APPENDIX TO ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION, I
§ 3. Multiplication of two unequal factors. Ἑτερομήκης, though often used more widely by general writers, is a term reserved by the mathematicians for numbers of the form x(x+1), i.e. 1×2, 2×3, 3×4, etc. (See Nicomachus ii. 17.) This restricted use of the word obviously fits the present passage.
§ 30. Impressions … active impulse. The φαντασία, translated now by “presentation,” now by “mental picture,” conceived of as an imprint (τύπωσις) on the mind, is a thoroughly Stoic idea. (See e.g. Diog. Laert. vii. 45; S. V. F. ii. 52 ff.) So also is ὁρμή, “impulse” or “appetite.” The sense of this section is given more fully and clearly in Quod Deus 43.
§ 57. Theoretical … practical. A more careful classification of the arts is given by Aristotle, Met. v. 1, viz.—θεωρητικαί, πρακτικαί and ποιητικαί (“productive”). Thus rhetoric and dancing are πρακτικαί, sculpture and poetry ποιητικαί, Cf. Quintilian ii. 18.
ibid. Its three parts. This division is claimed for the Stoics by Diogenes Laertius (vii. 39), though actually it appears incidentally in Aristotle, Topica i. 14, 105 b 20. The comparison quoted by Diogenes in vii. 40 of τὸ λογικόν to the fledge (φραγμός), τὸ φυσικόν to the field or trees, and τὸ ἠθικόν to the fruit is adopted by Philo in De Agr. 14.
§ 60. Another suggestion may be made for emending this passage. Elsewhere Philo explains unexpected silences on Moses’ part by his desire to stimulate the mystic to discover some high truth for himself. E.g. L.A. ii. 55. iii. 239. Note in particular De Cherubim 121 fin., where the likeness of diction to this passage is significant. There the silence is stated to be ἵνα ὁ μὴ φυσιολογίας ἀμύητος εἰς ἐπιστήμην ὠφελῆται. The stimulus to thought, that is to say, will be an actual assistance to the philosophical mind in its quest for knowledge. Here if we change the order of ὁ and μὴ we may perhaps leave the text otherwise undisturbed, translating “that the man versed in natural philosophy may <discover the="" truth="" for="" himself="" and=""> revere Him that is for His knowledge.” Or we might read (for τὸν ὄντα) τὸν <μεταδ>όντα τῆς ἐπιστήμης. The sense conveyed will then be that the stimulus to thought will lead to a higher knowledge, and so to reverence for Him who has imparted it.
§ 70. Our soul is threefold, etc. This theory is familiar to readers of Plato from the famous myth of the soul’s chariot in the Phaedrus 246 ff., where τὸ λογικόν appears as the charioteer, τὸ θυμικόν and τὸ ἐπιθυμητικόν as the nobler and baser horses respectively. Cf. Timaeus 69 C; Republic 439 D. Philo, in fact, reproduces the figure in 72 f., but without Plato’s distinction of the character of the two horses. The location of the three in different parts of the body here mentioned is taken from Timaeus 69 E, 90 A.
§ 80. Judah and Issachar. The idea seems to be that Judah, the mystic representing φρόνησις as a spiritual or mental condition, is ὁ φρόνιμος, while Issachar, who represents the same as carried into practical life, is ὁ φρονῶν. The somewhat unexpected use of ἀσκητής as applied to the mystic may perhaps be explained by laying stress on θεοῦ. He is a “practiser,” but of a wisdom higher than that of practisers in general.
§ 91. We conceive of God as the soul of the universe. It is implied that it is not an accurate or adequate expression. Cf. De Migr. 179, where the possible danger of this expression, as tending to suggest that God is contained in the universe, is pointed out, and ibid. 181, where the thought is further developed. The expression is Stoic (S. V. F. ii. 774). The equivalent ἡ τοῦ κόσμου ψυχή is attributed to Cleanthes himself (S. V. F. i. 532).