical parts. Although other biblical judges and Saul could receive the spirit in much the same way, and although Nebuchadnezzar too had his sense returned to him, though he had lost it because of pride rather than the spirit's work, one may justifiably ask where the bibhcal precedent hes for the whole of Kenaz's expe rience, with the spirit's leaping, indwelhng, lifting of Kenaz to view the future, and eflfecting an experience that necessitated the retum of sense.
222
RETROSPECT
AND
PROSPECT
What is more, Kenaz could not remember what he had seen (18:10), just as Saul sometime later could not recall what he had heard (62:2). Where is the biblical precedent for this detail, which actually runs counter to the biblical tradition, according to which prophets were charged to remember precisely what they heard in order to commu nicate these words and visions to the people of God? Although biblical precedent for the view of the spirit as the source of powerful prophetic revelations is sujfficiendy ample to provide a relevant milieu for apprehending Pseudo-Philo's extravagant exegeti cal movements, it is not adequate to explain these other particulars of Pseudo-Philo's portraits, all of which can be neatly cut from the cloth of Cicero's De divinatione and Plutarch's De defectu oraculorum, as well as from a complementary trajectory of references from other Jewish and Greco-Roman sources. Quintus, Cicero's Stoic spokesper son, contended that the prophetic frenzy of inspiration occurs "when the soul withdraws itself from the body and is violendy stimulated by a divine impulse" {Div. 1.66). The ascent of the mind entails equally disturbing effects: "Those then, whose souls, spurning their bodies, take wings and fly abroad—^inflamed and aroused by a sort of pas sion—^these people, I say, certainly see the things which they foretell in their prophecies" (1.114). What stimulates these experiences is some external impulse: "Such souls do not cling to the body and are kindled by many different influences . . . certain vocal tones . . . groves and forests . . . rivers and seas . . . certain subterranean vapours which had the effect of inspiring persons to utter oracles" (1.114). In these two passages of De divinatione, inflammation and agitation, ascent of the disembodied soul, and the necessity of an external impulse charac terize inspiration. These elements characterize as well Plutarch's discussions of inspi ration in De defectu oraculorum, where the catalysts of inspiration are external forces upon the body which cause the soul to withdraw, to become agitated, and to foresee the future. Of these external forces, "the prophetic current and breath is most divine" (432D). Under the influence of this prophetic nvev>\ia, "the soul becomes hot and fiery . . ." (432F). Precisely these details characterize prophetic inspiration in Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, where an external impulse—the spirit—both clothed Joshua, causing him to become inflamed and agitated, and leapt upon Kenaz, causing his mind to foresee far into the future. Moreover, the detail that Kenaz and Saul could not recollect their
RETROSPECT
223
experiences probably recalls Plato's contention that inspired poets did not know what they were saying {Apologia 22C and Meno 99C). This conviction was later misinterpreted to mean that inspired folk could not remember what they had said. Awareness of this view spanned more than half a millennium, from Jewish literature of the late first century, in 4 Ezra 14, where Ezra claims, "my spirit retained its memory," to the writings of Aelius Aristides, Pseudo-Justinus, John Cassian, and the author of the late prologue to the Sibylline Oracles. The work of the spirit in prophetic inspiration, therefore, is sufficient to dislodge the soul from the body. It leaps and clothes. It produces inflammation and agitation, loss of consciousness, a vision of the future, and the inability to recollect the prophetic experience. The spirit in Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum is a power like none other, able both to inspire the mihtary might of Gideon and Kenaz and to disturb the human soul to its core in prophetic ecstasy—though Pseudo-Philo painted these vivid portraits of mihtary and prophetic inspiration with hues from two distinct palettes, respectively, biblical and Greco-Roman. The Spirit and the Ideal Ruler Even Pseudo-Philo's extensive assimilation of Greco-Roman concep tions of prophecy appears conservative in comparison with Philo's depiction of Abraham, of whom it could be said, "whenever he was possessed, everything in him changed to something better, eyes, com plexion, stature, carriage, movements, voice. For the divine spirit which was breathed upon him from on high made its lodging in his soul, and invested his body with singular beauty, his voice with persuasive ness, and his hearers with understanding" {Virt. 217-18). The exege tical point of departure for this description is Gen 23:6, in which the Hittites said to Abraham, ". . . you are a king among us." The bib lical sp)eech which prompted Philo to this celebration of Abraham's rhetorical pre-eminence is Abraham's unremarkable request to buy a field in Machpelah for burial caves. The catalyst for Philo's praise of Abraham fies no doubt elsewhere in a miheu that prized the very attributes Philo ascribed to this noble ancestor. The association of inward and outward beauty which charac terizes Abraham, Adam, and Moses in the writings of Philo (e.g., Opif. 136; Vit. Mos. 2.69; 2.272) owes far less to exegetical interests than to the thoughts of Plato and his interpreters on the ideal ruler (e.g. Republic 7.535A). The emphasis Philo placed upon rhetorical prowess
224
RETROSPECT A N D
PROSPECT
is integrally related to Greco-Roman discussions, such as Dio Chrysos tom's, who stated "that a statesman needs experience and training in pubhc sj>eaking and in eloquence" {On Training for Public Speaking 2). Most important, however, was the conviction that both king and orator be recognized for virtue. Quintihan contended that the orator demonstrate "not merely the possession of exceptional gifts of speech, but of all the excellences of character as well" {Institutio oratoria, book one, preface, 9), while Dio Chrysostom emphasized that the king be "a man of good mind and heart" who is "to begin with, happy and wise himself" {Third Discourse on Kingship 39). Abraham was king, not because of any "outward state . . . mere commoner that he was, but because of his greatness of soul" {Virt. 216). It was not, therefore, training in rhetoric or even natural abilities that rendered Abraham capable of persuasion but the greatness of his soul that permitted "the divine spirit which was breathed upon him from on high" to make "its lodging in his soul" {Vkt. 217). This spirit in turn caused Abraham's body to be beautiful, his voice to be persuasive, and his hearers to understand. Small wonder that he "was regarded as a king by those in whose midst he setded" {Virt. 218)! The spirit, then, was beheved to provide the power capable of trans forming someone ordinary into an orator, a commoner into a king. Nothing escaped this transformation, as Philo observed, for "when ever he was possessed, everything in him changed to something better" {Vtrt. 217).
The Spirit and the Philosopher With an equally slender exegetical underpinning, Philo described the role of the spirit in the ascent of the philosopher's mind. The bibhcal text which Philo purported to interpret is Gen 9:20: "Noah began to be a husbandman, tilhng the ground, and he planted a vineyard." This text led Philo to Plato's Timaeus 90A, in which the soul is "not an earthly but a heavenly plant." The basis for Philo's discussion of philosophical ascent, therefore, is allegedly Gen 9:20 but actually Timaeus 90A; the texts are related by a slender common concern with agriculture. Platonic discussions of the ascent of the mind, based primarily upon Plato's Phaedrus 246A-253C, comprised the miheu of Philo's discussion in Plant. 18-24. In fact, Philo was indebted to this Platonic text for many descriptions of the mind's ascent—of ascent in general in Op^.
RETROSPECT
225
69-71, of Philo's own ascent in Spec. Leg. 3.1-6, and of Moses' ascent in Gig. 50-55. Furthermore, the similarides between these descripdons and Middle and Neoplatonic descripdons of ascent are so palpable
that one could forgivably mistake discussions of philosophical ascent in Plutarch's Platonic QuestionSy Maximus of Tyre's PhUosophumena, and Plodnus' Enneads for Philo's Plant. 18-26. With the excepdon of one element! Philo could have concluded his descripdon of ascent in Plant. 18-24 without the shghtest nod to the spirit, for his discussion begins with Plato's Tbnaeus 90A, is per meated by allusions to the Phaedrus, and has more in common with Platonic philosophers than with Genesis 9. Even a descripdon of the radonal soul as a coinage of the divine and invisible spirit would appear to confirm that the mind is capable of ascent. Nonetheless, at just that point where the discussion could conclude with a reference to Plato's nodon of recollection, to Plutarch's "faculty of reason," to Maximus of Tyre's "self," or to Plotinus' "intellect"^all of which were deemed adequate to cause the mind to ascend—Philo intro duced the divine spirit. According to Plant. 18~26, the ascent of the mind takes place only with the overpowering aid of the divine spirit. Despite his overwhelming indebtedness to Platonism for this dis cussion, therefore, Philo neither jettisoned the spirit nor judged it peripheral. On the contrary, in Plant. 18-26, he ascribed to the spirit, and to the spirit alone, the requisite power for philosophical ascent. Although "those who crave wisdom and knowledge with insatiable persistence are said in the Sacred Oracles to have been called upwards [Lev 1:1]," and although those who received God's "down-breathing [Gen 2:7] should be called up to Him," and although this is "so with the mind of the genuine philosopher" who "suffers from no weight of downward pressure towards the objects dear to the body and to earth"—although all of these descriptions appear to render the spirit superfluous, for Philo the spirit alone has the unleashed force capable of producing such ascent: For when trees are whirled up, roots and all, into the air by hurricanes and tornadoes, and heavily laden ships of large tonnage are snatched up out of mid-ocean, as though objects of very litde weight, and lakes and rivers are borne aloft, and earth's hollows arc left empty by the water as it is drawn up by a tangle of violendy eddying winds, it is strange if a light substance like the mind is not rendered buoyant and raised to the utmost height by the native force of the Divine spirit, overcoming as it docs in its boundless might all powers that are here below [PUmt. 24).
226
RETROSPECT A N D
PROSPECT
The spirit is a hurricane's gzdes, a tornado's winds, drawing philo sophical minds upward in its train. It is ultimately not recollection or intellect that causes the mind to ascend but the violent winds of the spirit that sever the mind from its earthly home and lead it upward.
The Spirit and Cosmic Unify
The Spirit and the Temple
In recasting the biblical version of the dedication of the temple (1 Kings 8), Josephus excluded references to enemies and war, con cluding Solomon's prayer, not with the hope that "all the peoples of the earth may know that the L O R D is God; there is no other" (1 Kgs 8:60), but with the hope that all people would reedize that the Jews "are not inhumane by nature nor unfriendly to those who are not of our country, but wish that all people equally should receive aid from Thee and enjoy Thy blessings" [Ant 8.117). These exegetical movements reflect Josephus' unwillingness to em brace a miheu in which the Jews were subject to unfounded hbels. His Contra Apionem, written shghdy later than the Antiquities, evinces Josephus' dedication to dispeUing the libel of Jewish misanthropy. He proffered a brief account of the Jewish constitution—theocracy— to demonstrate that the Jewish lawcode is intended "to promote piety, friendly relations with each other, and humanity towards the world at large, besides justice, hardihood, and contempt of death" (2.145). The final categories of his survey of Jewish laws encompass "the equitable treatment of ahens" (2.209) and "the duty of sharing," which consists of demonstrating "consideration even to declared enemies" (2.211). Josephus' penchant for promoting the philanthropic nature of the Jews suggests what a difficulty he confronted when he was compelled to interpret in a milieu defined in part by anti-Jewish sentiment the biblicsd version of Solomon's dedication of the temple, in which the chosenness of Israel, the centrality of the temple, and the conviction that "the L O R D is God; there is no other" feature so prominently. Libels current in this milieu explain as well why Josephus garnished his version of the dedication of the temple with Stoic vocabulary. The introduction of Stoic epistemology (the conceptions of impression and opinion) served to undermine the priests' false "opinion" that
RETROSPECT
227
God would permanendy dwell in the temple. Stoic theology replaced the biblical emphasis of God's unique reladon to Israel; God is said instead to move "through all of" creation. The introducdon of Stoic cosmology midgated Jewish exclusivism, for nothing was capable of expressing cosmic unity better than the Stoic concepdon of jcvevjia, the cohesive element of cosmic ovuJcaGeia. A request for a portion of the spirit was fulfilled when fire leapt from air, when the two consdtuent components of revevna, understood from a Stoic perspective, appeared. Josephus' recasdng of 1 Kings 8, then, is the product both of Jose phus' resistance to a milieu of malignancy toward the Jews and of the predominance of Stoicism in his era. With shrewd deftness, he transformed 1 Kings 8 very nearly into a Stoic tract in order to refute his opponents' libels on their own grounds. The Spirit and the Sage If Pseudo-Philo capably transformed the prophedc inspiration of Ba laam into impending death by means of allusions to Gen 6:3—"My spirit shall not abide forever among human beings, because they are flesh"—Philo ably transformed Gen 6:3 from a statement about hfe and death into sapiendal inspiration. Although their commonplace exegedcal movements were largely the same—interpredng one bibh cal text by means of another—the results were endrely diflferent. Philo interpreted Gen 6:3 in relation to Exod 31:3 to include the spirit as one of four elements which expressed the skill of Bezalel: jweujia Oeiov, wisdom, understanding, and knowledge {Gg. 23). From Exod 31:3, Philo turned to another biblical text, Num 11:17: "I will take of the spirit that is on thee and lay it upon the seventy elders," stripped however of its emphasis upon prophesying. Together, Exod 31:3 and Num 11:17 led Philo to a detailed description of the nature of the spirit of Gen 6:3 understood as an endowment that does not remain permanendy with humankind: But as it is, the spirit which is on him is the wise, the divine, the excel lent spirit, suscepdble of neither severance nor division, diffiised in its fullness everywhere and through all things, the spirit which helps, but suffers no hurt, which though it be shared with others or added to others suffers no diminution in understanding and knowledge and wisdom {Gig. 27).
228
RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT
This definition of the spirit is more than the product of a loose appli cation of gezerah shawah. In Philo's version, for example, the divine spirit does not Jill Bezalel alone but the entire cosmos. This definition com prises nothing less than an explosion of Stoic vocabulary culled from Philo's Greco-Roman milieu. This exegetical expansion represents an Alexandrian wisdom tra dition in which the author of the Wisdom of Solomon could also be included, for he wrote similarly, "Because the spirit of the Lord has filled the world . . ." (1:7). Cicero's Balbus, in Nat. Deor. 2.19, claimed similarly that the world order is "maintained in unison by a single divine and all-pervading spirit." Alexander of Aphrodisias summarized the perspective of Chrysippus similarly: "he assumes that the whole material world is unified by a spirit [itvdina] which whoUy pervades it [5iTiK0T0ower. The writings of first century biblical interpreters, therefore, exhibit enormous creativity and diversity with respect to the and the ruUwre of the spirit, depending upon their contextual needs. Philo, Josephus,
PROSPECT
241
and Pseudo-Philo are not alone among Israelite and early Jewish authors in recording divergent views of the spirit. In so-called Third Isaiah, for example, the "spirit of the LORD" can be set upon a savior figure as an anointing (Isa 61:1; see Isa 11:1-9), or it can be an angelic presence, not unlike the angel of the presence which led the people following the exodus (Isa 63:14; see Exod 23:20 21), depending upon whether the dominant interpretative tradition is the messianic servant or the exodus-wilderness narratives. A similar scenario is evident in the Community Rule (IQS) 3-4, where two quite diflferent interpretations of the spirit are intertwined. In IQS 3.13-4.16, the two spirits of truth and deceit are either human spirits set in people or angeUc and demonic beings which have their respective entourages of good and bad spirits. Thus one reads that God "created 'man' to rule the world and placed within [or 'for']^ him two spirits so that he would walk with them until the moment of his visitation: they are the spirits of truth and of deceit" (IQS 3.17b-19). Or, "Until now the spirits of truth and of injustice feud in the human heart and they walk in wisdom or in folly" (IQS 4.23c24a). These spirits either are at war with one another to control human destiny or co-exist at war within the human soul. Toward the conclusion of this section on the two spirits, the imagery changes, so that the spirit is portrayed, possibly under the influence of Ezek 36:25-27, as an agent of purification. What diflferentiates this text so clearly from the discussion of the two spirits is that the spirit is itself sprinkled on the faithful—an image quite incompatible with the nature of the two spirits, which are conceived either as human dispositions or as angelic beings: Meanwhile, God will refine, with his truth, all human deeds, and will purify for himself the human configuration, ripping out all spirit of deceit from the innermost part of his flesh, and cleansing him with the spirit of holiness from every irreverent deed. He will sprinkle over him the spirit of tmth like lustral water (in order to cleanse him) from all the abhorrences of deceit and from the defilement of the unclean spirit
(IQS 4.20b-22a). This interpretation of the spirit of truth or spirit of holiness as a cleansing agent which can be sprinkled on the faithful diverges from ^ On this translation, sec J. H. Charlesworth, "A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in IQS III, 13-IV, 26 and the 'Dualism' Contained in the Fourth Gospel," JVT5 15 (1969) 396-97.
242
RETROSPECT
AND
PROSPECT
the interpretation of the spirit of truth as either an angehc being or human disposition. Yet both are intertwined within the same topical section of the Community Rule.^ The patent lesson of this portion of our study is that, in light of the diversity of conceptions that co-exist within the writings of individualfirstcentury authors or within a single ancient document, it is ill-advised to attempt to ascertain for eachfirstcentury author one dominant conception of the spirit. The effect of faihng to account for this observation can be illustrated by D. Hill's attempt to legitimate the association Josephus establishes between the priesdy and prophetic dimensions. Hill appeals to the spirit's presence at the dedication of the temple: "All this reflects the sacral and cultic associations of prophecy in Israel. . . [the temple] at its dedication, received a portion of the divine spirit. . . which, for Josephus as for the rabbis, was pre-eminendy the spirit of prophecy."* Hill assumes that the spirit is always the spirit of prophecy, so that a reference to the spirit in a cultic context carries the association with prophecy, despite the absence of a reference to prophecy in that context. Our study has indicated that this attempt to interpret one text in hght of others which have in common with it only a reference to the spirit is ill-advised, for these first century biblical interpreters allow a vari ety of interpretations to co-exist. With respect to Ant. 8.114, to which Hill appeals, we have seen already that the spirit is associated here less with prophecy than with cosmic unity and Jewish philanthropy. Just as it may be inadvisable to assume consistency vis-a-vis the spirit, so is it inappropriate to assume that a lack of consistency is an indication of multiple sources or origins. The importance of this point can again be made by illustration. Studies of the Paraclete in the Fourth Gospel have not without evidence noted the disparity between the spirit in the first thirteen chapters and the Paraclete in the Farewell Discourses. On the basis of these observations, some scholars distinguish the spirit and the Paraclete from one another. H. Windisch's discussion is an instructive example of this approach: The fourth evangelist has not left his reader in doubt as to the identity of the (other) Paraclete: it is the Holy Spirit. No matter what one may think about the integrity of the Paraclete sayings, it is certain... that the Spirit and the Paraclete are originally two very different figures. The Spirit is, according to his nature, power, an incomprehensible being ' See also IQS 3.6b-9b. * New Testament Prophecy (Atlanta: John Knox, 1979) 30.
PROSPECT
243
that suddenly enters into man and imparts to him impulses and insights which lift him above his human existence. T h e Paraclete is a concrete heavenly person, a kind of angel, and when he appears on earth, it is as an emissary from God, as an angel in human form.. . ^
Divergent effects and natures, according to Windisch, indicate different origins. The validity of Windisch's inference that "the Spirit and the Para clete are originally two very different figures" is seriously undermined by the realizadon that first century authors embrace what may appear to us to be incompadble conceptions of the spirit. Philo's descripdon of philosophical ascent, in which "the mind is rendered buoyant and raised to the utmost height by the nadve force of the Divine spirit" (Plant. 18~24), bears an uncanny resemblance to Windisch's depicdon of the holy spirit as "an incomprehensible being that suddenly enters into man and imparts to him impulses and insights which lift him above his human existence." Similarly does Phil6's characterizadon of the spirit as an angelic being, akin to Socrates' daemonion in Vit. Mos. 2.264 65, Jos. 110-16, and Som. 2.252, exhibit an extraordi nary affinity to Windisch's description of the paraclete as "a concrete heavenly person, a kind of angel." Philo embraces both portraits, not because he conjoins two originally different figures, but because con textual requirements compel him to adopt varying characterizadons of the spirit. Is the author of the Fourth Gospel not capable of an analogous embrace of complementarity for contextual reasons? R. Brown, in response to an approach such as Windisch's, ac cords a similar value to consistency. By observing of the Fourth Gospel that "the combinadon of these diverse features into a consistent pic ture and the reshaping of the concept of the Holy Spirit according to that picture are what have given us the Johannine presentadon of the Paraclete,"^ Brown too espouses the assumption that first century authors adhered to a consistent conception of the spirit. We have noted, however, that this sort of consistency does not characterize first century literature about the spirit. Josephus holds to apparently inconsistent conceptions of the spirit both as a cosmic force at the temple dedication and as an angel in the tale of Balaam. Philo allows even more disparate conceptions to co-exist; in addition to being con strued as angel or hurricane wind, the spirit is also wisdom and cosmic ' Thr SpirU-ParacleU in the Fourth Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968) 20. The Gospel According to John (AB 29A; Garden City: Doubleday, 1970) 1139.
244
RETROSPECT AND
PROSPECT
unity. Pseudo-Philo designates Balaam's life-breath and the p>ower that indwells Kenaz—two very diflferent entities—with the same words, "holy spirit." Therefore, Brown's attempt to demonstrate "first of all, that the Johannine picture of the Paraclete is not inconsistent with what is said in the Gospel itself and in other N T books about the Holy Spirit,'" though it may provide an essential corrective to theo ries such as Windisch's, does not acknowledge the writings of other first century authors who attributed to the spirit an apparendy incon sistent collection of natures and an array of assorted eflfects. This analysis, therefore, has a two-fold imphcation vis-a-vis diversity. It demonstrates, on the one hand, that consistent conceptions of the spirit cannot be assumed, as does Hill, for an ancient author or docu ment. It demonstrates, on the other hand, that diversity and dispar ity of conceptions ought not to be construed, as do Windisch and Brown, as indications of diflfering sources or origins. Disparities can be ejqjlained by the exigencies of context and exegetical conundrums; it is suf>erfluous to postulate a variety of origins for authors who seem not only to have tolerated but also to have embraced diversity.
The Spirit and Prophecy Among the eflfects of the spirit prophecy is the most pervasive. Accord ing to Philo, Balaam became possessed when "there fell upon him the truly prophetic spirit which banished utterly from his soul his art of wizardry" (Vit. Mos. 1.277). The experience of this false diviner is characteristic as well of the prophetic race: "This is what regularly befalls the fellowship of the prophets. The mind is evicted at the arrival of the divine Spirit, but when that departs the mind retums to its tenancy" (Her. 265; see Spec. Leg. 1.65; 4.49; Qmest. in Gen 3,9). Moses, too, cannot be excluded from this prophetic race, for he too spoke "when possessed by God and carried away out of himself" because he experienced "that divine possession in virtue of which he is chiefly and in the strict sense considered a prophet" (Vit. Mos. 2.188, 191). Josephus also closely associates the work of the spirit with prophecy. On some occasions, Josephus adds references to prophecy in contexts that focus upon the effects of the spirit. For example, while 1 Sam ^ Gospel According lo John, 1139.
PROSPECT
245
16:13 recounts that "the spirit of the LORD came mightily upK)n David from that day forward," Josephus relates that David, "when the divine spirit had removed to him, began to prophesy" (Ant. 6.166). While Zedekiah, the false prophet, asks Micaiah in LXX 1 Kgs 22:24, "What sort of spirit of the Lord speaks in you?", Josephus explicidy relates the spirit to prophecy: "But you shall know whether he is really a true prophet and has the power of the divine spirit" (Ant. 8.408). Although he reduces the number of references to the spirit in his version of the book of Daniel, he does nonetheless preserve a ref erence to the spirit and emphasize Daniel's place as "one of the greatest prophets" (10.266). On other occasions, Josephus preserves the element of prophecy which is already included in a biblical narradve, such as in the story of Saul's pursuit of David. Saul's soldiers, upon encounter ing Samuel and the prophets, "were themselves possessed by the spirit of God and began to prophesy." Samuel himself then "caused him [Saul] too to prophesy" (6.222~23). Further, Josephus uncharacterisdcally adds references to the spirit in his version of the Balaam story. Although he does not designate Balaam a prophet—Balaam was too ambiguous a figure to be included alongside the hkes of Daniel—he nonetheless colors Balaam's inspiration with hues drawn from the palette of prophedc inspiradon at Delphi. In a variety of ways, then, Josephus underscores the attribution of prophecy to the spirit. This associadon between the spirit and prophecy is evident as well in the Liber Antiquitatum BibUcarum. In extra-biblical addidons, the spirit comes upon Miriam to be the recipient of a dream in which the birth of Moses is predicted (9:10), while Deborah is said explicidy to have predicted Sisera's demise by the inspiration of the spirit (31:9). PseudoPhilo also creates de novo the association of prophecy and the spirit in a biblical text, Jdg 3:9-10, in which the spirit is associated only with judging Israel: "And when they had sat down, a holy spirit came u{x>n Kenaz . . . and he began to prophesy" (LAB 28:6). The authen ticity of Kenaz's prophetic experience is confirmed by his inability to recollect what he had said or seen—an element of prophetic inspi ration in Greco-Roman interpretations of Plato's view of prophetic inspiration (28:10). The attentiveness of Pseudo-Philo is evident, fur thermore, in his interpretation of Deut 34:9, where an explicit refer ence to the spirit of wisdom is thoughtfully supplemented by allusions to 1 Sam 10:6 and Jdg 6:34, other biblical texts which refer to the spirit. Pseudo-PhUo combines these allusions with other eflfects upon Joshua—a mind afire and an agitated spirit—which correspond to
246
RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT
popular Greco-Roman conceptions of prophetic experiences. Even in a highly abbreviated account of Saul's pursuit of David, PseudoPhilo preserves the explicit association of prophecy and the spirit: "And (a) spirit abided in Saul, and he prophesied." Confirmation of his experience, like Kenaz's, is evident in his inability "to know what he had prophesied" (LAB 62:2). Philo, Josephus, and Pseudo-Philo, therefore, espouse the association of prophecy and the spirit in creative and thoughtful ways that both preserve biblical attributions of prophecy to the spirit and create that association even where biblical texts do not. Theirs is not merely a tacit acceptance of an ancient conception; these authors are themselves part of the creative process which develops and deepens the association of the spirit and prophecy. These firet century interpretations constitute only a portion of the rich patchwork of Early Judaism, in which this association of the spirit with prophecy was aflSrmed. The post-exihc author of the book of Nehemiah had already incorporated a prayer in which God is said to have been patient with Israel for many years and to have "warned them by your spirit through the prophets . . ." (9:30). This conviction is echoed by the Qumran sectarians: "This is the study of the law which he commanded through the hand of Moses, in order to act in compliance with all that has been revealed from age to age, and according to what the prophets have revealed through his holy spirit" (1 QS 8.15-16). In the Book of Jubilees, "a spirit of truth de scended upon the mouth" of Rebekkah so that she could bless her children (25:14), and Jacob blessed Levi and Judah when "a spirit of prophecy came down upon his mouth" (31:12). In the Enoch cycle of literature, Enoch commands, "Now, my son Methuselah, (please) summon all your brothers on my behalf, and gather together to me all the sons of your mother; for a voice calls me, and the spirit is poured over me so that I may show you everything that shall happen to you forever" (1 En 91:1). In a humorous portion of the Testament of Abraham, in which the archangel Michael cannot find the resources to convince Abraham that he will die, God says to Michael: "And I shall send my holy spirit upon his son Isaac, and I shall thrust the mention of his death into Isaac's heart, so that he will see his father's death in a dream" (TAbr [A] 4:8). This association of prophecy and the spirit is evident as well in early rabbinic literature. For example, in Mefdlta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Tractate Shirata 10.58-73, a discussion transpires concerning where in Torah
PROSPECT
247
Miriam is said to have been a prophetess.** The bibhcal text quoted, Exod 2:1-3, contains no such indication: '"There went a man of the house of Levi and took to wife . . . and the woman conceived, and bore a son. . . . And when she could no longer hide him,' etc." The editors appeal to two other details to explain her prophetic role. In the first, prior to the quotation of Exod 2:1-3, Miriam predicts exphcidy that her father will "beget a son who will arise and save Israel from the hands of the Egyptians." Her prophedc convicdon is subsequendy confirmed by appeal to the ensuing verse, Exodus 2:4: "But she sdll held on to her prophecy, as it is said: 'And his sister stood afar oflf, to know what would be done to him.'" The interpretadon of Exod 2:4 becomes particularly significant for ascertaining the association of the spirit and prophecy, for proof of Miriam's prophetic role is based, not upon the discernment of prophegi in this verse, but in the discernment of the presence of the holy spirit in this verse. Thus proof of the holy spirit constitutes proof of Miriam's prophetic role. The hermeneutical principle employed to demonstrate the presence of the holy spirit in Exod 2:4 is gezerah shawah, an argu ment from analogy drawn from two passages with the same expres sion. Accordingly, four expressions in Exod 2:4 are related to the same expression in other verses from which the presence of the holy spirit can be inferred. For example, the expression, "Afar oflf," in Exod 2:4 is said to suggest the holy spirit's presence because in Jer 31:2 it is said, "From afar the Lord appeared to me."^ What is significant from the perspective of our study is how unquestionably Miriam's prophecy is demonstrated by appeal, not to prophecy, but to the holy spirit's (i.e., the lord) presence.'^ ® Miriam has a prophetic dream inspired by the holy spirit in L \ B 9:10. ^ Three other expressions from E x o d 2:4 are interpreted similarly in Sfurata 10.5873. (1) "Standing" suggests the presence of the holy spirit because in three verses w h e r e t h e v e r b , " t o s t a n d , " o c c u r s , t h e Ix>rd is p r e s e n t : "I s a w t h e Ixtrd
standing
beside d i e altar" (Amos 9:1); "And d i e Lord came and stood" (1 Sam 3:10); (The Lord says to Moses) "Call Joshua and stand" (Deut 31:14). (2) "To know" su^ests the presence of the h o l y spirit because it is said in Isa 11:9, "For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord" (cf Hab 2:14). (3) "What would be done" sug gests the presence of the holy spirit because in Amos 3:7 it is said, "For the Lord will do nothing, but He revealeth His counsel unto His servants the prophets." A similar applicadon oi geztrah shawah in the context of an explanation of Exod 12:1 {Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael [ed. J. Z. Lauterbach; 3 vols.; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1933, 1935], Tractate Hsha 1.148-66) demonstrates once again that the association of prophecy and the spirit could be assumed in some rabbinic interpretation. The complaint of Jeremiah's scribe, Baruch, in Jer 45:3 is quoted, "I am weary with my groaning and I find no rest." This is taken to mean that Baruch,
248
RETROSPECT AND
PROSPECT
This collection of early Jewish texts which espouse an association between the spirit and prophecy would seem to support the conclusions of scholars such as G. F. Moore, who writes, "The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of prophecy.. ." or G. W. H. Lamp>e, who claims, "In the main, the Spirit condnues to be thought of as being, pre-eminendy, the Spirit of prophecy . . . " or D. Hill, who interprets Josephus on the basis of the assumption that the spirit "for Josephus as for the rabbis, was pre-eminendy the spirit of prophecy." The study we have undertaken, while confirming these statements, has made crystal clear as well that these statements are accurate only if the qualifying state ments, "In the main" and "pre-eminendy," be taken seriously. There are many other instances in which the presence of the spirit does not effect an experience of prophecy. in conurast to other disciples—Joshua the disciple of Moses and Elisha the disciple of Elijah—has not received the holy spirit. Jer 45:3, of course, does not indicate Baruch's failure to receive the holy spirit at all. But the presence of the holy spirit is inferred from the word, "rest" (TifTOD): "'Rest' here means prophecy, as it says, 'And the ^irit rested upon them' (Num 11:26), and again, 'the spirit of Elijah rested upon Elisha' (2 Kgs 2:15). and again, 'And the spirit of the LORD will rest in him' (Isa 11:2)." In each text, an explicit reference to the spirit is accompanied by an implicit reference to prophecy in the word "rest" (though in Num 11:26 prophesying appears in the immediate context). The interpretadvc flow of this passage is instructive: (I) Two disciples, Joshua and Elisha, had the spirit. (2) Baruch complains that he does not. (3) Jer 45:3 is quoted as biblical proof of his complaint. (4) "Rest" in Jer 45:3 is interpreted as prophecy—thus what Baruch lacks, at first identified as the ^irit, is now identified as prophecy. (5) The principle of gezerah shawah is applied, and each analogous text does not contain an explicit reference to prophecy but to the spirit which rested. The flow of this passage from references to the spirit to prophecy and back to the spirit reveals the assumption that prophecy and ^irit are interchangeaUe. In Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Tractate Pisha 1.42" 76, the question arises concerning prophets with whom God sf>oke "outside the land of Palestine." This is a problem because it has already been established that "Before the land of Israel had been cially chosen, all lands were suitable for divine revelations; after the land of Israel had been chosen, all other lands were eliminated." One explanation of this conundrum is that God spoke to these prophets outside of Israel "only because of the merit of the fathers." Another is that God sjx)ke only "at a pure spot, near water." Still an other is that God had already spoken to these prophets inside the land. Sul^quendy, God's presence everywhere is acknowledged, as the quotation of Ps 139:7-1Oa indicates, beginning with, "Wither shall I go from Thy spirit" {IHsha 1.74-75). Here the presence of the spirit is inferred within a discu^on of prophecy. On this passage, sec the discussion of W. D. Davies, "Reflections on the Spirit in the Mekilta: A Suggestion," in The Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University (The Caster Festschrift) 5 (1973) 95-105. With respect to the Targumim, J. P. Schafer ("Die Termini 'Heiliger Geist' und 'Geist der Prophetic' in den T a i ^ m i m und das Verhiltnis der Targumim Zueinander," FT 20 [1970] 304-14) observes that the expression, "^irit of prophecy," occurs consistendy in T a i ^ m Onkelos, while in Targum Pseudojonathan the expre^on "holy spirit" occurs fifteen times and "spirit of prophecy" eleven times.
PROSPECT
249
This is no more evident than in De gigantibus^ where the influence of Stoicism upon Philo's exegesis results in a detailed descripdon that is, although built upon the foundation of an exphcit citation of Num 11:17, surprisingly void of any reference to prophecy: "But as it is, the spirit which is on him [Moses] is the wise, the divine, the excellent spirit, susceptible of neither severance nor division, diflRised in its fullness everywhere and through all things, the spirit which . . . though it be shared . . . suflfers no diminution in understanding and knowledge and wisdom" (Gig. 24—27). Philo's reservation about Platonism, more over, results in the association of the spirit with the ascent of the philosopher's mind (Plant. 18-24). Even the powerful persuasive abihties of Abraham, which could be attributed to a prophetic experience, are presented as a transformation into an ideal king—with vocabulary far more at home in the world of Greco-Roman conceptions of the ideal ruler than in Philo's perceptions of prophetic phenomena (Vvrt. 217-19). Philo's own allegorical interpretation of scripture is the pro duct of his mind's ascent (Spec. Leg. 3.1-6), and the customary tenant that teaches him bears a striking resemblance to Socrates' inspiring daemonion (Som. 2.252) and thus to the angelic spirit that guides Moses' mind to the truth (Vit. Mos. 2.265). Josephus, like Philo, interprets the spirit along the hues of the cosmic spirit of Stoicism in his version of the dedication of the temple (^nt. 8.114, 118). This is the only instance in Josephus' writings in which the spirit is unrelated to a prophetic experience. Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum also contains references to the spirit unrelated to prophecy. In a creative reinterpretation of Gen 6:3, God says, "And I will reveal to him [Moses] my Law and statutes and judgments, and I will bum an eternal hght for him, because I thought of him in the days of old, saying, 'My spirit will not be a mediator among these people forever, because they are flesh and their days will be 120 years'" (LAB 9:8). Then of course there is the inspiration of Kenaz (27:9-10) and Gideon (36:2) in preparation for mihtary routs. Moreover, Deborah is exhorted to "let the grace of the holy spirit awaken" in her so that she may sing praises to God (LAB 33:14). Deborah's experience of the spirit ought to be distinguished from prophetic experiences because throughout the Uber Antiquitatum Biblicarum prophesying under the influence of the spirit consistendy involves prediction rather than praise. Philo, Josephus, and Pseudo-Philo constitute but a slender thread in a tapestry whose textures encompass far more than prophetic
250
RETROSPECT
AND
PROSPECT
inspiration. Once again, we may illustrate with a pastiche of early Jewish texts how much more widely than prophecy the effects of the spirit were beheved by Jews of the Greco-Roman era to extend. The spirit is associated with creation. The influence of Gen 1:2 is apparent in 2 Bar 21:4, Baruch's address to God, . . you who cre ated the earth, the one who fixed the firmament by the word and fastened the height of heaven by the spirit. . . God responds to this prayer in 23:5, "For my spirit creates the h v i n g . . ." Ezra in 4 Ezra 6:39 similarly recaUs the earliest creative activity of God: "And then the Spirit was hovering, and darkness and silence embraced everything; the sound of a human voice was not yet there. Then you commanded that a ray of light be brought forth.. . ." In Judith 16:14, it is Gen 2:7 and 2:22,'' mediated through Ps 104:29-30, which influences the depiction of the spirit's relation to creation. Judith praises God, Let all your creatures serve you, for you spoke, and they were made. You sent forth your spirit, and it formed them; there is none that can resist your voice. The spirit's function vis-a-vis creation is not only to grant life but also to convict wrongdoers. A representative of the Alexandrian wisdom tradition can contend that the ungodly will be punished "because the spirit of the Lord has filled the world, and that which holds all things together knows what is said" (WisSol 1:7). In the words of the sibyl composed by another Egyptian author. The earth itself will also drink of the blood of the dying; wild beasts will be sated with flesh. God himself, the great eternal one, told me to prophesy all these things. These things will not go unfulfilled. Nor is anything left unaccomplished that he so much as puts in mind for the spirit of God which knows no falsehood is throughout die world (Sibylline Oracles 3.696-701). In many other early Jewish texts, the spirit is related to human purity and cleansing. Rabbi JMehemiah, in Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Tractate Beshallah 7.134-36, associates obedience with reception of the spirit: "For as a reward for the faith with which Israel believed in God, the Holy Spirit rested upon them. . . . R. Nehemiah says: Whence can you prove that whosoever accepts even one single commandment with true faith is deserving of having the Holy Spirit rest upon him." In See my 'Judith 16:14 and the Creation of Woman,"
114 (1995) 467-69.
PRnSPKCT the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Benjamin attributes sexual purity to the spirit: "He has no pollution in his heart, because upon him is resting the spirit of God" (TBen 8.3). The Community Rule evinces the convicdon that the spirit is integrally related to purificadon: "by the spirit of holiness which links him with the truth he is cleansed of all his sins. And by the spirit of uprightness and of humihty his sin is atoned" (IQS 3.7b-8a). In the eschatological future, the spirit will once again purify the child of light, "cleansing him with the spirit of holiness from every irreverent deed. He will sprinkle over him the spirit of truth like lustral water..." (IQS 4.21). The association of purity with the spirit in the context of community initiation is apparent as well in the Qumran Hymns, particularly if H. W. Kuhn's study of initiatory language in the hymns holds true, according to which certain vocabulary can be understood to indi cate drawing near to God through the community, such as in IQH 14.13-14: . . . in your kindness toward humankind you have enlarged his share with the spirit of your holiness. Thus, you make me approach your intelligence, and to the degree that I approach my fervour against all those who act wickedly and (against) people of guile increases; for everyone who approaches you, does not defy your o r d e r s . . . .
The sixteenth hymn, though fragmentary and obtuse at several points, is particularly rich with such language: . . . to be strengthened by the spirit of holiness, to adhere to the truth of your covenant, to serve you in truth, with a perfect h e a r t . . . (16.15) You have resolved, in fact, to take pity . . . to show me favour by the spirit of your compassion and by the splendour of your ^ o r y . . . (16.16-17) I know that no-one besides you is just. I have appeased your face'^ by the spirit which you have given me, to lavish your favour on your servant for [ever,J to purify me with your holy spirit, to approach your will according to the extent of your kindnesses (16.19-20)." " The phrase, "fSB TtXfm, is difficult to understand. " H. W. Kuhn, Enderwartung und gtgmemtiges Hat UnUrsuchungm zu dm Gemmdeiietkm von Qumran (SUNT 4; Gdttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprccht, 1966) 117-39. Kuhn discerns initiation language as well in IQH 12.11-12; 13.19; 14.13, and f 3.14.
252
RETROSPECT
AND
PROSPECT
Far from the shores of the Dead Sea—and with much less vehemence— the spirit was also associated with entrance into a life of faith. In the romantic tale, Joseph and Aseneth, Aseneth, the daughter of Pentephres (the bibhcal Potiphar) is converted to Judaism. In this story, Joseph places his hand upon her head and prays, . . . and renew her by your spirit, and form her anew by your hidden hand, and make her alive again by your life, and let her eat your bread of life, and drink your cup of blessing, and number her among your people . .. (8:9). Subsequendy Aseneth is led by a heavenly man to a room with a mar velous honeycomb. He says to her, "Happy are you, Aseneth, because the ineffable mysteries of the Most High have been revealed to you, and happy (are) all who attach themselves to the Lord God in repen tance, because they will eat from this comb. For this comb is (full of the) spirit of life" (16:14). Finally, at a climactic moment, 'Joseph put his arms around her, and Aseneth (put hers) around Joseph, and they kissed each other for a long time and both came to life in their spirit. And Joseph kissed Aseneth and gave her spirit of life, and he kissed her the second time and gave her spirit of wisdom, and he kissed her the third time and gave her spirit of truth" (19:10-11). In this lovely romance, then, as in the poetry of the Qumran sectarians, the spirit purifies and draws people into the sphere of the faithful. This process of purification takes on a communal character in 1 QS 9.3-4: "When these exist in Israel in accordance with these rules in order to estabhsh the spirit of holiness in truth eternal, in order to atone for the fault of the transgression and for the guilt of sin and for the approval for the earth, without the flesh of burnt offerings...." Similarly, in Jubilees 1:20-21, Moses echoes Psalm 51, adapting it to a communal setting, when he intercedes for Israel, "O Lord, let your mercy be lifted up upon your people, and create for them an upright spirit.. . . Create a pure heart and a holy spirit for them. And do not let them be ensnared by their sin henceforth and forever." God responds (Jubilees 1:22-25) in turn by echoing Psalm 51 and Ezek 11:19-20: "And I shall create for them a holy spirit, and I shall purify them so that they will not turn away from following me from that day and forever. And their souls will cleave to me and to all my commandments" (1:23). Although these references to the spirit in relation to experiences
PROSPECT
253
other than prophecy certainly do not exhaust the rich reservoir that characterized Early Judaism, they do indicate unequivocally that the idendficadon of the spirit as "the spirit of prophecy" can be made only with the awareness of just how deeply convictions concerning the spirit were enmeshed in other spheres of life, from creation to new creation. This observation ought to engender reservation about the assumption of studies such as R. Menzies', in which he attempts to reconstruct early Christian pneumatology by attributing one domi nant effect of the spirit to primitive Christianity, another to Judaism, and another to Luke: "Whereas the primitive church, following in the footsteps of Jesus, broadened the functions traditionally ascribed to the Spirit in first-century Judaism and thus presented the Spirit as the source of miracle-working power, Luke retained the traditional Jewish understanding of the Spirit as the source of special insight and inspired speech.'"* Many associations of the spirit, such as PseudoPhilo's with mihtary might, Philo's with the ascent of the philosophical mind, the Qumran sectarians' with purification and initiation, and Judith's with creation, burst the boundary artificially created by grant ing such a notion as the spirit of prophecy all-encompassing scope. Another inference to be drawn from our study is that it is unwise to marginalize any particular form of prophecy. D. Hill, for instance, contends, "In Philo's writings we find either an acute hellenisation of the Jewish concept of prophecy, or a hellenistic view of prophecy justified on a bibhcal basis: whichever view of the matter we take, it must be admitted that it certainly represents a significant departure from what is reflected in other extant Jewish literature of the general period."'^ M. M. B. Turner, following a judicious survey of nonrabbinic Judaism, contends: "In all this there is a predictable, though not massive, shift in emphasis towards the Spirit of prophecy as the source of 'wisdom', whether communicated or infused. We also have quite prominent cases of 'invasive' charismatic speech, though it is notable that the clearest cases (in Philo and Josephus) are heavily marked by the language of divine possession, or of mantic prophetism (cf Plato Phaedms 244a-245c; Ion 533d-534e), and to diat extent cannot safely be regarded as conveying a typically Jewish notion of the Spirit of prophecy."'^ Early Christian PnetaruUobgy, 279. New Testament Prophecy, 33. "The Spirit of Prophecy and the Power of Authoritadve Preaching in LukeActs: A Question of Origins," 38 (1992) 85.
254
RETROSPECT
AND
PROSPECT
There is httle need to rehearse the Greco-Roman elements of Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum, but we ought nonetheless to recall how vividly his descripdons of Joshua's inflamed mind and agitated spirit, Kenaz's ascent, and the inability of Saul and Kenaz to recall what they heard and saw bear the marks of popular GrecoRoman conceptions of prophetic inspiration. If Philo in Alexandrian Egypt and Josephus in Rome are accompanied by Pseudo-Philo in Palestine in the process of assimilating Greco-Roman conceptions of prophecy, then one must question the usefulness of a description such as "typically Jewish" and ask further whether these conceptions of prophecy, which exhibit close affinities with Greco-Roman conceptions of inspiration, ought to be shunted aside as a "significant departure" from putatively typical forms of Judaism. Moreover, Hill's conten tion concerning Christian prophecy, that ". . . there will be few schol ars, if any, who will wish to claim that prophetic phenomena in Greek and Roman religion provide primary evidence for the understanding of Christian prophecy,'"^ ought perhaps to be revisited in light of the Greco-Roman elements which permeate, not only Diaspora Jewish literature, but also a first century Palestinian example of re-written Bible composed in Hebrew.
The Spirit and Charismatic Exegesis D. Aune traces the expression, "charismatic exegesis," to H. L. Gins berg who, in conversation with W. Brownlee, coined it in the 1950's to describe the sort of bibhcal interpretation employed in the Habakkuk commentary by the Qumran sectarians.'® During the next decade, D. Georgi broadened the application of this expression by locating the matrix of such inspired exegesis in the synagogue, where ".. . the medium of Jewish propaganda was the synagogue worship and the exegis [sic!] of the law presented there.''^^ Travelling Jewish leaders who were not tied to any particular synagogue would undertsdce this teaching in local synagogues. Such leaders were expected to show tricks, for "pubhc attention was typically aroused by extraordinary, often ecstatic per formances. . . For the clearest window into this arena of Jewish New Testament Prophecy, 9. '» "Charismatic Exegesis," 126. Opponents, 84; see 181-83n 59. 2" Georgi, Opponents, 101.
PROSPECT
255
life, Geoip turned to Philo, who according to Georgi idendfies proph ecy and interpretadon: ''interpreters of the Bible, the exegetes, are therefore for PhUo the prophets of the present. They are capable of setdng free the spirit botded up in the composition of holy scripture. . . . Insofar as they themselves did not create the text which is to be interpreted, the source of the spirit, they are subordinated to it. But insofar as the spirit speaks through their exegesis, they are quite equal to the prophets of old. The spirit has not vanished; it has merely modified itself "2' While Georgi mined Philo's wridngs to locate charismatic exegesis in the synagogue, M. Hengel garnered an impressive array of writ ings'^ as evidence of this phenomenon outside the synagogue, lead ing to the conclusion that "the Spirit was less efifecdve at that time through direct inspiration. The influence of the Spirit was more fre quendy felt via the charismatic interpretation of Scripture. The for mation of the canon did not necessarily have to result in a cessation of prophecy. On the contrary, only someone who was filled with the Spirit could really adequately interpret the words of Holy Scripture which were inspired by God, but were often very obscure."^' This phenomenon played a crucial role, according to Josephus' Jewish War, in the war against Rome. The ambiguous messianic prophecy to which Josephus refers in Bell. 6.312-13, which incited the Jews to rebellion because it predicted the rise of a leader whom Josephus identified with Vespasian, illustrates the need for inspired exegesis: "The un derlying scriptural text could not bc immediately understood: it had first to be interpreted by the oocpoC. This presupposes a prophetic charism on the part of the interpreter."^* In the last batde for the temple, observes Hengel, allegedly inspired prophecies and counterprophecies arose, each of them biblically based. Josephus urged trust in God by appealing to the divine rescue from the siege of Sennacharib, wfhile others demanded resistance to Rome by appealing to prophe cies such as Zech 12:2-6 and 14:2-5.'^ In a less known but significant study, H.-P. Miillcr argued that "die archaische Gestalt einer mantischen Weisheit hat sich in der Georgi, Opponents, III. " The ^ecdots: Investigations into the Jewish Freedom MouemetU in the Period From Herod I Until 70 AD (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1989) 235-36. " ZealoU, 234.
Zealots, 237. " Ziakts, 240-44.
256
RETROSPECT AND
PROSPECT
Apokalyptik fortgesetzt."^ Miiller observed first of all that the word, •pn, occurs both in the bibhcal and post-bibhcal tradition in relation to mantic powers or sup>ematural knowledge. Thus, the sage receives knowledge through various forms of inspiration. The quintessential sage in this respect is Joseph, who was educated, possessed the spirit of God, and could know even more than the Egyptian diviners.^' In the Greco-Roman era, observed Miiller, Daniel was the quintessen tial sage who possessed inspired knowledge: "Die Weisheit des Daniel von Kapitel ii, iv und v ist also wirklich rein mantischer Art; anders als Joseph hat er mit der Bildungsweisheit nichts zu tun."^ When, a few years later, D. Patte examined this topic, he arrived at a similar assessment of bibhcal interpretation in apocalyptic circles: " . . . for the Jewish Apocalyptic circles the concept of inspiration in volved a use of Scripture... . We can describe this inspiration as the work of the creative imagination of a man permeated with Scripture." This creative imagination "came to a very large extent from Scrip ture. We should add: from Scripture as read in the writer's miheu, that is, in the Jewish Palestinian milieu of that time. Thus some of die associations which allowed them to taUy various biblical texts with it, imposed themselves on the Apocalyptists because of the way the texts were used in the Synagogal readings, or in other circumstances which lie for the most part, beyond any possible investigation."^ Within a decade of Ginsberg's coining of the expression, "charis matic exegesis," then, this phenomenon had been located, not only at Qumran, but also in the synagogue, in the Palestinian Jewish ix)pulace at large, particularly the Zealots, and in apocalyptic Judaism. When Aune revisited the topic of charismatic exegesis and the Qumran sectarians, he reflected, "Though there is ample evidence that the Qumran Community beheved that God revealed the truth to them, there is precious httie evidence to suggest how they thought that the Spirit revealed truth."^ This uncertainty about the process
^ "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik," in Congress Vobtm Uppsala 1971 (SVT 22; Leiden: Brill, 1972) 271. " "Mantische Weisheit," 271-75. » "Mantische Weisheit," 277; see 275~80. " Earfy Jewish Hemeneutic in Palestine (SBLDS 22; Missoula, Scholars, 1975) 201; 183. He continues (183), "Thus it is not surprising to find a continuity, as G. Vermes has shown, between the traditional biblical interpretations in classical Judaism and in Apocalyptic literature." "Chansmatic Elxegesis," 128.
PROSPECT
257
of charismatic exegesis mirrors prior analyses. Georgi ultimately did not explain how charismatic exegesis transpired when he wrote, "In spite of varied evaluations of pneumatic details, there was a consen sus that possession of the spirit was necessary and real, amd also that the interpretation of the law was the most important spiritual func tion."^' Hengel could not pinpoint how Zealot prophecy occurred: . . . the Old Testament formed the point of departure for its "prophesy ing" and was applied in an authoritative and charismatic way to con crete situations in the eschatological present. It is not possible to know from Josephus' works to what extent this prophecy took an ecstatic form. It is, however, possible to assume, on the evidence provided by certain contemporary parallels, that the ecstatic form of prophesying was not completely unknown to the Zealots.'^ Nor could Patte determine whether the bibhcal material in apocalyptic literature arose "either in a conscious intellectual effort or uncon sciously . . . " that is "in a psychical experience or in the very process of writing."^^ Therefore, scholars who have attended to the topic of charismatic or inspired exegesis have not adequately determined how that inspiration was believed to take place. In chapter eight of our study I highlighted several biblical and post-biblical texts which may prove integral to dispeUing the uncer tainty that surrounds this issue of charismatic exegesis. I acknowl edged that Ezra 9:20, Josephus Bell. 3.351-53, and passages from Qumran, such as I Q H 12.11-13, evince the conviction that knowl edge requires inspiration without delineating how that inspiration was beheved to occur. Other texts, however, do shed indispensable hght on the nature of that inspiration. The exphcit conviction of 4 Ezra 14 is that Ezra's mind is inspired in a wakeful state to write ninety-four books. Prior to this inspira tion, Ezra is given the promise that the lamp of understanding, lucemam intellectus, will remain lit throughout his experience. The process itself begins as he drinks the cup given to him, as his heart pours forth understanding (intellectum), and as wisdom (sapientia) increases within him. Following his experience, it is said that these ninety-four books contain "the spring of understanding (intellectus), the fountain of wisdom (sapientiae), and the river of knowledge (scientiaey (14:47). The impres-
Opponents, 112. '2 Zealots, 244-45. 33 Earlj) Jewish Hemeneutic, 182-83.
258
RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT
sion that Ezra is inspired without the onset of ecstasy is confirmed by the significant detail that Ezra's understanding and wisdom over flowed because {nam) his own spirit retained its memory {Mam spiritus meus conservabat memoriam). This assertion that Ezra retains his memory distinguishes Ezra's experience from those ecstatic prophets who cannot recall what they said (according to Pseudo-Philo [LAB 28:10 and 62:2], Aelius Aristides, Pseudo-Justinus, John Cassian, and the author of the late prologue to the Sybilline Oracles). From start to finish, then, Ezra composes ninety-four books by means of a form of inspi ration that magnifies his scribal abihties. We wrested further insight from Philo's autobiographical reflections on his role as allegorical interpreter. Several of those details ought now to be recalled. First, in Spec. 3.1-2 and 3.5-6, Philo draws an evocative correspondence between the ascent of his mind under pos session of the spirit and his ability to interpret Torah allegorically. These correspondences between the ascents of Philo or Moses and Philo's ability to interpret Torah suggest that Philo regards inspired exe gesis as a process in which the mind awake is inspired by the spirit. Second, in Som. 2.252, the spirit is the source of the solution to a biblical conundrum. In this autobiographical reflection, Philo lets the reader know that: the immediate task is to solve an exegetical dilemma, such as why the bibhcal text refers to two, rather than to one, cher ubim; that the spirit teaches (dva8i5dle, and History, ed. L. H. Feldman and G. Hata (Detroit: Wayne State University, 1989) 330-448. ' Bibliographie ZM Flavius Josephus (ALGHJ 1; Leiden: BriU, 1968); Bibliographie zu Flavius Josefdms: Supplenuntband mit Gesamtregister (ALGHJ 14; Leiden: BriU, 1979). * See ako the bibUography in J. R, Levison and J. R. Wagner, Jr., "The Charac ter and Context of Josephus' Gm/ra Apionem," in Josephus' Contra Apionem: Studies in its Character and Context ivith a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing in Greek, ed. Feldman and Levison (AGAJU 34; Leiden: BriU, 1996) 22-48. * The Bibtical Antiquities of Philo (New York: Ktav, 1968). OriginaUy published in London in 1917 without Fcldman's prolegomenon. * C. EHetzfelbingcr, Pseudo-PkUo: Antiquitates Bibticae (JSHRZ 2.2; Gtitersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1975). ^ Pseudo-Phikm, Les 4^ntiquitis Bibhqms, ed. D.J. Harrington, J. Cazeaux, C. Perrot, and P.-M. Bogaert (SC 229-30; Paris: du Cerf", 1976). * H. Jacobson, A Commentary on Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicanmi, 2 vols. (AGAJU 31; Leiden: Brill, 19%).
262
APPENDIX
a commentary by F.J. Murphy (1993),^ a monograph by E. Reinmuth (1994),'« and a doctoral dissertadon by B. N. Fisk (1997)."
A wisp of Philo's stature among Alexandrian Jews is discernible in one datable event which he recounted in De l^atione ad Gatwn, viz. his leadership of a delegadon to visit the Roman emperor Gaius Cahgula in Rome in 39/40 CE following an and Jewish pogrom in Alexandria under the prefect Flaccus in 38 CE. From this and other events of less certain date, it appears that this Jewish statesman was probably bom between 20 and 10 BCE and died approximately 50 CE. Philo's first love was not, however, pohtics and citizenship, for at a seam in his interpretation of the Decalogue, between the command to love one's parents and the proscription against adultery {Spec. L^. 3.1-6), he burst the wineskins of civil hfe to rue his present preoccupa tion with the exigencies of civil life in lieu of his previous occupation with philosophical contemplation. In this extraordinary aside, he ex pressed passionately his yeaming, when he encountered "a calm from civil turmoils," to "get me wings and ride the waves and almost tread the lower air, wafted by the breezes of knowledge which often urges me to come to spend my days with her, a tmant as it were from merciless masters in the shape not only of people but of afifairs, which pour in upon me like a torrent from diflferent sides" {ressed as well certain interests that were less common, according to Jacobson, amongst Jews than amongst other Greco-Roman people. For example {A Commmtary, 384), the detail, according to an extra-biblical addition to the story of the Tower of Babel, that "God divided up their languages and changed their appear ances," is consonant with the interest in physical anthropology of an astronomer such as Firmicus Matemus (fourth century CE), who b^jan his first book on mathemat ics by taking "up die question of the complexions and characters of mankind [tnoribus hominum colibusgue]." Translation of Firmicus Matemus by J. R. Bram, in Ancient Astrology Theory arui Practice: Matheseos LUni VIII (Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes, 1975).
APPENDIX
269
God, covenants, and commands of Israel with a resilience toward Greco-Roman culture. This combination sets Pseudo-Philo alongside Philo and Josephus, as well as others such as the author of Wisdom of Solomon, who imbued their biblical interpretation with GrecoRoman hues, although Pseudo-Philo exhibited much more restraint with respect to Greco-Roman culture than did his Alexandrian and Roman counterparts.
Flavius Josephus While Philo and his contemporaries were beginning to be occupied with the anti-Jewish pogrom in Alexandria, Josephus was bom in 37 CE to a pre-eminent priesdy family in Jemsalem {Vita 1-2).^® Follow ing brief forays at the age of sixteen into the various Jewish schools— Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes—Josephus spent three years with the desert hermit, Banus, then retumed to opt for Pharisaism {Vita 10-12). Although this account raises certain questions—his educa tion amongst the so-called Jewish schools seems remarkably brief— nonetheless it locates Josephus within a particular Jewish tradition. Like Philo, though jjerhaps less reluctandy, Josephus was thmst into the political arena when, at the age of twenty-six, he partici pated in an embassy to Rome, where he fehcitously moved in Rome's privileged circles {Vita 16). Josephus subsequendy participated in the Jewish War against Rome (66 CE), first as a Jewish general, then, after his defection, as a counselor to the Romans against the Jews. Following the war, Josephus was taken to Rome, granted citizenship, and lodged in the Flavian household, with Titus the emperor as his benefactor. During this period he wrote his account of the Jewish revolt of 66-73 CE and the events leading up to it in the Jewish War {Bellum Judmcuni). In tiiis account, Josephus attempted to exonerate himself, to indict revolutionary leaders—rather than Judaism as a whole—for inciting rebellion, and to absolve Rome of responsibility for the destmction of Jemsalem in part by portraying them as the means of enacting God's will. After Titus' death in 81 CE, a Roman
^ For introductions to Josephus and his writings, see H. W. Attridge, "Josephus and His Worb," in Jeunsh Wridngs of the Second Ternple Period, ed. Stone, 185-232; and L. H. Feldman, "Use, Authority and Exegesis of Mikra in the Writings of Josephus," in Mihra, cd. Mulder, 455-518.
270
APPENDIX
intellectual leader, Epaphroditus, became Josephus' benefactor. During the next two decades, with keen political hindsight, Josephus com posed the Antiquities (93/94 GE). Vita, and Contra Apionem. The purpose of the Antiquities is to present a comprehensive history of the Jews in part to inculcate the lesson that those "who conform to the will of God, and do not venture to transgress laws that have been excellendy laid down, prosper in all things beyond belief, and for their reward are offered by God felicity; whereas, in proportion as they depart from the strict observance of these laws, things (else) practicable become impracticable, and whatever imaginary good thing they strive to do ends in irretrievable disasters" {Ant. 1.14).^® The Vita is Josephus' autobiography, the primary purpose of which is to exonerate himself with respect to his defection from the Jews to the Romans at Jotapata during the Jewish War (see Vita 17-421). In Contra Apionem Josephus attempted to demonstrate the antiquity—and therefore superiority— of the Jews and to refute many of the libels that circulated amongst the Greco-Roman opponents of the Jews. During the last three decades of his life, then, until his death in approximately 100 GE, Josephus devoted himself to writing on behalf of the Jews. Josephus was, then, like Philo, a cosmopolitan Jewish author, active in pohtical hfe but, unhke Philo, a resident of Rome for nearly three decades. The numerous sources to which Josephus referred enmesh him in the larger Greco-Roman world. Even in his re-telling of bib lical history, Josephus referred to non-Jewish works; for instance, he validated his account of the long lives of Israelite ancestors, such as Noah, with the attestation: "Moreover, my words are attested by all historians of antiquity, whether Greeks or barbarians: Manetho the annalist of the Egyptians, Berosus the compiler of the Chaldaean traditions; Mochus, Hestiaeus, along with the Egyptian Hieronymus, authors of Phoenician histories, concur in my statements; while Hesiod, Hecataeus, Hellanicus, Acusilaus, as well as Ephorus and Nicolas [of Damascus], report that the ancients lived for a thousand years" {Ant. 1.107-08). For his accounts of the period leading up to 66 GE, both in his Jewish War and Antiquities, Josephus depended heavily upon the writings of Nicolaus of Damascus, a Greek member of the court of Herod the Great who wrote a universal history that included the Jews. Josephus undergirded his authority by telling his readers that ^ See further H. W. Attridge, The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus (HDR 7; Missoula: Scholars, 1976).
APPENDIX
271
his own account was based upon commentaries on the Roman cam paign in Judea which were composed by Vespasian and Titus (Vita 342, 358; CA 1.56). The most impressive demonstration of Josephus' awareness of Greco-Roman, Egyptian, Babylonian, and other non-Jewish perccpdons of the Jews is exhibited in his Contra Apionem. The bulk of book one (1.57-218) is composed of non Jewish testimonies to the andquity of the Jews. The list of authors cited is enormously long, including non-Greek and Jewish sources of Antiquity such as the Egyptian Manetho (CA 1.73 105), Phoenician authors such as Dius and Menander of Ephcsus, as well as Tyrian public records (1.106-27), and the Chaldean Berosus (1.128-60). The list of Greek authors whom Josephus cited in defense of the antiquity of the Jews is equ2illy im pressive (1.161-218), including Hermippus, Theophrastus, Herodotus, Choerilus, Aristode (according to Clearchus), Hecataeus of Abdera, and Agatharchides. That Josephus' experdse extended beyond rote citadon is evident in his attempt to defend the Jews against non-Jewish libels, a task which occupies the end of book one (1.219-320) and much of book two (2.8-144; 2.220-86). In these portions, Josephus employed a variety of approaches to disqualify these libels, all of which exhibit an impres sive level of familiarity with non-Jewish customs, sources, and histo ries. He refuted libels such as the Egyptian Manetho's concerning the alleged association of the Jews with lepers in ancient Egypt (1.223320). He pointed out discrepancies between different accounts of the same event, such as the disparities between the versions of Manetho and Chaeremon on the exodus (1.288-303). He called into question his opponents' sources, such as when he attempted to undermine Apion's hbels concerning the temple by criticizing Apion's sources, Posidonius and Apollonius Molon (2.79). J o s e p h u s also defdy compared the Jews with other p e o p l e s (2.220 86). He contrasted the Spartans' loss of fidelity to their laws when they met reversals of fortune with the Jews' fidelity to their laws even in dire extremities (2.225-35). He compared approvingly Plato's precautions against random mixing with foreigners, the Spartans' resistance to foreign influence, and the Jews' efforts to maintain purity (2.255-61).'° ^ Detailed analyses of the sources and strategics of Contra Apionem arc included in Josephus' Contra Apionem, cd. Feldman and Levison. For introducdon, sec pages 9 20.
272
APPENDIX
Impressive indeed is Josephus' abihty to interact with non-Jewish authors and sources, in both his past and present. Here is a first century Jewish figure whose knowledge ranged from non-Jewish ver sions of the world's origins to the commentaries of recent emperors such as Titus. His Contra Apionem in particular demonstrates an im pressive awareness of non-Jewish philosophies, histories, and critiques of the Jews. N o less significant is Josephus' acqusdntance with Jewish hterature. Books one to ten of his Antiquities are based primarily on the Bible. Book eleven, which recounts the post-exilic period, is dependent upon the books of 1 and 2 Esdras and Esther. The material of book twelve on the Jews consists of paraphrases of the Episde of Aristeas, which embelhshes the origins of the Septuagint, as weU as 1 Maccabees 1:1-9:22. Book thirteen continues the paraphrase of 1 Maccabees. Josephus was, of course, intimately acquainted with persons and events in first century Judea because he was himself an eyewitness of many of them. However, his knowledge encompassed as well Alexandrian Jewry [CA 2.33-78) and Mesopotamian Jewry, 3s his detailed account of the conversion of the royal family of Adiabene reveals [Ant. 20.17-96). In addition to his knowledge of Jewish liter ary sources and Jewry, both Palestinian and Diaspora, Josephus could also capably depict "the laws which govern our daily life," as he did in Contra Apionem, in order to defend the Jews against charges of misanthropy and atheism. This defense includes praise of Moses (2.151-63), praise of Israel's theocratic constitution (2.164—89), and praise of specific laws (2.190-214), including the Decalogue, fair treat ment of ahens, and kindness toward all, even enemies and animals. Josephus' exegetical movements are those of a Palestinian Jew liv ing in Rome who W2is intimately acquainted with hfe in Judea, famihar with developments in world Jewry, from Alexandria in Egypt to Adia bene in Mesopotamia, and able to gain access to non-Jewish and Jewish hterary sources ahke, from Herodotus to 1 Maccabees. Josephus, hke Philo, who was perhaps travelling to Rome about the time Josephus was bom, was a cosmopolitan. He was a citizen of Rome who, after having turned his back on his feUow soldiers in the war against Rome, spent the remainder of his life in a self-exonerating effort to explztin the Jews to his Roman contemporaries.
ABBREVIATIONS
AB ABD Aetem. mundi AGAJU AGSU ALGHJ AmiU. Ant. ApAbr Asclsa ATD AzT 2 Bar BeU. BJS b.Sanh. BZNW CA CBd CBQMS CD Cher. 1-2 Chron Corf. Ung. 1-2 Cor Dan Def. Orac. Deut Div. Ebr. EHPR 1 En Exod Ezek Flaccus FRLANT Fug. Gams Gen Gen. Soc. GigHab
Anchor Bible Andurr Bible Dictionary Philo, De aetemiiate mmdi Arbeiten zur Geschichte des andken Judentums und des Urchristentums Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Spatjudentums und Urchri stentums Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentums Plutarch, Amatorius Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae Apocalypse of Abraham Ascension of Isaiah Acta Theolopca Danica Arf>eiten zur Theologie 2 (Syriac ^X)calypse of) Baruch Josephus, Bellum Judaicum Brown Judaic Studies Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanludrin Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fiir die ncutestamendiche Wistcnschafl Josephus, Contra Apionem Catholic BibUcal Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Scries Damascus Document Philo, De cherubim 1-2 Chronicles Philo, De conjusione Unguartm 1-2 Corinthians Daniel Plutarch, £k defectu oraculorum Deuteronomy Cicero, De divinatione Philo, De ebrietate l^tudes d'Histoire et de Philosophic Religieuses 1 Enoch Exodus Ezekiel Philo, In Flaccum Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments PhUo, Dejuga et irwentione Philo, De l^adone ad Gaium Genesis Plutarch, De genw Socratis Philo, De gigmtibus Habakkuk
274 Hag HDR Her. HM HTR Immut. Is. et Os. Isa JANES JBL Jdg Jer
m Jos. Josh
3QR JSHRZ JSJ JSNT JSNTS JSOTSS JSPSS 1 2 Kgs LAB Ug. AU. Lev LXX Mic Mig. MT Mut. Nat. Deor. Neh NRSV NT NTS Num OptJ. OTP PA PUmt. Post. Cain Praem. Prob. Ps(s) Ps-Justin Ps(s)Sol FI Pyth. Orac. IQH
ABBREVIATIONS
Haggai Harvard Dissertations in Religion Philo, Quis rerum (timnarum heres Heythrop Monogr^hs Harvard Theohgical Review Philo, Quod Deus unmutahUis sU Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride Isaiah Journal for Ancient Near F/Lstem Studies Journal of BibUcal IMerature Judges Jeremiah Jerusalem Talmud, Tractate Hag^tdi Journal of Jewish Stiuiies Philo, De losepk) Joshua The Jewish Quarterly Review Jiidische Schriften aus hellenistisch-romischer Zeit Journal for the Study of Judaim Jourrml for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 1-2 Kings Iiber Antiquitatum Biblicanm Philo, L^um alUgoricu Leviticus Septuagint Micah Philo, De migratioru Abrahami Masoretic Text Philo, De mutatioru nominum Cicero, De natura dmum Nehemiah New Revised Standard Version Novum Testamentum New Testament Shidies Numbers Philo, De op^cio muruU The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. H. Charlesworth) Philosophia Antigua Philo, Tk pUuitatume Philo, De posteritate Caini Philo, De praertttis et poems Quod omnis probus Uber sit Psalm(s) Pseudo-Justinus Psalm(s) of Solomon Le Point Theologique Hutarch, Pythiae oracuUs Qumran Hymns
ABBREVIATIONS
IQM IQpHab IQS IQSb 4Q504 1 IQPs'DavComp (^ext. in Gen RB Saa. Cain and Abel 1-2 Sam SBF SBLDS SBLSP SC Sir SJ SNTSMS Som. SPB Spec. L^. SPhA SUNT SVC SVT SzANT TAbr TAsh TBen TDan TDKT TGad TICP 1-2 Tim TIss TJos TJud TLevi TReub TSim TZeb Virt. VitaAdae Vu. Cont. Vtt Mos. VT WBC WisSol WUNT Zech
275
The War Scroll Habakkuk Commentary The Rule of the Community Rule of the Blessings 4QWords of the Luminaries llQPsalms* Davidic Compositions Philo, Quaestiones et solutiones in Genesin Recherchcs Bibliqucs Philo, De sacr^tcUs Abelis et Caini 1-2 Samuel Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Society of Biblical literature Seminar Pqxirs Sources chretiennes Sirach Studies in Judaica Society of New Testament Studies Monograph Series Philo, De somniis Studia Post-Biblica Philo, De specialUms l^ibus Studia mUmica Annual Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae Supplements to Vetus Testamentum Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Testament of Abraham Testament of Asher Testament of Benjamin Testament of Dan TheologUMl Dictionary of the New Testament (ed. G. Kittel) Testament of Gad Travaux de I'Institut Catholique de Paris 1-2 Timothy Testament of Issachar Testament of Joseph Testament of Judah Testament of Levi Testament of Reuben Testament of Simeon Testament of Zebulon Philo, De virtutibus Vita Adae et Eoae PhUo, De vita contemplatim Philo, De vita Mosis Vetus Testmientum Word Biblical Commentary Wisdom of Solomon Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zechariah
SELECT BIBUOGRAPHY
This bibhography is hmited to entries which are germane to research on the spirit in Early Judaism. It can be supplemented by three others. R. Menzies. The Development of Earfy Christian Pneumatology: with special reference to Luke-Acts. JSNTS 54. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1991. (This bibhography contains references to early Jewish and Christian works, with particular attention to Luke-Acts). F. W. Horn. Das Angeld des Geistes: Studien zur paulinischen Pneumatologie. FRLANT 154. Gottingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1992. (This bibhography contains a particularly thorough list of Continental publications.) A. E. Sekki. The Meaning ofKuah at Qumran. SBLDS 110. Adanta: Scholars Press, 1989.
Abelson, J. The Immanence of God in Red>binictd Literature. London: Macmillan, 1912. Anderson, A. A. "The Use of 'Ruah' in IQS, IQH and IQM." Journal of Semitic Studies 7 (1992): 293-303. Aune, D. E. Prophe(y in Early Christianity arui the Ancient Mediterranean World. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983. . "Charismatic Exegesis in Early Judaism and Early Christianity." In The Pseudepigr(q>ha and Early Biblical Interpretation, ed. J. H. Charlesworth and C. A. Evans. JSPSS 14 Sheffield: JSOT, 1993. 126-50. Baumgarten, F, "KveO|m." Thatlogkal Dictionary of the New Testament VI: 359-68. Bcaven, E. L. "Ruah Hakodesh in Some Early Jewish Literature." Unpublished Hi.D. di^rtation, Vanderbilt Univeraty, 1961. Berchman, R. "Arcana Mundi: Magic and Divination in the De Somniis of Philo of Alexandria." Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 1987: 403-28. . "Arcana Mundi: Prophecy and Divination in the ViUi Mosis of Philo of Alexandria." Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 1988: 385-423. Best, E. "The Use and Non-Use of Pneuma by Josephus." Novum Testamentum 3 (1959): 218-25. Betz, O. Offenbarung und Schrif^orschung in der Qumransekte. W U N T 6. Tubingen: Mohr, 1960. -. Der Paraklet, Ftirsprecher im haretischen Spd^udentum, im Joharmesofangelum und in neugefimdenen gnostichen Schriften. AGSU 2. Leiden: Brill, 1963. Bieder, W. "jtveuHa." Theological Dictionary of the New Testament VI: 368-75. Bruce, F. F. "Holy Spirit in the Qumran Texts." The Annual of Leeds Urdoersity Oriented Society 6 (1966-1968): 49-55. Burkhardt, H. Die Inspiration heitiger Schriften bei Phib von Alexandrien. Giessen/Basel: Brunnen, 1988.
SELECT B I B U O G R A P H Y
277
Biichscl, F. Der Geist Gottes im Neuen Testament. Gutcrsloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1926. Charlesworth, J. H. "A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in IQS III, 13-IV, 26 and the 'Dualism' Contained in the Fourth Gospel." New Testament Studies 15 (1%9): 389-418. Chevallier, M. A. L'Esprit et le Messie dans le Bas-Judeasme et le Nowoeau Testament. EHPR 49. Paris: Presses Universitaircs de France, 1958. . Smfffk de Dieu' Le Satnt-Esprit dans le Nouveau Testament Vol. L Ancient Testament, Hellenisme etjudaisme. La tradition sjmoptique. L'auvre de Luc. FT 26. Paris: £xiidons Beauchesne, 1978. Coppens, J. "Le Don de I'E^prit d'apres les textes de Qumran et le Quatrieme fevangile." In Vivangde de Jean. £tudes et Froblemes, ed. M. t . Boismard, et oL RB 3. Louvain: Desclee de Brouwer, 1958. 209-23. Danielou, J. "Une source de la spiritualite Chrctienne dans le Manuscrits de la Mer Morte: la doctrine des deux esprits." EHeu Vivant 25 (1953): 127-36. Davidson, M. J. Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 1-36, 72-108 and Sectarian Writings from Qamron. JSPSS 11: Sheffield: JSOT, 1992. Davies, W. D. "Reflections on the Spirit in the Mekilta." In The Gaster Festschrift, ed. D. Marcus. JANES 5. New York: Columbia University, 1973. Dietzel, A. "Beten im Geist. Eine religionsgeschichdichc Parallele aus den Hodajot zum paulinischen Beten im Geist." Theologische Z: with special reference to Ijdce^ Acts. jSNTS 54. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1991. Montague, G. T. The Holy Spml- Growth of a BibUcal Tradition. New York: Paulist, 1976. Miiller, H.-P. "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik." Confess Volume Uppsala 1971. SVT 22. Leiden: Brill, 1972. 268-93. Notscher, F. "Geist und Geister in den Texten von Qumran." Melanges BibUques. Redigees en I'honneur de A. Robert. TICP 4: Paris: Bloud and Gay, 1956. 305-15.
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
279
Orton, D. E. The Understanding Scribe. Matthew and the Apocalyptic Ideal JSNTS 25. Sheffield: JSOT, 1989. Parzen, H. "The Ruah Hakodesh in Tannaitic Literature." The Jewish Quarter^ Review 20 [n.s.J (1929-30): 51-76. Patte, D. Early Jewish Hermeneutic in Palestine. SBLDS 22. Missoula, Scholars Press, 1975. Pinero, A. "A Mediterranean View of Prophetic Inspiration: On the Concept of Inspiration in the IM>er Antiquitatum Biblicarum by Pseudo-Philo." Mediterranean Historical Review 6 (1991): 5-34. Schafer, J. P. "Die Termini 'Heiliger Geist' und 'Geist der Prophetic' in den Targumim und das Verhalmis der Targumim zueinander." Vetus Testmientum 20 (1970): 304-14. Schafer, P. Dtf VorsteUung vom hedigen Geist in der rabbinischen literatur. SzANT 28. Munich: Kosel-Verlag, 1972. Schnackenburg, R. "Die 'Anbetung in Geist und Wahrheit' (Joh 4,23) im Lichte von Qumran-Texten." Biblische Zeitschr^i 3 (1959): 88-94. Schreiner, J. "Geistbegabung in der Gemcindc von Qumran." Biblische Z^^f^^ift 9 (1965): 161-80. Schweizer, E. "Gegenwart des Geistes und eschatologische Hoffnung bei Zarathustra, spatjudischen Gruppen, Gnostikem und den Zeugen des Neuen Testaments." The Bac/^otmd of the Mew Testament and its Eschatology. Esscrys in Honor of C. H. Dodd. Cambridge: University Press, 1956. 482-508. «i0jg sieben Geister in der Apokalypse." Evangelische Theobgie 11 (1951-1952): 502-12. . "itvdj^a." Theological Dictionary of the Mew Testament VI: 389-455. . The Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980. Seitz, O. "Two Spirits in Man: An Elssay in Biblical Exegesis." Mew Testament Studies 6 (1959-1960): 82-95. Sekki, A. E. The Morning ofKuah at Qumran. SBLDS 110. Adanta: Scholars Press, 1989. Shoemaker, W. R. "The Use of TT\1 in the Old Testament, and of wvev^ia in the New Testament." Journal of Biblical literature 23 (1904): 13-67. Sjoberg, E. "Neuschopfung in den Toten-Meer-Rollen." Studia Theob^ca 9 (1955): 131-37. . "nvevna." Theological Dictionary of the Mew Testament VI: 375-89. Trautmann, C. " 'L'instruction sur les deux Esprits': Le dualisme dans la doctrine et la pratique des Esseniens." Foi et 80 (1981): 26-40. Treves, M. "The Two Spirits of the Rule of the Community." Revue de Qumran 3 (1961-1962): 449-52. Verbeke, G. devolution de la doctrine du Pneuma du Stoicisme a S. Augustin. Paris: Desclee de Brouwer, 1945. Volz, P. £kr Geist Gottes und die verwandten Erscheinungen im Alten Testament und im anschliefienden Judentum. Tubingen: Mohr, 1910. Wan, S.-K. "Charismatic Exegesis: Philo and Paul Compared." Studia Htibnica Annual 6 (1994): 54-82. Weaver, M. J. "nveujia in Philo of Alexandria." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Notre Dame, 1973. Welker, M. God the Spirit Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994. Wemberg-Moller, P. "A Reconsideration of the Two Spirits in the Rule of the Community (IQSerek III, 3-IV, 26)." Revue de Qumran 11 (1961): 413-41. Winston, D. "Two Types of Mosaic Prophecy According to Philo." Journal for the Study of the Pseudep^apha 2 (1989): 49-67.
I N D E X OF ANCIENT S O U R C E S
a. b. c. d. e. f
Hebrew Scriptures (MT) Greek Versions of Hebrew Scriptures Apocrypha Pseudepigrapha Josephus Philo Judaeus
Dead Sea Scrolls Rabbinic Literature Greek and Roman Authors New Testament Early Christian Literature
a. Hebrew Scriptures (MT) Genesis 1:2 1:6-27 2:7
2:22 3:14 5:24 6:1-4 6:2 6:2-3 6:3
6:16 6:17 7:15 9:20 12-32 12:3 15 15:6 15:12-13 18:17-18 22:17 23 23:6-13 23:8-9 23:13 28:12 32:24-27
250 49, 91, 149, 150, 156, 263 63, 69, 91, 47, 148, 149, 150, 156, 219, 225, 250 250 148 110 113, 139 44, 140 139 59, 60-68, 76-77, 79, 88, 106, 139-42, 144, 147, 158, 163, 218-20, 227, 229, 235, 236, 239, 249 183 218 218 138-39, 142, 163, 224, 225 60 59-60, 217 110 90 51 59, 218 59, 218 91 90, 223 91 91 44 59, 218
41:14-45 41:38 49 Exodus 2:1-4 12:1 13:21-22 14:13-14 14:19 23:20-21 31:3-4
176 106, 176, 179, 180 106
32:26-34 33 33:2-15 34:29-35 35:31-32
247 247 196 233 196 241 106, 141, 142, 144 145, 178, 179, 182 227, 235 92, 196 65 196 92 178, 179, 182
Leviticus 1:1 11:43 20:25
156, 225 74-75, 219 75, 219
Numbers 11 11:1-9 11:17-19 11:23-24 11:25 11:26 11:29 11:34 11:35
35, 235 36, 36, 249 35 145 35, 35 36 36
141-45, 196, 196 141, 145, 227,
248
282 12:6-7 14:14 20:2-13 22-24
22:5 22:7-8 22:18 22:20 22:22-35 22:35 22:36-23:6 22:38 22:41 23 23:4--5 23:12 23:16 23:26 24:2
24:13 25:1-9 27 27:16-20 31:16 Deuteronomy 1:33 8:4 8:15-16 18:9-14 18:10-11 18:18 23:6 29:4 31:14 34 34:9
Joshua 1 3:17-4:1 5:1 13:22 24:9-10
INDEX
110 196 196 2 5 - 3 3 , 4 8 - 4 9 , 56, 60, 62, 76-77, 79, 189, 219 25, 40 57 57 25 25 25, 26, 28, 30, 46, 78, 229 57 25, 28 57 25 28-31 30, 48 25, 30, 31, 48 30, 48 4, 26, 28, 30, 31, 46, 48, 56, 57, 58, 60, 61, 65, 78, 79, 87, 106, 167, 217-20, 229, 238 30, 48 26 179 106, 178 26, 78
197 197 197 26, 53 42, 53 26, 30 26 197 247 99 99, 100, 103, 104, 106, 121, 128, 163, 178, 182, 197, 221, 245
99 101 61 25, 61 26
Judges 3:9-11
6-7 6:33-35 6:34
6:36-40 7:1-8 7:8-18 7:19-23 8:24-27 10:3-5 11:29 14:6 14:19 15:14 17 38:1 1 Samuel 3 3:10 10-11 10-19 10:5-11
10:10 10:13 10:22-23 11:6 16:13-23 16:16 18:10 19 19:5-9 19:19-24 24:15 31:6 1 Kings 3:5-15 8 8:10-11
30, 84-86, 87, 89, 104, 114, 121, 128, 163, 221, 245 88, 220 88 85-89, 100, 101, 103, 104, 106, 128, 161, 220, 221, 245 86, 88 88, 89 85, 86, 88, 89 86 267 267 30 61 61 61 267 267
110 247 37, 105, 106, 114, 129 36-42, 46, 54, 102, 129, 236 36-38, 61, 84, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 97, 100, 101, 102, 103, 105, 106, 120, 128, 161, 221, 245 36, 105 37 38 36, 105, 120 36-38, 244-45 30 36-38 37 30, 36, 38, 129 30, 37, 38, 102, 128, 163 129 102, 129
110 135, 158, 226, 227, 236 133
ANCIENT
283
SOURCES
8:24-27 8:43-60 13 13:9 22:19-24
133 132, 226 103 103 36
42:1 44:1-3 48:16 51:17, 22 61:1 63:7-14
2 Kings 2:13-15 13:23
101, 248 66
63:10-11
181 182 34 206 181 18, 36, 65, 68, 241 65, 105, 114, 219
Jeremiah 4:19 15:18 20:9-10 31:2 31:33 45:3
34, 101 34 35, 101 247 67 247, 248
2 Chronicles 7:1 Nehemiah 8 8:2-15 9 9:12-25 9:20
9:30 Job 27:2-4 32:6-9 32:8-9 32:15-20 33:4, 6 Psalms 51 51:8 51:11-13 51:12-14 51:19 78:16 104:29-30 105:39 116:13 139 139:7 143:10 Isaiah 8:11 11:1-9 11:2 21:3 32:14-15
133, 136
196 196-97, 201 194-97, 207, 234, 236 195 36, 194-97, 199, 201, 207, 213, 246, 257 194, 195, 246
63, 106, 218 63, 106 178 6 3 - 6 4 , 65, 77, 106 63
73, 79, 114, 202, 204-05, 252 202 66, 205, 219 65-66, 105 65-66 196 218-19, 250 196 206 144 144 195
103 86, 143, 181, 213, 241, 247 86, 143, 144, 181, 248 34, 101 182
Ezekiel 1:28-2:3 2:2 2:8-3:3 3:10-14 3:24 8-11 8:1-3 8:11 10:20-22 11:5 11:19-20 11:24-25 20:1 21:15 36:25-27 37:14 40:2, 4 Daniel 1:17 4:5-15 4:33-36 5:8 5:11-14 5:11-16 6:3-4 7:15 8:17-18 8:27 10:8-9 10:15-17 10:239-50
105 119 206 34, 35, 101, 103, 107, 119 106 103 104, 105, 107, 119 129 103 103 34 67, 201, 252 103 105 35 67, 201, 205, 241 201 103
197 106 108, 109 169 7 2 - 7 3 , 106, 168-7( 232 169 72-73, 232 34, 101 35 35 35 35 239
284
INDEX
Hosea 9:7
34
Joel 3:1-2
110, 182
Amos 3:7 9:1
247 247
Micah 3:5-8
34, 183
Habakkuk 2:14 3:16
247 34, 101
Haggai 2:5
36
Zechariah 7:12 12:2-6 12:10 14:2-5
194 255 86, 182 255
b. Greek Versions of Hebrew Scriptures LXX Exodus 16:15-26 31:3
173, 174 143
Numbers 23:7
25, 28, 87
Joshua 24:9-10
26
Judges 13:24-25
46
1 Samuel 19:20-23
39
1 Kin^ 22:19-24
46, 245
1 Chronicles 5:26 2 Chronicles 36:22 1 Esdras 2:2
2:8
103:29 140:8 142:10
68 68 68
Isaiah 63:7-14
46
Jeremiah 28:11
72
Micah 2:7, 11 3:5-8
72 72 72 72
2 Esdras
1:1 1:5
72 72
Psalms 50:12-14
67-68, 70, 72, 73,219
46 34, 46
Haggai 1:14 2:5
72 46
Hosea 9:7
34
Daniel 4:5-15 5:12 5:14-15 6:4
73 168 73 72-73
Theododon Daniel 4:8(MT 4:5) 4:9(MT 4:6) 4:18(MT 4:15) 5:11-14 6:4
73 73 73 72-73, 168 72-73, 170
c, Apocrypha 4 Ezra. See under Pseudepigrapha. Judidi 16:14
46, 250
1 Maccabees 1:1-9:22
272
ANCIENT
Sirach Prologue 34:1-9 38:34 39:1-11 39:6-8
Susannah 45 63 (LXX)
264 199, 259 198 198-99 180, 183, 198-99, 200, 206, 259
285
SOURCES
Wisdom of Solomon 69-70, 72, 73, 145, 1:4-7 228, 250 70 1:8 7:7 144, 180 9:17 70, 105, 144-45, 180 15:7-13 69
73 180
d. Pseudepigrapha Apocalypse of Abraham 119 10.3 110 15-32 111 15.2-4 113 23.11 31.1-5 113 Aristobulus 2.12-17
265
Ascension of Isaiah 111 7.3 2 Baruch 6:3 21:4 23:5 76:2, 4
111 250 250 197
1 Enoch 1-36 14:2 14:5 14:8 19:1 37-71 39:12 40:1-10 46:3-8 49:2-3 60:6 60:11 62:2 70-71 70:3 71:1 71:5 72-82 81:1-2 82:7
112, 113 119 113 120 119 112 46 46 46 86, 181, 182 113 119 182 110 120 110, 120 111 112, 179 197 179, 180
83-90 91 91-104 91:1 91:11-17 92-104/7 93:1-10
112, 179 246 112, 179 179 179 179 179
2 Enoch [J] 1.10 3.1 38.3
111 111 111
4 Ezra 6:39 10:30-31 14
14:21-22 14:24-26 14:37-44 14:40 14:45-46 14:47
162 250 205 6, 105, 211, 223, 234, 236, 257, 259 204, 205 205 205-06, 211 122, 207, 223 204 206, 257
Joseph and Aseneth 179, 180 4:7 8:9 252 16:14 252 19:10-11 252 Jubilees 1:20 1:20-25 1:25 2:2 10:1-11:14 12:5 25:14
204 252 46 46 46 219 179, 180, 246
286 31:11-12 40:5
INDEX
179, 180, 246 179, 180
liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 60 3:2 268 6:9 60, 249 9:8 239, 245, 247 9:10 108 10:6 56-77, 217, 218, 18 219, 236 57-59, 61, 62, 218 18:3 76 18:4 56 18:4-6 59-60 18:5-6 56 18:9 4, 56-58, 6 0 - 6 2 , 18:10 70, 104, 105, 218-19, 222 60, 6 2 - 6 4 , 67, 18:11-12 6 9 - 7 0 , 72-73, 75-77, 105, 218-20 76-77, 78, 219 18:13-14 87, 89, 90, 9 9 - 1 0 1 , 20:2-3 104, 105, 128, 163, 239 267 25 89, 128, 267 25-28 267 25:9 27 88, 90, 235 110 27:1 268 27:2 107 27:6 86 27:7-12 60, 84-88, 89, 90, 27:9-10 97, 100, 101, 104, 105, 107, 110, 161, 163, 220, 249 27:11 85 110, 119 28 104-07, 112, 163, 28:6 221, 239, 240, 245 102-30 28:6-10 102-03, 106-09, 28:10 110, 112, 122-24, 207, 221, 239, 245, 258 108 30:6 31:9 60, 239, 245 32:9 104 32:14 60, 239 249 33:14 35:6-7 86
36 36:1-2
36:3 40 44 48.1 61.8 62:2
235 60, 85, 86, 88-90, 100, 104, 220, 239, 249 267 125-28 267 60 268 60, 102-04, 109, 125, 128-29, 163, 207, 222, 239, 246, 258
Psalms of Solomon 17:37-38 105, 143, 182, 183 18:7-9 182 Sybilline Oracles Prologue, 9-10 Prologue, 82-91 3.3-7 3.696-701
124 124 121, 212 145, 250
Testament of Abraham 2.1 119 lO.l 119 [A] 4 7 - 1 0 46 48 246 8-10 110 9.8-10.1 111 11-14 113 [B] 7-8 110 7.8 111 8-12 113 8.1-2 111 13.7 46 Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs Testament of Asher 1:9 46 6:1-5 46 Testament of Benjamin 3:3-4 46 5:2 46 6:1 46 8:3 251 Testament of Dan 1:6-8 46 3:6 46 4:5 46 5:5-6 46 6:1 46
ANCIENT
3:2-3 4:1 9:9 18:2 18:7 18:7-12
Testament of Gad 1:9 46 3:1 46 6:2 46 Testament of Issachar 4:4 46 7:7 46
287
SOURCES
46 113 46 143 143-44 182
Testament of Reuben 2:1-3:7 46 2:4 219
Testament of Joseph 7:4 46
Testament of Simeon 3:1 46 3:5 46 4:4 179 6:6 46
Testament of Judah 13:3 46 14:2 46 14:8 46 25:3 46
Testament of Zebulon 9:7-8 46
Testament of Levi 2 110 2-5 113 2:3 110, 119, 145, 180
Vita Adae et Evae 25 25.1-30.1
119 110-11, 119
e. Josephus Antiquitates Judaicae 27 1.10-12 1.14 270 1.23 49 1.107-08 49, 270 1.260 169 2.268 169 2.347-48 49, 169 3.81 49 3.139 54 3.295-99 36 3.316 169 4102-30 238 4104 169 29, 229, 240 4108 4109 39 4118 31 4118-21 29-42, 49, 50, 52, 53, 230 4119 32 4121 32 39 4122 4.129-30 78 4.158 49 85 5.182 6.6 39 6.56 203 6.76 203
6.166 6.222-23 6.271-73 8.102 8.106 8.106-07 8.107 8.108 8.111 8.113 8.114 8.116 8.117 8.118 8.118-19 8.342 8.346 8.408 9.35-36 10.132 10.235-39 10.239 10.250 10.266 10.281 12.1-59
238, 245 39, 238, 245 39 132 133 137 135 135 135 133 4, 133, 135, 163, 239, 242, 249 137 132, 226 133, 136, 239, 249 137 136 203 245 203 39 169-70, 232, 239 232, 239 170, 232, 239 203, 245 49, 170 27
288
INDEX
13.300-11 15.240 16.210 17.354 20.17-96
188, 202 203 188 49 272
Bellum Judaicum 1.69 1.78 2.113 3.351-53 4.33 4.388 6.312-13
188 202 202 203, 257 203 203 255
Contra Apionem 1 2 2.33-78 2.80-124 2.102-09
270 270 272 132 132
2.131 2.135 2.145 2.151-63 2.162 2.164-89 2.168 2.190 2.190-214 2.193 2.209-11 2.257-58 2.263-64
54 184 226 272 54 272 55 49 272 137 226 55 184, 187, 188,
Vita 1-2 10-12 16 17-421 342 358
269 269 269 270 271 271
f. Phib Judaeus Aetem. mundi 8 25 76-77 Cher. 27-29
263 263 191
32 43-47 69 116
177, 191, 209, 211, 238, 239, 258 229 193 175 175
Corif. Ung. 66 98 159 190
229 265 229 265
Dec. 175
182
Ebr. 146-48
206
Flaccus 44-48 83
264 264
Fug. 53-58 68-72 186
191, 258 49 36
Gaius 5 21 69
137 175, 177 54
Gig. 6 6-18 8 12 13-15 16 19-20 19-31 19-55 20 20-21 23 23-24 23-27 23-31 24 24-27
44, 139 44 139 44 139, 140 139, 140 140 147, 151 137-60, 163 147 141, 144 141, 144, 227 35 158, 159, 236, 239 141 249
ANCIENT
26 26-28 27
28 29 29-31 50-55 53-54 55 Her. 98 259 259-66 264-66 265-66
141 142 4, 35, 143, 144, 145, 147, 149, 162, 227-28, 239 147, 159, 227, 228 147 238 151, 152, 157, 159, 225 193, 238 141, 229, 239
Jos. 110
136 Pknt. 14 17 18 18-19 18-26
22 22-24 23 24
147 183 229 175
24-25 24-26 27 28 65 Post. Cain 80 113
175 54
Praem. 30 53-55 121-22
137 176, 177, 185, 187 137
Prob. 2 51-57
263-64 265
183 265 244 265
117 Leg. AU. 1.33 3.161 3.228
219 148 175
116
72-75 135
137, 151, 152, 155, 175, 224-25 49 91, 147, 148, 149, 151, 219 91, 92, 223
175 229 238 141 51, 52, 53, 146, 244
176-77, 187, 233, 239 176-77, 190, 192, 238 176-77, 233, 239, 243 177, 234
110-16
69-71
45 138 138, 139, 148, 163 149, 162 137-39, 142, 148-60, 190, 224-25, 236, 238, 243, 249 152, 153 193 156, 239 139, 157, 163, 225, 239 153 192 157 138 183, 212, 214
Immut. 35 146 181 182
289
SOURCES
Mig. 34-35 89-93 113
238 264, 265 229
Quaest. in Gen 2.6 3.5 3.9 4.152
Mut. 179-80 202
137 229
Sacr. Cain and Abel 13 175 101 49
150 150
Som. 1:23 1.141
opif. 13-35 24-25
177 44
290 1:164-65 2.222 2.252
Spec. Leg. 1.37-38 1.63-65 1.207 1.269 3.1 3.1-2 3.1-6
3.3-4 3.5-6 4.48 4.48-49 4.49 4.50 4.61 4.123 Virt. 216-17 217-19
INDEX
258 265 177, 190, 1 9 1 , 2 0 9 - 1 0 , 234, 238, 239, 243, 249, 2 5 8 - 5 9
137, 175, 177 42, 141, 146, 175, 238, 244 137 175 153, 155, 193 193, 258 151, 152, 155, 192-93, 208, 225, 238, 239, 249, 258, 259, 262 193 155, 193, 258, 259, 262 53 42 42, 5 2 - 5 3 , 141, 146, 238, 244 175, 177 265 149, 151
90, 94, 95, 224 9 0 - 9 5 , 223-24, 238, 249
Vtt. Cont. 57 78 90
184 265 263
Vit. Mos. 1.168 1.264 1.267-68 1.273-84
175 40, 42 48 238
1.274
1.277
1.281 1-282 1.283 1.284 1.286 1.287 2.1-65 2.37-40 2.69 2.187 2.187-92 2.187-292 2.188 2.188-91 2.190 2.191 2.192 2.192-220 2.221-33 2.233-35 2.246-57 2.246-92 2.250 2.258 2.259 2.263 2.264-65
2.268-69 2.270 2.270-74 2.272 2.275-87
28-30, 40, 42, 48, 5 0 - 5 1 , 52, 53, 229-30, 239 28-30, 33, 40, 41, 48, 51, 229-30, 239 244 48 40, 41 31, 33, 40, 41, 42, 230 41 48 31, 40, 41 92 27 92, 223 171, 185 238 175-76, 185, 233 171, 172, 174, 185, 233, 244 176, 177 171, 172, 233 172, 174-75, 244 171 171 171 171 174 177 233 174 173 174, 185 171, 173, 177, 183, 185-87, 190-91, 233, 239, 243, 249, 258 173, 174 174 174 92, 97, 223 174
g. Dead Sea ScroUs CD 5.11-13 7.3-6 7.4 12.11-13
75, 219 74 74, 75, 219 74, 219
3.18 9.13 9.32-34 11.10 12.10-13
IQH f3.14
251
13.19 1413-14
46 202 202 201 180, 201, 2 0 2 , 2 5 1 , 257 201, 251 251
ANCIENT
16.11 16.15-20 17.17
201 251 201
IQpHab 2.7-9 7.4-5
291
SOURCES
200 200, 201, 202
419-23 4.20-24 4.21 5.9 8.15-16 9.3-4 9.12
75 241 251 200, 202 200, 202, 246 252 201
IQM 13.10
46
IQSb 2.24
105
IQS 3^ 3.6-9 3.7-8 3.13-4.16 3.17-19
38, 241 242 251 241 241
4Q504 1-2 V 15
182
llQpPs'^DavComp 2-4 200
h. Rabbinic Literature Talmud b.Sanhedrin 107b
Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael Beshallah 250 7.134-36 Hsha 1.42-76 1.74-75 1.148-66 Shirata 10.58-73
248 248 247
264
j.Hagigah 77d
264
Numbers Rabbah 20:19
61
246-47
i. Greek and Roman Authors Aetius 4 1 2 . 2
134
Alexander of Aphrodisias De anima 26.6 136 De mixtione 216.14-17 223.6-9 22415-16 225.14-16 227.9-10
135, 145, 228 136 136 136 135
Aristides, In Defense of Oratory 43 123 Cicero Academica 1.40
134
De divinatione
8-10
1.7 1.8-9 1.9 1.10 1.11-36 1.12 1.24-25 1.34 1.37-71 1.38 1.39 1.60 1.60-67 1.62 1.63 1.63-64 1.64-65 1.66 1.66-67
14 8 9 9 9 9, 41 9 41 9 11 14 9, 15 10, 16 16 16, 11-12 16 112 16, 115, 120, 121, 222 212
292 1.67 1.68 1.72 1.72-109 1.82-83 1.89 1.110-15 1.113 1.114 1.114-15 1.116-21 1.118 1.122-24 1.129-130 2.3 2.8 2.38 2.100 2.117
INDEX
115 118, 121 42 9 9 184-85 16 16, 115, 199 16, 115, 120, 163, 222 10 9 9 184, 212, 184 9, 10, 16, 114 8 9 148 9 11
De oratore 1.18 1.113-115
93-94 96, 97
De re publka 2.4
96
De senectute 21.78
148
De natura deorum 2.19 2.30 2.37 2.38 3.20 3.40
135, 228 135 228 148 135 135
Tusculanae disputationes 4.14 134 5.91 183 Cleomedes, De motu circulari 1.1 136 Dio Chrysostom First Discourse on Kingship 15 94 Third Discourse on Kingship 39 95, 224 On Training for Public Speaking 2 94, 224
Diogenes Laertius, Philosophers 2.25 2.32 2.37 7.49 7.54 7.138-39 7.143
lives of Eminent 183 184 183, 212 134 134 148-49 135
Epictetus 1.14.6
148, 228
Euripides Bacchae 448-49
268
Daughters of Troy 445
126
Iphigenia at Aulis 461 1375 1382-84 1398-99 1420 1473
126 126 126 126 126 126
Galen, De pladtis Hippocrates et Platonis 42.1-6 134 5.3.8 136 Horace, Odes 1.28.1.1-6
154
Homer Iliad
1.149-68 3.167-70 3.221-24 16.844-50
268 95 95 268
Odyssey 5.308-10
268
Lucan, De bello ciuili 5.169-77 121, 212 Maximus of Tyre, Phibsophumena 8 184-85 11.10 155 Ovid Fasti 1.297
154
ANCIENT
293
SOURCES
Symposium 202D-E 202E 202E-203A
15 45, 231 44
118, 120 154
Theaetetus 173E
208
Apology 22C 31D 40A
43, 122, 223 184, 210 184, 210
Euthydemus 272E
Timaeus 32C 41-42 71E 90A
263 49, 263 43, 112, 114 138, 139, 224, 225
184, 210
Plotinus, Enneads 1.3.3 4.7.4 6.7.36
156 135 154-55
Heroides 3.114-15
268
Plato Amatorius 758E 766E
Euthyphro 3B
184, 210
Im 533D-534E 534B 534G-D
253 43, 231 43
Plutarch An sera respublica gerenda sit 786D 154
Merw 99C
43, 122, 223
De communibus notitiis adversus Stoicos 1085D 136
Phaedrus 242B 242C 244A 244A-B 244A-245C 244D 246A 246A-247E 246A-253C 246B 246D 247A 247A-253C 247B 247B-C 248A 249C 249D 249D-E 250C 251C 251E 253E 254B 265B
210 184 231 43 253 45 152, 153 115, 152, 153, 208, 224 151-58, 224-25 152, 208 152, 153 208 163, 208 152 153 152, 208 153, 154 152, 153 152 152 152 153 152, 153 156 118
Republic 2.402D 7.535A
95 96, 223
Comparison of Aristides with Marcus Cato 4 135 De defectu oraculorum 7 410G 411E 10 412F-413D 10 413D-414G 11 414D-E 11 414E 50, 53 414F-418D 11 415A 50, 53 418C-D 47, 231 418D 51 14 431A 431A-B 11, 47, 52, 231 431B 52, 231 431E 16 431E-434C 11, 15, 47 431F 16 16 432A 432G 16, 112, 199 432C-D 116, 204 432D 222 432D-E 16, 117, 120, 146 432E-F 117, 121 432F 16, 222 433A-B 117 16 433C
294
INDEX
433G-D 435A 436D-438D 436F-437A 438A
117-18 11, 12 12 11 16
De E apud Delphos 387F
14
De genio Socratis 579D-580C 580B-582C 580C 580C-F 580C-582G 580F-581A 581A-D 581F-582C 588B 588B-589F 588C 588D-E
De Stoicorum repugnantiis 1034B 135 1052D 135 1056E-F 134
589E 589E-F 589F 589F-592F 590A 591D 591F 593C
12 184 185, 187, 12 12, 210 12 13 12 13, 186 12, 184 187, 209 186, 187, 212, 235 186, 187 114, 154, 187, 199, 212, 235, 258-59 209 210 237 I, 13 17 140 140 45
De Iside et Osiride 361C
44
589B 589D
De Pythiae oraculis 402B-C
210
IJfe of Pebpidas 6-13
12
Platonicae quaestwnes 6
154
Quaestionum convivalium libri iii 718E-F 154 Quintilian, Institutio oratoria book one, preface, 9 94, 224
209,
162, 209,
Rhetorica ad Herennium 1.3 3.19-27
93 93
Seneca Epistulae Morales 4 41.1-9
135 71-72, 146-47
Sextus Empiricus, Adversus madmnaticos 7-8 (= Adversus dogmaticos 1-2) 7.151 134 7.227 134 7.426 134 8.400 68 Sophocles, Antigone 891 Theages 128D-129D
II, 12
126
184, 210
Vergil, Aeneid 1.97-101 268 Xenophon, Memorabilia 1.1.2-5 184
j . New Testament John (Fourth Gospel)
242-43
Acts 16:26
268
2 Cor 12:2
111
2 Tim 1:7
86
ANCIENT
295
SOURCES
k. Early Christian Literature Epiphanius, Adversus haereses 3.36 135 John Cassian, Collationes 12 123 Lactantius Divmae insHtutiones 1 135 6.25 135 De falsa religione 5
135
Origen Conta Celsum 1.5 6.71
135 136
Stromata 5.12.76
135
Pseudo-Justinus, Cohortatio ad Graecos 37.2-3 123
I N D E X OF SUBJECTS A N D ANCIENT NAMES
Abraham 90-97, 110-1 In. 22, 113n. 26, 119, 223-24, 246 Adam 9 1 - 9 2 , 110-11, 223 Aelius Aristides 122-24, 131, 207, 258 Alexander of Aphrodisias 135-36, 145, 228 Angels 4 3 - 4 5 , 46n. 44, 48-49nn. 5 1 - 5 2 , 139-40, 188-89, 241. See Daemons. Antipater of Tyre 148 Apocalyptic literature 18, 72-73, 109-111, 168-70, 181-82, 197, 203-07, 214, 232, 245, 255-57 Apollo 121, 123 Apollodorus 148n. 37 Aristobulus 265 Ascent of mind or soul 107-08, 110-11, 112-13n. 26, 114-22, 137, 138-39, 151-58, 192-94, 224-26, 238, 239, 243, 249, 2 6 2 - 6 3 Balaam biblical version 2 5 - 2 6 Josephus, according to 2 8 - 3 3 , 3 9 - 4 2 , 4 7 - 5 5 , 169, 189, 229-32 Philo, according to 2 9 - 3 3 , 47-55, 229-32, 233 Pseudo-Philo, according to 56-77, 87, 217-20, 267 Baruch 197 Beauty 9 0 - 9 3 Ben Sira 18, 183n. 29, 198-99, 206, 259, 264n. 17 Bezalel 141, 143-44, 145, 157, 178, I82n. 29, 227-28 Cassandra 115-16, 121, 126, 212, 267 Charismatic exegesis 190-211, 2 3 4 - 3 5 , 254-59 Christianity 18 Chrysippus 136, 145, 148n. 37, 228 Cicero biography of 7-9, 13-15 inspiration, descriptions of 9-10,
15-17, 110-12, 114-16, 118, 120-22, 184, 222 Plutarch, similarities to 13-17, 110-22 rhetoric, views on 93-94, 96, 97 Stoic pneuma, descriptions of 9, 14, 15-16, 116, 135-36, 228 Clement of Alexandria 135 Cleombrotus 11,47-53,231 Cleomedes 136n. 18 Clothing, as metaphor of inspiration 85, 88, 1 0 0 - 0 1 , 220-21 Cup, as metaphor of inspiration 205-06 Daemons 1, 13, 43-45, 46n. 44, 4 7 - 5 3 , 55n. 64, 139-40, 183-89, 208-10, 213-14, 234-35, 240, 258-59 Z)a
SUBJECTS A N D ANCIENT NAMES
Elihu 63-64, 178-79 Elijah lOln. 3, 136, 203 Elisha 10In. 3, 203 Enoch 110-11, 112-13n. 26, 119, 119-20n. 39, 179, 246 Epictetus 148n. 37, 228 Epiphanius 135 Eschatology 18, 143-44, 181-83 Essenes 202n. 23 Euripides 121, 125-26, 267, 268 Exegesis, charismatic. See charismatic exegesis. Exorcism 37-38 Ezekiel 101, 103, 105, 119n. 37, 206n. 29 Ezra 122, 124, 1 9 4 - 9 7 , 2 0 4 - 0 7 , 257-59 Fire, as metaphor of inspiration 16, 101, 114-18, 120-21, 221, 245-46 Fourth Gospel, spirit in 2 4 2 - 4 4 Galen 134n. 8, 136 Gideon 85-86, 8 8 - 9 0 , 100-01, 220-23, 249 God 47-49, 55n. 64, 171-73 Greco-Roman milieu of Judaism, introduction to 5-6, 7-17, 19-21 Homer Horace
94, 95, 268 154n. 47
Inspiration, Greco-Roman views of, introduction to 9-13, 15-17 Iphigenia 126-28 Jacob 106, 179, 180n. 25, 246 Jeremiah 101, 203 Job 62, 218 John, gospel of See Fourth Gospel. John Cassian 123-24, 207, 258 John Hyrcanus 188-89 Joseph 176-77, 179, 180n. 25, 187, 192, 203, 2 3 3 - 3 4 Josephus autobiography, inspiration according to 2 0 2 - 0 3 biblical text of 27n. 1 biography of 3, 269 exegetical methods 2 9 - 3 3 , 47-50, 78-79, 131-33, 158, 161-62, 168-70, 226, 229, 232, 236
297
Judaism, knowledge of 271-72 Sources, non-Jewish 2 7 0 - 7 1 Plutarch, in relation to 4 6 - 5 5 , 231-32 scholarship on 3n. 5, 261 Stoicism, in relation to 131-37, 145, 158, 226-27, 240 writings of 270-71 Joshua 87, 9 9 - 1 0 1 , 104, 129, 178, 182n. 29, 221-22, 245-46 Kenaz 84-88, 89, 97, 1 0 0 - 0 1 , 102-09, 119-25, 128-30, 2 2 0 - 2 3 , 245-46, 249 Lactantius 124, 135nn. 16-17 Levi 110, 113n. 26, 119, 145n. 31, 179 Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum authorship of 266 biblical text of 56n. 2 Cicero, in relation to 120-22, 222 Daniel (book of), in relation to 72-73 date of 266 Dead Sea Scrolls, in relation to 73-76 exegetical methods 5 6 - 5 8 , 65, 76-77, 79, 8 4 - 9 0 , 9 7 - 9 8 , 99-109, 114, 125, 128-30, 162-63, 2 1 7 - 2 1 , 235-36 Gen 6:3, allusions to 59-65, 217-18, 249 Greco-Roman conceptions and 120-28, 222, 235-36, 267-68 Idolatry in 267 Plutarch, in relation to 120-22, 222 Psalm 51, allusions to 6 5 - 6 8 , 70 rabbinic traditions, in relation to 6 0 - 6 I n . 9 scholarship on 3n. 4, 261-62 Seneca, in relation to 7 0 - 7 2 Stoicism, in relation to 6 7 - 7 2 , 119-22 wisdom tradition, in relation to 6 2 - 6 4 , 6 9 - 7 0 , 218-19 Lucan 121 Matthew, gospel of 198n. 10 Maximus of Tyre 155, 157, 184, 225 Memory, loss of 1 0 2 - 0 3 , 109, 122-24, 2 0 6 - 0 7 , 2 2 2 - 2 3 , 245, 258
298
INDEX
Mental control loss of 11, 16, 30-33, 34-55, 107-09, 112, 114-18, 120-24, 212, 229-32, 233 retention of 168-89, 190-211, 212-14, 233-35, 257-59 Messiah 18, 143-44, 181-83 Methuselah 11 In. 22 Micah 182-83n. 29, 267 Military skill 8 4 - 9 0 , 97-98, 161, 2 2 0 - 2 1 , 239 Miriam 247-48 Moses biblical version 18, 9 9 - 1 0 0 , 196n. 8 Josephus, according to 272 Philo, according to 92, 97, 141-42, 145-46, 151-52, 157-60, 169n. 2, 171-76, 182n. 29, 183-89, 194, 223, 227-29, 232-33, 258-59, 265 Pseudo-Philo, according to 60, 249 Mystery religions 2n. 3, 19-21 Nehemiah 194-97, 207 New Academy 13-14, 47 Noah 138-39, 142 Origen 135, 136n. 18 Othniel. See Kenaz. Ovid 154n. 47, 268 Paraclete 2 4 2 - 4 4 Paul, aposde 11 In. 23, 268 Philo Judaeus autobiography, inspiration according to 190-94, 208-10, 211, 212-14, 234-35, 258 biblical text of 27n. 1 biography of 2, 19, 262-63 Dead Sea Scrolls, in relation to 2 0 1 - 0 2 exegesis, inspired 190-94, 213-14 exegetical methods 2 8 - 3 3 , 35-36n. 20, 4 0 - 4 1 n. 32, 47-50, 78-79, 9 7 - 9 8 , 137-42, 161-63, 171-78, 227-28, 229, 232-33, 235-36, 264-65 Judaism, knowledge of 2 6 4 - 6 5 Plato, allusions to 137-39, 151-53, 223, 224, 263, 265 Platonism, in relation to 150-51,
151-60, 183-87, 208-11, 213-14, 224-25 Plutarch, in relation to 46-55, 146, 183-89, 208-10, 225, 231-32 scholarship on 2n. 3, 261 Stoicism, in relation to 144-51, 158-59, 227-29, 239, 263 wisdom tradition, in relation to 2n. 3, 143-51, 178-83, 198-99, 212-13, 227-29, 249 writings of 263 Philosophy 140, 151-58, 192-94, 208, 213, 2 2 4 - 2 6 Pindar 208 Plato 42-45, 95-96, 112, 115, 118, 122-24, 128, 137-39, 151-52n. 43, 184, 208, 210, 222-26, 231, 271 Plotinus 135n. 17, 154-55n. 49, 156n. 52, 225 Plutarch ascent of the mind, presentations of 154, 157 biography 10, 12, 13-15 Cicero, similarities to 13-17, 110-22 inspiration, descriptions of 10-11, 15-17, 4 6 - 5 5 , 112, 116-18, 222, 231-32 Socrates' daemonion, views of 12-13, 183-89, 208-10, 213-14, 234-35, 243, 258-59 Stoic pneuma, description of 11, 15-16, 47n. 47, 116-18, 136n. 20 Posidonius 148n. 37 Prophecy 2 4 4 - 5 4 biblical 34, 101, 194, 199, 203, 234, 246 Cicero, according to 114—16 diversity of forms 253-54 Josephus, according to 28-33, 39-42, 47-53, 168-70, 189, 229-32, 242, 244-45 Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, according to 246-48 Philo, according to 29-33, 4 7 - 5 3 , 171-76, 229-32, 232-33, 244 Plutarch, according to 116-18 Pseudo-Philo, according to 87, 99-109, 120-25, 128-30, 161, 221-22, 245-46, 249 Pseudo-Justinus 123-24, 207, 258
SUBJECTS A N D ANCIENT NAMES
Pseudo-Philo. See Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum. Posidonius 9 Quintilian
94, 97, 224
Rebekkah 179, 180n. 25, 246 Rhetoric 93-97, 161, 223-24, 249 Rule, ideal 90-97, 161, 223-24, 249 Samuel 38 Saul 3 6 - 4 1 , 86-87, 102-06, 122-25, 128-30, 203, 230, 245 Seila (Jephtah's daughter) 125-28, 267-68 Seneca 70-72, 135nn, 11 & 16, 146-47, 228-29 Seth 110-1 In. 22 Sextus Empiricus 68, 134 Sibyl 124, 145n. 34, 207, 212, 250, 258 Sirach. See Ben Sira. Socrates 12-13, 4 3 - 4 4 , 152-53, 183-89, 208-10, 213-14, 234-35, 243, 258-59, 265 Solomon 132-33, 135-37, 1 4 ^ 4 5 , 180, 226-27 Sophocles 126 Soul, nature of 139-41 Spirit, characterization of 239-41 aether 148-49 angelic or daemonic being 18, 28-30, 36-53, 119n. 38, 183-89, 229-32, 239, 240, 243 breadi (life itself) 59-77, 178-79, 217-20, 240 customary friend 208-10, 232-35, 249, 258-59 fire from air 135-37, 226-27, 240 holy 65-76, 104-05, 219, 240 hurricane 157, 225-26, 239 soul 6 9 - 7 2 , 91-92. See Stoicism. Stoic pneuma 131-37, 144-45, 162, 226-29, 240 tornado 157, 225-26, 239 vapor 11, 115-18, 146. See Delphi. voice 176-77, 187-92, 209 Spirit, effects of 238-39 ascent of mind or soul 107-08, 110-11, 114-22, 151-58, 192-94, 224-26, 238, 243, 249 beauty, external and internal 90-93, 223-24, 238
299
conversion 252 cosmic unity 131-37, 144—45, 162, 226-29, 240 creation 250 exegesis, charismatic 190-211, 234-35, 254-59 inflammation 16, 101, 221, 245-46 initiation into community 251 life itself 57-77 memory, loss of 102-03, 109, 122-24, 206-07, 2 2 2 - 2 3 , 245, 258 mental control, loss of 11, 16, 3 0 - 3 3 , 3 4 - 5 5 , 107-09, 112, 114-18, 120-24, 212, 229-32, 233 military skill 8 4 - 9 0 , 97-98, 161, 220-21, 239 mind enlightened 168-89, 190-211, 212-14, 232-35, 257-59 praise 239 prophecy 27-55, 87, 99-109, 120-25, 128-30, 161, 168-70, 171-76, 2 2 1 - 2 3 , 229-32, 232-33, 240, 2 4 4 - 5 4 purification 251-52 rhetorical prowess 90, 93-97, 161, 223-24, 249 rule ideal 90-97, 161, 223-24, 249 speech 6 2 - 6 4 , 218-19 wisdom 6 2 - 6 4 , 6 9 - 7 0 , 178-83, 227-29, 238, 239, 255-58 Spirit, modes of presence of 238-41 accompanying 157-58, 169-70, 239 clothing 85, 88, 100-01, 220-21 cosmic sympathy 131-37, 144-45, 162, 226-29, 240 guiding, prompting, and teaching the mind 145-46, 168-89, 191-210, 232-35, 238, 2 5 7 - 5 9 indwelling 3 1 - 3 2 , 90-97, 104-05, 221 leaping upon 104-06, 121, 221 pouring over 179 resting upon 178-81 vocal chords, using 3 0 - 3 3 , 4 6 - 5 3 , 186, 2 2 9 - 3 1 , 238 Spirits, evil 36-38 Spirits, two (IQS 3-4) 38n. 27, 241-42
300
INDEX
Stoicism 9, 11, 14, 15-16, 47n. 47, 6 7 - 7 2 , 116-19, 133-37, 144-51, 226-29, 239-40, 249. See Seneca. Synagogue 254-55 Teacher of Righteousness 200-02 Temple 132-37, 226-27, 240 Therapeutae 263 Timarchus, myth of 1, 13, 17, 140n. 26, 237
and creation 250 Israelite leaders in 178-81 Messiah in 181-83 Philo, in relation to 2n. 3, 143-51, 178-83, 198-99, 212-13, 227-29, 249 Pseudo-Philo, in relation to 62-64, 6 9 - 7 0 , 218-19 and 4 Ezra 204-07 Xenophon
184
Voice, divine 176-77, 187-88, 190-92, 209
Youdifulness
Wisdom tradidon and Ben Sira 18, 183n. 29, 198-99, 206, 259, 264n. 17
Zealots 255, 257 Zeno 134n. 6, 135, 148n. 37, 184, 265
62-64
I N D E X OF M O D E R N A U T H O R S
Abusch, R. 132n. 2 Alexiou, M. 125-28, 268n. 25 Amir, Y. 27n. 1, 262n. 12, 265n. 18 Amim, H. von 68n. 19 Attridge, H. W. 27n. 2, 269n. 28, 270n. 29 Aune, D. 200n. 16, 254 Aviemaric, F. 267n. 22 Bar-Kochva, B. 132n. 2 Barrow, R. H. lOn. 17 Barton, J. 3n. 6 Baskin, J. R. 26n. 2, 6In. 9 Bauckham, R. 132n. 2 Berchman, R. 2n. 3 Best, E. 3n. 5, 29n. 9 Betz, O. 26n. 4, 200n. 17 Bogaert, P.-M. 60n. 9, 261 Bonner, S. F. 94n. 24 Borgen, P. 262n. 12, 263n. 13 Bousset, W. 113n. 26, 167 Bram, J. R. 268n. 27 Brehier, E. 48-49n. 51, 167 Brown, R. 243-44 Brownlee, W. 254 Bruns, I. 135n. 9 Buchsel, F. 3n. 5, 29n. 9 Burkhardt, H. 2n. 3, 167
131n. 1, 170n. 3, 203n. 24, 269n. 28, 27In. 30 Fisk, B. N. 60n. 8, 262, 266n. 21 naceliere, R. 14n. 23, 47n. 45 Fontenrose, J. 47n. 47 Garcia-Martinez, F. 200nn. 15-17, 202n. 22 Geffcken, J. 124n. 47 Georgi, D. 2n. 3, 254-57 Ginsberg, H. L. 254, 256 Goodenough, E. R. 2n. 3 Goodman, M. 27n. 1 Greene, J. T. 26n. 4 Gunkel, H. 167 Hare, D. R. A. 85n. 2 Harrington, D. J. 56n. 2, 60n. 9, 89n. 16, 104n. 10, 107n. 15, 108n. 16, 179n. 22, 261n. 7 Hata, G. 26In. 2 Hengel, M. 5-6, 21, 232, 255, 257, 264n. 17 Henten, van J.-W. 132n. 2 Hill, D . 242-44, 248, 2 5 3 - 5 4 Hobein, H. 155n. 50 Holm-Nielson, S. 20In. 19 Isaacs, M. E.
Cazeaux, J. 60n. 9, 26In. 7 Charleswordi, J. H. 56n. 1, 11 On. 21, 200n. 16, 24In. 2 Chevallier, M.-A. 3n. 5 Clarke, E. G. 69n. 20 Collins, J. J. 72n. 24 Davies, W. D. 248n. 10 Dean-Otting, M. 113n. 26 Dietzfelbinger, C. 104n. 10, 261 Dodds, E. R. 212n. 4 Dronke, P. 125-28, 268n. 25 Evans, C. A.
2n. 3, 3n. 5
Jacobson, H. 56n. 2, 58n. 6, 102n. 5, 108n. 16, 119n. 38, 125n. 48, 261, 266, 267, 268 James, M. R. 56n. 2, 84n. 1, 85n. 2, 104n. 10, 107n. 15, 261 Jeremias, J. 85n. 2 Jonas, H. 167 Kennedy, G. 94n. 24 Klein, R. W. 37n. 23 Kuhn, H. W. 25In. 13 Kuhn, G. 134n. 8
200n. 16
Faye, E. de 47n. 45 Feldman, L. H. 5n. 8, 26n. 4, 27n. 1, 56n. 2, 78n. 1, 126n. 51,
Lampe, G. W. H. 248 Lauterbach, J. Z. 247n. 10 Leisegang, H. 2n. 3, 3n. 5, 19-21, 159, 167
302
INDEX
Levison, J. R. 2n. 3, 3n. 5, 28n. 4, 29n. 7, 36n. 21, 38n. 27, 39n. 30, 40n. 31, 46n. 44, 65n. 13, 89n. 16, 131n. I, 133n. 5, 152n. 45, 170n. 5, 174n. 12, 175-77nn. 15-19, 182n. 29, 191n. 3, 193n. 4, 198n. 10, 204n. 27, 208n. 31, 238n. 1, 250n. 11, 26In. 4, 267n. 22, 27In. 30 Lewy, H. 2n. 3, 206n. 29 Lichtenberger, H. 267n. 22 Lindblom 34nn. 16-17, 35n. 19, 103n. 8 Long, A. A. 134nn. 6-7, 136n. 20 Lucas, F. L. 126n. 51 Mack, B. 167 Marchovich, M, 123n. 44 Marcus, R. 170n. 4 Meadowcroft, T. J. 72n. 24, 73n. 26 Measson, A. 15 In. 43, 152n. 44, 208n. 32 Mendelson, A. 263n. 15 Menzies, R. P. 3n. 5, 253 MiUar, F. 27n. 1 Moore, G. F. 167, 248 Mowinckel, S. 201-02n. 21 Mulder, J. 27n. 1, 262n. 12, 269n. 28 Miiller, H.-P. 255-56 Murphy, F. J. 262 Niese, B.
32n. 15
Orton, D. E. 197-98nn. 9-10, 198n. 13, 200n. 15 Parke, H. W. 47n. 47 Patte, D . 256-57 Pease, A. S. 8n. 15, 9n. 16, 148n. 37 Perrot, C. 60n. 9, 261 Pfeifer, G. 49n. 51 Pichery, E. 123n. 45
4849
Pinero, A. 3n. 4 Pohlenz, M. 21 On. 34 Radice, R. 261 Reinmuth, E. 262, 266n. 21 Runia, D. T. 45n. 42, 261, 263n. 16 Sambursky, S. 136n. 18 Schafer, J. P. 248n. 10 Schafer, P. 183n. 29 Schlatter, A. 29n. 9 Schreckenberg, H. 261 Schiirer, E. 27n. 1 Sedley, D. N. 134nn. 6-7, 136n. 20 Segal, A. 113n. 26 Sekki, A. E. 38n. 27, 46n. 44, 74n. 28, 75n. 30 Smidi, M. 29n. 9, 188n. 43 Spilsbury, P. 131n. 1 Stone, M. E. 122n. 42, 206n. 29, 207n. 30, 262n. 12, 269n. 28 Sysling, H. 27n. 1 Thackeray, Thompson, Tobin, T. Turner, M.
H. St. J. 32n. 15 R. G. 37-38nn. 24-26 150n. 42 M. B. 253
VanderKam, J. 179n. 20 Verbeke, G. 2n. 3, 3n. 5 Vermes, G. 26nn. 3-4, 27n. 1, 60n. 9, 78n. 1, 200n. 17 Volz, P. 17-19, 36n. 21 Wagner, J. R. 26In. 4 Walbank, F. W. 27n. 2 Wilson, R. R. 34n. 17 Windisch, H. 242-44 Winston, D. 45n. 42, 69n. 20, 210n. 38 Wolfson, H. A. 2n. 3, 167 Wormell, D. E. W. 47n. 47 Ziegler, H.
136n. 18
