chroust a., the term philosopher

7/24/2019 Chroust a., The Term Philosopher

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chroust-a-the-term-philosopher 1/3

THE  T E R M  P H I L O S O P H E R AND THE  P A N E G Y R I C  ANALOGY

IN

  ARISTOTLE'S

  PROTREPTICUS

T h e r e  exists  a  w i d e l y s p r e a d

  tradition

  w h i c h

  m ai n t a i n s

  that

  th e t e rm

  p hi l o so p her w a s  c o i n e d ,  o r  first  u s e d  by ,  P y t h a g o r a s . P y t h a g o r a s  is  sa id  n o t

o n l y  to  h a v e c a l l e d h i m s e l f  a  p h i l o s o ph e r ,  that  is,  a  lover  o f  w i s dom ,  bu t

also  t o  h a v e e x p l a i n e d  t h e

  m e a n i n g

  o f  this  n o v e l a n d ,  i t  a p p e a r s ,  startling

term.

  T h e tradition

  w h i c h  d e c l a r e s  P y t h a g o r a s

  to be th e

  originator

  an d  inter-

preter  o f the  ^ . e r m , p h i l o s o p h e r is

  c o mmo nl y

  t r a c e d  to  H e r a c l e i d e s  o f  Po n t us

and

  hisTT^-T^S

  Q . T N O V

  mpl  \ /06LC >\ /

  ,

  a  work  w n i c h  is  c o m p l e t e l y  lost.

F o r t u n a t e l y , i n h i s

  T u s c u l a n

  D i s p u t a t i o n s V . 8 - 1 0 ,  G i c e r c  ha s p r ese r v ed

  what

  seem

to be the

  essentials

  o f

  H e r a c l e i d e s

c

  a c c o u n t .

  I t m a y

 also

  be

  pr e s u m e d  that

  C i c e r o

r e c o r d e d  this  story  f a i r l y  accurately.

A c c o r d i n g  t o

  C i c e r o ' s  report,

  P y t h a g o r a s  o n c e

  visited

  t h e

  town

  o f  Phlius.

  h e n  a s k e d

  in

  what

  particular  a r t o r

  skill

  h e

  e x c e l l e d ,

  he i s

  sa i d

  to

  ha v e

  replied

that  h e w as a

  p h i lo s o ph e r a n d , h e n c e ,

  d i d n o t

  p o s s e s s

  an y

 particular

  practical

skill.

  E x p l a i n i n g f u r t h e r

  this

  u n u s u a l  t e r m ,  w h i c h  a p p a r e n t l y b a f f l e d  his

  listen-

e r s , P y t h a g o r a s c o n t i n u e d : T h e  life  o f m a n r e s e m b l e s  a  great festival  celebrated.,

b ef o r e t he

  c o n c o u r s e  £rom

  th e

  w h ol e

  o f

  G r e e c e .

  A t

  this  festival  some  pe opl e  so ug h t

to w i n th e  g l o r i o u s  distinction  o f a  c r w o n ;  an d others  w e r e  attracted  by th e  pros-

pect

  o f

  m a t e r i a l g a i n t h r o u g h b u y i n g

  a n d

  selling.

  B u t

  there

  w a s

  a l s o

  a

  certain

type  o f p eo p l e , a n d  that  quite  th e  best  t y p e o f m e n , w h o w e r e

  interested

  neither

in

  c o m p e t i n g ,  a p p l a u d i n g

  o r

  s e e k i n g m a t e r i a l g a i n ,

  b u t w h o

 came  solely

  fo r

  the

s a k e  o f

  the

  spectacle

  itself

  a n d , h e n c e ,

  c l o s e l y

  w a t c h e d  what

  w as

  done

  and h ow i t

was

  d o n e .  S o  a l s o  we, as ' thoug h we had  come  f rom  some  city  to a  crowded  festival,

l e a v i n g  in  like  f a s h i o n a n o t h e r  life  a n d  a n o t h e r n a t u r e  o f  b e i n g ,  entered  upon

this  life.

  A n d

 some

  were

  slaves

  of

  a m b i t i o n ,

  an d

  some

  slaves

  o f

  m on e y .

  B u t

  there

are  a  special  fe w

  w h o, c o u n t i n g

  a l l

  else

  fo r

  n o t h i n g ,

  closely

  s c a n n e d

  t h e  n a t u r e

of

  things.

  T h e s e  m e n g a v e t h e m s e l v e s  th e

  n a m e

  o f  'philosophers' (sapientiae

studiosi)...and

  this  is the  m e a n i n g  of the  term

  ' p h i l o s o p h e r s ' .

  And just  as at

these

  festivals

  t h e m e n o f t h e m o s t e x a l t e d e d u c a t i o n l o o k e d o n w i t h o u t an y

s e l f - s e e k i n g  interest,

  so in  life  t h e

  c o n t e m p l a t i o n

 o f

  t h i n g s

  a n d their  rational

a p p r e h e n s i o n ( c o g n i t i o )

  b y f a r  surpasses  a l l  other  pursuits. 4

T h a t  H e r a c l e i d e s  o f  P o n t u s  w a s n o t t h e  i n v e n t o r  o r  p e r h a p s  th e

  first

reporter

  o f

  this  e n g a g i n g story  m i g h t

  b e

  g a t h e r e d

  f rom

  Aristotle's

  Protrepticus

w h i c h , '

  it is  fairly

  r e a s o n a b l e

  to

  a s s u m e ,

  was

 com posed

  a b o u t

  350

 B . C . ,

  that

  is,

some

  t i m e

  b e f o r e H e r a c l e i d e s w r o t e h i s  rtfa\

  ôçò drt^cxJ

  ° In the

  Protrepticus

Aristotle  m a i n t a i n s :  I t i s by no

  m e a n s

  s t r a n g e  that  p h i l o s o p h i c  wisdom

(^puv^eiS  ) sho u l d a p p ea r d ev o i d o f

  i m m e d i a t e  practical

  u s e f u l n e s s a n d , a t t h e

same

  t i m e ,

  m i g h t  n o t a t a l l  prove  itself  a d v a n t a g e o u s .  F o r w e call  p h i l o s o p h i c

wisdom

  n o t

  a d v a n t a g e o u s ,

  b u t

  g o o d .

  I t

  o u g h t

  to be

  p u r s u e d ,

  no t fo r th e

  sa k e

  o f

a n y t h i n g

  else,  b u t

  solely

  fo r  ts  o w n

 s a k e «

  F o r a s w e

 j o u r n e y

  to th e

  Games

  a t

Olympia

  for the  s a k e  of the  s p e c t a c l e  itself  - for the spectacle as  s u c h  is  w o r t h

more  t h a n  just  a  great  d e a l  of

  money

  - and as we w a t c h  th e  D i o n y s i a  no t in

  order

to  derive  some

  m a t e r i a l g a i n  from

  th e  actors  - as a

  m a t t e r

  o f

  f a c t ,

  w e

 spend

money

  on  them  - and as  there  a re  many  m o r e

  s p e c t a c l e s

  w e

  o u g h t

  to  prefer  to

  great

riches:

  so ,

  t o o ,

  t h e

  v i e w i n g

  a n d

  c o n t e m p l a t i o n

  o f t h e

  u n i v e r s e

  is to be

  v a l u e d

above

  a ll  other

  t h i n g s  commonly  c o n s i d e r e d

  to be

  u s e f u l

  in a  practical  sense.

F o r ,

  m os t  certainly,

  i t

  w o u l d  m a k e

  little

  sen se w er e

  w e

 to

  t a k e  p a i n s

  t o

  w a t c h

m e n   i m i t a t i n g  w o m e n

  o r

  slaves,

  o r

  f i g h t i n g

  o r

  r u n n i n g ,

  b u t n o t

  t h i n k

  i t

  proper

t o

  v i ew , f r ee

  o f a l l

  c h a r g e s ,

  t h e

  n a t u r e

  a n d t n e  true  reality  o f

  e v e r y t h i n g

  that

exists .

  b

Thi s p a ssa g e  from  Aristotle's  Protrepticus,

  w h i c h

  h a s a p p a r e n t l y b e e n

c o m p l e t e l y o v e r l o o k e d  or  s i m p l y i g n o r e d ,

  s t tou ld

  m a k e  it

  quite

  clear  that  the use

of  th e  p a n e g y r i c a n a l o g y  for th e  p u r p o s e  o f  e x p l a i n i n g  th e  t e r m  p hi l o so p her o r

  theoretic  m a n ,

  is  certainly older

  t h a n

  H e r a c l e i d e s '

  n f f t

  **?J  ctrTVOtJ  , and

p er ha p s ev en o l d e r t ha n   Aristotle's

  Protrepticus.

  It

  m i g h t

  be  c o n j e c t u r e d

  that

i t w a s a l r e a d y  k n o w n ,  a n d  a l r e a d y u s e d ,  d u r i n g  t h e  first  part  o f t h e  f o u r t h c e n t u r y

B . C . ,

  a n d ,  as  f r a g m e n t  19 4  ( D i e l s - K r a n z )  of  Democr i t u*-  seems  t o  indicate,  probably

b e f o r e

  that

  t i m e .  T h e  f u r t h e r q u e s t i o n  as to  w h e t h e r

  this

  a n a l o g y

  m a y i n  f a c t  b e

traced  b a ck  to  P y t h ag o ra s h i m s e l f ,  is  o u t s i d e  the  s c o p e  of  this

  brief

  c o m m e n t .  It

d o es  seem  d o u b t f u l , h o w e v e r ,  that  so  t e c h n i c a l a t e r m a s p h i l o so p he r sho u l d

a l r e a d y  be in use  d u r i n g  t h e

  latter

  part  o f the

  sixth

  c e n t u r y

  B . C .

7

  I n a n y

 event,

Aristotle  d o es

  not

  credit

  it

  s p e c i f i c a l l y

  to

  P y t h a g o r a s .

7/24/2019 Chroust a., The Term Philosopher

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chroust-a-the-term-philosopher 2/3

15.

  Both

  Pythagoras  and  Aristotle  seem  to  stress

  that  /fzjptci,

  is  enjoyable

per

  se without  any material gain  - a

  distinctly

  Platonic  twist.  Heracleides,  it

s e e m s ,

  tries  to  point  out

  that

  in

  h u man  life

  we

 m i g h t

  be

  either

  a  passionate

participant  or a  dispassionate  spectator.  For

  some  u n k n o w n

  reason Heracleides

links  this  observation

  to the

  story  that  Pythagoras invented

  the

  term  philosopher

T he  panegyric analogy  emp loyed  by

 Aristotle

  and  credited  by Heracleides  to  Pythag-

oras in no way explains the term

  philosopher

10

,

  but merely proclaims or  illustrates

that

  dispassionate contemplation -

  the

  purely  theoretic  life -  constitutes  the

m a i n

  or

  preferred activity

  of the

  true  philosopher.  H e n c e

  it

  m i g h t

  be

  argued  that

the link  be tween  the  term  philosopher and the

  m a i n

  activity  of the philosopher

is not  altogether  successful  : it

  s i m p l y

  presupposes  the  term philosopher as

a

  well-established

  term.

It

  w o u l d

  not be too far  fetched  to  surmise

 that

  the  a b o v e m e n t i o n e d

passage  f rom  Aristotle's

  Protrepticus

  is a faint

  echo

  of  Plato,  Republic  475E:

  Who,  then,  are the  true  philosophers?  T h o s e . . . w h o  are  the  lovers  of the  vision

of  truth

  (ôïàß

  iff?

  aUf  ct e/tO   sdtA 'Ctú  ) « One m i g h t  quote  here also  the

m a n y  Platonic references to the true nature or  f u n c t i o n  of philosophy and the

philosopher: Philosophical  m i n d s  a l w a y s  have

  k n o w l e d g e

  of a

  sort  w h i c h  shows

them

  the

  eternal  nature ( R e p u b l i c

  485B);

  the philosophers alone

  are

  capable

  of

grasping

  that

  w h i c h  is eternal and  u n c h a n g e a b l e ( R e p u b l ic  484B);  those who

love

  the

  truth

  in

  e a c h  thing

  are to be

  called  philosophers (Republic  480A);

  only

  the philosopher is capable of  k n o w i n g  the  truth  of  each  thing

( R e p u b l i c

484D) ;

  and of experiencing the

  delight

  w h i c h

  is to be

  f o u n d

  in the understanding

of

  true

  being

( R e p u b l i c 5 8 2 D ) ;

  the

  philosopher alone, being capable

  of  visual-

izing and loving absolute beauty, recognizes the

  existence

  of absolute beauty

( R e p u b l i c

  476B) ;  the philosopher's eyes are  forever  directed

  towards  things

i m m u t a b l e  and

  fixed ( R e p u b l i c   500C) ;  God invented

  and  gave  us

  sight

  to the end

that

  we m i g ht

  beho ld

  the  courses  of the  intelligences  in the  heavens....and  f rom

this  source  we

  h ave

  derived philosophy ( T i m a e u s  47A f f . ) ;  the

  m i n d

  of the

philosopher, disdaining  the

  pettiness

  and nothingness  of  hu m a n

  affairs . . . .

  is

flying

  about,  m e a s u r i n g

  earth

  a n d  heaven

(Theaetetus  173E);  and the

  philosopher's

m i n d ,  being

  f i x e d

  on  true  being,  has  surely  no  time  to

  look

  down  on  h u man  affairs

....And  holding conversation with  the  divine order,  he  himself  becomes....divine :

(Republ i c 500C  f f . ) .

All

  these

  statements,

  in

  turn,

  bring

  us

  close

  to the

  problem, discussed

in  Plato's  Sympos i um  (201C f f . ) ,  but not to be  discussed

  here,

  that  the

  good

  is

also  the  beautiful

  and , ,

  hence,  truth;  and that  love  is  directed  towards  the  beaut-

iful and the  true

0

  The

 dispassionate  v i e w i n g

  of the

  sublimely beautiful

  is the

dispassionate love  of  the  sublimely  beautiful  and  of  the  ultimate  truth  arid  b e a u t y «

W i t h  Plato,  the close  interrelation

  of

  ô&

 KC^ON/

  /nd y Ë&/  permits  us to  call

philosophy

  âÑ/ëè«?/1<âÉ

  , and the  philosopher  a

 òÑ/ëïÇáÁï^

  :  But  who are the lovers

of w isdom?  °  >

  They

  are

  those

  w ho are in a  mear .  b e t w e e n  th e  t w O o  Love  is one of

t hem

0

  For

  wi sdom

  is a  mos t  beautiful  t h i n g , ,  and

  love

  is  of  the  beautiful. And

therefore love  is  also  a

  p h i l o s o p h e r »

1

  Bu t

  ail  these

  explanations

  a n d  references

still  leave unsolved the  p rob l em  of the panegyric  a n a l o g y « ,

It

  m i g h t

  be

  s a f e

  to  a s s u m e

  that  the  ideal

  of the

  contemplative

  or

  theor-

etic

  life, as it is

  extolled

  in the

  story

  of

  Pythagoras

  and

 stated

  in Aristotle's

Protrepticus.was originally  a d v o c a t e d  by  PJatc  a n d t h e

  Academy»

  At one  time,  w e

m a v   surmise,  thie  ideal  was retroactively  attributed  or  credited  to  Pythagoras,

p r e s u m a b l y  w h e n

  late  Piatonism  a s s u m e d  a

  distinct

  Pythagorizing

  trends

  U n d o u b t e d l y ,

the

  panegyric  a n a l o g y  refers primarily

  to the

  truee  basic

  w a y s  of

  life:

  the

  life

of

  bodily pleasure or material gain,

  represented

  by those who

 attend

  the

  festival

tor the  sake of  buying  and  selling ;  the  life  of

  virtue

  and  h o n o r  (the

  practical

or  political  life), represented  by  those  w n

' ° a eeK

  a  c r o w n ;  and the  life  of  pure

c o n t e m p l a t i o n

  (or  theoretic  life  -

  $F£j£>tft

  ) »  represented by the  dispassionate

(philosophic)  observer.

  The

 philosopher

  - and

 this  s e e m s

  to be a

  definite Platonic

twist

  - is

  w h o l l y  dedicated

  to a

  life

  of

  contemplation

  and

  ' theory ,  that

  is, a

life  centered

  a r o u n d

  (Pfd^dct  °

  H e n c e ,

  the  accounts  of  Aristotle  and  Heracleides

of

  P o n t u s  actually

  c o m b ine  two  m a j or

  themes:

  the  three  f u n d a m e n t a l

  w a y s

  of  life

a n d

  the way of the

  true

  p h i l o s o p h e r , ,

  W . J a e g e r

  S u g g e s t s

  that

  Heracleides took

  these

tw o

  themes

  directly  f rom

  Aristotle's

  Protrepticus  ( a & d  more

  remotely

  f rom  Plato),

a n d ,  at the

  s ame

  time,  c o m b ine d  to

  tried

  to  integrate  them  into  a  single  a c c o u n t »

In  order  to

  endow  this

  story  with  greater  authority  he  projected  into  the  remote

past  by creo*iting  it  to.  Pythagoras»  ̂ I n  Aristotle's  a c c o u n t . ,  it  will  be  noted,

the key  terrfi  is  Oe^jpco,  and it is  this  (9f6J£t .  w h i c h  he  advocates  and extolls»

7/24/2019 Chroust a., The Term Philosopher

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chroust-a-the-term-philosopher 3/3

16.

For

  the  purpose  o f

  illustration

  Aristotle  d r a w s  certain parallels  be tween  the

con t empl a t i ve

  or  theoretic life

  of the  true  ph i l o s ophe r  a n d t h e  ce leb ra t ed

spectacle

  (o r

  d i s p a s s i o n a t e  v i ewe r

  of the

  s p e c t a c l e )

  a t  Olympia  or  the

  G re a t

D i o n y s i a .

Tha t

  the  story  of the

  three

  b a s i c

  w a y s

  o f

  life

  goes  back  t o P l a t o ma y

b e

  ga t he red

  from  R e pub l i c

  581C,

  where  w e a r e  told  that  there  exist

  three

  classes

of

  m e n : lovers

  o f

  wi sd om,

  lovers  o f  honor  (o r  virtue  o r  f a m e ) ,  a n d

  lovers

  o f

m a t e r i a l  gain.

In

  short,  a c c o r d i n g

 to

  Plato  ( a n d Aristotle)

  there  are  three

main

  purposes in  human  life  as we l l a s i n a l l

  f u n d a m e n t a l  human

  pursuits.·^

D i f f e r e n t  people seek

  their

  h a p p i n e s s

  a n d

  f u l f i l m e n t

  in

  these

  three

  pursuits,

n a m e l y ,

  either

  in  ifpOWeiS   , or in  virtue  (honor  o r  f a m e ) ,  or in  p h y s i c a l

p l e a s u re

  or

  m a t e r i a l  gain.  Th i s  triadic  n o t i o n ,

  wh i ch  is  vitally

  related  to

Plato's  basic  p h i l o s o p h i c o u t l o o k ,

  i s  once

  a g a i n

  restated  in  Aristotle's

  E u d emian

Ethics,  i n c i d e n t a l l y  a  fairly  early  w o r k :

  N o w

  to be  h a p p y ,  to

  live

  b l i s s f u l l y

'and  b e a u t i f u l l y ,  must

  consist

  m a i n l y  in  three  t h i n g s  wh ich  appea r t o be

  most

desirable.  F o r

  some

  m a i n t a i n

 that  <Upow76iS

  is  the  greatest

  go o d ,  some

  sa y

virtue  ( o r h o n o r ) , a n d

  some

  s a y p h y s i c a l  pleasure.  ̂ Hence  w e realize

  that

  there  are

  three

  lives  wh ich

  a l l

  those choose

  w ho

 have

  the

 power

 to do so , to

  w i t ,

the  life  o f

  'political  (practical)  m a n ,

1

  th e  life  of the  ph i l o s ophe r ,  a n d t h e

life  of the

  v o l u p t u a r y .

  Of

 these,

  the

  phi losopher

  is

  de t e rmi n ed

  to

  ded i c a t e

himse l f

  to  <pf>o \S )6l5

  ;

  the

  'political

  ( p r a c t i c a l )

  m a n '

  to  n ob l e deeds ,

  that

  is,

to  acts

  wh ich

  originate  w i t h  virtue;  and the  v o l u p t u a r y  to  b o d i l y  pleasures.

14

The  triad

  of

  < ^ D V < t f t S

  ,

  virtue

  (o r

  n o b l e d e e d s )

  and

 p h y s ic a l

  pleasure,  it

  goes

w i t h o u t s a y i n g ,  is  closely  related  to  Plato's  d o c t r i n e  of the

  tripartite

  soul,

f rom  wh ich  P l a t o a l s o  derives  the  three  w a y s  o f  life  a s  w e l l  as the  three  types

of  happ i n e s s  o r  p l e a s u r e .

Notre

  D a m e  L aw

 Schoo l ,

  An ton -He rmann

  C hrous t

N o t r e  Dame,

  I n d i a n a .

N o t e s ;

1..

  S ee

  A .

 -H . C hrous t ,

  Some

  O bserva t ions on the O r ig in o f the

  Term

  ' P h i l o s o p h e r ' ,

The  N ew  S c h o l a s t i c i s m ,  v o l .

  28 .

  n o .

 4. (1 96 4 ) ,  pp .

  423-434.

2.  Diogenes

  Laertius  1.12.

3. See also  l a m b l i c h u s ,  Protrepticus  ( S u m m a r i a ) ,

  p.

 4, lines 15  f f

(edit.H.Pitelli,

1888).

4 .  l a m b l i c h u s , V i t a P y t h a g o r a e ,  pp .

 58

  f f . ,  closely

  f o l l o w s

  C i c e r o ' s  a c c o u n t .

Hence  i t ma y be  assumed  that  l a m b l i c h u s relies  o n  Cicero  for his  i n f o r m a t i o n  o r ,

pe rhaps ,

  on a

  source c lose

  to  that  used  by

  C i c e r o .

  It is not

  i mpos s i b l e

  that  he

sa w   the

  original

  work  o f

  H e r a c l ei d e s

  o f

  P o n t u s .

  S ee

  a l s o

  l a m b l i c h u s « P r o t r e p t i c u s ,

p. 53,

  lines

  15 f f . ;  A t he n ae us ,

  De i pn os oph i s t a e

  X I.  463DE;

  D i o g e n es L a e r t i u s V I I I .

8.  He re  Diogenes

  L a e r t i u s

  credits  the

  story

  to  Sosicrates'

  Success ion

  of

  P h i l o s o -

phers

  rather

  t h a n

  to

  H e r a c le id e s

  o f

  P o n t u s .

5.

  l a m b l i c h u s ,  Protrepticus,

  p. 53, line 5 - p. 54, line 5;

  f r a g .

 58, R o s e ;

  f r a g .

 12,

W a l z e r ;  f r a g .

 12, R o s s ;  f r a g . 44, Dur in g  (I . D u r i n g ,

  Aristotle's

  Protrepticus; A n

At tempt

  a t  R e c o n s t r u c t i o n ,

  S t ud i a  Graeca

  e t

  L a t i n a G o t h o b u r g e n s ia ,

 vol.

 XI I ,

G

  teborg, 1961,

  p. 6 7 ) ;  f r a g . 42,

  C hrous t

  (A

0

- H » C h r o u s t ,  Aristotle iProtrepticus

  -

A

  Recon s t ruc t i on , N o t r e  Dame,  Ind i ana , 1964 , pp .18 f f .T i

6. It

  will

  be

  no ted  that  Aristotle  r e f e r s

  to the

  Olymp ic  Games

  in

  Nicomachean

E thics 1099

  a

  3;

  a n d that

  St. P a u l ,

  I

  C o r i n t h i a n s 9 : 2 4 , l i k ew i s e u s e s

  the

  p a n e g y r i c

a n a l o g y   ( the I s thmian

  Games ) .

  -  S i n c e P y t h a g o r a s  compares  th e  ph i l o s ophe r  to the

  f o n d  v iwer  of the

  subl ime

  spec t ac le  (o r  v i s i o n ) , he  s hou l d have c a l l e d h i ms e l f

a <^i/ioO FQ//c^y  (see  Plato,

  R e p u b l i c

  475E,  an d  ibid,  a t  476A)  or , perhaps , a

(see

  Aristotle,  Nicomachean

  E thics 1100 b 19-20) ,  rather  t han a

7. It is not  imposs ib le

  that

  the  d e f i n i t i o n  of the  ph i l o s ophe r  as the

  lover

 of

wisdom

goes  back

  to  Plato,  Phaedrus

  278D:

  Wise  ( 6 o<po£ ) ,  I may no t  call

  them

(seil. ,

  those  whose

  com pos i t i on s a r e b a s ed on t he  knowledge  o f

  truth,

  a n d w h o

 are

ab le t o  de f e n d  or prove

  t he m ) .  F o r ^ t h i s

  i s a n exa l t ed t e rm

  wh ich

  b e l on gs t o G od

a l o n e .  B u t

  'lovers

  o f

  wi sd om

1

  (ö/ëï ïöïß,

  )

  is

  their  modes t  a n d  b e f i tt i n g

  title.