Collins - Harlow - Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism

Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2010. – 1406 p.

ISBN 978-0-8028-2549-0

 

The field of Second Temple Judaism has emerged as a major area of study only in this generation. In large part, the flowering of the field has been due to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which made available for the first time a wealth of primary sources for the period between the Bible and the Mishnah. There has also been a resurgence of interest in the Pseudepigrapha, the large and loosely defined corpus of literature transmitted by Christians that includes many works of Jewish origin. Despite the proliferation of studies, however, there has not hitherto existed a major reference work devoted specifically to this period. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the time is ripe to take stock of this burgeoning field.

 

Naming and delimiting the field have been a problem. The old German label Spätjudentum (“Late Judaism”) had pejorative connotations, and in any case was largely based on the rabbinic literature, from a later period. Second Temple Judaism, strictly defined, includes most of the Hebrew Bible, while several major nonbiblical, nonrabbinic works were composed after the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. (e.g., the writings of Josephus, some of the apocalypses). “Early Judaism” has been the accepted name for the Judaism of the Hellenistic and early Roman period in the Society of Biblical Literature for some time, and that is the name we have adopted here. The boundaries of the period are admittedly fuzzy. The primary focus falls on the period between Alexander the Great in the late fourth century B.C.E. and the Roman emperor Hadrian and the Bar Kokhba Revolt in the early second century C.E. It is impossible to study this period, however, without taking some account of the Persian period and the postexilic biblical books, on the one hand, and of the subsequent development of rabbinic Judaism, on the other.

 

This Dictionary has two parts. The first part contains thirteen major essays that attempt to synthesize major aspects of Judaism in this period. The second, substantially longer part offers 520 entries arranged alphabetically. Many of these entries have cross-references, and all have select bibliographies. Equal attention is given to literary and nonliterary evidence. The New Testament writings are included, as evidence for Judaism in the first century C.E. This volume does not attempt full treatment of the Hebrew Bible or rabbinic Judaism, but it does contain some entries on these areas that provide the reader with at least initial reference information.

 

The volume is intended to meet the needs of scholars and students, but also to provide accessible information for the general reader. It is ecumenical and international in character. Two hundred and sixty-six authors, from as many as twenty countries, have contributed. These include Jews, Christians, and people of no religious affiliation. Naturally, the opinions of these authors are diverse, but all are competent scholars with expertise in the subjects they address.

 

The completion of this Dictionary would not have been possible without help from several quarters. At Eerdmans Michael Thomson first broached the idea and asked us to undertake it. Klaas Wolterstorff over-saw the volume’s production at every stage with great care and expertise. Tim Straayer did the laborious work of electronic compositing. Nancy Collins was a great help with researching illustrations. Willem Mineur came up with a fetching cover design. Milton Essenburg put our pages through several rigorous rounds of proofreading. And Tracey Gebbia produced the ancient city maps. Calvin College provided Dan Harlow with a sabbatical in January and Spring 2005 so that he could lay the groundwork for this project. Several contributors went above and beyond the call of duty by providing replacement articles on short notice as the project drew to a close. To these, and to all our colleagues who took the time to write articles for this volume, we are deeply grateful.

 

* * *

 

Metatron

 

Metatron is the name of a principal angel that in Jewish angelology occupies a unique place: the divine vice-regent and the lesser manifestation of the divine name (YHWH ha-qātôn, “the lesser YHWH”). 3 (Hebrew) Apocalypse of Enoch, also known as Sefer Hekhalot, portrays Metatron as the replica of the Deity whose crown, garments, throne, and even corporeality imitate the divine attributes. The Babylonian Talmud (b. Ḥagigah 15a) accentuates the uniqueness of Metatron’s position by noting that he alone is allowed to be seated in heaven because he is the celestial scribe who records the good deeds of Israel. According to this talmudic passage, a vision of the seated Metatron led R. Elisha b. Avuyah to the erroneous belief that there are “two powers in heaven” because he mistook the angel for a second deity.

 

The origin of the Metatron tradition is shrouded in mystery. Some scholars trace it back to Enochic lore, noting that in rabbinic and Hekhalot materials many early roles and titles attributed to Enoch in apocalyptic writings have been transferred to Metatron. Metatron’s origins, however, cannot be explained solely with reference to Enoch, because Metatron also assumed many of the titles and functions assigned to Michael, Yahoel, Melchizedek, and other exalted angelic figures in early Jewish apocalyptic writings.

 

A classical study by Gershom Scholem (1971) distinguishes two basic strands of Metatron speculation that were fused in rabbinic and Hekhalot literature. These include lore relating to Enoch and lore associated with Yahoel and Michael. One strand, which is reflected in talmudic passages, identifies Metatron with Yahoel as the representation of the divine name and knows nothing of his transfiguration from a human being into an angel. The other identifies Metatron with the figure of Enoch. This identification is made in Sefer Hekhalot (also known as 3 Enoch), which offers the most detailed description of the transformation of Enoch into the principal angel Metatron. Sefer Hekhalot gives Enoch-Metatron the title naʿar, “youth,” because he was transformed by God into a celestial creature and thus became the youngest of the angels. Metatron’s scribal duties and judicial functions also reflect a connection with Enoch.

 

No scholarly consensus exists about the etymology of the name Metatron, which occurs in two forms in rabbinic literature, one written with six letters, Mṭṭrwn, and the other with seven, Myṭṭrwn. One suggestion is that the name derives from Lat. metator (“leader, guide”). Since talmudic materials identify Metatron with the “angel of the LORD” mentioned in Exod. 23:21, some scholars believe that the appellation may originally have been given to this angel, who led the Israelites through the wilderness like a Roman army metator. Another suggestion is that the name is based on Gr. tetra (four), construed as related to the four letters of the divine name, the Tetragrammaton. Still other suggestions relate the name to Gr. metatyrannos (“the one next to the ruler”) or Gr. (ho) meta thronou (“next to the [divine] throne”).

 

Metatron’s proximity to the Deity is expressed in his appellation the “Prince of the Countenance” (śar hapānîm). He is the only one allowed to behold the divine face and go behind the heavenly curtain. In some Hekhalot and Shiʿur Qomah materials, Metatron is depicted either as a celestial choirmaster or a heavenly priest who has his own celestial tabernacle.

 

Metatron’s leading role in heaven as God’s secretary and vice-regent, and possibly his demiurgic role, is expressed through another prominent office, the Prince of the World (śar hā-ʿôlam), who is responsible for conveying divine decisions to the seventy (sometimes seventy-two) princes controlling the seventy nations of the earth. In Hekhalot and Shiʿur Qomah tradition, Metatron also functions as a heavenly guide, protector, and agent of revelation to the famous tannaim, R. Akiva and R. Ishmael.

 

Although scholars usually date the origins of speculation about Metatron to the rabbinic period, it is possible that the shaping of the exalted profile of this principal angel began already in the Second Temple period as a polemical response to traditions about exalted patriarchs and prophets.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

P. S. ALEXANDER 1985, “3 (Hebrew Apocalypse) of Enoch,” in OTP 1: 223-315. • J. DAN 1993, The Ancient Jewish Mysticism, Tel Aviv: MOD Books, 108-24. • I. GRUENWALD 1980, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism, Leiden: Brill, 195-206. • M. IDEL 1990, “Enoch Is Metatron,” Immanuel 24/25: 220-40. • S. LIEBERMAN 1980, “Metatron, the Meaning of His Name and His Functions,” in I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkabah Mysticism, Leiden: Brill, 235-41. • C. MOPSIK 1989, Le livre hébreu d’Hénoch ou livre des palais, Paris: Verdier. • H. ODEBERG 1928, 3 Enoch, or the Hebrew Book of Enoch, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. • A. ORLOV 2005, The Enoch-Metatron Tradition, Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck. • P. SCHÄFER 1993, The Hidden and Manifest God, Albany: State University of New York Press. • G. SCHOLEM 1971, “Metatron,” EncJud 11: 1443-46.

 

ANDREI A. ORLOV