alexandria and her schools-第14节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


und　wisdom：　　Philo's　books　taught　him　the　same　truth：　　but　they　taught　him　also；　that　the　search　for　wisdom　was　not　merely　the　search　for　that　which　is；　but　for　Him　who　is；　not　for　a　thing；　but　for　a　person。　　I　do　not　mean　that　Plato　and　the　elder　Greeks　had　not　that　object　also　in　view；　for　I　have　said　already　that　Theology　was　with　them　the　ultimate　object　of　all　metaphysic　science：　　but　I　do　think　that　they　saw　it　infinitely　less　clearly　than　the　old　Jewish　sages。　　Those　sages　were　utterly　unable　to　conceive　of　an　absolute　truth；　except　as　residing　in　an　absolutely　true　person；　of　absolute　wisdom；　except　in　an　absolutely　wise　person；　of　an　absolute　order　and　law；　except　in　a　lawgiver；　of　an　absolute　good；　except　in　an　absolutely　good　person：　　any　more　than　either　they　or　we　can　conceive　of　an　absolute　love；　except　in　an　absolutely　loving　person。　　I　say　boldly；　that　I　think　them　right；　on　all　grounds　of　Baconian　induction。　　For　all　these　qualities　are　only　known　to　us　as　exhibited　in　persons；　and　if　we　believe　them　to　have　any　absolute　and　eternal　existence　at　all；　to　be　objective；　and　independent　of　us；　and　the　momentary　moods　and　sentiments　of　our　own　mind；　they　must　exist　in　some　absolute　and　eternal　person；　or　they　are　mere　notions；　abstractions；　words；　which　have　no　counterparts。

But　here　arose　a　puzzle　in　the　mind　of　Philo；　as　it　in　reality　had；　we　may　see；　in　the　minds　of　Socrates　and　Plato。　　How　could　he　reconcile　the　idea　of　that　absolute　and　eternal　one　Being；　that　Zeus；　Father　of　Gods　and　men；　self…perfect；　self…contained；　without　change　or　motion；　in　whom；　as　a　Jew；　he　believed　even　more　firmly　than　the　Platonists；　with　the　Daemon　of　Socrates；　the　Divine　Teacher　whom　both　Plato　and　Solomon　confessed？　　Or　how；　again；　could　he　reconcile　the　idea　of　Him　with　the　creative　and　providential　energy；　working　in　space　and　time；　working　on　matter；　and　apparently　affected　and　limited；　if　not　baffled；　by　the　imperfection　of　the　minds　which　he　taught；　by　the　imperfection　of　the　matter　which　he　moulded？　　This；　as　all　students　of　philosophy　must　know；　was　one　of　the　great　puzzles　of　old　Greek　philosophy；　as　long　as　it　was　earnest　and　cared　to　have　any　puzzles　at　all：　　it　has　been；　since　the　days　of　Spinoza；　the　great　puzzle　of　all　earnest　modern　philosophers。　Philo　offered　a　solution　in　that　idea　of　a　Logos；　or　Word　of　God；　Divinity　articulate；　speaking　and　acting　in　time　and　space；　and　therefore　by　successive　acts；　and　so　doing；　in　time　and　space；　the　will　of　the　timeless　and　spaceless　Father；　the　Abysmal　and　Eternal　Being；　of　whom　he　was　the　perfect　likeness。　　In　calling　this　person　the　Logos；　and　making　him　the　source　of　all　human　reason；　and　knowledge　of　eternal　laws；　he　only　translated　from　Hebrew　into　Greek　the　name　which　he　found　in　his　sacred　books；　〃The　Word　of　God。〃　　As　yet　we　have　found　no　unfair　allegorising　of　Moses；　or　twisting　of　Plato。　　How　then　has　he　incurred　this　accusation？

I　cannot　think；　again；　that　he　was　unfair　in　supposing　that　he　might　hold　at　the　same　time　the　Jewish　belief　concerning　Creation；　and　the　Platonic　doctrine　of　the　real　existence　of　Archetypal　ideas；　both　of　moral　and　of　physical　phenomena。　　I　do　not　mean　that　such　a　conception　was　present　consciously　to　the　mind　of　the　old　Jews；　as　it　was　most　certainly　to　the　mind　of　St。　Paul；　a　practised　Platonic　dialectician；　but　it　seems　to　me；　as　to　Philo；　to　be　a　fair；　perhaps　a　necessary；　corollary　from　the　Genetic　Philosophy；　both　of　Moses　and　of　Solomon。

But　in　one　thing　he　was　unfair；　namely；　in　his　allegorising。　　But　unfair　to　whom？　　To　Socrates　and　Plato；　I　believe；　as　much　as　to　Moses　and　to　Samuel。　　For　what　is　the　part　of　the　old　Jewish　books　which　he　evaporates　away　into　mere　mystic　symbols　of　the　private　experiences　of　the　devout　philosopher？　　Its　practical　everyday　histories；　which　deal　with　the　common　human　facts　of　family　and　national　life；　of　man's　outward　and　physical　labour　and　craft。　　These　to　him　have　no　meaning；　except　an　allegoric　one。　　But　has　he　thrown　them　away　for　the　sake　of　getting　a　step　nearer　to　Socrates；　or　Plato；　or　Aristotle？　　Surely　not。　To　them；　as　to　the　old　Jewish　sages；　man　is　most　important　when　regarded　not　merely　as　a　soul；　but　as　a　man；　a　social　being　of　flesh　and　blood。　Aristotle　declares　politics　to　be　the　architectonical　science；　the　family　and　social　relations　to　be　the　eternal　master…facts　of　humanity。　Plato；　in　his　Republic；　sets　before　himself　the　Constitution　of　a　State；　as　the　crowning　problem　of　his　philosophy。　　Every　work　of　his；　like　every　saying　of　his　master　Socrates；　deals　with　the　common；　outward；　vulgar　facts　of　human　life；　and　asserts　that　there　is　a　divine　meaning　in　them；　and　that　reverent　induction　from　them　is　the　way　to　obtain　the　deepest　truths。　　Socrates　and　Plato　were　as　little　inclined　to　separate　the　man　and　the　philosopher　as　Moses；　Solomon；　or　Isaiah　were。　　When　Philo；　by　allegorising　away　the　simple　human　parts　of　his　books；　is　untrue　to　Moses's　teaching；　he　becomes　untrue　to　Plato's。　　He　becomes　untrue；　I　believe；　to　a　higher　teaching　than　Plato's。　　He　loses　sight　of　an　eternal　truth；　which　even　old　Homer　might　have　taught　him；　when　he　treats　Moses　as　one　section　of　his　disciples　in　after　years　treated　Homer。

For　what　is　the　secret　of　the　eternal　freshness；　the　eternal　beauty；　ay；　I　may　say　boldly；　in　spite　of　all　their　absurdities　and　immoralities；　the　eternal　righteousness　of　those　old　Greek　myths？　　What　is　it　which　made　Socrates　and　Plato　cling　lovingly　and　reverently　to　them；　they　scarce　knew　why；　while　they　deplored　the　immoralities　to　which　they　had　given　rise？　　What　is　it　which　made　those　myths；　alone　of　all　old　mythologies；　the　parents　of　truly　beautiful　sculpture；　painting；　poetry？　What　is　it　which　makes　us　love　them　still；　find；　even　at　times　against　our　consciences；　new　meaning；　new　beauty　in　them；　and　brings　home　the　story　of　Perseas　or　of　Hercules；　alike　to　the　practised　reason　of　Niebuhr；　and　the　untutored　instincts　of　Niebuhr's　little　child；　for　whom　he　threw　them　into　simplest　forms？　　Why　is　it　that　in　spite　of　our　disagreeing　with　their　creed　and　their　morality；　we　still　persistand　long　may　we　persist；　or　rather　be　compelledas　it　were　by　blind　instinct；　to　train　our　boys　upon　those　old　Greek　dreams；　and　confess；　whenever　we　try　to　find　a　substitute　for　them　in　our　educational　schemes；　that　we　have　as　yet　none？　　Because　those　old　Greek　stories　do　represent　the　Deities　as　the　archetypes；　the　kinsmen；　the　teachers；　the　friends；　the　inspirers　of　men。　　Because　while　the　schoolboy　reads　how　the　Gods　were　like　to　men；　only　better；　wiser；　greater；　how　the　Heroes　are　the　children　of　the　Gods；　and　the　slayers　of　the　monsters　which　devour　the　earth；　how　Athene　taught　men　weaving；　and　Phoebus　music；　and　Vulcan　the　cunning　of　the　stithy；　how　the　Gods　took　pity　on　the　noble…　hearted　son　of　Danae；　and　lent　him　celestial　arms　and　guided　him　over　desert　and　ocean　to　fulfil　his　vowthat　boy　is　learning　deep　lessons　of　metaphysic；　more　in　accordance　with　the　reine　vernunft；　the　pure　reason　whereby　man　perceives　that　which　is　moral；　and　spiritual；　and　eternal；　than　he　would　from　all　disquisitions　about　being　and　becoming；　about　actualities　and　potentialities；　which　ever　tormented　the　weary　brain　of　man。

Let　us　not　despise　the　gem　because　it　has　been　broken　to　fragments；　obscured　by　silt　and　mud。　　Still　less　let　us　fancy　that　one　least　fragment　of　it　is　not　more　precious　than　the　most　brilliant　paste　jewel　of　our　own　compounding；　though　it　be　polished　and　faceted　never　so　completely。　　For　what　are　all　these　myths　but　fragments　of　that　great　metaphysic　idea；　which；　I　boldly　say；　I　believe　to　be　at　once　the　justifier　and　the　harmoniser　of　all　philosophic　truth　which　man　has　ever　discovered；　or　will　discover；　which　Philo　saw　partially；　and　yet　clearly；　which　the　Hebrew　sages　perceived　far　more　deeply；　because　more　humanly　and　practically；　which　Saint　Paul　the　Platonist；　and　yet　the　Apostle；　raised　to　its　highest　power；　when　he　declared　that　the　immutable　and　self…existent　Being；　for　whom　the　Greek　sages　sought；　and　did　not　altogether　seek　in　vain；　has　gathered　together　all　things　both　in　heaven　and　in　earth　in　one　inspiring　and　creating　Logos；　who　is　both　God　and　Man？

Be　this　as　it　may；　we　find　that　from　the　time　of　Philo；　the　deepest　thought　of　the　heathen　world　began　to　flow　in　a　theologic　channel。　　All　the　great　heathen　thinkers　henceforth　are　theologians。　　In　the　times　of　Nero；　for　instance；　Epictetus　the　slave；　the　regenerator　of　Stoicism；　is　no　mere　speculator　concerning　entities　and　quiddities；　correct　or　incorrect。　　He　is　a　slave　searching　for　the　secret　of　freedom；　and　finding　that　it　consists　in　escaping　not　from　a　master；　but　from　self：　not　to　wealth　and　power；　but　to　Jove。　　He　discovers　that　Jove　is；　in　some　most　mysterious；　but　most　real　sense；　the　Father　of　men；　he　learns　to　look　up　to　that　Father　as　his　guide　and　friend。

Numenius；　again；　in　the　second　century；　was　a　man　who　had　evidently　studied　Philo。　　He　perceived　so　deeply；　I　may　say　so　exaggeratedly；　the　analogy　between　the　Jewish　and　the　Platonic　assertions　of　an　Absolute　and　Eternal　Being；　side　by　side　with　the　assertion　of　a　Divine　Teacher　of　man；　that　he　is　said　to　have　uttered　the　startling　saying：　　〃W