Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

critical studies 2003 265
20384. A. M. Mazzanti, ‘The “Mysteries” in Philo of Alexandria,’ in
F. Calabi (ed.), Italian Studies on Philo of Alexandria, Studies in Philo of
Alexandria and Mediterranean Antiquity 1 (Boston 2003) 117–129.
The author deals with various Philonic passages in which a terminology
typical of the mysteries is used. Scholars widely differ in their views, ranging
from the claim that Jewish mysteries did exist in the Hellenistic world to
the consideration of the use of certain terms only as literary formulae. Philo
expresses a negative evaluation of pagan mysteries. The mysteries of God, on
the other hand, acquire their value in that they lead to knowledge of the divine.
An ethical perfection emerges, determined by the formation of a harmonious
ordering of the components of human nature; the perspective is that of a
happiness open to all those that seek it. A study of Philo’s ‘mystical’ terminology
thus turns out to touch upon fundamental theses of Philonic thought. (HMK;
basedinpartontheeditor’sintroductorysummary)
20385. M. Merino Rodriguez, Clemente de Alejandría: Stromata IV–
V; Martirio cristiano e investigación sobre Dios. Introducción, traducción
ynotas, Fuentes Patrísticas 15 (Madrid 2003).
This volume is a continuation of the bilingual edition of Clement of Alexandria
(cf. RRS 9657 and above 9870). Taking into account the research of A.
van den Hoek (RRS 8834), it mentions more than hundred Philonic passages
as antecedents of Clement’s text. The author emphasizes the influence of Philo
in the description of the figure of Abraham in Str.5.8. It is noteworthy that the
author identifies Philo with the author whom Clement has in mind when he
speaks about hê barbaros philosophia,inStr. 5.93.4, (p. 482), although Clement
does not name Philo here nor anywhere else in the rest of this volume. It is also
pointed out that it is common for Clement to present Philonic ideas as belonging
to Plato, e.g. at Str. 5.73.3 (p. 447). (JPM)
20386.S.M.Nadler,‘SpinozaandPhilo:theAllegedMysticisminthe
Ethics,’ in J. Miller and B. Inwood (edd.), Hellenistic and Early Modern
Philosophy (Cambridge 2003) 232–250.
The author, who is Spinoza’s biographer and a leading exponent of his
thought, is strongly opposed to the view that the Dutch–Jewish philosopher’s
metaphysics can be seen as a mystically inclined pantheism (or pan-entheism)
which was ultimately, if unconsciously, derived from the Kabbalah. One way of
illustrating the issues involved is to make a comparison between Spinoza and
his distant Jewish predecessor Philo. The main body of the article consists of
insightful analyses of the main lines of theological thought espoused by the
two thinkers. Philo is a mystic in Nadler’s use of the term for three reasons.
The human being requires either divine revelation or an act of divine grace to
obtain a true knowledge of God’s existence, but even so the full knowledge of
God’s essence simply remains beyond reach. Spinoza on the other hand sees the