tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post4477288892880460618..comments2023-10-12T07:59:31.827-04:00Comments on Antiquitopia: Daily Hekhalot: Hekhalot Zutarti §420c (A Universal Vision of the Angelic Throne Keeper)Jared Calawayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09380681998833566514noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-20855501686575175452011-07-14T11:05:48.723-04:002011-07-14T11:05:48.723-04:00By the way, Rebecca, I don't think there will ...By the way, Rebecca, I don't think there will be much more of interest in the rest of §421. Is there any other pericope that you want to look at?Jared Calawayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09380681998833566514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-25526348729739363282011-07-14T10:34:11.601-04:002011-07-14T10:34:11.601-04:00Rebecca, I do change my translation a bit in the &...Rebecca, I do change my translation a bit in the "synthesis" post to "willingly or unwillingly." But that does not change the point you are most interested in. I actually was quite surprised to see both women and foreigners involved.<br /><br />In a paper I am currently publishing on "seeing God in late antique Judaism," I talk about how both women and Gentiles are excluded from a direct revelation of God (whether a vision or audition), but the same texts allow them to see an angel or other intermediary of God. So, perhaps since this is an angelic vision--albeit the highest angel--it is still in line with a great deal of contemporary thought.Jared Calawayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09380681998833566514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-15412032500649630312011-07-14T09:21:46.295-04:002011-07-14T09:21:46.295-04:00This is indeed a puzzling passage. Right now, for ...This is indeed a puzzling passage. Right now, for a paper I'm working on, I'm trying to figure out what it means. It's the only passage in the Hekhalot texts themselves that refers to women (whether free or slave) having the vision of an angel. Your suggestion that this is an eschatological vision is intriguing - that in the future the gates of salvation will open to all, and all will seek this angel. James Davila (in Descenders to the Chariot, p. 279) translates the last sentence differently: “whether or not he returns the favor.”Rebeccahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626228106192215280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-78681220204693979182011-06-27T10:02:48.237-04:002011-06-27T10:02:48.237-04:00That is indeed curious. The preposition נוכח in th...That is indeed curious. The preposition נוכח in the Bible has visual connotations, occurring as נוכח פנים (Num. 19:4, Jer. 17:16, Ezk. 14:3, Lam. 2:19) or נוכח עינים (Prov. 5:21).Nirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12114001284623564472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-58796683117596863232011-06-24T17:42:53.288-04:002011-06-24T17:42:53.288-04:00I kept reading נוכח as a nif. of יכח; thus, the &q...I kept reading נוכח as a nif. of יכח; thus, the "arguing," although with your emendation I was thinking of "justified." I probably was predisposed for a speaking word there with דיבר coming just after--which I had read as pi'el rather than as a noun. I was admittedly less comfortable with my translation there and find your reading clearer. <br /><br />If "facing," that makes for an interesting phrase since it would be a spatial preposition with regard to the speech of the seraphim.Jared Calawayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09380681998833566514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-67077899399291862222011-06-24T17:03:02.793-04:002011-06-24T17:03:02.793-04:00נוכח is a preposition, "before, facing"
...נוכח is a preposition, "before, facing"<br /><br />Hmm, perhaps the mystic would rather not be provided for? Self-sufficiency is a virtueNirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12114001284623564472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-46153441192582409342011-06-24T15:51:54.980-04:002011-06-24T15:51:54.980-04:00One more thing: You got me thinking about the imp...One more thing: You got me thinking about the implications of the idiom at the end: are they rejoicing unwillingly?Jared Calawayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09380681998833566514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-80726886986037453522011-06-24T15:50:38.772-04:002011-06-24T15:50:38.772-04:00Quick question: What is your translation doing wi...Quick question: What is your translation doing with the נוכח?Jared Calawayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09380681998833566514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-51562582605898396702011-06-24T15:49:10.885-04:002011-06-24T15:49:10.885-04:00Thanks Nir. I was in between "there" an...Thanks Nir. I was in between "there" and "name" on this passage. I liked what I could do with either one. But given the importance of the name earlier in the pericope, it makes sense that this would continue. <br /><br />I was reading the passage as the angel opening the gates of redemption and providing provision for those who see him. So I wasn't reading that the angel needed provision, but gave it to those who saw him. <br /><br />Keep the critiques and comments coming!Jared Calawayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09380681998833566514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1006479003534298455.post-37586237244572438002011-06-24T14:49:03.492-04:002011-06-24T14:49:03.492-04:00I would translate the first bit "He stands be...I would translate the first bit "He stands before the Throne of Glory, before the speech of seraphim (cf. Isa. 6), for his name is as His name, it is the same name"<br /><br />Also, could the last part refer to the mystic being seen rather than an angel? One would imagine that angels don't need "provision"...<br /><br />בין בטובתו בין שלא בטובתו is idiomatic, "whether willingly or unwillingly"Nirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12114001284623564472noreply@blogger.com