METATRON

 Chilufim 25/2018 147-182

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 147

ANY MORLOK · FRANKFURT

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

Kabbalistic Angels and their Christian Angels

Transformations*

Angels and especially the figure of Enoch have always held a great fascination

Jewish mysticism in all its variations and epochs.

Not only the transformation from an earthly to a heavenly existence,

already indicated in the short biblical passage on Enoch (Gen 5:21-24)

seems to have become the starting point for numerous speculations,

but also the angelic hierarchies drew a multitude of theological

assumptions. The special position of Enoch in his heavenly

status as Archangel Metatron also served as a paradigm for the

Transformation of the mystic into an "angelic" state in numerous

texts of medieval Jewish mysticism, both in Ashkenaz

and in Sefarad.1 It is not only in the ancient Jewish sources that

of angel names and especially Metatron as a hybrid new creation

from earlier Jewish traditions from Babylon in Palestine

7th/8th century,2 but on the basis of a comparativist

At the same time, a far-reaching development of the topic

* This publication is published in the context of the

Ministry of Science and the Arts funded research focus "Religious

Positioning: modalities and constellations in Jewish, Christian and Islamic

Contexts" at Goethe University Frankfurt and the Justus Liebig University

University of Giessen.

1 Idel, Enoch; Abrams, Divine Ontology.

2 Paz, Metatron; Schremer, Parvanka.

Elke Morlok

148 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

also within Christian sources.3 One will find that

that in the early modern period among Christian Kabbalists and missionary

active Pietists Engelnamen and above all Metatron in close

Connection with a doctrine of the Trinity inspired by Kabbalistic sources

and Christology, the development of which I will discuss in the following

contextualize and sketch here. The history of ideas

Transformations of angel names, especially in the context of

of Enoch's transformation into Metatron, and the dynamic

Appropriations of these figures therefore not only allow a more precise

Positioning of the respective inner-Jewish currents between Ashkenaz

and Sefarad, but at the same time allow a position to be determined

of the respective authors between Jewish and Christian Kabbalah

or between (Christian) missionary undertakings and the (Jewish)

Target persons of the same.4 The widespread use of mystical angel names is

among other things due to the idea in the Kabbalistic texts,

that these are the modes of action of the divine, i.e. the structure of the upper

world. In many passages, elements from the traditional

Angelology combined with innovative exegetical techniques,

who often "wandered" from Ashkenaz to Sefarad. On the basis of

the search for the precursors of these techniques, which mostly consist of letter

manipulation

, the respective new combinations can be

of names as hybrid constructs and their different

positions in inner-Jewish developments and at the same time in their

dynamic confrontations with non-Jewish sources.

1. Ancient Springs between Babylon and Palestine

3 Abrams, Metatron and Jesus; Schäfer, Zwei Götter, S. 116-118.

4 Voß/Siluk, Jenseits von Mission.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 149 Previous

research has mostly assumed that the

identification of Enoch with Metatron represents an early symbiosis and

the mentions of Metatron in the Talmudic sources and in the Hekhalot

literature.5 For this reason, some researchers

an ancient triangular structure between Metatron, Enoch and the

Son of Man,6 so that in turn subsequent investigations

Enoch-Metatron, a man made god, as a literary mythological

model of the figure of Jesus.7 Enoch-Metatron

was considered the basis of all Metatron's appearances in the rabbinic and rabbinic

of the Hekhalot literature and Metatron, according to this research, was initially

was introduced to Babylonia.8 There he was introduced to Enoch and Enoch

the Son of Man and even received messianic traits

as a kind of "Jewish Jesus".9

However, recent research has suggested that Metatron

in Palestine from metator, the name for the role of the angel

of God as a "messenger" (parvanka)10 according to Ex 23:20-21; only in

Babylonia from the second half of the 3rd century onwards, "Metatron" refers to a

angel, who was not equated with Enoch there.

11 The earliest mentions of Enoch-Metatron in Palestinian

5 Odeberg, 3 Enoch, S. 23-43; Orlov, Enoch-Metatron; ders., Yahoel and Metatron;

Boyarin,

Beyond Judaisms; Idel, Enoch; Halperin, Faces, S. 421-427; Deutsch, Guardians,

S. 28-35; Segal, Two Powers, S. 60-73.

6 Boyarin, Beyond Judaisms, S. 344.

7 Ebd., S. 323-324; Deutsch, Guardians, S. 151-157; Paz, Metatron.

8 Ginzberg, Legends, 5:163; Schäfer, Jewish Jesus, S. 103-143; ders., Origins, S. 324-

326;

ders., Metatron in Babylonia.

9 Schäfer, Jewish Jesus, S. 141-149.

10 To this Persian (or Parthian) loanword (messenger/harbinger/messenger) and

its specific meaning in the Mandaean context as angels, see Schremer, Parvanka.

11 Schremer, Parvanka.

Elke Morlok

150 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Sources are said to be after the migrations of these Babylonian traditions

to the west to the beginning of the 8th century. Metatron is therefore

no Jewish Jesus and Jesus no Christian Metatron. It was

rather a late, innovative synthesis of the two figures around the

year 700 as a result of the fusion of Babylonian Metatronund

Byzantine Enoch movements. The Angelification of Metatron

from a human existence to that of a second deity

not in Babylonia, where Metatron had a relatively stable career

as archangels like Michael and others. It was not until the Babylonian

traditions were uprooted and reached the West, a

redefinition of Metatron, which is linked to local traditions for angelification

Enoch.12 This late, hybrid Palestinian

Synthesis of the Babylonian Metatron and the Byzantine Enoch

but had a decisive influence on the development of the Jewish

Mysticism. Such a hybridity of the figure of Metatron and his implied

importance for the transformation of the mystic played a decisive role in the

role in the adaptation of these constructions in Christian

contexts, as we will see later.

In the Hekhalot literature, angel names take on a central magical

Position as a "seal" or "password" when transitioning from a palace

to the next higher one,13 so that here an angelic magic can be

speak. This phenomenon may be closely related to the

Use of angel names in the magical texts of the Cairo Geniza,

as well as ancient Jewish traditions for the magical use of

Angel names. In the Sefer haRazim (Book of Secrets) or in the

both tractates Sefer Shimmushe Torah (Book of Magical Use)

of the Torah) and Sefer Shimmushe Tehillim (Book of Magical Use

12 Paz, Metatron. For a similar context, see also: Paz/Weiss, From Encoding.

13 Herrmann, Massekhet Hekhalot, pp. 158, 258; Schäfer, Origins.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 151 of the

Psalms), these traditions are taken up again.14

In this context, the Pentateuch

Commentary by Ephraim ben Shimshon and Rabbi Avigdor from Ashkenaz

a.15

2. The Meaning of Angel Names in Kabbalah

Among the Ḥaside Ashkenaz, who are known to have the Hekhalot corpus

edited, the magical use of angel names

prominently in an anonymous Torah commentary, which together with

with the better known Sefer haḤokhmah (Book of Wisdom) as

whose introduction is wrongly attributed to Eleazar of Worms

16 In Yehuda heḤasid's Pentateuch commentary and in his Sefer

angel names also play a central role. In the

writings of his grandson, Eleazar haDarshan, are given angel names with complex

linguistic techniques such as gematria (numerical value), notarikon

(acronym) and Temurah (letter permutation) in an exegetical

process to gain access to the highest insights of the Torah.

receive. The script is only preserved in a single manuscript in Munich

(Hass Manchen 221, Fall. 83a-273a). Efraim Ben Shimson Commenter

to the Pentateuch also belongs to the category of angelic magic

Ashkenaz, as well as Jakob ben Asher's extensive Torah commentary with

dem Titel Ba'al haTurim. R. Isaac ben Jehuda Halevis Scripture Sefer

Pa'aneaḥ Raza from the 14th century is also to be classified here.17

The manuscripts of Rabbi Nehemiah ben deserve attention

14 Rebiger, Shimmush Tehillim; ders., Sefer ha-Razim.

15 Idel, On Angels; ders., World of Angels; Liebes, Rabbi Solomon.

16 Idel, Commentaries.

17 For all these writings, their authors and their occurrence, see Idel, On Angels,

p. 213.

Elke Morlok

152 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Shlomo haNavi (Menahem Tröstlin) from Erfurt, who has his own school

established in addition to that of the Kalonymids and in his work on the 70 names

Metatron's New Standards of Kabbalistic Linguistic

techniques.18 It should be noted here that all of these writings

and comments different ideas and conceptions from Ashkenaz

and added their own characteristics to each of them.

In this milieu of philosophical-cabalistic and astromagical

Commentary, angels take away a central position in Revelation

of the hidden content of the Torah. This content is formed by a series of

divine names, which possess magical powers and the essence of the divine

within themselves. Through the angels, the magical potential of the

Torah, which has been handed down for generations, to the initiated reader

As we read in the introduction to Sefer Shimmushe Torah :

The saint immediately summoned Yefeifi'ah, the prince of the Torah (sar haTorah),

and to him Moses gave the Torah, in all things well ordered and secured

(2 Samuel 23:5) and all the angels of service became his beloved, and every one

gave him a remedy (dvar refu'ah) and a secret of names (sod

haShemot), which arises from each individual pericope, and all its magical

uses [...] and this is the magical use that the

angels gave him, through Yefeifi'ah, the prince of the Torah, and through Metatron,

the prince of the divine presence (sar haPanim). And Moses

passed it on to Eleazar and Eleazar to his son Pinchas, who was identical

is with Elijah, the high and revered priest.19

According to this text, Moses did not receive the Torah from God at Sinai

but by the angels Yefeifi'ah and Metatron, i.e. the Sar ha-

18 Idel, Forlorn Writings, S. 187-190; Dan, Seventy Names; Abrams, Divine Ontology;

Wolfson,

Metatron. On the magical use of angel names, esp. Taftafiah, near Nehemiah

see Idel, Shield of David.

19 Reprinted in Jellinek, Bet Midrash I., p. 58f. See Idel, On Angels, p. 214f.

Translations

of the source texts, unless otherwise indicated, by the author.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 153 Torah (Prince

of the Torah) and the Sar haPanim (Prince of the Divine Presence,

lit. of the face). The term "mystery of names" (Sod

haShemot) implies a complex exegetical technique by which

angel names are extracted from biblical pericopes in order to reveal the hidden,

magical content of the biblical text. The respective

According to this method, angels are those who have the esoteric

Knowledge to the initiated reader. According to Moshe Idel, this

Customs are closely related to ancient angel cults, which were used in the Middle Ages

were revived by certain Jewish groups.20

According to Gershom Scholem, the arrangement of the letters of the printed

Torah and that of the primordial variant are not identical, but

the original structure is only indicated by the angels, whereas

according to Moshe Idel in Ma'ayan Ḥokhmah, the revealed and the original

Torah.21

However, in contrast to the biblical and rabbinic literature, it is

to point out the role of angels as revelators of the Torah. Similar to the

pseudepigraphic and apocalyptic writings, a higher

appreciation of angels, which in the Middle Ages were once again

shifted the focus. Very special at this point are the explanations

of the already mentioned R. Nehemiah from Erfurt, who in the first

third of the 13th century was active at the same time as the Kalonymides, but in the

his writings, which are largely anonymous, differ strongly from his

more well-known contemporaries from the Rhineland.22

In Nehemiah, another angel, Yaho'el, who is used in numerous ancient

Interpretation of Ex 21:23 as the "embodiment" of the Torah or the divine

20 Idel, On Angels, S. 215.

21 Ibid., pp. 215f.

22 Idel, Forlorn Writings, S. 188-196; ders., Commentaries, S. 47-94; Liebes, Angels, S.

171-

196.

Elke Morlok

154 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

name,23 on the basis of exegetical techniques on Deuteronomy 1,5

and Ex 24:1 in the context of rabbinic statements, the task of

Teaching the Torah to Abraham:

Since Yaho'el was the teacher of Abraham, he taught Abraham, our ancestor

the entire Torah, as it is written: [...] Moses began ( הואיל

משה ho'il moshe) to interpret this law (be'er), and spoke (Deuteronomy 1:5).

The letters of the word ho'il ( הואיל ) are identical to Yaho'el ( ,(יהואל

the letters of "Moses interpreted", Moshe be'er ( משה באר ) are

"of Abraham", she-Avraham ( שאברהם ), because Abraham was 52

years,24 when he received the Torah (cf. bAvoda Zara 9a) [...] and 52

according to the numerical value (Gematria) Yaho'el. Yaho'el is the angel whom Moses

our teacher called to ascend to heaven, according to Sanhedrin

(38b) where it is written, and he said to Moses, "Come up to

YHWH ('aleh el YHWH, Ex 24:1). It should say "Ascend to me!"

But Moses ascended to this angel, whose name was the same as that of his Master.

is equal to YHWH, who has the same letters as Yaho'el.25

The exegetical basis of these statements can be found in Deuteronomy 1:5 and Ex 24:1

from which the name of the angel, Yaho'el, is derived as a new combination

of the words ho'il or el YHWH. By letter permutation

and numerical value, it is shown that not only Moses interpreted the Torah from a

angels, but already Abraham. The author substantiates this statement

by the consonant correspondence with another passage

from this verse – namely, the letters of be'er Moshe with she-

Avraham – who again Abraham and Moshe are both with each other and with each

other.

also with the Torah. The age of revelation of Abraham, 52, will be

is cited as a further indication of the revelation by the angel Yaho'el, since

23 Orlov, Yaho’el and Metatron, S. 109f.

24 52 in Hebrew corresponds to the letters nun and bet, i.e. ben (son).

25 Hs British Library 752, fol. 45b; Idel, Ben, S. 208f; ders., On Angels, S. 236. Dort

findet

the Hebrew text.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 155 of this not

only by letter permutation from the two verses,

but also by the matching numerical value as the Son of God

(ben = 52). The equation of the angel as the Son of God

is confirmed in another passage from the writings of Nehemiah. It

this is the anonymous manuscript Hs Cambridge Add. 858.2,

which, according to Moshe Idel, is also attributable to the school of Nehemiah.26

It states:

Our teacher, R. Tröstlin, gave the explanation. Since it is written , Moses began

to interpret this law (Deuteronomy 1:5), and Moses said to Israel, "Whoever

in his name , the Torah/the

Act. And who has ho'il ( הואיל in his name )? It is Elijah.

How do we know that? Elijah (Eliahu, אליהו ) gives in its numerical value

Ho'il (52).

On the basis of another passage, Scholem has already assumed that

that Menachem Tröstlin is that Nehemiah, the prophet

who is identical with Nehemiah ben Shlomo and who is described in Abraham

ben Azriels 'Arugat haBosem.27 In the Ashkenazi context

is an equation of Yaho'el with the Sar haTorah also by R. Ephraim

ben Shimshon.28

In Kabbalistic literature, these combinations are mainly used in the

Sefer haPeli'yah, from the 14th century in Byzantium. There

the hidden secrets of Elijah are revealed, which is also

through the verse from Deuteronomy 1:5 ho'il Moshe (Moses began [...]) – and the

inversion

the letter of the name Eliahu ( אליהו ) as the teacher Moses, who

reveals himself as Yaho'el ( יהואל , by letter reversal) and the

26 Idel, On Angels, S. 218.

27 Scholem, Ursprung, p. 211, footnote 70; id., Jüdische Mystik, p. 95.

28 Ephraim ben Shimshon (or ben Samson), Commentary on the Pentateuch, vol. 2, p.

152,

cf. pp. 77, 201, 284, 319 (Hebrew).

Elke Morlok

156 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

is destined to interpret the Torah in 70 ways.29

line of interpretation, Yaho'el becomes a central role in the Ashkenazi region.

mediator of revelation, to the prince of the Torah or even – by means of

exegetical techniques in relation to Deuteronomy 1:5 and Ex 24:1 – to the Son of God;

the exegetical techniques mentioned above were used in the late Middle Ages

in Byzantium. This extraction from two biblical verses

includes not only the creation of an angel as an interpreter of the Torah,

but also excludes the substitution of God by an angel in the

moment of revelation. However, it is difficult to decide here whether

was initially based on a binary divine structure, which

was then exegetically proven, or whether an exegetical manipulation

only these theophoric figures brought to light.30

There are many other examples of the creation of such

angel names in the writings of Nehemiah. Thus, in his

Commentary on the 42-letter name from Shma' Israel ( (שמע ישראל

the angel or prince Shema'i'el Sar ( שמעיאל שר ) or the names of the two

Engel Pani'el und Uri'el aus Ex 33,23 (Panay la' Yir'u) extrahiert.31 In

In the above-mentioned commentary on the name of God , the name of the angel

Yuppi'el from the first letters of Num 6:26 ישא יהוה פניו אליך וישם

לך.32 In a similar way, in a work of the school of R.

Eleazar from Worms the angel 'Anafi'el from the two words 'al penei

(Gen 1:2),33 while in the Pentateuch commentary R. Eph-

29 Sefer HaPeli'yah, vol. 1, fol. 55b. For the text, see Idel, On Angels, pp. 218, 237,

footnote 41.

30 Ibid., p. 219.

31 Idel, Commentaries, S. 181.

32 Ibid., p. 180.

33 On 'Anafi'el and his connection with Helios/Mithras in the mosaic of the Hammat

Tiberias

Synagogue see Idel, Holding an Orb, esp. p. 29

of Enoch with the Atlas/Helios myth, as it was also used by Eusebius of Caesarea

can be found: "[...] the Greeks say that Atlas invented astrology and that

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 157 raim ben

Shimshons, also from the Nehemiah School, from the Hebrew

Consonants of the name Aharon ( אהרן ) as an acronym the four angel names

Uri'el אוריאל , Hadarni'el הדרניאל , Rapha'el רפאל und Nuri'el נוריאל

follow. These four spread out as service angels in the form of the Torah scroll

or the parchment (Yeri'ah) before the throne of God.34 The connection

parchment (Yeri'ah), i.e. the manifestation of the divine

word by angels or the written Torah, results according to the

Numerical value of Hadarni'el and Yeri'ah, both of which add up to 300 each.

Nehemiah also deduces from the numerical value of Ps 91:1 beSeter, "in the

protection, in secret" (662). 35

In a wider context, various biblical and liturgical

elements with the angel names: for example, the shock-like

Bubbles of the shofar, teqiy'ah (585) dissolved as Hadarni'el weSandalfon (585),

36 whereas the elongated teru'ah has the numerical value of

Shamshi'el (681).37 It can be assumed that angel names

God's actions and the structure of the upper

world. Familiar elements from the traditional

angelology is combined with exegetical techniques that create a magical

Use of names. These angel names are based on

their combination with liturgical elements to become integral parts of the

tradition and find their way into a channel accessible to the wider public.

Font corpus.

Atlas was the same as Enoch, and that Enoch had a son, Methuselah, who had all

We learned things through God's angels, and that's why we gained our knowledge."

(Praeparatio Evangelica, IX, 17).

34 Ben Shimshon, Pentateuch Commentary, vols. 2, 7. See Idel, On Angels, pp. 220,

237.

35 Liebes, Angels, S. 181f.

36 Liebes, Angels, S. 174, 177f. Fn 28.

37 Ebd., S. 174; Idel, On Angels, S. 221.

Elke Morlok

158 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

On the basis of the letter manipulations cited, different

Synthesized corpora of Jewish and non-Jewish literature

and new narratives emerge. In some elite circles, such as Abraham,

Abulafia will combine these linguistic techniques with philosophical

themes,38 while in other cases they are affected by the theosophical-theurgical

current of Kabbalistic literature.

39

3. Apotheosis and Redemption Function: Enoch/Metatron Traditions

at Nehemiah

A special position, as already mentioned, is occupied by the Enoch

Metatron tradition with Nehemiah. In the process, well-known mythical

Narratives of Enoch with innovative exegetical techniques from Ashkenaz

at the end of which Metatron as Archangel and Son of God,

as the Redeemer from the Red Sea.

Thus, Nehemiah writes in his commentary on the 42-literal name of God:

For the prince of the present day came together with the great God40 and

they manifested themselves on the sea; and the numerical value of Moses ( 345 ,משה )

testify to this,41 for the prince of the present day went before Moses, as written

It is written (Ex 14:2) "before him (nikheḥo נכחו ) you shall lie down by the sea".

Nikheḥo has the same letters as Enoch ( חנוך ) and he is Metatron,

38 Idel, Ben, S. 276-376.

39 For example, Yaho'el in the writings of R. Joseph of Hamadan or in the Sefer Brit

Menuḥa .

40 For the difficult distinction between God and Metatron, see Abram, Divine

Ontology; Wolfson, Metatron; Dan, Esoteric Theology, S. 215-229.

41 It is unclear here whether Moshe serves as an acronym for Metatron Sar haPanim ,

since the consonants

of Moshe and the first letters of the angel designation are identical.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 159 the prince of

the present, and also the numerical value of haSefer (the book,

345) and paṭron ( 345 ,פטרון ) (protector), for it was the merit of

Moses that God has given the book through him, which is the Torah, which is the

is the paṭron (protector) of Israel, so that they could cross the sea

and because of the merit of Metatron, the prince of the present day,

the entire Torah, its hidden wisdom, mysteries and

Mysteries that Moses our teacher all learned from the prince of the present day

were given.42

Moses received the Torah and its mysteries from the Prince of the Divine Presence

but in this section there is a hierarchy between three

Protagonists to distinguish: God, Metatron (the prince of the present)

and Moses, through whom the Torah enters the earthly realm.

The consonants of Moses ( משה ) are referred to as haShem ( השם ) with God

identified. The basic numerical value of the passage is 345, which is

corresponds to the book (haSefer) and the protector (paṭron) at the same time. These

hierarchy reflects a ditheistic approach in which the

Boundary between man and angel, here using the example of Enoch, is blurred.

This is further taken from another passage from Nehemiah's commentary on

the 70 names of Metatron , which are based on the identical numerical values

of the following textual contexts: The words yhwh

whyh ("YHWH and he was", as the equivalent of Yaho'el)43 with the numerical value

52 have the same value as ben (son). In addition, this corresponds to

the numerical value of Enoch and the particle אנא (anna, "alas") from Ps

118,25. The latter is interpreted as a prayer of the high priest in the sense of an

invocation to

the prince of the present day. In a subsequent ex-

42 Hs Oxford-Bodleiana 1568, fol. 8a; and Hs Oxford-Bodleiana 1812, fol. 66a. To a

English translation with detailed explanations, see Idel, On Angels, pp. 223f.;

ders., Alphabet of Metatron, S. 255-264.

43 To equate YHWH WHYH (YHWH and he was) with Yaho'el with Nehemiah and

the implication of Metatron as a "man", see Idel, Ben, pp. 200-203.

Elke Morlok

160 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

egetic dynamics, Yaho'el (as Enoch) and baYam

(by the sea) (52) and Eliahu (52) were added to the role of redeemer of the prince

of the present (Sar haPanim). This becomes unambiguous

named as son. Implicitly, reference is made to the redemptive function of the angel

figures

on different levels in the gradually ascending prayer

received. The Theophany/Apotheosis of a Theophoric Mediator Figure,

who is even called a son, is thus described in various writings

Nehemiah. In doing so, the central position of justice,

above in the context of nikheḥo and often in his commentary on the

70 names of Metatron,44 as the righteousness of Enoch

interpreted. Earlier Enoch traditions are replaced by this binary vision

which Metatron/Yaho'el played the redemptive role on the Red Sea as

founding myth of the people of Israel, which in the sense of a

birth can be understood. In a similar way, we read in the commentary

to the 70 names of Metatron:

According to the numerical value, Yaho'el is anna (from Ps 118:25), because when

Israel was on the [Red]

sea, the prince of the present day was a messenger to help them.

Yaho'el (52) corresponds to yhwh whyh in numerical value, and it is a noble

prince over the women who are in the throes of childbirth, for

then God sends the prince of the present (Sar HaPanim) to save them.

45

Contrary to traditional Jewish beliefs that God alone is at the

Red Sea,46 an archangel is shown here as the Redeemer.

In this context, Yaho'el is mentioned in various sources from Ash

44 Ibid., pp. 645f.

45 Hs Berlin-Tübingen 239, fol. 112; reprinted in Dan, Esoteric Theology, pp. 220f.; Idel,

On Angels, S. 225.

46 On the Passover Haggadah and its emphasis that God alone redeemed Israel, as a

polemic

against ancient sources that ascribed a central function to angels, see Goldin, Not

by Means, S. 412-424.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 161 kenaz, similar

to R. Ephraim Shimshon, referred to as the Son of God.

At the same time, as the Prince of the Torah, he is the teacher of Moses and Abraham

and on the

The one to whom Moses ascends to receive the Torah ends. Thereby

possesses the "hypostatic sonship" of Yaho'el in the scriptures

Nehemiah not only played a role of redemption on the collective, but also

at the individual level.47

However, in the complex transmission of these traditions, one must take into account

the

different lines of transmission of the source material from Italy

(various manuscripts from Rome) and Ashkenaz (Nehemiah).

The dissemination of extensive source material on Metatron in Thuringia

is illustrated by a recently discovered binding fragment from Gotha from the

at the end of the 14th century.48 There it says:

And Uri'el, who stands before the Shekhinah, as it is written, but my face

cannot be seen (Ex 33:23), which means that his essence

(luḥo) and his power throws his light on Metatron, who as his prince of the present day

(Sar Panin), and this means that he is in his face

looks.49

In the further course the redeeming functions of angels are discussed,

whose names are obtained from letter reversal, whereby

often referred to the Sefer Yezirah (Book of Creation)

becomes. In a similar way to Nehemiah, exegetical

techniques of extracting angel names (Uri'el) from biblical verses in order to

to receive a magical or redemptive effect. The fact that such a close

connection between redemption, sonship and metatron also Christian

circles in Thuringia and especially in the 18th century.

47 Idel, On Angels, S. 226.

48 Lehnardt, Neues Licht.

49 Slightly modified translation from Lehnardt, Neues Licht, p. 74.

Elke Morlok

162 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

can be demonstrated by the following two examples:

Gottfried Christoph Sommers Specimen Theologiae Soharicae (Gotha

1734) and Caspar Calvör's Gloria Christi.50 In these works, the figure

Metatron in a direct context of the doctrine of the Trinity or the

Christology in order to use Kabbalistic teachings to

to legitimize truth claims.51

4. Metatron and Christ in their Christian adaptation

In 1734, an anthology of theses from the Zohar, the

most important work of Jewish mysticism of the Middle Ages, by Gottfried

Christoph Sommer in Gotha, which has so far been used in research

received little attention.52

Sommer was born in 1706 in Bad Langensalza, near Erfurt, as the son of

of a Protestant theologian.53 In 1708, the family moved

to Gotha, where Gottfried attended the grammar school until 1723.54

After studying theology and oriental languages, he became an educator of

Johann Adolf of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg (1721-1799), the youngest

Son of Prince Frederick II When the young prince completed his education in 1735 in

Geneva, Sommer worked as a theologian and Hebrew scholar. But already

50 It is not possible to go into detail about this work below. Therefore, see

Abrams, Metatron and Jesus.

51 For the two works, see Abrams, Metatron and Jesus; and Morlok, Missio or

Do I confess?tag.

52 See, however, Huss, Translations, pp. 93, 96-104.

53 His father, Johann Friedrich Sommer, came from Remstädt and died in Gotha. He

was also a Protestant theologian and was appointed dean in Bad Langensalza in 1706

before he became court deacon in Gotha in 1708 and finally from 1711 until his

Death in 1716 became court chaplain at Friedenstein Castle in Gotha.

54 Schneider, Die Abiturienten, No. 810, p. 17; Zedler, Universallexikon, vol. 38, p. 693.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 163 the year

before, in 1734, his work on the Christian Kabbalah was published with the

Titel Specimen Theologiae Soharicae publiziert (Abb. 1).55

55 The full Latin title is: Zohar miSefer haZohar Seu Specimen

Theologiae Soharicae cum Christiana Amice Convenientis, exhibens articulorum fidei

fundamentalium probationes, e Sohare, antiquissimo Iudaeorum monumento, petitas,

et versione Latina ac necessariis adnotationibus illustratas, quibus non modo successio

doctrinae salutaris per secula, Christi nativitatem proxime antecedentia, eandemque

mox excipientia, demonstratur, errores modernorum Iudaeorum corriguntur, et veritas

ipsa vindicatur, ab oppugnationibus reliquorum hostium purae et verae religionis; sed

etiam multis scripturae sacrae tam vet. quam Novi Testamenti locis lux non exigua

conciliatur. Studio et opera Gottofr. Christophori Sommeri, Gothani 1734.

Elke Morlok

164 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Fig. 1: Title page of Sommer, Specimen, p. 5 (unpaginated)

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 165 Sommer's

Preface and Structure of the Work

In his Praefatio, Sommer tries to convince his readers that the

Zohar and Kabbalistic Literature in General Jews and Christians

connect. He gives a brief introduction to the divine system of

ten ways of being or acting of God, the ten Sefirot, which are usually

as a tree (Hebrew. ilan). In this context, it has

the strong influence of Christian Knorr von Rosenroth56 and the Sabbatean

converts Johann Kemper57 and Anders Norrelius'58.

Sommer conceives his 20 theses as principles of faith, which he draws from the

Zohar as the source of ancient Christian truths. Due to the

"fact" that the Zohar was written during Jesus' lifetime, it contains the

original Christian theology of the New Testament. Therefore,

Sommer assumes that he will not only persuade the Jews to convert

but could also bring about a renewed unity of Christians.

In order to initiate this process of reconciliation among Christians, it is necessary to

central motifs from the Cabbala Christiana can be cited as evidence.

For this reason, he structures Specimen Theologiae Soharicae in a

literary form, which reminds the various Christian readers of the Protestant

confessional writings:59 After the dedication, the

The accompanying letter and the foreword are followed by 20 theses, each of which is

based on

one or more probatio / probationes e Sohare (in Hebrew or

56 On Knorr von Rosenroth and Kabbalah, see the relevant articles in Morgen-Glantz 7

(1997), 8 (1998), 10 (2000), 13 (2003), 16 (2006), 20 (2010), 24 (2014) and 27 (2017).

57 On this dazzling figure of the Christian Kabbalah, see Wolfson, Messianism; id.,

Angelic Embodiment; Asulin, Another Glance.

58 On Norrelius and his influence in Sweden, especially Uppsala, see Roling,

Redemption,

S. 404-408; vgl. Huss, Translations, S. 91-93.

59 Dingel, Bekenntnisschriften.

Elke Morlok

166 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Aramaic with Latin translation from the Zohar).60

der probationes Sommer adds one or more explicatio / explicationes

. Most theses conclude with an illustratio . The conclusion

of the book forms an index with Latin and Hebrew key terms.

61

Sommer begins his preface by presenting two central, inner-Christian

themes of his writing: the Trinity and the Doctrine of Two Natures

Christ. According to him, the Trinity is presented in the upper three Sefirot,

which represent the unity of the three Trinitarian Persons

(tres primas Sephiras indicare tres in una essentia divinitatis personas62).

Christ's mediating function between the upper and lower worlds is

possible through his twofold nature as man and God (theántropos).

Accordingly, the Messiah is the foundation and head of the church

(mediam Christum θεάνθρωπον reliquas ad utrumque latus sitas, attributa

divina, penultima iterum in medio locatam, Christum s. Messiam notare

tanquam fundamentum & caput ecclesiae).63

It must be mentioned that Sommer belongs to the terms personas, theántropos

and attributa divina detailed footnotes on "harmonic agreement"

between the system of the divine Sefirot and the Christological

teachings. In addition, he adds two Ilanot (graphic representation)

of the divine attributes as a tree) with Hebrew and Latin

60 The quotations follow the text of the editions of Sulzbach and Amsterdam and come

from

mostly from the Tiqqune Zohar and Raʽya Mehemna.

61 It is also worth noting the two Greek terms in the index: mikroposopos

for Ze'ir Anpin in the Lemma Messiah, and eikon in the Lemma to Shekhinah (est Dei

O.M.

eikon seu imago).

62 Sommer, Specimen, S. 4.

63 Ibid., pp. 4-5.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR JÜDISCHE KULTURGESCHICHTE ∙ 25/2018 167

The following can be proven on the basis of Kabbalistic motifs.65

64 Sommer, Specimen, S. 4-5.

65 On the visual representation of Sefirot, especially in Knorr von Rosenroth, see

Chajes,

Permeable borders.

Fig. 2: Graphical representation of the divine attributes as a tree

from Sommer, Specimen, p. 23 (unpaginated)

Elke Morlok

168 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Thesis I to Gen 1:26 thematizes the image of God of man,

who can either oppose or confirm it. The

Man possesses free will, which means after the first probatio ,

that he can choose between good and evil – Metatron or

Samael: Deus creavit hominem ad imaginem suam ita tamen ut iterum vel

amittere eam, vel in eadem persistere & confirmari potuisset, libertate

praeditus voluntatis. The following Probatio e Sohare quotes Gen 1:26 with

the interpretation of the divine image as "ad imaginem suam", which

refers to Metatron and the repetition "ad imaginem Dei"

is a reference to Samael.66 Indirectly, the theme of the "free

Will" with a view to Metatron and his transformation as the main theme

of the book, which deals with the book from the first to the last page

becomes.

Metatron in den 20 Theses

Sommer begins his argumentation with the statement that man

was created in the image of the first angel, Metatron, who

at the same time represents the imago Christi . But through the

66 In the Sulzbach edition, this passage is found in Volume 1, fol. 25; in the classic

Edition of Margalioth III, 278b (pp. 614-615). The double yud in וייצר may refer to:

of creation "in bonum in imaginem Metatronis" (cf. Zohar 3:46b). In the Illustratio

for Thesis I there is another quotation from Zohar (Sulzbach III, fol. 19, c. 4) on the

double

yud as a reference to the dual nature of creation as good and evil, and to the

man's free choice to choose sin or to resist it. Summer

also refers to Gersonides' interpretation of 1 Kings 17, which was found in Eisenmenger,

Discovered Judaism, p. 37 on the free will of man: "The

blessed God does not compel man to sin, but has given him the

free will that he may save himself from spiritual and physical evils (and

preserve) may [...] For behold, if he could not deliver himself from this, he would have

not to be punished worthily, because he would be compelled to commit sin."

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 169 Sin this

image and turned away from its Creator. He

was then created in the image of Samael or after him. From there

man was created in two images.67 Sinfulness

of man is the starting point for theses II to V. They treat

the nature of sin, the loss of the image of God, the original sin as

Special theme and death as a consequence of sin. Sommer reminds his readers

that man will suffer eternal damnation without repentance.68

In his sixth thesis, Sommer defines Metatron's role as a mediator,

who reconciles the Creator with his creation and makes the angelic being

of man.69 In addition to Metatron, Christ also fulfills the

and the Shekhinah this reconciling function.70 In the seventh thesis,

Sommer explains to what extent the Shekhinah represents the divine image71

and exists as Deus in indumento / vestimentum (God in the Robe).72

functions as the eikon of the divine Creator and in it the

creative power that is present in all creatures. At the same time,

the outer form of the Divine, which is expressed in its inner

Essence never changed. If it is present in Metatron (this one with yud

then it bears the divine name Shadday,73 which

67 Sommer, Specimen, S. 19f und 26f.

68 Sommer's section on "repentance" shows great proximity to Luther's doctrine of

justification and

requires a separate study. Cf. Pekka-Vainio, Justification and Participation.

69 Sommer, Specimen, S. 31-34.

70 Ibid., pp. 34-38. However, Sommer leaves a clear definition of the exact relationship

between

Metatron, Christ and the Shekhinah miss. The transition between these

Characters remain fluid and there is no indication of a hierarchical relationship

of the three among themselves. But in order to shed light on his speculations, Johann

Kemper

Maṭṭe Moshe.

71 Vgl. Zohar, Sulzbach II, p. 93.

72 „[…] vocatur quoque Schechina 2) indumentum ipsius DEI omnipotentis ( שדי )“;

Sommer,

Specimen, S. 34.

73 The identical numerical value is 314 (Sommer, Specimen, pp. 36-38). Cf. Abrams,

Metatron and Jesus, pp. 45-50. To this gematria Metatron - Shadday (314) and Jesus -

beShadday (316) vgl. auch Sefer haPeli'yah, Premyslany 1884, fol. 38a and 66a. Siehe

Elke Morlok

170 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

the divine face, the divine language or the divine word. Summer

emphasizes Metatron as the "middle pillar" (of the divine structure) and

points out that he and the Godhead have the same name.74

According to Thesis IIX (sic.), the Shekhinah is the אני (ani, I) in Revelation

Abraham's and thus higher than the Messiah and the divine image.75

Therefore, she created the cosmos in consortio with God, is in creation

"incarnate" and eventually leads to redemption from sin.76 Already in Thesis

VI, the return to God through Metatron / Matrona,77 in its

function as an angel of the covenant, who is at the same time the Messiah, the

Mediator and the "only Son of God."78

According to Thesis IX, the three Sefirot Tif'eret, Yesod and Malkhut unite

in the same way as Metatron and the Shekhinah, the human

and the divine nature of Christ. Salvation can be achieved through the Shekhinah

and it represents the true analogy to the mystery of the Incarnation

also the examples in Calvör, Gloria Christi, in Abrams, Metatron and Jesus, pp. 65-67,

69.

74 These are typical aspects of the Ashkenazi Metatron traditions; cf. Idel, Forlorn

Writings, S. 189-195; Abrams, Metatron and Jesus, S. 25, 29, 38 Fn 52.

75 Sommer, Specimen, Thesis IIX, S. 38-48.

76 „[…] quae Schechina tamen nihilominus veniam petiit creandi eum ad imaginem

suam,

simulque condixit, velle se, homine peccatore facto, corpus induere humanum.“ (ebd.,

p. 48).

77 Only the one who enters the house of the matrona, the upper Jerusalem, will enter

the

inner rooms of the king. The Matrona is the Mediatrix, the Angel of God

and the king's mistress. Therefore, God entrusted Israel to her: "Sic [...] tradidit

singulas Israelitas versa sub potestatam eius (Matronae) dicendo: […] Haec una est

columba

mea, integra mea, quid ipsi facere possem aliud, quam ut tota domus mea sit

sub manu eius?“ (ebd., S. 33).

78 Sommer, Specimen, p. 34. He adds that Matrona, Metatron and the Shekhinah

Synonyms for the only Son of God are: "[...] clarissime patefiet Matronam, Metatron,

& Schechinam esse Synonyma, atque nullum alium respicere omnes has voces

quam Messiam, unicum Dei filium.“

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 171.79 Eternal life

and happiness can only be obtained through the Shekhinah,

the divine face. Through it, man receives his angelic

and reunites creation with its divine

Origin.80

The longest section is found in Thesis X , which deals with the Trinitarian

The form of God. In Thesis XI, the nature of Christ as a true man is discussed.

and true God as follows: "Messiah, quoad personam suam est

θεάνθρωπος, Dei supremi Filius, & secunda divinitatis persona“.81 Des

He is also equated with the Shekhinah, who is also the Messiah

Thesis VIII.82 Thesis XII explains why the Messiah in Galilee

The Garden of Eden, the treasure house of souls.83

Thesis XIII discusses the Messiah's threefold role as prophet, king

and high priest (propheticum, regium & sacerdotale). It reflects the

Search Sommers for Zohar sections that show the position of the Lutheran

Orthodoxy, especially its doctrine of justification,

which is based on the high priesthood of Christ.84 Thesis XIV problematizes

the high priesthood of the Messiah and the difficult distinction between

Justice and law. Summer here reduces Christ's human

nature refers to a "phenomenon without manifestation" (subsistentia) that only

manifested by the substistentia of the lógos.85 This is reaffirmed by the

79 Sommer, Specimen, S. 49-59.

80 Ibid., pp. 113-17.

81 Ibid., p. 77.

82 A similar connection between Metatron, the Shekhinah and the Memra as a

messianic

constellation can also be found in Calvör, Gloria Christi; Abrams, Metatron

and Jesus, S. 70-72.

83 Sommer, Specimen, S. 81.

84 Luthardt, Kompendium, S. 237-272.

85 Sommer, Specimen, S. 93: „[…] propria subsistentia destituta, subsistit subsistentia

τοΰ

speech."

Elke Morlok

172 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

eschatological and Christological function of Christ, the Messiah as

High Priest. Thesis XV deals with universal reconciliation

(satisfactio) before the coming of the Messiah, who is the second person

of the Trinity, the lógos, that of the second Sefirah Ḥokhmah

(wisdom) in Kabbalistic theosophy.86 Thesis XVI discusses

the meritum Messiae universale: the Messiah invites with his gratia

universalis, both believers and sinners are invited to reconciliation (resipiscentia).

87 Thesis XVII deals with "true repentance," while Thesis

XVIII outlines the relationship between body and soul after death:

„Anima per mortem a corpora separata statim sistitur coram iudicio divino

[…] Corpus vero interim in sepulcro quiescit, usque ad diem

extremum." 88 Theses XIX and XX conclude the book with the Resurrection

and the glorified body ("[...] quod corpus immortalitate gaudens

resurrexerit, piique corpore glorificato fuerint praediti.“), sowie mit der

eternal bliss in physical and mental, that is, angelic form,

from.89

The complex inner connection between Kabbalistic motifs such as

Metatron, the Shekhinah, the system of Sefirot and Christological

principles, i.e. messianic expectations, were thus consistently

debated. Especially in Theses I and VI to XI it becomes clear how closely Sommers

conceptions of Metatron, the Shekhinah, the Son of God, and

its redeemer function are mixed up with each other, whereby astonishingly

is that it is precisely this mediating function of the feminine side of the divine,

the Shekhinah.

86 Sommer refers here to Gen 49:11.

87 Sommer, Specimen, S. 98.

88 Ibid., p. 113.

89 Ibid., pp. 117 and 122.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 173 The

transformative, redemptive aspect of the figure of Metatron, which

with reference to the creation account contains "as male and female",

is reinterpreted here by Sommer in Christological terms. It remains to be assumed that

that summer with materials of mystical literatures, which are

since the 13th century in Thuringia, was familiar with this and found it in

included his speculations throughout.

Johann Kemper (1670-1716)

As a model for Sommer's work, Kemper's christological

Reflections from Maṭṭe Moshe (Staff of Moses, 1711) and Briaḥ haTikhon

("the middle bar" according to Ex 36:33)90.91 Kemper also

the Shekhinah can at the same time include the Trinity as a whole

and thus stand for Christ. In it, the divine

and the human nature of Christ, both are identical.

The incarnation thesis is now continued by Kemper in such a way that

Jesus, according to the Jewish tradition, as the incarnation of the written

Torah or Logos, as guf elohi (divine body) in the earthly body

is considered. In him the Word becomes flesh (Jn 1:14). But now follows

a strengthening of the identity of the Shekhinah with Jesus by recourse to

another tradition in the Zohar, according to which the Shekhinah not only

as a female, but also as a male hypostasis. They

became, similar to the human being, as Androgynos, as You-Partzufim, as a double

face

created. Only within the divine system of the Sefirot

she appears as a female part, but outside of it, i.e. in the earthly part

realm, she becomes the Angel of Salvation (haMalakh haGo'el) from

90 Hs Uppsala Heb. 24. Vgl. Wolfson, Angelic Embodiment.

91 For the following section on Kemper, see Wolfson, Angelic Embodiment, esp.

pp. 415-419.

Elke Morlok

174 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Gen 48:18 (Zohar 1:232a, cf. Zohar 1:166a). These two natures of the Shekhinah

– inner-divine feminine, extra-divine masculine – are now

Christ. For the male angelic name of the Shekhinah,

Metatron, is at the same time the angelological name of Christ, who as the incarnation

of the Logos now brings a new, oral Torah, teaching. As an incarnated

Logos, the earthly Jesus is thus the incarnation of the primordial

Torah, the memra from the Targumim, the garment of the divine in its

earthly manifestation, which at the same time contains the new teaching, Torah

ḥadashah

into the earthly realm. This new Torah will now in turn become the

Word/Logos in the Dicta of Jesus in the New Testament, i.e. a kind of excarnation

– the flesh becomes word. It is assumed that there is a correspondence

between the body of Christ and that of man: as in the

bodily body of Jesus, the imago back to the text (of the New Testament)

the human body becomes the imago of this text through the

Believe. In faith, man receives his original image of the

creation and corresponds to his true angelic nature, Metatron.

The goal of creation is then what is also taken up by Sommer.

attainment of man's angelic nature, Metatron, in whose

image he was created.

According to Kemper, therefore, Jesus and the Shekhinah can both be considered dual

natures.

can be assigned to both the earthly and the heavenly realm.

Before the incarnation, both were one. For this reason,

Sommer and Kemper, the Son of God, are further central symbols of the 10th century.

Sefirah like Matrona, prince/angel of the face, angel of redemption, angel of the

covenant,

Wisdom, kingship, or veil in the temple. Christ

and the Shekhinah have produced creation with God in consortio.

Both manifest the self-revelation of the Divine, be it

according to Kabbalistic or New Testament models, and both symbolize

the transition from word to flesh and flesh to word.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 175 In addition,

Kemper introduces an interesting variant of the kenosis or Cryptic

debate from the post-Reformation period: Christ in his

humiliation of the female form. This is explained in Kemper's Zohar template

based on the relationship between Binah, the insight, as the upper

mother and the Shekhinah as her daughter/princess. They

wears father and mother or the inner glory of her father (Ḥokhmah,

wisdom) (Ps 45:14). Only as a female being can Christ

To carry the mystery of the incarnation within oneself and to be part of the material

world

become. It thus corresponds to the rabbinic Bat Qol (lit. Daughter of

Voice, Zohar 3:156a) and wears the garment of corrupt flesh. Thereby

the comparison with Metatron is again cited, which is based on the Zohar

(2:216a) as a son himself "diminished" and become a na'ar (young man)

becomes. He carries the glory of the Father within him, but he has humbled himself

and has descended to the earth. This necessary self-abasement

(Krypsis) is expressed in his feminine appearance. She's

at the same time the mystery and the reason for its transformation into the well-known

Archangel who, in humility (cf. Mt 23:12), first humbles himself

has. In this constellation, the symbol of the mother refers to Kemper

to the Christ as the demiurgic Logos, whereas the daughter

incarnation in mortal flesh.92

92 Wolfson, Angelic Embodiment, pp. 419-426. To Kemper's entry tashash koḥo

kiNeqevah

(his strength became weak as a woman's) in his edition of Zohar, see ibid.,

pp. 422-424.

Elke Morlok

176 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

5. Conclusion

It should be sketched here how angelic figures, especially Enoch and

Metatron, in Jewish traditions in the Rhineland and in Thuringia initially

in the Middle Ages, a central position in the questions of revelation

and the handing over of the Torah.93 From the ancient, often magical

Speculation became specific exegetical techniques in Ashkenaz

developed to be used according to the tradition of the Sod haShemot (Secret

of names) to restore the original form of the Torah, or

to extract the corresponding angel names from biblical passages.

These angels were able to reveal the deepest secrets of the Torah to the reader.

The redemptive function and "sonship" of the supreme angel were

already associated with Metatron and Enoch in these texts. The complex

linguistic techniques that make the magical use of the angels' names

made possible in the first place, found their way into the Kabbalistic traditions

on the Iberian Peninsula, but in the Iberian Peninsula

tradition the theosophical-theurgical main current of the Jewish

Mysticism. Above all, the Sefer haZohar is worth mentioning here. To this in turn

refer to Christian speculations from Thuringia in the 18th century,

which have their very own Christology from the Kabbalistic sources

develop. However, it remains to be assumed that the

Medieval techniques and connections between Christ

and Metatron were still known from these areas, as summer

and Kemper do not necessarily address the most central themes of the

Zohar , but a close connection with that time

current Christological questions. Due to the

popularity and the sacred status of the Zohar from earlier times could be

93 In recent research, an attempt has also been made to identify Albrecht

Dürer's Melencolia §1 as a visual representation of Metatron. See

Gershman, DRER's Enigma.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 177 Metatron in

his Christological and female form as Shekhinah

have become the central theme of these theologians, who, in addition to

missionary intentions among the Jews according to a unifying principle

of all Lutheran factions and expressed this in the Kabbalistic

Lessons thought they could find. Sommer thus presents himself not only as an author,

which reads "through different traditions", 94 not only

Judeo-Christian positions, but also

Jewish mystical speculations in his work. Kempers

Sabbatean-motivated attempt at a Kabbalistic Christology

should be considered separately in this context.

.95

Bibliography

Primary sources:

Ben Shimshon (or Ben Samson), Ephraim: Commentary on the Pentateuch.

by E. Korach and Z. Leitner, Jerusalem 1992, 32009 (Hebrew).

Calvör, Caspar: Gloria Christi oder Herrlichkeit Jesu Christi. Leipzig 1710.

<https://reader.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb1035

3578_00005.html> (15.4.2019).

Eisenmenger, Johann Andreae: Discovered Judaism Part I. Königsberg

1711.<https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=osu.32435029329653; view

=1up; seq=11> or <http://www.digitale-bibliothek-mv. en/viewer/

image/PPN607481293/4/#topDocAnchor> (15.4.2019).

Eusebius Caesariensis: Werke Band 8: Die Praeparatio evangelica. Teil 1. Hg. von

Karl Mras. Göttingen 22012 (GCS 43).

Sefer haPeli'yah, Premislany 1884 (Anonymous, Hebrew).

94 Vgl. Abrams, Metatron and Jesus, S. 59.

95 Siehe Wolfson, Angelic Embodiment; ders., Messianism.

Elke Morlok

178 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Sefer haZohar, Sulzbach 1684 (printed by Moses Bloch, Latin introduction

by Christian Knorr von Rosenroth).

Sefer haZohar, Amsterdam 1715 (printed by Shlomo Proops).

Sommer, Gottfried Christoph, Zohar miSefer haZohar Seu Specimen Theologiae

Soharicae cum Christiana Amice Convenientis. Gotha 1734.

<https://reader.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb1021

6815_00005.html> (15.4.2019).

Secondary literature:

Abrams, Daniel, The Boundaries of Divine Ontology: The Inclusion and Exclusion

of Metatron in the Godhead. In: Harvard Theological Review 87,3 (1994),

S. 291-321.

Abrams, Daniel: Metatron and Jesus: The Long Durée of Rabbinic and Kabbalistic

Traditions. An Eighteenth Century Manual of Christian Proselytizing in

German and Yiddish. In: Kabbalah. Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical

Texts 27 (2012), S. 13-60.

Asulin, Shifra: Another Glance at Sabbateanism, Conversion, Hebraism in Seventeenth-

Century Europe: Scrutinizing the Character of Johan Kemper of

Uppsala, or Moshe Son of Aharon of Krakow. In: Elior, Rachel (Hg.), The

Sabbatean Movement and Its Aftermath: Messianism, Sabbateanism

and Frankism, Bd.2. Jerusalem 2001, S. 423-470 (Hebräisch).

Boyarin, Daniel: Beyond Judaisms: Metatron and the Divine Polymorphy of Ancient

Judaism. In: Journal for the Study of Judaism 41 (2010), S. 323-365.

Chajes, J.H.: Permeable Borders. The visualization of God between Jewish

and Christian Kabbalah in Knorr von Rosenroth and van Helmont. In:

Morgen-Glantz 27 (2017), S. 99-147.

Dan, Joseph: The Esoteric Theology of Ashkenazi Hasidism. Jerusalem 1968

(Hebrew).

Dan, Joseph: The Seventy Names of Metatron. In: Proceedings of the Eighth

World Congress of Jewish Studies, Division C. Jerusalem 1982, S. 19-23

(Hebrew).

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR JÜDISCHE KULTURGESCHICHTE ∙ 25/2018 179

German, Nathaniel: Guardians of the Gate. Angelic Vice Regency in Late Antiquity.

Leiden 1999.

Dingel, Irene: Die Bekenntnisschriften der Evangelisch-Lutherischen Kirche. Sources

and materials. Bd. I-II. Göttingen 2014.

Gershman, Zhenya: Dürer’s Enigma. A Kabbalistic Relevation in Melencolia §1. In:

Aries – Journal for the Study of Western Esotericism 18 (2018), S. 217-

257.

Ginzberg, Louis: The Legends of the Jews. 7 vols. Philadelphia 1936-1946.

Goldin, Judah: Not by Means of an Angel, and Not by Means of A Messenger. In:

Neusner, Jacob (Hg.), Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of Erwin

Ramsdell Goodenough. Leiden 1968, S. 412-424.

Halperin, David: The Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel’s

Vision. Tübingen 1988.

Herrmann, Klaus: Massekhet Hekhalot. Treatise on the heavenly palaces.

Tübingen 1994.

Huss, Boaz: Translations of the Zohar: Historical Contexts and Ideological Frameworks.

In: Correspondences 4 (2016), S. 81-128.

Idel, Moshe: The Anonymous Commentary on the Alphabet of Metatron: An Additional

Composition of Nehemia ben Shlomo haNavi. In: Tarbiz 76 (2007),

pp. 255-264 (Hebrew).

Idel, Moshe: Ben. Sonship and Jewish Mysticism. New York / London 2007.

Idel, Moshe: Enoch is Metatron. In: Immanuel 24/25 (1990), S. 220-40.

Idel, Moshe: Holding an Orb in his Hand: The Angel ‘Anafi’el and a Late Antiquity

Helios Mosaic. In: Ars Judaica 9 (2013), S. 1-26.

Idel, Moshe: R. Nehemiah ben Shlomo on the Shield of David and the Name

Taftafia: From Jewish Magic to Practical and to Theoretical Kabbalah. In:

Reiner, Avraham et al. (Hg.), Ta Shma: Research in Jewish Studies in

Memory of Israel Ta-Shma. Alon Shvut 2011, S. 1-76 (Hebräisch).

Idel, Moshe: On Angels and Biblical Exegesis in Thirteenth-Century Ashkenaz. In:

Green, Deborah A., Lieber, Laura S. (Hg.), Scriptural Exegesis - The

Elke Morlok

180 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Shapes of Culture and the Religious Imagination; Essays in Honour of Michael

Fishbane. Oxford 2009, S. 211-244.

Idel, Moshe: On R. Nehemia ben Shlomo’s Commentaries on the Forty-Two Letter

Divine Name. In: Kabbalah. Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts

14 (2006), pp. 157-261 (Hebrew).

Idel, Moshe: Some Forlorn Writings of a Forgotten Ashkenazi Prophet. In: Jewish

Quarterly Review 95,1 (2005), S. 183-196.

Idel, Moshe: The World of Angels in Human Form. In: Dan, Joseph, Hacker, Joseph

(Hg.), Studies in Philosophy, Mysticism, and Ethical Literature Presented

to Isaiah Tishby on His Seventy-Fifth Birthday. Jerusalem 1986, S. 1-66

(Hebrew).

Jellinek, Adolf (Hg.), Bet Midrash I. Jerusalem 1967.

Lehnardt, Andreas: Neues Licht auf Metatron. The fragment of an unknown,

mystical treatise in the Gotha Research and State Library. In:

Judaica 73,1 (2017), S. 58-76.

Liebes, Yehuda: The Angels of the Shofar and Yeshua Sar ha-Panim. In: Jerusalem

Studies in Jewish Thought 6,1-2 (1987), S. 171-198 (Hebräisch).

Liebes, Yehuda: Rabbi Solomon Ibn Gabirol’s Use of the Sefer Yetzirah and the

Commentary on the Poem ‘I love Thee’. In: Jerusalem Studies in Jewish

Thought 6, 3-4 (1987), pp. 73-123 (Hebrew).

Luthardt, Christoph E.: Kompendium der Dogmatik. Leipzig 1914.

Morlok, Elke: Missio or Confessio? On Gottfried Sommer’s Specimen Theologiae

Soharicae (Gotha 1734). In: Bar-Levav, Avriel et al. (Hg.), Jerusalem Studies

in Jewish Thought. Festschrift Moshe Idel. Jerusalem 2019 (im Druck).

Odeberg, Hans: 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Book of Enoch. Neudruck New York 1973.

Orlov, Andrei: The Enoch-Metatron Tradition. Tübingen 2005.

Orlov, Andrei: Yahoel and Metatron. Aural Apocalypticism and the Origins of

Early Jewish Mysticism. Tübingen 2017.

Paz, Yakir: Metatron is not Enoch: Reevaluating the Evolution of an Archangel. In:

Journal for the Study of Judaism 50 (2019), S. 1-49.

Henoch – Metatron – Christus?

CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018 181 Paz, Yakir

and Weiss, Tzahi: From Encoding to Decoding: The ATBH of R. Hiyya in

Light of a Syriac, Greek and Coptic Cipher. In: Journal of Near Eastern

Studies 74 (2015), S. 45-65.

Pekka-Vainio, Olla: Justification and Participation in Christ: The Development of

the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification from Luther to the Formula of Concord

(1580). Leiden / Boston 2008.

Rebiger, Bill: Sefer ha-Razim I und II. The Book of Mysteries I and II, Volume 2:

Introduction, translation and commentary.Tübingen 2009.

Rebiger, Bill: Sefer Shimmush Tehillim. Book of the Magical Use of the Psalms.

Tübingen 2010.

Roling, Bernd: Redemption in the Angelic Cosmos. Emanuel Swedenborg, the

Kabbalah

Denudata and Swedish Oriental Studies. In: Morgen-Glantz 16

(2006), S. 387-457.

Schäfer, Peter: The Jewish Jesus: How Judaism and Christianity Shaped Each Other.

Princeton 2012.

Schäfer, Peter: Metatron in Babylonia. In: Boustan Ra’anan, Himmelfarb, Martha

und ders. (Hg.), Hekhalot Literature in Context: Between Byzantium and

Babylonia. Tübingen 2013, S. 29-39.

Schäfer, Peter: Origins of Jewish Mysticism. Tübingen 2009.

Schäfer, Peter: Two Gods in Heaven: Concepts of God in Jewish Antiquity.

Munich 2017.

Schneider, Max: Die Abiturienten des Gymnasium illustre zu Gotha aus Mgr. Gottfried

Vockerodts rectorate from 1695-1727. In: Programm des Herzoglichen

Gymnasium Ernestinum zu Gotha as an invitation to the

Dismissal of the Abiturienten, Gotha 1913.

Scholem, Gershom: Die Jüdische Mystik in ihren Hauptströmungen. Frankfurt a.

M. 2015.

Scholem, Gershom: Ursprung und Anfänge der Kabbalah. Berlin 22001.

Schremer, Admiel: Parvanka: The Mandean Context of an Anti-Heretical Polemic

in the Babylonian Talmud. In: Tarbiz 85 (2018), S. 205-231 (Hebräisch).

Elke Morlok

182 CHILUFIM ∙ JOURNAL OF JEWISH CULTURAL HISTORY ∙ 25/2018

Segal, Alan J.: Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports About Christianity

and Gnosticism. Leiden 1977.

Wolfson, Elliot R.: Angelic Embodiment and the Feminine Representation of Jesus:

Reconstructing Carnality in the Christian Kabbalah of Johann Kemper. In:

Diemling, Maria, Veltri, Giuseppe (Hg.), The Jewish Body. Corporeality,

Society, and Identity in the Renaissance and Early Modern Period. Leiden

/ Boston 2009, S. 395-426.

Voß, Rebekka / Siluk, Avraham: Beyond Mission and Conversion: Jewish

Reactions to Pietism. In: Schorch, Grit / Klosterberg, Brigitte

(Hg.), Konversionsstrategien im Institutum Judaicum et Muhammedicum

in Halle. Wiesbaden 2019 (in press).

Wolfson, Elliot R.: Messianism in the Christian Kabbalah of Johann Kemper. In:

Goldish, Matt / Popkin, Richard (Hg.), Jewish Messianism in the Early

Modern World. Dordrecht / Boston / London 2007, S. 139-87.

Wolfson, Elliot R.: Metatron and Shʽiur Qomah in the Writings of Hasidei

Ashkenaz. In: Grözinger, Karl E. / Dan, Joseph (Hg.), Mysticism, Magic

and Kabbalah in Ashkenazi Judaism. Berlin / New York 1995, S. 60-92.

Zedler, Johann H.: Großes komplettes Universallexikon aller Wissenschaften

and arts. Bd. 38. Leipzig / Halle 1743.

Proof of image

Fig. 1 Title page to Gottfried Christoph, Zohar miSefer haZohar Seu Specimen

Theologiae Soharicae cum Christiana Amice Convenientis. Gotha 1734.

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München, 4 A.hebr. 406, p. 5,

urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb10216815-7

Fig. 2 Graphic representation of the divine attributes as a tree. Summer

Gottfried Christoph, Zohar miSefer haZohar Seu Specimen Theologiae

Soharicae cum Christiana Amice Convenientis. Gotha 1734.

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München, 4 A.hebr. 406, p. 13,

urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb10216815-7