[Philo of Alexandria and his views on health and sickness]. / Gesundheit und Krankheit bei Philo von Alexandrien.

Philo of Alexandria, Torah scholar and philosopher of religion, (c. 20 BC to 50 BCE) is the first Middle Platonic philosopher whom we know through his own works. His thinking was determined by the two antitheses of God and world, and virtue and vice. The Logos (divine reason) mediates between the transcendent God and the earthly world. His thoughts on health and illness and on the possibilities and limitations of medicine are testimony to his comprehensive philosophical education as well as to his belief in God as ruler of the world and of human life. He saw human health as the reward for self-control for which one was best prepared by the classical education programme. Self-control and physical exercise were therefore, in his view, possible guarantors of health, and a coach potentially more important than a physician. Illnesses, if they result from the loss of self-control, may point to the necessity for penitence. Philo therefore saw virtuousness as the safest precondition for a healthy and cheerful life. That the life forces increase during youth and diminish in old age is part of destiny. Similarly, illness can be brought about by strokes of fate. If illness occurred in this or any other way, medicine was there to help and its success or failure depended on divine providence. Like Jesus Sirach, the Jewish scholar who taught around a hundred years earlier, Philo did not think it sinful to use medical help if one was ill, seeing that God himself had made natural remedies available. He compared the importance of physicians for their patients to that other professionals have in people's lives. Philo did not provide a compendium on the work of the physician, but he gave indications, on nutrition for instance, or on the use of laxatives and fragrances, or that complaints can be necessary stages of recovery. Philo also asked himself whether physicians were always obliged to tell patients the truth. The only case of illness he described in sufficient detail was one of leprosy, which he diagnosed in accordance with Leviticus 13:2. Philo saw physicians as helpers of God, who was the Lord of life and who would therefore decide on the fate of the healthy and sick. Faith in God, Philo thought, was vital if one was to cope with life's ups and downs. Only the wicked had to fear death, however, while the souls of the righteous returned to heaven after death.

Mold: "tsara'at," Leviticus, and the history of a confusion.

The noun tsara'at appears about two dozen times in the Hebrew Bible, almost exclusively in Leviticus, where it is used to describe a state of ritual defilement manifested as a scaly condition of the skin, a condition of cloth, leather, and the walls of houses. In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, negac tsara'at was translated as aphe lepras; in the Latin Vulgate, this became plega leprae. These words in Greek and Latin implied a condition that spread over the body, not a term of ritual impurity. Tsara'at has continued to be translated as "leprosy," even though this term is not appropriate, as there was no leprosy as we know it in the Middle East during the time period the Hebrew Bible was written. Others have suggested that the proper translation of tsara'at is "mold." The recent identification of a specific mold (Stachybotrys sp.) that contaminates buildings and causes respiratory distress, memory loss, and rash, and the fact that mold has been present for millennia, lend support to the translation of tsara'at as "mold."

Leprosy: Medical views of leviticus rabba.

This article discusses chapters 15 and 16 of the ancient midrash (allegorical commentary) Leviticus Rabba (IV -V AD) and its view of leprosy. The phenomenon of Biblical leprosy is here not investigated from a paleo-pathological point of view. The focus lies on its physiological, aetiological, pathological and therapeutic aspects as represented in Leviticus Rabba. It is argued that the medical views of Leviticus Rabba show a certain resemblance to some of the view of the Hippocratic School, notably with respect to humoral theory, the belief in the correspondence between the macrocosm and the individual microcosm, and the notion of paideia as a way of healing. Finally, it is shown that the ancient myth of the two floods (of water and of fire) is connected to the understanding of leprosy in Leviticus Rabba.