Category: Uncategorized

In my last blog, we discussed the concept of nature as an impression made by the intellect of the universe on the creation, like a seal impressed upon wax. In Stoicism, this intellect which pervades the universe and binds it together is called the Logos (Greek for “word” or “reason”), the Greek word from which we get our word “logic.”

The Greek word Logos has it’s parallels in the Hebrew word Davar.

By the word of YHWH were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. (Psalm 33:6)

The Hebrew word for “WORD” is DAVAR which means “word, thing, matter” and comes from the same root as DIVRA (reason, cause)

like Logos, Davar. implies logic.  There are several examples in the Tanak:

But as for me, I would seek unto El, and unto Elohim would I commit my cause (“reason” DIVRA):
(Job 5:8)

I said in my heart, It is because (“for this reason” AL-DIVRAT) of the sons of men that Elohim may sift them: and that they may see, that they themselves are but as beasts.
(Ecc. 3:18)

In the day of prosperity be joyful, and in the day of adversity consider: Elohim has made even the one, as well as the other, to the end that ( “to the logical conclusion that” AL-DIVRAT) man should find nothing after him.
(Eccl. 7:14)

I counsel you, Keep the king’s command: and that, in regard ( “for this reason” AL-DIVRAT) of the oath of Elohim.
(Ecc. 8:2)

The Targums, ancient Aramaic paraphrases of the books of the Tanak, had a parallel Aramaic word, the Memra.

The ancient Hebraic Stoics believed that Abraham’s faith, was not an irrational faith, but a rational faith in the Logos, the rational intellect which pervades the universe.

In Genesis 15:6 we read concerning Abraham:

“And he believed in YHWH, and He counted it to him for righteousness.”
(Gen. 15:6)

The Targums were ancient Aramaic paraphrases of the Torah and the Prophets.  The official Targum to this verse paraphrases:

 “And he believed in the Word (Memra) of YHWH. And He counted it to him for righteousness.”
(Gen. 15:6 Targum Onkelos)

And Targum Psedo-Jonathan has:

“And he believed in YHWH, and had faith in the Word (Memra) of YHWH, and He reckoned it to him for righteousness.”
(Gen. 15:6 Targum Pseudo-Jonathan)

Philo of Alexandria made a very interesting comment about this verse (Gen. 15:6):

“It is best, therefore, to trust in God, and not in uncertain reasoning, or unsure conjectures. “Abraham trusted in the Lord, and it was counted to him for Righteousness” (Gen. 15:6) And Moses governed the people, being testified to that he was faithful with his whole house. But if we distrust our own reason (LOGOS, Word), we shall prepare and build ourselves a city of the mind which will destroy the truth.”
(Philo of Alexandria; Allegorical Interpretation, III, 228)

The ancient Hebraic Stoics saw Abraham’s faith as a rational faith, and ultimately as a faith in the Logos.

The Logos is the Mind of YHWH

It is important to understand the MEMRA is the very expression of the Mind of YHWH.  Philo of Alexandria makes this case as follows:

IV. We must mention as much as we can of the matters contained in his account, since to enumerate them all is impossible; for he embraces that beautiful world which is perceptible only by the intellect, as the account of the first day will show: (16) for God, as apprehending beforehand, as a God must do, that there could not exist a good imitation without a good model, and that of the things perceptible to the external senses nothing could be faultless which wax not fashioned with reference to some archetypal idea conceived by the intellect, when he had determined to create this visible world, previously formed that one which is perceptible only by the intellect, in order that so using an incorporeal model formed as far as possible on the image of God, he might then make this corporeal world, a younger likeness of the elder creation, which should embrace as many different genera perceptible to the external senses, as the other world contains of those which are visible only to the intellect. (17) But that world which consists of ideas, it were impious in any degree to attempt to describe or even to imagine: but how it was created, we shall know if we take for our guide a certain image of the things which exist among us. When any city is founded through the exceeding ambition of some king or leader who lays claim to absolute authority, and is at the same time a man of brilliant imagination, eager to display his good fortune, then it happens at times that some man coming up who, from his education, is skilful in architecture, and he, seeing the advantageous character and beauty of the situation, first of all sketches out in his own mind nearly all the parts of the city which is about to be completed–the temples, the gymnasia, the prytanea, and markets, the harbour, the docks, the streets, the arrangement of the walls, the situations of the dwelling houses, and of the public and other buildings. (18) Then, having received in his own mind, as on a waxen tablet, the form of each building, he carries in his heart the image of a city, perceptible as yet only by the intellect, the images of which he stirs up in memory which is innate in him, and, still further, engraving them in his mind like a good workman, keeping his eyes fixed on his model, he begins to raise the city of stones and wood, making the corporeal substances to resemble each of the incorporeal ideas. (19) Now we must form a somewhat similar opinion of God, who, having determined to found a mighty state, first of all conceived its form in his mind, according to which form he made a world perceptible only by the intellect, and then completed one visible to the external senses, using the first one as a model.

V. (20) As therefore the city, when previously shadowed out in the mind of the man of architectural skill had no external place, but was stamped solely in the mind of the workman, so in the same manner neither can the world which existed in ideas have had any other local position except the divine reason (Logos) which made them; for what other place could there be for his powers which should be able to receive and contain, I do not say all, but even any single one of them whatever, in its simple form? (21) And the power and faculty which could be capable of creating the world, has for its origin that good which is founded on truth; for if any one were desirous to investigate the cause on account of which this universe was created, I think that he would come to no erroneous conclusion if he were to say as one of the ancients did say: “That the Father and Creator was good; on which account he did not grudge the substance a share of his own excellent nature, since it had nothing good of itself, but was able to become everything.” (22) For the substance was of itself destitute of arrangement, of quality, of animation, of distinctive character, and full of all disorder and confusion; and it received a change and transformation to what is opposite to this condition, and most excellent, being invested with order, quality, animation, resemblance, identity, arrangement, harmony, and everything which belongs to the more excellent idea.
(Philo; On Creation IV, 15b-V, 22)

The Logos Permeates the Universe Biding it Together

Solomon identifies the Word with Wisdom speaking

1 “O God of my fathers and Lord of mercy,
who hast made all things by thy word,
2 and by thy wisdom hast formed man,
to have dominion over the creatures thou hast made,
(Wisdom of Solomon 9:1-2 RSV)

And earlier he writes concerning Wisdom:

6 For wisdom is a kindly spirit and
will not free a blasphemer from the guilt of his words;
because God is witness of his inmost feelings,
and a true observer of his heart, and a hearer of his tongue.
7 Because the Spirit of the Lord has filled the world,
and that which holds all things together knows what is said;
(Wisdom of Solomon 1:6-7 RSV)

Philo of Alexandria says of the Word (Greek: Logos):

for all other things are intrinsically and by their own nature loose; and if there is any where any thing consolidated, that has been bound by the word of God, for this word is glue and a chain, filling all things with its essence. And the word, which connects together and fastens every thing, is peculiarly full itself of itself, having no need whatever of any thing beyond. (Philo; Who is Heir of all Things? 188)

And he says of the Law, which he elsewhere identifies  with the Word:

(8) If therefore any one wishes to escape from the difficulties of this question which present themselves in the different doubts thus raised, let him speak freely and say that there is nothing in any material of such power as to be able to support this weight of the world. But it is the eternal law of the everlasting God which is the most supporting and firm foundation of the universe. (9) This it is which, being extended from the centre of the borders, and again from the extremities to the centre, runs through the whole unsubdued course of nature, collecting all the parts and binding them firmly together; for the father who created them has made it the indissoluble bond of the universe. (10) Very naturally and appropriately therefore, all earth will not be dissolved by all water, which the bosom of the earth contains, nor will fire be extinguished by air, nor again will air be burnt up by fire, since the divine law establishes itself as a boundary to all these elements, like a vowel among consonants, so that the universe may, as it were, be harmonious in concert with the music expressed by letters; persuasion, by its own authority, putting an end to the threatening conflicts of contrary natures.
(Philo; Concerning Noah’s Work as a Planter 8-10)

Gershom Scholem writes of the Word:

…the memra– the paraphrase used in the Targumim, the Aramaic Bible translations, to refer to God’s word. The memra is not merely a linguistic device for overcoming the problem of biblical anthropomorphisms; it has theological significance in its own right. The memra….is, as Abelson correctly puts it. “a world-permeating force, a reality in the world of matter or mind, the immanent aspect of Elohim, holding all things under its omnipresent sway.”
(On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead: Basic Concepts in the Kabbalah, by Gershom Scholem pg 181-182)

He here refers to the monumental work by J. Abelson:

“…the Memra has, to the minds of the Targumic authors, some real theological connotation…. it connotes the manifestation on earth and among men of several aspects of -Divine power, goodness, wisdom and justice. The “Word” is a world-permeating force, a reality in the world of matter or mind, the immanent aspect of God holding all things under its omnipresent sway.”
(The Immanence of God in Rabbinic Literature by J. Abelson; p. 159; 1912)

The Memra is the Creator

This “Word of YHWH” was, according to Targum Jonathan, the Creator:

And the Word [Memra] of YHWH created man in his likeness,
in the likeness of YHWH, YHWH created,
male and female created He them.
(Targ. Jonathan Gen. 1:27)

This idea is also put forward in the Jerusalem Targum:

And the Word [Memra] of YHWH said to Moses:
“I am He who said unto the world ‘Be!’ and it was:
and who in the future shall say to it ‘Be!’
and it shall be.” And He said: “Thus you shall say
to the children of Israel: ‘I Am’ has sent me to you.”
(Jerusalem Targum Ex. 3:14)

The Fragmentary Targum of the Torah also expresses that the Word of YHWH was the Creator:

The first night, when the “Word of YHWH”
was revealed to the world in order to create it,
the world was desolate and void,
and darkness spread over the face of the abyss
and the “Word of the Lord” was bright and illuminating
and He called it the first night.
(Fragmentary Targum Ex. 12:42)

That the Word of YHWH was the Creator can also be seen in the Tanak itself:

By the Word (DAVAR) of YHWH were the heavens made,
and all the hosts of them by the Spirit of His mouth.
(Ps. 33:6)

The Memra is the Image of Elohim

Philo’s concept of the “Word” (Logos) is the “image of Elohim” which served as the pattern for the creation of man in Gen. 1:26-27. Philo writes:

(30) And air and light he considered worthy of the pre-eminence. For the one he called the breath of God, because it is air, which is the most life-giving of things, and of life the causer is God; and the other he called light, because it is surpassingly beautiful: for that which is perceptible only by intellect is as far more brilliant and splendid than that which is seen, as I conceive, the sun is than darkness, or day than night, or the intellect than any other of the outward senses by which men judge (inasmuch as it is the guide of the entire soul), or the eyes than any other part of the body. (31) And the invisible divine reason, perceptible only by intellect, he calls the image of God. And the image of this image is that light, perceptible only by the intellect, which is the image of the divine reason, which has explained its generation. And it is a star above the heavens, the source of those stars which are perceptible by the external senses, and if any one were to call it universal light he would not be very wrong; since it is from that the sun and the moon, and all the other planets and fixed stars derive their due light, in proportion as each has power given to it; that unmingled and pure light being obscured when it begins to change, according to the change from that which is perceptible only by the intellect, to that which is perceptible by the external senses; for none of those things which are perceptible to the external senses is pure. (On Creation 30-31)

…For God does not seem to have availed himself
of any other animal existing in creation as his model
in the formation of man; but to have been guided,
as I have said before, by his own Word (Logos) alone…
(Philo; On Creation XLVIII (139))

But the divine Word (Logos) which is above these
does not come into any visible appearance,
inasmuch as it is not like to any of the things
that come under the external senses,
but is itself an image of God,
the most ancient of all the objects of intellect
in the whole world, and that which is placed
in the closest proximity to the only truly existing God,
without any partition or distance being interposed
between them:
(On Flight and Finding XVIII (101))

Now, Bezaleel, being interpreted, means God in his shadow.
But the shadow of God is his Word (Logos), which he used
like an instrument when he was making the world.
And this shadow, and, as it were, model, is the archetype of other things. For, as God is himself the model of that image which he has now called a shadow, so also that image is the model of other things,
as he showed when he commenced giving the law to the Israelites,
and said, “And God made man according to the image of God.”[Gen. 1:26] as the image was modeled according to God, and as man was modeled according to the image, which thus received the power and character of the model.
(Allegorical Interpretations III 96)

For if it was necessary to examine the mortal body
of the priest that it ought not be imperfect through
any misfortune, much more was it necessary to look
into his immortal soul, which they say is fashioned
in the form of the living God. Now the image of God
is the Word (Logos), by which all the world was made.
(The Special Laws I, 81)

What is the man who was created? And how is that man
distinguished who was made after the image of God? (Gen. 2:7).
This man was created as perceptible to the senses,
and in the similitude of a Being appreciable only by the intellect;
but he who in respect of his form is intellectual and incorporeal,
is the similitude of the archetypal model as to appearance,
and he is the form of the principal character;
but this is the Word (Logos) of God, the first beginning of all things,
the original species or the archetypal idea,
the first measure of the universe.
(Q & A on Gen. I, 4)

Why is it that he speaks as if of some other god,
saying that he made man after the image of God,
and not that he made him after his own image? (Gen. 9:6).
Very appropriately and without any falsehood
was this oracular sentence uttered by God,
for no mortal thing could have been formed
on the similitude of the supreme Father of the universe,
but only after the pattern of the second deity,
who is the Word (Logos) of the supreme Being;
since it is fitting that the rational soul of man should bear it
the type of the divine Word (Logos); since in his first Word (Logos)
God is superior to the most rational possible nature.
But he who is superior to the Word (Logos) holds his rank
in a better and most singular pre-eminence, and how could
the creature possibly exhibit a likeness of him in himself?
Nevertheless he also wished to intimate this fact,
that God does rightly and correctly require vengeance,
in order to the defense of virtuous and consistent men,
because such bear in themselves a familiar acquaintance
with his Word (Logos), of which the human mind is
the similitude and form.
(Q & A on Gen. II 62)

This parallels what we read in the Targum:

And the Word (Memra) of YHWH
created man in his likeness,
in the likeness of YHWH, YHWH created,
male and female created He them.
(Targ. Jonathan Gen. 1:27)

The Memra is the Covenant Maker

The Word was also the covenant maker. For example the Noachdic covenant was between the Word and all mankind:

And YHWH said to Noah,
“This is the token of the covenant
which I have established between My Word [Memra]
and between all flesh that is upon the earth.
(Targum Onkelos Gen. 9:17)

The Word also made the Abrahamic covenant as Targum Onkelos also paraphrases:

And I will establish my covenant
between My Word [Memra] and between you…
(Targum Onkelos Gen. 17:7)

The Word of YHWH was also the giver of the Mosaic Covenant and the Torah as the Jerusalem Targum (as quoted above) makes the Torah giver “the Word of YHWH” in Ex. 20:1. It was to th e Word that Jacob turned to for salvation:

Our father Jacob said: “My soul does not wait for salvation
such as that wrought by Gideon, the son of Joash,
for that was but temporal; neither for a salvation
like that of Samson, which was only transitory;
but for that salvation which You have promised to come,
through Your Word unto Your people, the children of Israel;
for your salvation my soul hopes.”
(Targum Jonathan Gen. 49:18)

The Memra is Messiah

The Targums also identify this Memra as the Messiah:

Behold, my servant, the Messiah, whom I bring,
my chosen in whom one delights:
as for my Word [MEMRA], I will put my Holy Spirit upon Him;
He shall reveal my judgment unto the nations.
2 He shall not cry aloud, nor raise a clamor,
 and He shall not lift up His voice in the street.
3 The meek who are like a bruised reed He shall not break,
and the poor who are as a glimmering wick with Him, He will not quench:
He shall bring forth judgment unto truth.
4 He shall not faint nor be weary,
till He have established judgment in the earth;
and the isles shall wait for His Torah.
(Targum Jonathan to Isaiah 42:1-4)

Likewise Philo of Alexandria identified the Logos as the Messiah:

“The head of all things is the eternal Word (Logos) of the eternal God, under which, as if it were his feet or other limbs, is placed the whole world, over which He passes and firmly stands. Now it is not because Messiah is Lord that He passes and sits over the whole world, for His seat with His Father and God but because for its perfect fullness the world is in need of the care and superintendence of the best ordered dispensation, and for its own complete piety, of the Divine Word (Logos), just as living creatures (need) a head, without which it is impossible to live.”
(Q&A on Exodus, II, 117)

Understanding the concept of the Logos (Davar, Memra) is important because the development of self-control and fortitude as a means of controlling destructive emotions and holds that becoming a clear and unbiased thinker allows one to understand the universal reason (logos). We will pick up with that topic in my next blog.

The opening verse of Torah reads:

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ

“In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth.”

There is a great truth embedded in the Hebrew grammar of this verse. In his monumental work On Creation, the first century Jewish writer Philo of Alexandria wrote:

“(7) For some men, admiring the world itself rather than the Creator of the world, have represented it as existing without any maker, and eternal; and as impiously as falsely have represented God as existing in a state of complete inactivity, while it would have been right on the other hand to marvel at the might of God as the creator and father of all, and to admire the world in a degree not exceeding the bounds of moderation. (8) But Moses, who had early reached the very summits of philosophy, and who had learnt from the oracles of God the most numerous and important of the principles of nature, was well aware that it is indispensable that in all existing things there must be an active cause, and a passive subject; and that the active cause is the intellect of the universe, thoroughly unadulterated and thoroughly unmixed, superior to virtue and superior to science, superior even to abstract good or abstract beauty; (9) while the passive subject is something inanimate and incapable of motion by any intrinsic power of its own, but having been set in motion, and fashioned, and endowed with life by the intellect, became transformed into that most perfect work, this world. And those who describe it as being uncreated, do, without being aware of it, cut off the most useful and necessary of all the qualities which tend to produce piety, namely, providence:” (Philo; On Creation 7-9)

These words recall the Wisdom of Solomon which reads:

“For all men who were ignorant of God were foolish by nature;
and they were unable from the good things that
are seen to know him who exists,
nor did they recognize the craftsman while
paying heed to his works;”
(Wisdom of Solomon 13:1 RSV)

As well as those ascribed to Timaeus in Plato’s Timaeus:

…we therefore who are purposing to deliver a discourse concerning the Universe, how it was created or haply is uncreate, … Now first of all we must, in my judgement, make the following distinction. What is that which is Existent always and has no Becoming? And what is that which is Becoming always and never is Existent? Now the one of these is apprehensible by thought with the aid of reasoning, since it is ever uniformly existent; whereas the other is an object of opinion with the aid of unreasoning sensation, since it becomes and perishes and is never really existent. Again, everything which becomes must of necessity become owing to some Cause; for without a cause it is impossible for anything to attain becoming. … Now the whole Heaven, or Cosmos, or if there is any other name which it specially prefers, by that let us call it,—so, be its name what it may, we must first investigate concerning it that primary question which has to be investigated at the outset in every case,—namely, whether it has existed always, having no beginning of generation, or whether it has come into existence, having begun from some beginning. It has come into existence; for it is visible and tangible and possessed of a body; and all such things are sensible, [28c] and things sensible, being apprehensible by opinion with the aid of sensation, come into existence, as we saw, and are generated. And that which has come into existence must necessarily, as we say, have come into existence by reason of some Cause. Now to discover the Maker and Father of this Universe were a task indeed; and having discovered Him, to declare Him unto all men were a thing impossible.
(Plato’s Timaeous 27-28)

Philo is saying that every event in the universe is part of a chain of cause and effect. Everything that happens is the effect of a previous cause, and that cause was an effect of a previous cause, in a chain of cause and effect, reaching back to the First Cause (Creator). And since no effect is greater than it’s cause (an idea today we would call the Second Law of Thermodynamics), that Creator must be superior to anything in the universe.

This same truth is revealed in the grammatical structure of Genesis 1:1:

בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ

“In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth.”

The first word בראשית means “In the beginning” the next word is the verb ברא “created” then the word אלהים (Elohim) means “God”.

The key word here is את which is a word which cannot be translated into English (or any other language). It is a unique Hebrew word that points to the next word as receiving the action of the verb, in this case pointing to השמים “the heavens” and again to הארץ “the earth” as receiving the action from the verb “create”. This word literally denotes the passive subject of an active cause. So in the literal Hebrew text of Genesis 1:1 we see revealed that “the heavens and the earth” are the passive subject, acted upon by the active cause of creation, and that the source of the active cause of creation was Elohim “the intellect of the universe” and that this event was “the beginning” or first “cause”.

Next Philo addresses the idea that the Creation was based on a model. He writes:

We must mention as much as we can of the matters contained in his account, since to enumerate them all is impossible; for he embraces that beautiful world which is perceptible only by the intellect, as the account of the first day will show: (16) for God, as apprehending beforehand, as a God must do, that there could not exist a good imitation without a good model, and that of the things perceptible to the external senses nothing could be faultless which wax not fashioned with reference to some archetypal idea conceived by the intellect, when he had determined to create this visible world, previously formed that one which is perceptible only by the intellect, in order that so using an incorporeal model formed as far as possible on the image of God (Gen. 1:27), he might then make this corporeal world, a younger likeness of the elder creation, which should embrace as many different genera perceptible to the external senses, as the other world contains of those which are visible only to the intellect. (17) But that world which consists of ideas, it were impious in any degree to attempt to describe or even to imagine: but how it was created, we shall know if we take for our guide a certain image of the things which exist among us. When any city is founded through the exceeding ambition of some king or leader who lays claim to absolute authority, and is at the same time a man of brilliant imagination, eager to display his good fortune, then it happens at times that some man coming up who, from his education, is skilful in architecture, and he, seeing the advantageous character and beauty of the situation, first of all sketches out in his own mind nearly all the parts of the city which is about to be completed–the temples, the gymnasia, the prytanea, and markets, the harbour, the docks, the streets, the arrangement of the walls, the situations of the dwelling houses, and of the public and other buildings. (18) Then, having received in his own mind, as on a waxen tablet, the form of each building, he carries in his heart the image of a city, perceptible as yet only by the intellect, the images of which he stirs up in memory which is innate in him, and, still further, engraving them in his mind like a good workman, keeping his eyes fixed on his model, he begins to raise the city of stones and wood, making the corporeal substances to resemble each of the incorporeal ideas. (19) Now we must form a somewhat similar opinion of God, who, having determined to found a mighty state, first of all conceived its form in his mind, according to which form he made a world perceptible only by the intellect, and then completed one visible to the external senses, using the first one as a model. (Philo; On Creation 15-19)

These are reminiscent of the words Plato ascribes to Timeaus:

But when the artificer of any object, in forming its shape and quality, keeps his gaze fixed on that which is uniform, using a model of this kind, that object, executed in this way, must of necessity [28b] be beautiful; but whenever he gazes at that which has come into existence and uses a created model, the object thus executed is not beautiful. (Plato; Timeaus 28)

However, Philo derives this idea from Gen. 1:26-27:

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
(Gen. 1:26-27)

Philo continues:

(20) As therefore the city, when previously shadowed out in the mind of the man of architectural skill had no external place, but was stamped solely in the mind of the workman, so in the same manner neither can the world which existed in ideas have had any other local position except the divine reason (Greek: the Logos) which made them; for what other place could there be for his powers which should be able to receive and contain, I do not say all, but even any single one of them whatever, in its simple form? (21) And the power and faculty which could be capable of creating the world, has for its origin that good which is founded on truth; for if any one were desirous to investigate the cause on account of which this universe was created, I think that he would come to no erroneous conclusion if he were to say as one of the ancients did say: “That the Father and Creator was good; on which account he did not grudge the substance a share of his own excellent nature, since it had nothing good of itself, but was able to become everything.” (22) For the substance was of itself destitute of arrangement, of quality, of animation, of distinctive character, and full of all disorder and confusion; and it received a change and transformation to what is opposite to this condition, and most excellent, being invested with order, quality, animation, resemblance, identity, arrangement, harmony, and everything which belongs to the more excellent idea. (On Creation 20-22)

Here Philo directly references Timaeus as quoted by Plato when he says: “…as one of the ancients did say: ‘That the Father and Creator was good; on which account he did not grudge the substance a share of his own excellent nature, since it had nothing good of itself, but was able to become everything.“‘ The quote is found in Timaeus 29:

Let us now state the Cause wherefore He that constructed it constructed Becoming and the All. He was good, and in him that is good no envy ariseth ever concerning anything; and being devoid of envy He desired that all should be, so far as possible, like unto Himself. This principle, then, we shall be wholly right in accepting from men of wisdom as being above all the supreme originating principle of Becoming and the Cosmos.For God desired that, so far as possible, all things should be good and nothing evil; wherefore, when He took over all that was visible, seeing that it was not in a state of rest but in a state of discordant and disorderly motion, He brought it into order out of disorder, deeming that the former state is in all ways better than the latter. (Timaeus 29-30)

Elsewhere Philo discusses this idea of Creation from a model when he writes:

(129) So Moses, summing up his account of the creation of the world, says in a brief style, “This is the book of the creation of the heaven and of the earth, when it took place, in the day on which God made the heaven and the earth, and every green herb before it appeared upon the earth, and all the grass of the field before it sprang up.” Does he not here manifestly set before us incorporeal ideas perceptible only by the intellect, which have been appointed to be as seals of the perfected works, perceptible by the outward senses. For before the earth was green, he says that this same thing, verdure, existed in the nature of things, and before the grass sprang up in the field, there was grass though it was not visible. (130) And we must understand in the case of every thing else which is decided on by the external senses, there were elder forms and motions previously existing, according to which the things which were created were fashioned and measured out. For although Moses did not describe everything collectively, but only a part of what existed, as he was desirous of brevity, beyond all men that ever wrote, still the few things which he has mentioned are examples of the nature of all, for nature perfects none of those which are perceptible to the outward senses without an incorporeal model. (Philo On Creation 129-130)

Which Philo derives from the Torah:

And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
(Gen. 2:5)

Philo also writes on the process of Creation being comparable to engraving in a wax tablet, or s seal making an impression in wax:

(6) For as the smallest seal receives imitations of things of colossal magnitude when engraved upon it, so perchance in some instances the exceeding beauty of the description of the creation of the world as recorded in the Law, overshadowing with its brilliancy the souls of those who happen to meet with it, will be delivered to a more concise record after these facts have been first premised which it would be improper to pass over in silence.

We must mention as much as we can of the matters contained in his account, since to enumerate them all is impossible; for he embraces that beautiful world which is perceptible only by the intellect, as the account of the first day will show: (16) for God, as apprehending beforehand, as a God must do, that there could not exist a good imitation without a good model, and that of the things perceptible to the external senses nothing could be faultless which wax not fashioned with reference to some archetypal idea conceived by the intellect, when he had determined to create this visible world, previously formed that one which is perceptible only by the intellect, in order that so using an incorporeal model formed as far as possible on the image of God, he might then make this corporeal world, a younger likeness of the elder creation, which should embrace as many different genera perceptible to the external senses, as the other world contains of those which are visible only to the intellect. (17) But that world which consists of ideas, it were impious in any degree to attempt to describe or even to imagine: but how it was created, we shall know if we take for our guide a certain image of the things which exist among us. When any city is founded through the exceeding ambition of some king or leader who lays claim to absolute authority, and is at the same time a man of brilliant imagination, eager to display his good fortune, then it happens at times that some man coming up who, from his education, is skilful in architecture, and he, seeing the advantageous character and beauty of the situation, first of all sketches out in his own mind nearly all the parts of the city which is about to be completed–the temples, the gymnasia, the prytanea, and markets, the harbour, the docks, the streets, the arrangement of the walls, the situations of the dwelling houses, and of the public and other buildings. (18) Then, having received in his own mind, as on a waxen tablet, the form of each building, he carries in his heart the image of a city, perceptible as yet only by the intellect, the images of which he stirs up in memory which is innate in him, and, still further, engraving them in his mind like a good workman, keeping his eyes fixed on his model, he begins to raise the city of stones and wood, making the corporeal substances to resemble each of the incorporeal ideas. (19) Now we must form a somewhat similar opinion of God, who, having determined to found a mighty state, first of all conceived its form in his mind, according to which form he made a world perceptible only by the intellect, and then completed one visible to the external senses, using the first one as a model. (Philo; On Creation 6, 15-19)

This idea is derived from the Tanak which reads:

Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened (טבע)? or who laid the corner stone thereof; (Job. 38:6 KJV)

Before the mountains were settled (טבע), before the hills was I brought forth:(Proverbs 8:25 KJV)

The Hebrew word used here is טָבַע TAVA Strong’s 2883 “to make an impression”

This verb is the root for the Hebrew word טבֶַע TEVA “nature, reputation”

In other words, embedded in the Hebrew language is the idea that “nature” is an impression on Creation, made by the Creator, like a seal makes on wax!

From this information, Philo comes to the profound conclusion:

 (3) And his exordium, as I have already said, is most admirable; embracing the creation of the world, under the idea that the law corresponds to the world and the world to the law, and that a man who is obedient to the law, being, by so doing, a citizen of the world, arranges his actions with reference to the intention of nature, in harmony with which the whole universal world is regulated. (Philo; On Creation 3)

Or as he states elsewhere:

…for he [Moses] was not like any ordinary compiler of history, studying to leave behind him records of ancient transactions as memorials to future ages for the mere sake of affording pleasure without any advantage; but he traced back the most ancient events from the beginning of the world, commencing with the creation of the universe, in order to make known two most necessary principles. First, that the same being was the father and creator of the world, and likewise the lawgiver of truth; secondly, that the man who adhered to these laws, and clung closely to a connection with and obedience to nature, would live in a manner corresponding to the arrangement of the universe with a perfect harmony and union, between his words and his actions and between his actions and his words.
(On the Life of Moses 2, 48)

In my own endeavor to incorporate the ancient philosophy of Hebraic Stoicism as my own personal philosophy, I have sought to better understand the work known as “On the Supremacy of Reason”, otherwise known as 4th Maccabees. In my search for a better understanding of this treatise, I have consulted not only the Tanak (which the author cites frequently) but the works of Philo of Alexandria (who was himself a Hebrew Stoic), as well as the ancient Greek and Aramaic (Syriac) versions of this document, in order to explore its profound teachings.

Having made such a deep investigation, and wishing to share the fruits with others seeking this same path, I am writing this commentary for the benefit of the restoration of Hebraic Stoicism.
The author opens with the words:

The subject that I am about to discuss is most philosophical, that is, whether devout reason is sovereign over the emotions. So it is right for me to advise you to pay earnest attention to philosophy.
(4Macc. 1:1 RSV)

By “philosophical” the author refers not just to philosophy in general, but clearly to the philosophy of Stoicism.

The key term “devout reasoning” is in the Greek ευσεβης λογισμος combining ευσεβης “godly, devout, reverent “ with λογισμος “calculation, reasoning, thought, reasoning power” from the Greek root λογος (Logos).  The term is similar to Philo’s term θειον λογον “Divine Reasoning”.

The Aramaic text has רעינא שרישא דשלם literally “true mind of peace” or “true mind of shalom”.  The Aramaic word שרישא is used in the Old Syriac and Peshitta in Matthew 22:16 when the Talmidim say to Yeshua “Teacher, we know that you are true” and where the DuTillet/Munster Hebrew has “we know you are am man of the faithful ones אמונים))”

In Genesis 15:6 we read concerning Avraham:

“And he believed (האמן) in YHWH, and He counted it to him for righteousness.” (Gen. 15:6)

The verb “believed” here in the Hebrew is the root for the word “faithful ones” in Matthew 22:16.

The official Targum to Genesis 15:6 paraphrases:

 “And he believed in the Word (Memra) of YHWH. And He counted it to him for righteousness.” (Gen. 15:6 Targum Onkelos)

And Targum Pseudo-Jonathan has:

“And he believed in YHWH, and had faith in the Word (Memra) of YHWH, and He reckoned it to him for righteousness.” (Gen. 15:6 Targum Pseudo-Jonathan)

Philo of Alexandria made a very interesting comment about this verse (Gen. 15:6):

“It is best, therefore, to trust in God, and not in uncertain reasoning, or unsure conjectures. “Abraham trusted in the Lord, and it was counted to him for Righteousness” (Gen. 15:6) And Moses governed the people, being testified to that he was faithful with his whole house. But if we distrust our own reason (LOGOS, Word), we shall prepare and build ourselves a city of the mind which will destroy the truth.” (Philo of Alexandria; Allegorical Interpretation, III, 228)

Hebraic Stoicism combines Stoic λογισμος “rational thought” with Jewish ευσεβης “devoutness” in a combination that the Aramaic translator understood as the רעינא שרישא דשלם “true mind of peace.” 

This system combined devout Torah Observant Judaism with the highly rational Stoic philosophy. The author of this treatise will demonstrate thru the arguments that it presents, that this philosophy Hebraic Stoicism naturally arises from the Torah, and not simply an attempt to synthesize something new by combining Judaism with Stoicism.. 

 For the subject is essential to everyone who is seeking knowledge, and in addition it includes the praise of the highest virtue — I mean, of course, rational judgment. (4Macc. 1:2 RSV)

The Greek word for “rational judgment” in this verse is φρονησεως “prudence” or “wisdom”.  The Aramaic has רעינא רמיסא “calm mind”.  The phrase reminds us of Proverbs 14:17 which reads differently in the Aramaic:

A man hasty in whatever he does never seeks counsel, But a wise man is calm (רמיסא). (Proverbs 14:17 Peshitta Aramaic)

Hebraic Stoicism is an idea which the world needs now more than ever. It is a philosophy that demonstrates that logic and Judaeo-Christian faith are not diametrically opposed, but are natural partners. Hebraic Stoicism is a philosophy that naturally combines the precepts of Judaeo-Christian faith, with rational thought, in a manner that demonstrates that the two are fully compatible.

What is Hebraic Stoicism?

Hebraic Stoicism Videos

Watch for additional content in coming days!