gorically because he considered it to be a separate unit (Praem. 1). Indeed,
when treating it in hisExposition of the Law,he insisted that it may not be
interpreted allegorically (Opif.1–28). Philo’sAllegory of the Lawthus seems
to have focused on the stories of the early heroes, which he regarded as be-
longing to the second part of the Torah dealing with “history” (Praem. 1).
Philo proceeds verse by verse in theAllegory of the Law,quoting a bib-
lical passage, identifying a particular problem or question raised by it, and
then discussing and ultimately resolving it on the allegorical level. A good
example isLeg.1.101-2, where Philo comments on Gen. 2:17, “But of the
tree of knowledge of good and evil ye shall not eat.” Using classical Greek
terminology, Philo raises the difficulty why the command is here formu-
lated in the plural, while in the previous verse God had addressed a single
person, saying, “you may eat of every tree of the garden” (Gen. 2:16). Hav-
ing defined the problem, Philo states his allegorical solution, again using
standard academic terminology. He suggests that different forms of ad-
dress have been chosen because the good is scarce but evil abounds.
Similar questions are raised in connection with the creation of man.
Commenting on Gen. 2:7, Philo lines up several of them (Leg.1.33):Someone may inquire why God generally considered worthy of the di-
vine spirit the earthborn and body-loving mind...;secondly,whatis
the precise meaning of the expression “breathed into”; thirdly, why was
it breathed “into the face”; fourthly, why does he mention the word
“breath” rather than “spirit” even though he knows the latter word, as
when he said “and the spirit of God was lying upon the water”? (LXX
Gen. 1:2)Philo initially provides elaborate literal answers before embarking on the
allegorical level. He thus insists, in response to the first query, that God is
generous and happily provides good things to everyone; in response to the
second, that the expression “breathed into” is the same as “blew into” or
“put a soul into soulless things”; and, in response to the third, that there is
a difference between “breath” and “spirit”: the latter implies strength and
vigor, while the former is like air. These explanations show how important
the literal level was for Philo and how eager he was to integrate his allegori-
cal approach with proper scholarship.
In terms of content, theAllegory of the Lawcovers some of the same
ground that is treated inDe Opificio Mundi.Most important of these is the
issue of the double creation of man. Philo, for the first time in Jewish exe-266sterling, runia, niehoff, and van den hoekEERDMANS -- Early Judaism (Collins and Harlow) final text
Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:04:07 PM