By Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel
CHULA VISTA, California — The following selections are from the commentaries I have written on Philo and Maimonides. The selection from Philo comes from Rediscovering Philo of Alexandria: A First Century Jewish Commentary: Vol. 1: Genesis (Sarasota, FL: First Edition Design, 2016). The selections from Maimonides are from my new commentary, Maimonides’ Hidden Torah Commentary Vol. 1 Genesis (Sarasota, Florida: First Edition Design, 2016). Each work introduces an approach I call “philosophical peshat,” which contains the plain meaning of a biblical passage along with its philosophical nuances and meaning. Although both these scholars lived over a thousand years apart, they often arrived at a similar philosophical understanding of Scripture.
Philo of Alexandria’s Reflections on Genesis:
A Virtuous Man Stands Apart from His Generation
6:9. These are the descendants of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation; Noah walked with God. — Why did the Scriptures define Noah’s progeny not by his predecessors, but instead by enumerating his personal virtues, as indicated by the verse, “These are the descendants of Noah; Noah was a righteous man”? Noah was a just man and whole-hearted man in his generation; Noah walked with God” (Gen 6:9). One reason is to contrast Noah with the people of his generation, who were wicked. Secondly, in a manner of speaking, one man’s virtuous character constitutes a generation in and of itself. A virtuous person stands apart from his generation by “walking with God.” For this reason, Moses announces that Noah was a just man, perfect, and one who pleased God; whom he served with justice and perfection, and grace, making up the greatest of virtues.[1]
Notes: Philo’s ambivalence about Noah’s character is also reflected in rabbinic literature:
- Judah and R. Nehemiah differed. R. Judah said, “Only in his generations was he righteous human being[2] by comparison. Had he flourished in the generation of Moses or Samuel, he would not have been considered righteous… in the same manner, Noah was ‘righteous’ only in a relative sense, when compared to his generation.” R. Nehemiah countered, “If he was just even in his generation—he would have been even more just had he lived in the time of Moses! Noah may be compared to a tightly closed vial of perfume lying in a graveyard, which nevertheless gave forth a fragrant odor. How much more so, if it were outside the graveyard!” (Genesis Rabbah 30:9). Rashi noted, “Had Noah lived in Abraham’s generation, he would not have been considered of any importance.[3] Ibn Ezra (1089–1164) refutes Rashi and the Midrash, observing that Noah and Abraham’s lifespans overlap one another by 58 years!
Family: Three Hearts or More that Beat as One
8:1. But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and all the domestic animals that were with him in the ark. — Why is it that the sacred writer says, “But God remembered Noah, and all the wild animals and all the domestic animals,” but does not add that he remembered his wife and children? A husband and wife are as one, much like a father is equal to his sons. Therefore, by mentioning Noah, the sacred biblical historian included with him his entire household.
This is true when the family functions in a state of harmony. But when a husband, wife, children, and relations of the family suffer from discord, they don’t act as if they were “one family,” but rather as an aggregate of several individual units. Family harmony expresses itself in how the superior of the house conducts oneself; a family is analogous to the branches of a tree that shoot out from it, or like the fruit of a vine branch that does not fall off from it.
Elsewhere, the prophet says, “Look to Abraham, your father, and to Sarah, who gave you birth; When he was but one I called him, I blessed him and made him many” (Isa. 51:2). Abraham and Sarah made up one family and she is mentioned alongside her husband because they were of like mind.[4]
… the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of humankind… — [ Notes: Where MT reads “said in His heart,” lxx reads “gave it thought,” which is anti-anthropomorphic, but raises a question of how God can come to realize something He did not know, since He knows everything.]
The reasons given indicate a change of purpose, a passion alien to the Divine Power. A man’s dispositions are weak and unstable, just as human affairs are inherently unpredictable and riddled with great uncertainty. However, nothing is uncertain; nothing is incomprehensible for His opinions are eternally firm and stable. Since this is obviously the case, how is it possible that God now suddenly realizes for the first time that thoughts of man are predisposed toward evil from his youth?
How could God destroy the human race by a flood and then claim that He does not intend to destroy it anymore—especially since the same evil attitudes remain embedded in the human soul? We are forced to say that this kind of expression serves a pedagogical function rather than convey the nature of truth. God instructs a man much like a father instructs his son. With respect to the actual truth, it is important to remember: (1) “God is not a man who lies and changes his mind” (Num. 23:19); (2) secondly, in another sense, “God disciplines you much like a man disciplines his son” (Deut. 8:5). Factually speaking, the first expression is unequivocally true; God is not as a man, or for that matter, like the sun, or the heavens, or for that matter—anything that the outward senses perceive. God is beyond blessedness itself and happiness—and does not admit any likeness, comparison, or parable.
However, the second passage conveys a pedagogical truth: Divine “wrath” teaches earthborn creatures how they are accountable for their actions and the consequences of their deeds. The knowledge that God will exact retribution is enough of a reason to keep people mindful of their deeds and disrupt their quietude. However, to inflict perpetual vengeance against offenders is conduct more becoming and worthy of a savage; such a disposition can only describe someone who has a ferocious disposition [e.g., as seen in someone who is bipolar]. God’s retributional power is never excessive; He measures it justly according to each individual’s deeds, which serve to preserve the memory of past retributions. [5] Let us further add that it is most unbecoming to add more curses, especially when considering all the evil unleashed unto the world during the flood. Thus, the time of affliction is already complete. Besides, here we see that the Heavenly Father would much rather act in a kind and merciful manner, rather than add to humankind’s misery….[6]
Human Beings have a Penchant for Mischief
… for the mind of humankind applies itself attentively to evil things from youth (lxx). — Man’s attentiveness to evil is not limited to any one evil per se, but has a penchant toward mischief in general. Evil’s existence is not something incidental. Rather, man’s devotion for evil is obvious from the time of his youth—even from the cradle. It is as though man is united and nourished by evil, as well as raised with evil.[7]
n Let us further add: A young child’s character has not yet been fully formed in the first seven years of its life. The child’s nature is much like a smooth waxen tablet that has not yet been stamped with the indelible impressions of good and evil. Anything that appears to be engraved upon it is soon confused and erased because of the wax’s moist nature. This period represents the first developmental stage of the soul’s moral development. [See the Introduction to Rediscovering Philo of Alexandria on Exodus, concerning Pharaoh’s hardened heart for more detail regarding Philo’s use of the wax metaphor.] During the second period, the young child’s soul begins to associate with evil, both with respect to those that it discovers on its own, as well as those evils it learns from other people. Know that the instructors of sin are legion, as are the nurses, pedagogues, parents, society, as well as written and unwritten laws that extol poor behavior. Apart from all these influences, the soul is its own pupil in the school of guilt, which is weighed down by its capacity for causing harm. Thus, the mind of man, says Moses, is “carefully intent upon wickedness from its youth” (Gen. 8:21).[8]
**
Maimonidean Reflections on Genesis
6:12. And God saw that the earth was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon the earth. — Know that all the great evils in the world that people cause to one another are because their intentions, desires, opinions, or religious principles derive from ignorance, which is the absence of wisdom. Take the example of a blind person who has no guide; such a man will always find himself stumbling, causing harm to himself and others. The classes of society behave commensurately according to their ignorance—they not only bring harm to themselves and their fellow species. If only men possessed wisdom, nobody would ever cause any injury to themselves or others, for the knowledge of the truth, will remove hatred and quarrels and prevent people from ever harming one another. This state of society is promised to us by the prophet:
Then the wolf shall be a guest of the lamb,
and the leopard shall lie down with the kid;
The calf and the young lion shall browse together,
with a little child to guide them
Isaiah 11:6
The prophet also points out the cause of this change, for he says that hatred, quarrels, and fighting will end because men will then have a true understanding of God. “They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea” (ibid. ver. 9). Note it well.[9]
11:5. The Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which mortals had built. — The narrative reveals God’s intent to punish man is introduced by the verb “to descend”; comp. הָבָה נֵרְדָה וְנָבְלָה שָׁם שְׂפָתָם “Go to, let us go down and there confound their language” (Gen. 11:7); וַיֵּרֶד יְיָ לִרְאֹת “And the Lord came down to see” (Gen. 11:5); אֵרֲדָה־נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה “I will go down now and see” (Gen. 18:21). Both instances convey the process of divine retribution that is about to unfold in the human realm. However, we must not imagine that the Supreme Being occupies a place to which He will “descend” or “ascend.” God remains infinitely removed from what the ignorant masses imagine.[10]
NOTES: In the end, Maimonides believed that Onkelos (a Roman convert to Judaism credited with translating the Torah into Aramaic) was cautious not to situate God in a spatial sense. That is why he referred to God’s Presence through such idioms as שְׁכִינַת (šĕkînat) or יְקָרָך (yĕqārāk)—metaphors that convey both God’s brilliance and God’s Indwelling Presence among mortals. Based on his understanding of Onkelos, Maimonides believed Onkelos expressed the true intent of the verse—and by doing so, he made God more philosophically discernable to the ordinary person who could not understand the original Hebrew. Onkelos lived in a Hellenistic world that had gone to great lengths to demythologize the Greek and Roman gods. Onkelos tried to demythologize certain problematic passages that stressed God’s more “humanlike” characteristics in his own simple way.
Word Focus: Metaphors of ascent and descent
11:7. “Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another’s speech.” — Grammatically, these two words,עָלָה “he went up,” and יָרַד “he went down,” are the Hebrew terms used concerning ascending and descending. When a body moves from a higher to a lower place, the verb יָרַד, “to go down,” is used; when it moves from a lower to a higher place, עָלָה, “to go up,” is applied. These two verbs are used with regard to greatness and power.
When a man falls from his high position, we say “he has come down,” and when he rises in station, “he has gone up.” Thus, when the Almighty says, הַגֵּר אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבְּךָ יַעֲלֶה עָלֶיךָ מַעְלָה מָּעְלָה וְאַתָּה תֵרֵד מַטָּה מָּטָּה “The resident aliens among you will rise above you higher and higher, while you sink lower and lower” (Deut. 28:43). The same idea is expressed elsewhere וּנְתָנְךָ יְיָ אֱלֹהֶיךָ עֶלְיוֹן עַל כָּל־גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ “The Lord, your God, will set you high above all the nations of the earth” (Deut. 28:1). The prooftext for this idea derives from the passage, “And the Lord exalted Solomon greatly in the eyes of all Israel” (1 Chr. 29:25).
The Sages also employed similar language with respect to what it means to be holy, thus, שֶׁמַּעֲלִין בַּקֹּדֶשׁ וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין “We ascend (ma’alin) in matters pertaining to holiness, and do not go descend (moridin) in holiness.”[11] Similarly, the term “descent” may also denote a lower state of speculation in a figurative sense. When a man directs his thought toward a very mean object, he is said to have “descended”; and similarly, when he directs his thought toward an exalted and sublime object, he is said to have “ascended.”
When used in reference to God, the expressions “to go up” and “to go down” must also be interpreted in this same figurative sense. Sometimes this expression is used concerning retribution, e.g., “that I must go down to see (אֵרֲדָה־נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה) whether or not their actions are as bad as the cry against them that comes to me. I mean to find out” (Gen 18:21; cf. Gen. 11:5). Thus, God’s “descent” as it were serves as visitation for carrying out retribution against the Sodomites… Of course, God’s existence does not exist in a spatial sense but only in relation to absolute existence, greatness, and power. Similarly, whenever God chooses to grant a person a measure of wisdom or prophetic inspiration, God is said to have “descended” upon the individual (cf. Num. 11:17).[12]
*
NOTES
[1] Philo’s Questions on Genesis (QG) 1:97.
[2] Most translations prefer the translation “righteous man” (צַדִּיק; = ṣǎddîq) should not be confused with the term “pious.” Rather, a צַדִּיק is someone whose behavior is wholly given over to the pursuit of צֶדֶק truth and integrity, without any partiality (Lev. 19:15). Such a person avoids commercial fraud and deception (Lev. 19:36). The צַדִּיק is one who truly does not deviate from the ethical in all of his or her personal relationships. Noah was righteous in both his personal conduct and his character. He proved that one man really make a difference in the world.
[3] BT Sanhedrin 108a, Gen. Rabbah 30:9, Tan. Noach 5.
[4] QG 2:22.
[5] QG 2:54.
[6] QG 2:54.
[7] Heir 54-55.
[8] QG 2:54.
[9] Ibid., 3:11.
[10] Guide 1:10.
[11] Mishnah Shekalim 6:4.
[12] Guide 1:10.
*
Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel is spiritual leader of Temple Beth Shalom in Chula Vista and a biblical scholar. He may be contacted via michael.samuel@sdjewishworld.com