ON THE MIGRATION OF ABRAHAM (DE MIGRATIONE ABRAHAMI)
ANALYTICAL INTRODUCTION
The subject of this treatise is Gen. 12:1–4 and 6. This naturally falls into two divisions, of which the first contains the words of God to Abraham. This again is analysed as follows:
I. (a) The command to depart from country, kindred and father’s house.
(b) To the land which I will shew thee (this constitutes the first promise or gift to Abraham).
(c) And I will make thee a great nation (Second Gift).
(d) And I will bless thee (Third Gift).
(e) And I will magnify thy name (Fourth Gift).
(f) And thou shalt be blessed (Fifth Gift).
(g) I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee.
And in thee shall all the nations of the earth be blessed (the gifts to others through Abraham.)
In the second part we deal successively with the statements.
(а) He went as God spake to him.
(b) And Lot went with him.
(c) And Abraham was seventy-five years old, when he went forth out of Haran.
(d) And Abraham travelled through the land to the length of it, to the place Shechem to the high oak.
“Land” means spiritually body, “kinsfolk,” senses (2–4), while “father’s house” is speech, and this last is illustrated by the way in which the Logos itself is spoken of as God’s house (4–6). Thus the command is to alienate ourselves from these and so to “depart” to higher realities (7–12). Biblical examples of this departing follow: Abraham from Lot, the Exodus of Israel from Egypt (13–15), and in connexion with this Philo propounds the idea that when we read of Joseph’s body being placed in a coffin in Egypt, and later of his bones being taken to Canaan at the Exodus, we have an allegory of the spiritual burial of the lower qualities, and the survival of the higher qualities of the mixed or Joseph mind (16–17). An enumeration of these higher qualities as shewn in the story of Joseph follows (18–23), and from this we pass back to the theme of “departure,” as shewn in the order of Moses to make the Passover “with speed” (24–25), and (with a difference) in the injunction in Gen. 31:3 to Jacob to turn back to his father’s land, which must be understood in the sense of wisdom (26–30). The last words of that passage, “I will be with thee,” lead to a meditation on how independent of our efforts is the Divine presence and inspiration, which Philo illustrates from his own experience in literary composition (31–35), whence we pass almost insensibly to the consideration of the words of the First Gift, “The land which I will shew thee.” After some thoughts about the “thing shewn,” i.e. the perfect good, “the person who sees,” i.e. the wise man, and the “Shewer,” i.e. God (36–42), Philo points out that the shewing is in the future, thus calling for Abraham’s faith. He illustrates it further from the words of Deut. 34:4, “I shewed it to thine eyes but thou shalt not possess it,” and this points to the thought that possession of the perfect good is more than seeing it (43–46). And yet seeing is higher than hearing, and thus God’s words are said in certain places to be seen rather than heard, a noteworthy usage when we remember that hearing in the ordinary sense is even less than the other senses capable of being associated with sight (47–52).
We pass on to the Second Gift. “I will make thee a great nation.” Here nation can be taken to mean “multitude of qualities.” “Great” shews something more, namely that the qualities grow to their full stature (53–55). A great nation is elsewhere defined as one which draws nigh to God (56–59). Indeed, mere quantity or multitude is often spoken of as an evil thing, which is vanquished by the little and good (59–63). The many-footed is called an abomination in Leviticus. This reminds us that the footless which crawls on its belly, is equally an abomination (64–65). And thence he digresses for the moment to suggest that the breast stands for the spirited element, as the belly stands for desire, and it is when both these are exscinded as in the sacrificial directions of Lev. 8, and reason is left supreme, that we get both multitude and greatness (65–68). From another point of view the many-footed and the footless are respectively the polytheist and the atheist (69).
The Third Gift is “I will bless thee” (εὐλογήσω). Looking at the composition of the word, Philo takes this to mean “I will give thee excellent Logos.” Now Logos is both thought and speech, and this last leads him to the idea that mastery of language is needed by the sage and that otherwise he will be unable to hold his own against the sophist (70–75). This is illustrated first from the case of Cain and Abel and then from that of Moses, and there follows a commentary on Exodus 4:10–16 in which “Aaron thy brother” is shewn to represent the speech or eloquence which rejoices when it finds clear conceptions to express (76–81). It is this use of language in the service of truth which is shewn by the story of Moses with Aaron’s rod outdoing the Egyptian magicians (82–85).
The Fourth Gift is “I will magnify thy name.” Here “name” is interpreted as equivalent to what we seem. The seeming indeed is worthless without the being, but true happiness consists in both (86–88). The need of obedience to established custom is a necessary consequence, and here Philo takes the opportunity to define his attitude to the literal Law, Sabbath, Circumcision, Feast-days. Though these have their soul, namely the spiritual interpretation, they have also their body, and the body is the house of the soul, and must not be set at nought (89–94). The same lesson is taught by the “lesser substance” bequeathed by Abraham to the children of the concubines who, though of less account, were still children (94). So too Leah accounted herself blessed, because women will count her such, and by women are meant those comparatively earth-bound souls whose esteem is nevertheless valuable (95–96). This leads to an illustration from the work entrusted by Moses to the women—the senses, that is—but the senses also must have their due if happiness is to be had (97–100). This thought is further developed from Isaac’s prayer that Jacob may have the wealth of earth as well as of heaven, and from Aaron’s robe on which the sensible world is figured by the bells whose sound was to be audible when he entered the Holy Place (101–104). So the sensible must second the music of the mental in the great Choir, and the three-fold phrase of Ex. 21, the “needful,” the “raiment,” and the “fellowship,” means that the sensible and the mental must be so blended that we shall find in the first the sacrament of the second (104–105).
Yet in the three next sections Philo swings round to the other point of view. The Fifth Gift is “Thou shalt be blessed.” Here he reads εὐλογητός (meet to be blessed), for the εὐλογημένος (subject to blessing) of our texts, and thence deduces, in spite of all that has been said, that true blessedness is to him who is worthy of it rather than to him who is so reputed by men (106–108).
In the next words, “I will bless them who bless thee, and curse them who curse thee,” we go on to shew what the Abraham mind can do for others. It stands to reason that to praise the praiseworthy is in itself a praiseworthy act, if done in sincerity. But this is an important exception, and thus the blessing of Israel by Balaam, splendid as it is, only brought on him God’s curse (109–115). Conversely, curses which are meant to benefit, such as the rebukes of those who have charge of the young, bring blessings on those who speak them. All depends on the intention (115–117).
The next words “And in thee shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed” shew that the blessing conferred by the Abraham spirit is not to be limited to those who know its value. In one sense indeed the words may be applied to the individual himself. The perfect mind will sanctify all its tribes, that is, all its faculties (118–119). But in the wider sense the righteous man both by his influence and prayers is a pillar of society. We see this in God’s words to Moses (I will be merciful to them for thy word); in the willingness to spare Sodom, if only a few righteous could be found there; most of all in the story of Noah, who victorious over the deluge of moral decay, founded the line of Israel, which, though obscured at times, will be brought to the light again, when that season comes of which God spoke to Sarah (120–126).
The second part of the treatise begins with the words: “And Abraham went as the Lord spake.” Philo interprets this to mean that his way of going was in accordance with God’s word, i.e. his life was in accordance with God’s laws (127–132). And he proceeds to ask what the “end” and the “reward” of such “going” is. The true end and reward is to be able to recognize that the only thing we can know is our own ignorance (133–135). This leads to a denunciation of speculation about the universe instead of self-examination (136–138). A rambling discussion of some texts follows (139–142). And then in contrast to the “going” of Abraham, we have the weaklings who lag behind and are “cut off” as the “weary” part of Israel was by Amalek (143–144), though indeed there is a better kind of weariness which is typified by Leah (144–145). The treatment of this part concludes with the thought which has been fully developed in Quod Deus, that the true path of the soul is, as Aristotle taught, along the Mean (146–147).
“Lot went with him.” As Lot means “turning away,” we see that this was a companionship not to imitate but to hinder, and this is proved by his later disaster and Abraham’s separation from him (148–150). That this separation did not take place at once shews that the Abraham soul has still much to learn. The hindrance which is caused by such conflicting companionship is symbolized by the “mixed multitude,” which went up from Egypt and caused Israel to wander for forty years (150–155). (Incidentally we hear of this multitude weeping and this leads to a short digression on good and bad tears (155–157).) While some refuse all intercourse with this mixed multitude others make alliance with it, as Joseph, ever the man of compromise, did when he was accompanied by the Egyptians to his father’s funeral (158–163). Some illustrations of good fellow-travelling (συμπορεύεσθαι) are now given. Abraham’s comrades in war; Isaac going with Abraham to the sacrifice, signifying the union of natural gifts with effort (164–167). And while it is natural that higher minds should be drawn up to God, as Aaron and his fellow priests were, Moses will cry “Unless thou journey with me (συμπορεύῃ) bring me not up hence,” for God must be our fellow-traveller (168–172). Abraham, too, “journeyed with the angels.” For though in the imperfect state the Logos leads us, the perfected will walk at his side (173–175).
“Abraham was seventy-five years old when he went forth out of Haran.” What do these words mean? We remember that originally he went from Chaldea to Haran. Now Chaldea is astrology, which conceives of the universe as a whole where all the parts work in harmony with each other (176–179). So far Moses agrees with it: it is when the astrologers ignore God and His creative goodness that he disagrees (180–183). And when he shews Abraham as leaving Chaldea for Haran, that is, for the place of the senses, which is also the house of the mind, he is bidding us discard astrological speculations for the Socratic study of ourselves (184–189). And when we have done this we may leave Haran also, to contemplate God Himself, just as Saul had to be taken from the “baggage” before he could grasp the kingship (189–197).
“Seventy-five years old.” Seventy is the number of the higher mind and reason (198–202), five of the senses (203–206), and both these are proved by many texts (203–206). The combination indicates an intermediate and necessary stage in the soul’s progress (207). And so Rebecca bids Jacob even in his hour of triumph fly to Haran, for compromise with the senses is often necessary for a time (208–213). Yet Jacob also will ultimately leave Haran and “make a house for himself,” that is, “the fear of God” which won, according to Ex. 1:21 “ ‘their houses’ for the midwives” (214–215).
“He travelled through the land to the length of it to the place Shechem, to the high oak.” “Travelled through” shews us the course of the soul in its search for wisdom, a search which must cover the whole land i.e. whole of ethical philosophy (216–220). In Shechem, which means “shouldering,” and in the oak, we find a symbol of the solid labour which such travelling entails (221–223). But we remember that in Genesis we have a man Shechem, who represents evil labour, the seducer of Dinah. Or rather, the would-be seducer. For to Philo’s mind the spiritual Dinah being Virtue can never be corrupted, and the treatise ends with the thought that the vengeance of her brothers and defenders will overtake the seducer with his purpose unattained (224-end).