by ceasing to be Jews and philosophers.  Philo foresaw this danger, and he tried to combat it by presenting his people with a commentary of the Bible which should satisfy their intellectual and speculative bent, but at the same time preserve their loyalty to the Bible and the law.  To the Greek world he offered a philosophical religion, to his own people a religious philosophy.  Thus the allegorical commentary is the crowning point of his work, the offering of his deepest thought to the most cultured of the community; and though much of its detail had only relevancy for its own time, and its method may repel our modern taste, yet the spirit which animates it is of value to all ages, and should be an inspiration to every generation of emancipated Jews.  That spirit is one of fearless acceptance of the finest culture of the age combined with unswerving love of the law and loyalty to catholic Judaism.

We have already treated of the general characteristics of Philo’s method of allegorical interpretation, but we must now consider rather more closely the way in which he employs it.  The general principle upon which he depends is, that besides and in addition to the literal meaning which the Bible bears for the common man, it has a hidden and deeper meaning for the philosopher.  It is, as it were, a sort of palimpsest; the writing on the top all may read, the writing below the student alone can decipher.  With the rabbis Philo holds that the Torah was written “in the language of the sons of man,"[113] but he believes with them again that it contains all wisdom.  And if the ideas of reason do not appear in its literal meaning, then they must be searched out in some inner interpretation.  Commenting on the verse in Genesis (xi. 7), “Let us confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech,” he says:  “Those who follow the literal and obvious interpretation think that the origin of the Greek and barbarian languages is here described; [the contrast between Greek, on the one hand, and barbarian—­in which Hebrew, it seems, is included—­on the other, is remarkable].  I would not find fault with them, because they also, perhaps, employ right reason, but I would call on them not to remain content with this, but to follow me to the metaphorical renderings, considering that the actual words of the holy oracle are, as it were, shadows of the real bodies, and the powers which they reflect are the true underlying ideas."[114]

Elsewhere he tells a story of the condign punishment which befell a godless and impious man, perchance a Samaritan Jew, who made mock of the race of allegorical interpreters, jeering at the idea that the change of names from Abram to Abraham and from Sarai to Sarah contained some deep meaning.  He soon paid a fitting penalty for his wicked wit, for on some very trivial pretext he went and hanged himself.  Which was just, says Philo; for such a rascal deserved a rascal’s death.[115] It is noteworthy that the Talmud also lays