theory of vision in psalm 58 and Aristotle's De Sensu and De Anima, and Philo's De Ebrietate

PSALM 58 COMPARED WITH PASSAGES IN DE EBRIETATE OF PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA

The Mikhtam Psalm 58 is easily compared with important passages in De Ebrietate (On Drunkenness) of Philo of Alexandria. The comparisons will straightforwardly argue, that Philo has been considering especially the Mikhtam Psalm 58 when writing some important passages of De Ebrietate. In the book De Ebrietate is easily found reference to the wife of Lot in the Ebr 164, Philo here writing
MOI DOKEI LOT O THUGATROPOIOS MALISTA KERAINEIN ARREN KAI TELEION EN PSUKHE FUTON ANATHREPSAI ME DUNAMENOS DUO GAR THUGATERAS EK TES LITHOUMENES GUNAIKOS ESKHKEN
Philo here notices that Lot was parent only to daughters- he had two daughters from his wife who was turned to stone (LITHOUMENES)- Lot could not raise complete male growths in the soul. This statement in De Ebrietate 164 very clearly paraphrases the Biblical history of Lot, especially the LITHOUMENES here notices the Gen 19:26
KAI EPEBLEPSEN HE GUNE AUTOU EIS TA OPISO KAI EGENETO STELE HALOS
This reference to the history of the wife of Lot in Gen 19 thus clearly notices in this writing of De Ebrietate the ideas of STELE and generally ideas of stone. Philo further notices in Ebr 164 concerning the wife of Lot that
She was lagging behind and seeing round to old and familiar things, and was then remaining among them in the manner of stele without soul
HUSTERIDZOUSAN KAI PERIBLEPOMENEN TA ARKHAIA KAI SUNTROFA KAI APSUKHOU TROPON STELES EN MESOIS AUTOIS KATAMENOUSAN
In this Midrashic interpretation of the Gen 19:26 the STELE is clearly noticed. Also for other Mikhtam Psalms has been noticed that Philo makes references to them especially in such texts where he writes interpretations of this Biblical history of wife of Lot, understandably, because here the Greek Bible writes the important word STELE noticing the stele pillar of stone material. The writing of the wife of Lot occurs in this De Ebrietate 164 here in very notorious text: this writing of De Ebrietate is well known among the historians of philosophy for its clear listing and discussing of the famous TROPES OF AENESIDEMUS, especially in Ebr 170 ff and – the writing of Ebr 164ff. is very clearly echoing the teachings of Sceptic philosophers (see, for example Colson’s comment for Ebr 164ff “the sections which follow are very extraordinary. Philo seems to jettison his general dogmatic principles and to enrol himself in the school of the Sceptics. In fact he reproduces so clearly several of the ten tropes of the famous sceptic Aenesidemus, as given by Diogenes Laertius and Sextus Empiricus, that he enables the historians of philosophy to lay down a terminus ad quem for the date of that philosopher” (Philo V, 314 in the Introduction to the book De Ebrietate). The general philosophical questions of the Sceptic philosophers concerned truth and impossibility of attaining to the truth and descriptions of sources and circumstances of making errors in sensations and in making assent. The writing of De Ebrietate 164ff. very detailed considers such difficulties, and is very notoriously writes also interpretation of the history of the wife of Lot. Among the Mikhtam Psalms the Psalm 58 in the Greek Bible very clearly commences with questioning
EI ALETHOS ARA DIKAIOSUNEN LALEITE
This statement in the Greek Bible explicit writes alert to consider if they were in accordance with TRUTH speaking concerning righteousness. The Greek Bible notices this topic often in this Psalm 58 (the Psalm 57 in the Greek Bible)- 58:2 writing question if EUTHEIA KRINETE, the 58:4 noticing APELLOTRIOTHESAN (of ALLOTRIO, undergoing alterations) and ELALESAN PSEUDE. Importantly, it is this Psalm 58 of the Mikhtam Psalms that writes the clear and unmistakable references to practises of magic and doings of magicians and the incantations- clearly noticing of the snakes and the 58:6 writing of the FARMAKOU TE FARMAKEUOMENOU. Very importantly, Philo clearly makes references to THIS Mikhtam Psalm 58 in many details of his writing in De Ebrietate 164ff in manner following the Sceptics. The following study will argue for this- and thus the following argumentation will argue that the Mikhtam Psalm 58 was in the time of Philo applied for highly educated Jewish discussions with then very influential philosophies of the Sceptics (they are, of course, even currently very important for many philosophical argumentations)- the current argument will argue for this reading of the Psalm 58 in the Greek Bible; but the current study will NOT argue that the Greek translation itself of this Psalm 58 into the Greek language would have been written to discuss with some earlier forms of Sceptic thought. The writing of the 58:2 EI ALETHOS LALEITE to 58:4 ELALESAN PSEUDE clearly notices in this Mikhtam Psalm 58 questioning for truth and notices of false speaking and thus clearly motivates Philonic references to this Psalm in his writing in the style of Sceptic philosophers here in Ebr 164ff. Philo writes here of errors concerning visions and seeing especially in Ebr 181ff. and here Philo writes clearly words that unmistakably refer to the ideas of STELOGRAPHEIN of these Mikhtam Psalms, especially the Ps 58. Philo concludes the Ebr 183 with writing
KAI MURIA ALLA HUPO TES FANERAS OPSEOS PSEUDOGRAFEITAI, OIS OUK AN TIS EU FRONON OS BEBAIOIS SUNEPIGRAPSAITO
The words PSEUDOGRAFEITAI and SUNEPIGRAPSAITO concluding this discussion of alterations of visions and illusory visions of Ebr 181-183 thus very clearly notice the GRAFEIN writing or depicting- and more specifically they notice the EPIGRAMMA and EPIGRAFEIN- these words especially notice in Philonic writings carving inscriptions on stele, such esp. in Philo’s book Heres where Heres 30 writes the only occurrence of STELOGRAPHEIN in Philonic literature and words of EPIGRAMMA and EPIGRAFEIN are importantly written. Philo writes the word SUNEPIGRAFO here also in Ebr 205 in very Sceptic style discussion for suspending judgement- Philo here considers that mind cannot clearly and firmly grasp neither sleeping nor waking. Importantly, after this concluding Philo commences more discussing the gluttony following drunkenness- thus is the SUNEPIGRAFO in Ebr 205 in very important text written. This discussion is importantly written in Ebr 205 to be interpretation of the two daughters of Laban, the Ebr 203 referring to Gen 19:33-35. It is in the descriptions of episodes of Laban that also the word PSEUDOGRAFEIN is written in this De Ebrietate. Philo writes here in Ebr 47 concerning Laban who did not see the true laws of nature describes wrongly (PSEUDOGRAFEI) the laws among people. Philo is also in Ebr 46 commenting making errors in apprehending something
TA DE PERI SOMA TE KAI EKTOS KHROMASI KAI SKHEMASI PEPOIKILMENA PROS APATEN AISTHESEOS EUPARAGOGOU THAUMADZETAI
Philo here notices some one wandering like miracles the colours and forms concerning what is outside the body and concerning of body in such manner that the senses are deceived. Importantly, the Hebrew name Laban exactly means white and whiteness, and especially for Platonic writings of senses white and seeing white are very fundamental for descriptions of working of seeing. Very importantly, thus Philo writes in this discussion of STELE (noticing the history of wife of Lot) and writes of errors of senses with words SUNEPIGRAFEIN and PSEUDOGRAFEIN. Clearly is the central topic of STELOGRAPHEIN Psalms 56-60 thus referred to.

Many parallels to the Psalm 58 written in the Greek Bible are easily found in this writing of De Ebrietate. For the Psalm 58:6 the writing of FARMAKOU TE FARMAKEUOMENOU PARA SOFOU is notorious; and in De Ebrietate Philo writes notably often of FARMAKON. Philo notices wine and especially unmixed wine here to be chemical producing folly, writing thus of AFROSUNES FARMAKON in Ebr 128 and Ebr 27; this notice connects to the central topic of this book De Ebrietate, concerning describing wine drinking and drunkenness. Notably, such writing of AFROSUNES FARMAKON so much echoes this Ps 58:6 noticing SOFOS and FARMAKON. The word FARMAKON also appears in the Ebr 184; the Ebr 183 writes of errors in visions and illusions, and writes of PSEUDOGRAFEIN and SUNEPIGRAFEIN, these comparing to the STELOGRAFEIN of this Psalm 58. The Ebr 184 writes of rightly measuring the medicines in accordance with the knowledge of medical science
TON KATA TEN IATRIKEN EPISTEMEN EKHEI FARMAKON
Philo here discusses the effects of measuring the medicines rightly, or making erroneous measurements either excessive or too weak, and their harmful consequences. The word FARMAKON also is written in the Ebr 172 in somewhat more general meaning, considering
TAKHA POU TES SOTERIOU FUSEOS ALEKSIKAKON SULLEPSEOS DORESAMENES TEN EIS TO POLYKHROMATON AUTOIS TROPEN FARMAKON
Here Philo writes of some animals to which the helpful nature has given changing of colours to be remedy (FARMAKON) for the dangers of captivity. This word FARMAKON echoes also this Ps 58:6 writing of the FARMAKON, and more attentive considerations of these texts further establish Philonic reference here to the Psalm 58. Philo writes here in Ebr 172-175 a list of animals that change their colours. This is written to discuss the trope of AENESIDEMUS called
PARA TEN TON ZOON EKSALLAGEN
This trope of Aenesidemus considers that the differencies of the constitution of animals give rise to differencies of sensations coming from such animals. Very importantly, Colson comments that the list of the examples in the animal world here in Ebr 172-174 written is notable “the introduction of these examples, which have no parallel in Sextus or Diogenes, is quite illogical...Philo, or the source from which he drew, was attracted by the interest of these supposed changes in the animal world and could not refrain from noticing them in a passage which deals with animals” (Philo V, 506). However, easily is found that Philo with this list of animals is commenting the Psalm 58, this emphasising his reference to Psalm 58 here, also writing of FARMAKON, STELE and GRAFEIN, especially EPIGRAFEIN. For the Philonic style of writing interpretations of Biblical texts, such reference to Psalm 58 in this highly Sceptic style writing of De Ebrietate was surely obvious, because so many illusory or visual sensations are here in De Ebr considered or their erroneous interpretations and the Psalm 58:1-2 commences writing that EIS STELOGRAFIAN EI ALETHOS...Philo commences in Ebr 172 writing of chameleon and polypus
KHORIS GAR TON KRINONTON IDE KAI TON KRINOMENON ENIA OIA TON KHAMAILEONTA, TON POLYPODA. This notoriously echoes the Ps 58:6-7 writing of the FARMAKON and noticing TAS MULAS TON LEONTON. The Ps 58:5 also notices the snake, such crawling creature; and Philo continues the description of the chameleon noticing its changing colours similar to places where it is crawling
TEN KHROAN ALLATTONTA TOIS EDAFESIN OMOIOUSTHAI KATH’ ON EIOTHEN ERPEIN
The notice of the polypus finds parallel in the Psalm 58:10 where some bowl or pot is noticed; the Greek Bible here writes PRO TOU SUNIENAI TAS AKANTHAS HUMON TEN RAMNON- and often such bowls or pots occur in literature with their names noticing how many feet they had. Also Philo here connects such polypus to waters- this further comparably to the usual water containing pots with many feet- Philo here specifying the polypus changing its colours growing similar to the rocks of sea to which it is clinging
TAIS KATA THALATTES PETRAIS, ON AN PERIDRAKSETAI
To these creatures polypus and chameleon Philo then notices that the nature has given the ability to change their colours to be remedy (FARMAKON) for dangers of captivity. In this list Philo clearly writes thus reference to the Psalm 58, in this discussion considering truth, error and sensations. Philo writes here in Ebr 174 a further example of such changing of colours of creatures-
THERION O KALEITAI TARANDROS, MEGETHOS MEN BOOS OUK APODEON, ELAFO DE TON TOU PROSOPOU TUPON EMFERESTATON LOGOS EKHEI TOUTO METABALLEIN AEI TAS TRIKHAS PROS TE TA KHORIA KAI TA DENDRA...OS DIA TEN TES KHROAS OMOIOTETA LANTHANEIN TOUS ENTUGKHANONTAS
Here Philo writes description of “elk” (so translation of Colson here), that was known for its changing colour of its hair to be similar of its place and the trees and its thus escaping the sight of those it meets. Philo writes that such creature is famously occurring in the land of Scythians, known also as Geloans (TOIS KALOUMENOIS GELOOIS). Attentive reading of this descriptions finds easily parallels in the Mikhtam Psalm 60. There the Ps 60:8-9 writes of AGALLIASOMAI...GALAAD echoing the KALOUMENOIS GELOOIS in Ebr 174; the notice of the change of the colour of the hair notices in Ps 60:4 where are emphatically changes describes, also the SUNETARAKSAS – this noticing the TRIKS (nom. Greek for hair) and also noticing the TARANDROS “elk”. Philo emphasises here in Ebr 174 that such ability of changing colour of hair makes such “elk” difficult to catch and helps its evading the passers-by; and so notices Ps 60:6 TOU FUGEIN APO PROSOPOU TOKSOU. Also is notable the statement of the Mikhtam Psalm 56:7 PAROIKESOUSIN KAI KATAKRUPSOUSIN noticing for Readers of Greek sojourning in a place in hiddenness, or sojourning in a place and hiding themselves. Philo also writes example of creatures in Ebr 173 considering how the neck of dove changes its colours- and mention of dove does find notorious parallel in the commencing of the Mikhtam Psalm 56:1 (Hebrew) YL JWNT ALM RHQJM that writes of the Jona, that is, the dove. Philo here writes a notorious Midrashic interpretation of statements of the Psalm 56 (the LXX Psalm 55) for describing the variable colours of the dove. The Psalm 56 in the Greek Bible concludes with the words EN FOTI ZOONTON, thus describing something of the light of the living beings; and writing an ingenuous interpretation of these statements, Philo describes in Ebr 173 exactly how the neck of dove is seen to change its colours in thousand varieties in the sun light, writing that
TON DE AUKHENA TES PERISTERAS EN HELIAKAIS AUGAIS OU KATENOESAS MURIAS KHROMATON ALLATTONTA IDEAS
This clear description of observation of natural creatures and their alteration of their colours is in this writing of De Ebrietate 173 a very ingenuous Midrashic interpretation of details of the Mikhtam Psalm 56 writing of the Jona-dove and concluding EN FOTI ZOONTON.

Further textual details in this discussion of De Ebrietate notice to the attentive Readers, that writing this text Philo is making references especially to the Mikhtam Psalm 58. Philo commences in the Ebr 175 discussion of another trope of the Sceptic AENESIDEMUS, writing here of the trope called
O PARA TEN TON ANTHROPON DIAFORAN
Thus is this trope named by Sextus Empiricus, and this trope considers the difficulties and impossibilities of apprehension due to changing of the impressions because of the changes in the situation of the observers themselves. De Ebr 176 writes of this
OU GAR MONON ALLOTE ALLOS TA AUTA KRINOUSIN ALLA KAI ETEROS ETEROI
This notices that different observers receive different impressions from objects at different times. Philo writes to exemplify this trope descriptions for situations where something is liked by some people but disliked by other people. The Ebr 177 writes description of Philo’s having attended some theatre and noticed that some single tune of melody sung (ENOS MELOUS) by the actors or played by the musicians has produced totally different effects among the audience. Some people in the audience are utterly praising such melodies and tunes; but some other among that audience have become utterly irritated by such melody, leaving then the theatre and very importantly, then they have stopped their ear with their both hands so that echoes of such tunes would no further irritate their souls- especially here are notable the descriptions of
OS KAI TEN THEAN KATALIPONTAS ETI KAI PROSAPOKLEIOMENOUS EKATERA TON KHEIRON TA OTA
This is notable Midrashic interpretation of Psalm 58:5-6 writing in the Greek
BUOUSES TA OTA AUTES, ETIS OUK EISAKOUSETAI FONEN EPADONTON
This Greek text of the Psalm 58:5-6 notices exactly stopping ears and not hearing to the voice of those who are singing. Once more it is very important to notice that this text from the Psalm 58:5-6 is then followed by the notice of FARMAKOU TE FARMAKEUOMENOU PARA SOFOU that was already in this study noticed for its clear parallels in De Ebrietate, especially Ebrietate 184-185 describing amounts of chemicals and the science of medicine and the Ebr 172 writing of the different animals having been given by the nature the special ability to change their colours for remedy for the dangers of capture, TEN EIS TO POLYKHROMATON AUTOIS TROPEN FARMAKON. Philo writes here in De Ebrietate thus references especially to the Mikhtam Psalm 58. The Mikhtam Psalm 58 in the Greek Bible also notices creatures of different ages; for the readers considering some philosophical theories such writing is very specific notice of important alteration for living beings, their being young, adult and elderly beings. Philosophically thinking Readers thus might suppose Philo making at least some references also to such alterations when thus writing of further trope considering O PARA TAS PERISTASEIS. Philo indeed does continue the discussion of this trope after now quoted writing of the theatre and some of the audience leaving the theatre covering their ears after some for them irritating tunes and melodies. Philo continues thus in the Ebr 178 the discussion of this trope noticing that every one is
MURIAS METABOLAS KAI TROPAS DEKHOMENOS KATA TE SOMA KAI PSUKHEN
Especially, Philo notices for such alterations that people are some times healthy, some times they are sick; some times people are sleeping, some times awake; and importantly, they are young and they are old. Such notices parallel clearly the writing of the Psalm 58, especially 58:4 APELLOTRIOTHESAN OI AMARTOLOI, and the 58:2 noticing HUIOI TON ANTHROPON, the 58:7 even noticing the whelps of lions. Especially is notorious the statement of the 58:2 writing
EUTHEIA KRINETE OI HUIOI TON ANTHROPON
This statement exhorting people to make right judgements directly notices the topic of this trope- alterations of people their being younger and elder, and their making judgements (KRINEIN). Importantly, now the KRINEIN is used in these context of epistemology to denote judgements, not in the juridical sense of the KRINEIN; so is the KRINEIN in these discussions of De Ebrietate written and so can the KRINEIN of 58:2 also be comprehended.

Further very important parallel to the writings of Psalm 58 is found in Philo’s discussing of the trope called by Sextus Empiricus O PARA TAS THESEIS KAI TA DIASTEMATA KAI TOUS TOPOUS (see PH 1.118-120), so writes also Philo in this Ebr 181. Philo follows here discussing the examples of fishes in the sea and that some oars seem to be bent under water; different illustrations for this is there written by Sextus Empiricus, noticing in PH 1.118-120 pillar, tower and ship- and concerning ship noticing how it appears to be larger and moving when seen near and its appearing smaller and steady to observers situated far from it (DIASTEMATA); and here is also written the example of that oar seems to be bent under water. Importantly, the Psalm 58:8-9 writes of
OS HUDOR DIAPOREUOMENON ENTENEI
This statement in the Greek Bible notices how living (or streaming) waters make stretching – this statement is clear although the current division of verses discourages the Readers from finding this clear statement concerning waters (once more the division into verses is difficult for the Readers). This notice of stretching by waters here in Psalm 58:8-9 constitutes clear parallel to the notice of Ebr 182 writing
E TOUS KATA THALATTES IKHTUS OUKH OROMEN OPOTE TAS PTERUGAS DIATEINONTES ENNEKHOINTO, MEIDZOUS AEI TES FUSEOS PROFAINOUMENOIS
The Translation of Colson for this statement reads
“We see that fishes in the sea, when they swim with their fins stretched, always look larger than nature has made them” (Philo III, 413). Philo had many contemporary parallels for writing such description of magnified visions seen through waters, especially seeing fishes magnified in waters. Especially important is that then wide spread cult of Atargatis, according to the descriptions of Lucian, did also include observations of fishes in the fish ponds and making observations of their huge magnitudes- Lucian much writes of this in the De Dea Syria. This specific writing of Philo was more discussed by the current writer in the Book “Divination by Bowls in Bible, Septuagint, Qumran Texts, Philo and Matthew 13:1-12. Magnified Visions from Glass Bowls in Bible Interpretations” (2007), the Chapter 2.5.4. there more interpreting this text of magnified fish in Ebrietate 182 and noticing Hellenistic context. The current study establishes that the highly Sceptic style discussion of senses in De Ebrietate is writing many Midrashim clearly referring to the Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16 in the Old Testament, especially the Psalm 58 there being referred to. It is very important that these Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16 write the only occurrences of the word STELOGRAFEIN in the Greek Bible- the GRAFEIN exactly does mean production of visual signs and visions. We can thus retrieve important pieces of ancient Jewish somewhat theoretical writing of production of visions and visual signs- importantly, this Philonic writing of De Ebrietate 164ff. is very clearly written writing of philosophical style, discussing with contemporary philosophies- and this writing of De Ebrietate is widely also recognised for its philosophical writing among current historians of philosophy. It is further very important to notice that Philo of Alexandria writes these somewhat more philosophical style considerations of senses and sensations in this writing of De Ebrietate- this writing is profoundly a Midrash for the Old Testament statement of Noah’s wine drinking according to the Genesis 9. Noah’s becoming sober from his wine drinking is described in Gen 9:24 WJJQZ NH MJJN WJDY (Hebrew Bible); and this statement is profoundly studied in the De Sobrietate by Philo of Alexandria. Importantly, prophetic state of mind is often described to be some sober drunkenness. We notice also that the very philosophical writing of the senses is in De Ebrietate written to be Midrash for wine drinking, the Gen 19:33 writing of the daughters of Laban that they EPOTISAN TON PATERA OINON, this quoted in the Ebr 166- the Ebr 164 already had noticed the wife of Lot who had become STELE HALOS. We can thus conclude that these Jewish traditions concerning wine and wine cups contained in the writings of Philo of Alexandria descriptions of productions of visions and visual signs and sensations written with very specialised and philosophical style writing, discussing with contemporary philosophical theories. The traditions of wine and wine cups especially notice the Biblical histories of Noah and wine drinking, so that the Hebrew QZ words are always important (WJJQZ NH MJJN WJDY), also some Qumranic writings of the QZ thus being . Philo’s more philosophical writing of such theories of producing of visions in De Ebrietate make clear Midrashim for details in the Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16- these Psalms expressly write of the STELOGRAFEIN or production of visual signs and visions; and in Hebrew Bible the STELOGRAFEIN translates the MTKM or Mikhtam, this rare word thus noticing vision-producing and even referring to the famous Kittim so often noticed in the Qumranic writings. Thus is found important theoretical discussion concerning producing of visions with philosophically very specialised writing among the Jewish of the Hellenistic times.

Philo writes in the discussion of the Ebr 172 considering the trope of Aenesidemus O PARA TEN TON ZOON EKSALLAGEN (see Sextus Empiricus PH 1.36 and for more of this trope in PH 1.40ff). Writing of the alterations of colours is generally for the Greek and Hellenistic theory of seeing very serious argument indeed, because of the central role the colour has for the seeing. Aristotle writes of the senses and sensations in De Anima very extensively; and the objects proper to the sense of seeing are especially colours. Some notices to Aristotle’s writing of the sense of seeing are here helpful for better comprehending the seriousness of these examples from nature mentioned by Philo concerning the change of colours. Aristotle writes in De An II.7 commencing the more extensive writing of the sense of vision that
OU MEN OUN ESTIN E OPSIS TOUT’ ESTIN ORATON. ORATON D’ ESTIN KHROMA TE, KAI O LOGO MEN ESTIN EIPEIN, ANONUMON TUGKHANEI ON
All writings of Aristotle are very detailed and very difficult and much debated, but here major idea for discussing the sense of sight notices that the visible is object of sight. Aristotle here further notices that such visible are colour and something else: ORATON D’ ESTIN KHROMA (418a26-28). Further Aristotle writes here even more specifically TO GAR ORATON ESTI KHROMA. TOUTO D’ ESTI TO EPI TOU KAT’ AUTO ORATOU; thus is noticed that the visible is colour- and that such colour is on something that in itself is visible (418a28-30). Thus is the colour (KHROMA) very fundamental for the sense of sight according to the De Anima of Aristotle. For the sense of seeing is further very central the idea of some transparent medium, and De An II.7 writes of the DIAFANES transparent medium
PAN DE KHROMA KINETIKON ESTI TOU KAT’ ENERGEIAN DIAFANOUS
Here is noticed that every colour produces some movement in the actually transparent (418b1-2). Further is written in De An II.7 concerning light, ESTI TI DIAFANES (418b3-4); Aristotle notices among such transparent media air, water and many solid objects (POLLA TON STEREON), thus writing in 418b5-7. What might be such transparent solid objects- the modern Readers might well suppose some crystals and possibly glass objects (that is, transparent glass objects!) thus been noticed. Aristotle writes further in 418b10-11 that TO DE FOS OION KHROMA ESTI TOU DIAFANOUS thus considering light in some sense to be colour of the transparent, although writing more difficult statement here FOS DE ESTIN E TOUTOU ENERGEIA TOU DIAFANES E DIAFANES writing thus a difficult statement concerning the actuality of the transparent, and light (418b9-10). Further continuing the writing of sense of sight, Aristotle here in De An II.7 emphasises that what is seen in the light is colour, TO MEN EN FOTI OROMENON KHROMA (419a9-10). Very important although difficult statement of the essence of colour is here written in 419a10-11 TOUTO GAR EN AUTO TO KHROMATI EINAI TO KINETIKO EINAI TOU KAT’ ENERGEIAN DIAFANOUS E D’ ENTELEKHEIA TOU DIAFANOUS FOS ESTIN. This is VERY fundamental statement of the essence of colour. Furthermore, Aristotle writes also of the sense of sight in De Sensu. There Aristotle considers more questions of potential and actual and senses (439a). Aristotle continues here writing of De Anima and notices PERI FOTOS...OTI ESTI KHROMA TOU DIAFANOUS KATA SUMBEBEKOS. OTAN GAR ENE TI PURODES EN DIAFANEI E MEN PAROUSIA FOS E DE STERESIS SKOTOS (439a18-21). Here Aristotle notices observable bodies and colour and colour’s appearing in their limits or surfaces TO GAR KHROMA E EN TO PERATI ESTIN E PERAS (439a30-31); thereafter is a notice to the theories of the Pythagoreans written. Further he writes in 439b10-11 that KHROMA AN EIE TO TOU DIAFANOUS EN SOMATI ORISMENO PERAS, thus noticing the limit of observable body and the transparent, and there appearing colour- more specifically this describes KHROMA AN EIE. Very important notice of production of colours seen through air or waters is written here in De Sensu 440a6-10
EIS MEN OUN TROPOS TES GENESEOS TON KHROMATON OUTOS, EIS DE TO FAINESTHAI DI’ ALLELON, OION ENIOTE OI GRAFES POIOUSIN, ETERAN KHROAN EF’ ETERAN ENARGESTERAN EPALEFOUSIN, OSPER OTAN EN HUDATI TI E EN AERI BOULONTAI POIESAI FAINOMENON
This describes exactly attempts for making something seen in waters or in air (EN AERI!) and the appearance of colours of that object to the sight in such situations, the DI’ ALLELON being here central. Aristotle here continues in De Sensu 440a13-15 writing of the situation DI’ ALLELON and writes the statement
POLLAI DE KAI OUTOS ESONTAI KHROAI TON AUTON TROPON TO PROTERON EIREMENO LOGOS GAR AN EIE TIS TON EPIPOLES PROS TA EN BATHEI, TA DE KAI OLOS OUK EN LOGO
Aristotle writes here very clearly concerning attempts of those people OI GRAFES to make visions through water (and through air), clearly writing example of sun seen with different colours in different air conditions. Why does Aristotle here write of POLLAI KHROAI? Does this POLLAI denote the numerousness of different colours? Other obvious possibility is that such POLLAI refers to spatially magnified visions seen from objects through water filled glass bowls, glass chalices, glass cups and glass bottles. Aristotle in this De Sensu specifically writes that the colour is something that is limit of the observed body and the transparent, especially in 439b10-13 KHROMA AN EIE TO TOU DIAFANOUS EN SOMATI ORISMENO PERAS. KAI AUTON DE TON DIAFANON OION HUDATOS KAI EI TI ALLO TOIOUTON. Notoriously, here is especially WATER noticed to be example of such TRANSPARENT. Thus is very important question the comprehension of POLLAI KHROAI in the situation of making something visible through water (and air). Clearly, such POLLAI can here with arguable grounds be comprehended to notice that the limits of observable bodies seem to be spatially stretched from the waters, that is, transparent water containers produce magnified visions of objects. The full and comprehensive academic discussion of these difficult details of Aristotle’s writings and their later interpretations is, however, to be left to specialists of that philosophy. (Also many statements especially in Meteorologica of Aristotle are for such discussions of notorious importance). Importantly, Aristotle here writes of those attempting to produce such visions the term OI GRAFES; the current study is devoted to translating and commenting the Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16 of the Old Testament, the Greek Bible writing for the Hebrew word Mikhtam the notorious word STELOGRAFIA. Aristotle refers here to the example of seeing sun either white when it is directly seen, and seeing sun red if seen through DIA AKHLUOS KAI KAPNOU. Aristotle’s writing of colour and sense of sight is very difficult; but these references to the important writings in De Anima do clearly emphasises to the Readers of the very fundamental role of colour for seeing and the sense of sight. Thus Philo’s writing in De Ebrietate concerning the changes of COLOURS of animals, the chameleon, polypus, “elk” and dove noticed address very important questions concerning the impressions arriving to eyes and the functioning of the sense of sight and mind’s working.


comparison of theory of seeing in Philo of Alexandria's De Ebrietate (the Sceptic discussion), and Aristotle's De Sensu and De Anima, for study of Mikhtam Psalm 58, written by Pasi Pohjala 2009, copyright Pasi Pohjala 2009 based on fre art licence http://artlibre.org

theory of dream visions in Aristotle and De Somniis of Philo

The current study attempts to translate the Mikhtam Psalms of the Old Testament, the Psalms 56-60 and 16, and for these Psalms is a Commentary written in this study for clarifying the principles of translation and for arguing the here written translation into English. Very many parallels to these Psalms are found also in the writings of Philo of Alexandria, understandably enough, because Philonic writings are vast and complicated writings. Many parallels are found especially in Philo’s writing of dreams- especially his writings in the books De Somniis 1 and 2 have now been found very important with their writing many references to the Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16. Therefore some notices of writings of dreams in the Hellenistic world is advisable; such topic is, however, well known to be vast study of numerous and very difficult books. Important information of Hellenistic theories for comprehending dreams and sleeping can be found among Aristotle’s writings: the current study wishes to notice some important details of Aristotle’s theory of dreams and prophecy in sleep for thus discussing more the environment of Greek and Hellenistic philosophy that was often so well known to Philo and that is so manifold and often so difficult noticed in his writings. The current study wishes to notice especially the books of Aristotle writing theory of prophecy in sleep with the Greek title PERI TES KAT’ HUPNON MANTIKES, (de Divinatione per Somnia, or hereafter referred Div.Somn.). Also is here studied some theories in the writing of the theory of sleep in Aristotle’s book PERI ENUPNION (de Insomniis, hereafter referred Insomn.). The Greek text here follows the ed. of Sir David Ross of these Books in the Parva Naturalia (1955); and especially are noticed the English translations of these Books by J. I. Beare in The Works of Aristotle Translated into English (vol. III, 1931), and the currently popular translation by W. S. Hett in the LCL 288. The current study is still written for commentary of the Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16 in the Old Testament. These Psalms are in the Greek Bible specially distinguished by their title STELOGRAFIA that in these Psalms always translates the Hebrew word MIKHTAM but does not occur in any other writing of the Greek Bible. This study of the theory on prophecy in sleep and theory of sleep and these Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16 can now be commenced by noticing that Aristotle writes in the commencing of the PERI TES KAT’ HUPNON MANTIKES very interesting reference to STELE, writing in 462b24-27
TO GAR PERI TON EF’ HERAKLEIAIS STELAIS E TON EN BORUSTHENEI PROORAN TINAS, HUPER TEN HEMETERAN EINAI DOKSEIEN AN SUNESIN EUREIN TOUTON TEN ARKHEN
This writing continues the commencing of the discussion of divine causation of dreams- Aristotle discusses the theory that it is God who sends dreams- and then writes these notices of PERI TON EF’ HERAKLEIAIS STELAIS and TON EN BORUSTHENEI- and for the current world, these words are well attested in the Mss. Here is notoriously written notice of seeing something and the STELE- and thereafter are the dreams discussed to be signs (SEMEIA). The currently followed translation of such STELAIS comprehends these to be Pillars of Hercules (Beare), similarly trl. Hett writing Pillars of Heracles. In the ancient world the Pillars of Hercules were, of course, well known reference to certain place. The attentive Readers should, however, be cautious for possibility of writing such word to symbolise something or some objects. Once more it is important to notice that the STELE generally denotes some block of stone, and that Herodotus writes the word STELE to denote even “block of rock crystal in which the Ethiopian mummies were cased” (so in the Liddell-Scott for “STELE”). The attentive Reader thus considers these writings with very special detail. Especially, the PROORAN is therefore very important- this word denotes “foresee”, this noticing the ability to foresee or predict future events and occurrences, but importantly, the PROORAN does denote also “see before one” and “see what is just before the eyes” (see Liddell-Scott 1492), these obviously comprehending the meaning of the Greek PRO. Currently such PROORAN is here comprehended to notice foreseeing something (thus also Hett and Beare), especially foreseeing some events occurring at the Pillars of Hercules (so e.g. the commentary of Ross “of the supposed power of certain people to foresee events in distant parts no reasonable explanation can be found” (1955, 279)). However, the attentive Reader surely considers if the notice of the Pillars of Hercules is here written in some symbolic meaning- such is more possible because this text is writing of dreams and prophecy and therefore can be supposed to write in some places some more symbolical writings. The Readers will also notice the PERI TON EF’ HERAKLEIAIS STELAIS writing the EF’ or EPI- such notice easily echoes the EPIGRAMMA and EPIGRAFEIN that were written on STELAI of obelisk style (for example, Philo is found to write such EPIGRAMMA and EPIGRAFEIN for the STELE to denote the signs and inscriptions written or carved on such STELAI). Furthermore, Aristotle here continues writing if dreams are possibly SIGNS (SEMEIA) for events. The Readers will therefore surely consider that this writing of Heracles’ pillars with good grounds can be considered to denote some object (or some special device) in front of a observer who attempts to see there something occurring in front of his eyes. This notice of the Aristotle’s writing in the PERI TES KAT’ HUPNON MANTIKES is thus very important notice to further specify the writing of the STELOGRAFIA in the Greek Bible writing of the Mikhtam Psalms.

The notice of such special prophetic style seeing and Pillars of Hercules written here by Aristotle can be further compared with noticing some details in the writings of Philo of Alexandria. The attentive searching for possible parallels focuses the attention especially to the Q. G. II.5 (Quaestiones et Solutiones in Genesin, II). The Readers can read some studies of the history of these mainly in the Armenian language preserved books Quaestiones by Philo of Alexandria; the current study merely notices the details of Q.G. II.5 important for THE CURRENT STUDY; here is the translation of Yonge followed, this translation based on the Latin translation of these mainly in Armenian preserved very important Books. The Q.G. II.5 comments the Gen 6:15 writing
“why did God give the measures of the ark in the following manner; the length to be of three hundred cubits, and the breadth thereof to be fifty cubits, and the height to be thirty cubits: and above it was to be raised to a point in one cubit, being brought together gradually like an OBELISK?” (trl.Yonge). This writing writes much of the measurements of width, height and breadth and notices an OBELISK- being based on the Younge’s thus translating the Latin translation of the Armenian text of Quaestiones. The Greek Bible here does not, of course, write words denoting pillars or obelisks, neither do these many times translated Philonic texts with this mention of obelisk make specific reference to the Door of the Ark- this is in detail more studied by Philo in the following Q.G. II.6. Philo’s commentary of this text in the Q.G. II.5 is very notoriously writing in much detail of measurements (and Philo writes of numbers very often in the style of Pythagorean school); here are written of measurements of the ark, the animals and measurements of different creatures. Very importantly, in this writing of Q.G. II.5 Philo makes also an interesting reference to Heraclitus (clearly referring to the Greek philosopher Heraclitus; but with regard to the notorious and complex stages of transmission of these writings of Quaestiones in Armenian manuscripts and thereafter more well known in the Latin translations, even such reference to Heraclitus is important for the current study of Heracles’ pillars mentioned by Aristotle in theory of prophecy in sleep and for the notices of STELOGRAFIA in the Old Testament Mikhtam Psalms 56-60 and 16). In this Q.G. II.5 Philo notices Heraclitus’ saying that the number thirty is called “generation”, Philonic writing here “on which account it was not without some foundation and sufficient reason that Heraclitus called that number “generation,” when he said: a man in thirty years from the time of his birth can become a grandfather”. This notice of Heraclitus attests Philonic writing of Heraclitus and numbers in such text that mostly studies numbers and measurements and writes of an obelisk. Philo can here make special reference to Heracles and pillars. It is now to be emphasised that Philo writes of the theory of senses and sensations often interpreting the place Charran and Abraham’s migrating (see, for example, current author’s writing of the Charran texts in the Book “Divination by Bowls in Bible, Septuagint, Qumran texts, Philo and Matthew 13:1-12. Magnified Visions from Glass Bowls in Bible Interpretations” (2007), the Ch. 4.5. “Philonic allegories of Haran, the Place of Seeing: the Cavities of Vision”)- and some of these interpretations of senses and Charran write the word STELE, interestingly enough, because the name Haran among all names in the Bible somehow does resemble the name Hercules. (Philo very specifically writes in the interpretations of Haran that it symbolises some cavities for senses; attentive Readers now recall that generally the STELE does notice some block of stone, even blocks of rock crystal where Ethiopian mummies were buried, thus STELE in some texts noticing some carved or somewhat hollowed block of stone, too. It is to be further studied how Philo writes STELE in interpretations of Haran.). Thus can be noticed that in the Philonic writings it is the Q.G. II.5 that appears to be important text for the current writing of STELE, especially for the Pillars of Hercules noticed by Aristotle in his PERI TES KAT’ HUPNON MANTIKES.

In the Books PERI TES KAT’ HUPNON MANTIKES and PERI ENUPNION Aristotle writes notoriously often seeing something in waters, or seeing something reflected in waters. It is very important to notice that the treatise of prophecy in the sleep actually concludes with a notice of seeing visions and figures reflected in waters, this according to Aristotle is illustrating skilful judging of dreams; this text is for the current study of visions and reflections seen in waters obviously very central, having the very authority of Aristotle himself, and therefore this statement from conclusion of the PERI TES KAT’ HUPNON MANTIKES is here to be noticed (464b5-12)
TEKHNIKOTATOS D’ ESTI KRITES ENUPNION OSTIS DUNATAI TAS HOMOIOTETAS THEOREIN TAS GAR EUTHUONEIRIAS KRINEIN PANTOS ESTIN. LEGO DE TAS HOMOIOTETAS, OTI PARAPLESIA SUMBAINEI TA FANTASMATA TOIS EN HUDASIN EIDOLOIS, KATHAPER KAI PROTERON EIPOMEN. EKEI DE, AN POLLE GINETAI E KINESIS, OUDEN HOMOIA GINETAI E EMFASIS KAI TA EIDOLA TOIS ALETHINOIS
The translation of J. I. Beare of this text reads
“The most skilful interpreter of dreams is he who has the faculty of observing resemblances. Any one may interpret dreams that are vivid and plain. But, speaking of ‘resemblances’, I mean that dream presentations are analogous to the forms reflected in water, as indeed we have already stated. In the latter case, if the motion in the water be great, the reflexion has no resemblance to its original, nor do the forms resemble the real objects.” (Translation of J. I. Beare in The Works of Aristotle Translated into English, vol III, 1931). This text writes of interpreting dreams- central is here the ability to observe resemblances, or likenesses. Importantly, here are such resemblances by Aristotle compared to PARAPLESIA SUMBAINEI TA FANTASMATA TOIS EN HUDASIN EIDOLOIS; such resemblances are like forms reflected in water. Importantly, this statement of Aristotle thus specifies that skilful interpretation of dreams is very comparable to the ability of seeing forms reflected in water. Aristotle does write much of forms reflected in waters also in the book PERI ENUPNION, especially 461a14-18
OSTE KATHAPER EN HUGRO, EAN SFODRA KINE TIS OTE MEN OUDEN FAINETAI EIDOLON OTE DE FAINETAI MEN DIESTRAMMENON DE PAMPAN, OSTE FAINESTHAI ALLOION E OION ESTIN, EREMESANTOS DE KATHARA KAI FANERA, OUTO KAI EN TO KATHEUDEIN FANTASMATA
The translation of J. I. Beare for this text is
“Hence, just as in a liquid, if one vehemently disturbs it, sometimes no reflected image appears, while at other times one appears, indeed, but utterly distorted, so as to seem quite unlike its original; while, when once the motion has ceased, the reflected images are clear and plain; in the same manner during sleep the phantasms...” (Translation of J. I. Beare in the Works of Aristotle Translated into English, vol. III, 1931). The Commentary of Sir David Ross for this 461a14- in the Parva Naturalia writes “Thus, just as in a liquid that is being vigorously stirred, sometimes no reflection is seen, sometimes quite a distorted one, but when the liquid has quieted down the reflections are pure and clear, so in sleep the images and residual movements are sometimes extinguished by the greater movement” (1955, 274). The writing in the conclusion of PERI TES KAT’ HUPNON MANTIKES writes of the TAS HOMOIOTETA THEOREIN...PARAPLESIA TA FANTASMATA TOIS EN HUDASIN EIDOLOIS; and here is written EN HUGRO...FAINETAI EIDOLON...FAINESTHAI ALLOION E OION ESTIN. Thus these texts write very clearly of the EIDOLON appearing in water or some liquid (EN HUDASIN or EN HUGRO) and their being resemblances, especially here studying their being some times resemblances but some times their not being resemblaces- because of the disturbing (or stirring) of the water or liquid. It is very notorious indeed that both books here notice visual forms reflected in waters when discussing prophecy in sleep and studying dreams. It is further notable that Aristotle further mentions visions seen in waters, writing here in PERI ENUPNION the description
GINONTAI FANERAI KATHISTAMENES TES TARAKHES. DEI D’ HUPOLABEIN OSPER TAS MIKRAS DINAS TAS EN TOIS POTAMOIS GINOMENAS, OUTO TEN KINESIN EKASTEN GINESTHAI SUNEKHOS, POLLAKIS MEN HOMOIOS, POLLAKIS DE DIALUOMENAS EIS ALLA SKEMATA DIA TEN ANTIKROUSIN (461a8-12)
The translation of J. I. Beare here reads that
“and there display themselves as the disturbance (of waking life) subsides. We must suppose that, like the little eddies which are being ever formed in rivers, so the sensory movements are each a continuous process, often remaining like what they were when first started, but often, too, broken into other forms by collision with obstacles” (Translation of J. I. Beare in The Works of Aristotle Translated into English, vol. III, 1931). This statement rather notices the streams and rivers, the POTAMOI, and in those occurring TAS MIKRAS DINAS, small eddies; the forms of such appearances are especially here noticed writing of the DIALUOMENAS EIS ALLA SKEMATA or their sometimes appearing with HOMOIOS resemblances. Also here are visual forms appearing in waters, especially river and stream, thus central, and noticed that such can be resemblances. Especially, this is here written to clarify why after dinner or to very young people dreams do not occur.

Aristotle does write also notoriously concerning the device “mirror”, the KATOPTRON or ENOPTRON, in these books writing of dreams and prophecy in sleep. In the Book PERI ENUPNION is written notice of such mirrors, the 459b23-
OTI DE TAKHU TA AISTHETERIA KAI MIKRAS DIAFORAS AISTHANETAI, SEMEION TO EPI TON ENOPTRON GINOMENON...EN GAR TOIS ENOPTROIS TOIS SFODRA KATHAROIS, OTAN TON KATAMENION TOIS GUNAIKSI GINOMENON EMBLEPSOSIN EIS TO KATOPTRON, GINETAI TO EPIPOLES TOU ENOPTROU OION NEFELE AIMATODES. KAI MEN KAINON E TO KATOPTRON, OU RADION EKMAKSAI TEN TOIAUTEN KELIDA, EAN DE PALAION, RAON
This writing very clearly considers KATOPTRON and ENOPTRON, and especially importantly notices how the senses can observe even very small differences, the MIKRAS DIAFORAS. The translation of this statement by Hett reads
“an example of the rapidity with which the sense organs perceive even a slight difference is found in the behaviour of mirrors...if a woman looks into a highly polished mirror during the menstrual period, the surface of the mirror becomes clouded with a blood-red colour (and if the mirror is a new one the stain is not easy to remove, but if it is an old one there is less difficulty”
(Translation of Hett in LCL 288). This is obviously very learned Translation although can be somewhat considered. The EKMAKSAI of the EKMASSO means either to wipe off or wipe away (this chosen by Hett), and means also impressing images (see also the L-S 513)- this motivating the famous more Platonic EKMAGEION. Clearly in translating this text is preferable the meaning of impressing images rather than the meaning of cleaning- this text thus writes rather of production of images in such mirrors. Furthermore, the EN GAR TOIS ENOPTROIS TOIS SFODRA KATHAROIS more generally some mirrors that are very pure- it is only the assumption of placing this statement to the context of polished bronze mirrors that necessitates translating here “highly polished mirror”. The word KHALKOS (for bronze) is in this writing much later noticed, in the 460a 15, so that much attention is here called for- indeed, Aristotle does very often in the theory of senses write of the famous “transparent” or DIAFANES. This is very clear statement of production of visual images in mirrors (or seeing devices), the KATOPTRON or ENOPTRON- and their specific material should be attentively be discussed. Especially, Aristotle continues this writing in 460a1- finding such to be exemplifying that the sense of sight is also active- OU MONON PASKHEI TI E OPSIS HUPO TOU AEROS ALLA KAI POIEI TI KAI KINEI, OSPER KAI TA LAMPRA. KAI GAR E OPSIS TON LAMPRON KAI EKHONTON KHROMA. The LAMPROS generally denotes some bright objects, and it is surely very notorious indeed that immediately after writing notices of production of visions in the “mirrors” Aristotle here notices LAMPROS; Hett translates this “the organ of sight not only is acted upon by the air, but also sets up an active process, just as bright objects do” (LCL 288).

Philo writes concerning his interpreting of dreams in the books De Somniis, or PERI TOU THEOPEMPTOUS EINAI TOUS ONEIROUS, and notoriously writes there of the Haran and STELE. Clearly Philonic writing of the dreams is discussing partially also with the Aristotelian theory, especially noticing the difficult problem of the (divine) causation of dreams. In the Aristotle’s writing of PERI TES KAT HUPNON MANTIKES or on Prophecy in Sleep there was found in the beginning of this book considerations of the divine causation of dreams, the 462b21 directly writing of God’s sending dreams TO TE GAR THEON EINAI TON PEMPONTA- this directly is discussed in the title THEOPEMPTOUS of Philo, noteworthy even if this topic is usual in dream books, and the writing and copying of titles to Philonic books includes several considerations. Here Aristotle writes of the Pillars of Hercules, PERI TON EF’ HERAKLEIAIS STELAIS...PROORAN TINAS; and in this book De Somniis Philo writes often of STELE and discusses much Haran the place of senses. Among the Biblical names the Haran does somewhat closely resemble even the Greek name Hercules. Importantly, Philo does write of STELE and such places of sense in this Book. Philo notices in Somn 1:41 that Haran can be considered to be a sort of mother-city to senses (METROPOLIS TIS AISTHESEON). Here he allegorically interprets that Haran means sometimes “dug”, sometimes “holes”
ERMENEUETAI GAR TOTE MEN ORUKTE, TOTE DE TROGLAI
Philo also notices that O APO TOU FREATOS EKSELTHON EIS AUTEN ERKHETAI- that one coming from the well (FREAR) arrives there to Haran. Philo notices in Somon 1:42 that
GEGONEN EKASTON TON ORGANON EKASTES OPE TIS AISTHESEOS
Philo here writes a theory that organs for senses are some ”dug-out of each sense” (so Colson). This writing of the OPE, FREAR and TROGLAI is explicit commented with STELE somewhat earlier in Somn 1:11-13. Philo writes that TO MEN OUN EPISTEMES FREAR ORON KAI TELEUTEN OUK EKHON TOIOUTON APEDEIKHTE (1:11); this writing is part of commentary for Jacob’s journey and the vision of Heavenly Ladder in Gen 28. In the 1:11-13 Philo studies why this well was called well of Oath, the FREAR TOU ORKOU (Gen 28:10-11); in 1:13 Philo emphasises SAFOS EIDOS OTI EN EUORKON GRAFESETAI STELAIS. Here Philo, importantly, connects the interpretation of Haran and the wells in Haran with the STELE, especially applying the GRAFEIN to this notice of STELE. This argues for that Philo considers the idea of “Pillars of Hercules” (especially in the theory of Aristotle’s writing of the prophecy in sleep) when writing interpretation of the wells of Haran (for Gen 28)- Philo emphasises that such wells and cavities of Haran were the places of senses. (In the continuation De Somniis 1 Philo does write further of the STELE in 1:238ff.- these writings especially notice seeing vision from God, the TO PRESBUTATON IDEIN AITION and notices that STELE GAR TRION PRAGMATON SUMBOLON STASEOS ANATHESEOS EPIGRAMMATOS. Such echoes Aristotle’s writing after noticing here the Pillars of Hercules, that dreams are AITIA, SEMEIA TON GIGNOMENON or SUMPTOMATA. (The Somn 1:247 notices Lot’s wife GENESTHAI STELE HALOS). Further evidence for connection of STELE and Haran (especially the wells of Haran) are easily found in Fuga 119-122. Philo notices here Lot’s wife who became the STELE (here not writing merely GENESTHAI STELEN but not noticing the ALOS); encouraging to observations of what is directly in front of one (TA MEN PROSO); and here Philo refers to the Gen 16:7 EUREN AUTEN AGGELOS KURIOU- importantly, Greek Bible here writes EUREN AUTEN AGGELOS KURIOU EPI TES PEGES TOU HUDATOS EN TE EREMO- so Philo also here connects STELE and some “source of water” this echoing the history of Haran noticed in De Somniis 1 and its connecting to STELAI and thus emphasises echoes of Pillars of Hercules in interpretation of the Biblical writings of Haran.

study for theory of dream visions in psalm 16, in greek, compared with Aristotle's writings of Dreams and Prophecy in Sleep (PARVA NATURALIA), written by pasi pohjala 2009, copyright pasi pohjala 2009 based on free art licence http://artlibre.org