Увага! Всі конференції починаючи з 2014 року публікуються на новому сайті: conferences.neasmo.org.ua
Наукові конференції


Oldooz Tabrizi (Tajikestan, Dushanbe)

The look of Greek philosophers to woman that was introducing her ontologically, and socially subordinate, and inferior in comparision with man; was legitimized by the jewish philosophers.

In the first century AD, Philo, the jewish philosopher of Alexandria, combined Plato’s, and Aristotle's views with the Bible’s phrases, and while interpreting the Torah, provided the philosophical, and religious ideas about woman.

Ofcourse, the woman’s feature had been also drown humble before Philo in the distorted Old Testament, and woman in the distorted Torah was equally despicable as she was in the Greek philosophy even more.

In the Torah, except two books of Esther, and Judiet that has described the actions, and services of two women with these names to save the jewish people, and meantime praising, and sanctifying; has built an absolute model from them for the jewish women, and some sporadic examples of jewish women, including wives, and daughters’ of Isaiah prophets that are remembered just because they have used their womanish attractions for cheating, and seducing non-jewish men, and intriguing to favor of jewishs, there is not found any other positive comment about woman, [1, p.62] ,and the overall look of the distorted Old Testament to woman is negative, and in that there are lots of humiliating comments toward women.

The first, and the most famous of these ideas, has been expressed in the Genesis book, and in the creation story of two sexes according to that from the outset there is no intention for the creation of Eve, and after the creation of Adam for him not to be alone, Eve has been created from a more inferior source which means one of his ribs, [2, p. 18-25] ,and then has become the origination of evil, and temptation, and has led man to the sin.

However; studying the philo’s look to the woman is important because firstly he, by placing these jewish concepts in the Greek philosophy, provided religious valid for the Greek - Aristotle theories about woman, and rational valid for the jewish perspectives in this field, and secondly, later, these ideas through some christians with Jewish roots such as Paul, and Christian saints like Augustine – that the issue of original sin had made the organ of their mind- entered the Christian world, and determined the woman’s destiny for centuries.

Philo, in interpreting the Jewish Bible, stated, and confirmed exactly idem Aristotelian hierarchy that put woman in a lower place than man, from the tongue of Torah that God first created man or the wise soul which is one of the most cherished things, and then physical senses or woman. [4, p.54] Then for saying the characteristics of these two sexes, by modeling from Pythagoras’ paradox Othello, provided a list of existential differentation that on one side of that were woman, and all vices or at least all the shortcomings, full of disability, and physical desires including irrational, bad, unfaithful, servant, incomplete, patient, passive…, and on the other side were man and all the the virtues and good things such as intellectual, good, faithful, free, complete, healthy, active… [4, p.55] ,and by this way concluded too the low status of woman, and the necessity of her full submission from man, and stated that if man who is wise, and superior, and… be collected with woman who is humble, and the symbol of body; hedegrades to a lower level, but if a woman obeys a man; it is like the body obeys wise. There will be no sign of body, and both will become wise soul. [4, p. 54-55]

This Philo’s idea was taken from the distorted Genesis story in Torah according to that, man as a result of listening to woman talk, becomes sentenced to the descent, and fall because devil that has no direct way to the man being, it is through woman that deciets men; as in serpent ‘s disguise deceived Eve, and through her forced her husband to commit sin. [3, p.13]

Despite this Jewish view that made a more humble creature from woman than what she was in the Greek philosophy, had been raised before Philo by jewish thinkers such as Ibn Sierra, but Philo's intellectual, and philosophical interpretation, made a reasonable, and acceptable approach from it in appearance that till centuries knew woman as the committed of origination sin, and the cause of taking Adam to the transient, and dying world, and full of misery; sentenced to accept any humiliation.

From another perspective, this view of Philo is the difference of his view with Aristotle, and the expression of being under Plato's influence. Unlike Aristotle’s idea that knew the woman’s level, unchangeable; according to Philo, the woman shall progress as the result of this obedience morally. [5, p. 39-42]

Moral progress in Philo’s view is nothing except leaving female gender. Achieving virtues in an effort to leave the female gender, and weak womanish desires like passions which are also female, in Philo’s idea is necessary for all, and also possible for women.

Moral progress for women is achieved by quiting the traits that are considered as the femininity’s discriminant, and woman can achieve good ethical characters only in this condition that she leaves her female character, but in men by making the characters they already had, Strengthened. [4, p. 57-58]

In other words, he under the impressed of the Old Testament, and Aristotle, puts woman in an inferior rank than man due to her characteristics, but like Plato, he is hopeful to be able to separate these characters from women, and make man from them though in his idea, women for achieving the virtues are facing with some obstacles that may make the ethical promote, impossible for them.

Another point is that, Philo by stating this statement that, God when starts to talk to soul, transform the woman to the maiden to get the dirty desires that are the cause of the soul’s degeneration from her, and replace them with innate growth of the non-infected virtue [4, p.58] also creates a hierarchy among female sex, and defines a lower position for women in comparision with maiden, and so provides the introduction of forming an idea that laters by breaching in christianity, and spreading through it, knows the rols of women as a mother, and spouse, things that they have been queered to them because of following the dirty sensual, and carnal disires, and for having the high ranking of humanity they must ware, and refuse accepting that.

In the discussion of knowing gender, natural or social; it can be said that since both Torah and Aristotle have considered gender as a natural thing, gender in Philo’s thought that is taken from them, is assumed a natural affair, and he, impressed by these two sources, believes in a relation between gender, and different inherent characteristics of two sexes.

Philo’s warning that we shouldn’t know the Genesis story, a fanciful legends, and his emphasis that these stories are the way of showing eternal forms or allegories [4, p.59] shows that he seriously agrees with this Biblical thought, and consequently the Aristotelian that the female sex is inherently inferior in comparison with the male sex, and these differences are not as a result of different socialization process of two sexes that are formed, but from the time of Adam and Eve, woman, and man have been different, and have acted different.

In addition, accepting the possibility of changing the woman’s natrual in Philo’s idea, primarily means accepting the natural superiority of men, and all the natural defects that woman is entitled in his view, and then trying to turn to the male sex who is superior, and possesses all the wonderful qualities, and not being woman. In another word what is possible to be made according to Philo’s idea is not a more virtuous woman, but is to make man from a woman who has realized her inferior traits, and has intend to leave them. He, like Plato knows moral progress depends on quiting the female characters, and gender completely, and transformation, and strengthening the masculine gender, and male characters. He doesn’t say that society has make such a being from woman, and it is possible to make another kind of woman with new characters in the society, but says that woman naturaly is a being, and existing with those characters that Torah, and Aristotle have mentioned, but she can try not to be a woman, and achieve male characters.

These humble definition of gender characteristics that women naturaly have; became a field that next centuries, one of the first steps of feminists in order to achieve prestige for women to claim that any character in women is not natural, and inherent of their existing, and all are made by the hand of patriarchal society that should be reformed again, and more regrettable is that these feminists recommended the approach of these people -who had been drawing the woman's feature so humble- to the women, and wanted, and tried to make male from female sex.


  1. Al-za’bi, A, Truth about Jewish, translated by Abdul Hosain Ibrahimi, marefat journal, Tehran, No 74, 1382, 9 p from 57-65

  2. The Bible, (Genesis book, part 2) translated by Hamedani, F, Tehran, Asatir press, first ed,1380, 2190 p.

  3. The Bible, (Genesis book, part 3) translated by Hamedani, F, Tehran, Asatir press, first ed, 1380, 2190 p.

  4. Lioyd, G, The man of reason: male and female in western philosophy, translated by Mohajer, M, second ed, 1387, Tehran, Ney press.

  5. Табризи, O, Зан дар фалсафаи Афлотун ва Арасту, Dushanbe, Аxбopи Институти фалсафа Академияи илмњои Тољикистон, No 1, 2012, 5 p from 39-43