Quid. apud Clem. Alex. l. 1. Strom.PYTHAGORAS, a famous Philosopher, whom some think to have been a Disciple of the Prophet Ezekiel: For they will have Nazaratus the Assyrian, the Master of Pythagoras, to be the same as Ezekiel. Certain it is, that Pythagoras travelled into Chaldea and Egypt; and it is pretended, that it was in these Voyages that he learned what he knew about the Law of Moses, and especially his Tetrachys, or Quartenary, which is thought to be nothing else but the sacred Name Jehovah, consisting of four a Hermipp. apud Josep. l. 1. contra Appion. p. 1046. Aristobul. Judæus apud Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 1.Letters.
But it may be demonstrated, that Pythagoras could not have seen Ezekiel in Chaldea. This Prophet was carry’d thither along with King Jeconiah in 3405, and began to prophesy in 3409; he prophesy’d yet in 3430, fourteen Years after the Taking of Jerusalem. He might then be about fifty Years old, supposing him not to have been above Five and twenty, when he was carry’d away Captive beyond the Euphrates. After the Year 3430, we have no certain Date, either of the Life or Death of this Prophet.
Dion. Hal. l. 2. hist. p. 120, 121. About 3418. Plin. l. 36. c. 9. Jambl. vit. Pyth. c. 3. 4. Cicero l. 4. Quæst. Thusc. Jambl. vit. Pyth. c. 3.Dionysius Halicarnassensis shews, that Pythagoras came into the World about the Forty-seventh Olympiad, four Generations after Numa. Usher places his coming into Egypt in the Year of the World 3457, under the Reign of Amasis. He continued there Two and twenty Years, according to Jamblicus. He was taken and carried to Babylon by the Soldiers of Cambyses, in the Year of the World 3479. He returned into Italy at the Time that Brutus deliver’d his Country from the Yoke of the Tarquins, about the Year 3506. Therefore it is not credible that Pythagoras could have been the Disciple of Ezekiel. Jamblicus, in the Life of this Philosopher, says, That he went gladly and dwelt long in the Temple of Mount Carmel in Phenicia, or in Palestine. This Passage is made use of to prove, that he had had Correspondence with the Jews.
The generality of those who have mentioned Apulei Floridor. l. 2. Jamb. vita Pyth. c. 4. Porph. vita Pyth. Clem. Alex. Stromat. l. 1.this Philosopher, will have him to have been a Disciple of Zoroaster at Babylon, and that he derived all that fine Knowledge from him, by which he afterwards became so famous in the West. For we make no doubt but that it was Zoroaster, whom Porphyry describes under the Name Zabratus, or Zaratus, and Clemens Alexandrinus under the Name of Nazaratus. Thus he relates the Matter.a When Cambyses conquer’d Egypt, he there met with Pythagoras, who had repair’d thither in the View of instructing himself in the Learning of the Country. He took him Prisoner, and sent him with his other Captives to Babylon, where Zoroaster lived at that time. He committed himself to the Discipline of that great Man; ” Zoroaster purified him ” from the Defilements of his Life past, ” instructed him in such things, in which ” a vertuous Man ought to be free; he ” taught him what were the Principles of ” the Universe, and the Secrets of Nature.
This History agrees very well with our Chronology, and it is allow’d that Pythagoras was at Babylon, and that he improved much by the Acquaintance he had with the Magians. Besides, what we have taken notice of before, he there learned Arithmetick, Musick, the Knowledge of divine Things, and particularly the Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul. All the antient Greek Authors acknowledge, that he was the first that taught these important Truths. But he did not teach them in their native Purity; but disfigured them with his Notion of a Metempsychosis, which he had borrowed from the Indians, where also it is said, that he had travelled. He made the Soul’s Immortality to consist in a certain Revolution or Transmigration of the Soul out of one Body into another.
Many Touches have been observed in the Doctrine of Pythagoras, in his Maxims, and in the Lives of his Disciples, which have made it be suspected, that he derived several things from the Therapeutæ and the Essenians, and that he was one of the Number of those antient Disciples of the Prophets, from whom the Carmelites boast that they take their Original.1
The Pythagoreans abstained from Meat, brought all their Goods into a common Stock, eat nothing that had had Life, rejected all anointing with Oil, contemn’d Pleasures, wore white Cloths, not Linen, but Woollen, abstained from Swearing, had a great Veneration for old Men, never durst make Water before the Sun, kept Silence for a long time in their Schools, paid an immense Deference to the Sentiments of their Masters.
Pythagoras acknowledg’d an Unity of Diogen. Laert. l. 8 vita Pyth.Principle, from whence proceeded the Duality in an indefinite manner. But this Duality always adhered like Matter to its Principle, or its Author. They believed that all things proceded from this Unity. Some have imagin’d that they perceived in these Expressions, the Unity of the Godhead in three Persons. He condemned all Images of the Deity, and would have his Worship to be burthened with as few Ceremonies as might be. God was the principal Object of his Worship and of his Studies. He said that Salt at Meals was the Symbol of Union; and among the Hebrews in their Sacrifices, it was esteemed as a Token of the Covenant with God, who had forbid that any Victim should be offer’d to him without Levit. ii. 13. Levit. xx. 27. 2 Kings xxi. 6. 2 Kings xxiii. 24. Matth. vii. 6. Acts xvi. 16. Ovid. Met. l. 1. v. 441, &c. Deut. xviii. 11. Levit. xx. 6. 1 Samuel xxviii. 7, 8, &c.Salt. The figurative and symbolical Manner in which he gave his Instructions, was borrowed from the Hebrews, and other Orientals, who generally concealed the Mysteries of their Knowledge under Allegories and Parables. Jesus Christ himself forbids his Disciples to give their Holy Things to Dogs, or to cast their Pearls before Swine.
All these things together confirm their Conjecture, who suppose Pythagoras to have had some Communication with the Hebrews, either in Egypt, or in Chaldea, or in Palestine.
Read this article in its place on the printed pages
Footnotes
-
See Gale, Court of the Gentiles, l. 2. Stanley, Hist. of the Philosophers. Faidit Lettre nouvelle de la Rep. des Lettr. 1703. Octob. Theses des Carmes de Beziers, in 1682. ↩