Andrei Orlov, «Moses’ Heavenly Counterpart in the Book of Jubilees and the
Exagoge of Ezekiel the Tragedian», Vol. 88 (2007) 153-173
The paper provides conceptual background for the idea of the angel of the presence as the heavenly counterpart of Moses in the Book of Jubilees and the Exagoge of Ezekiel the Tragedian. The identity of the celestial scribe in the form
of the angel of the presence found in the Book of Jubilees and some other Second Temple materials might further our understanding of the enigmatic process of
mystical and literary emulation of the exemplary figure, the cryptic mechanics of which often remains beyond the grasp of our post/modern sensibilities. It is possible that in the traditions of heavenly counterparts where the two characters
of the story, one of which is represented by a biblical exemplar, become eventually unified and acquire a single identity, we are able to draw nearer to the very heart of the pseudepigraphical enterprise. In this respect, it does not appear to be coincidental that these transformational accounts dealing with the heavenly doubles of their adepts are permeated with the aesthetics of penmanship and the
imagery of the literary enterprise. In the course of these mystical and literary metamorphoses, the heavenly figure surrenders his scribal seat, the library of the celestial books and even personal writing tools to the other, earthly identity who now becomes the new guardian of the literary tradition.
Moses’ Heavenly Counterpart 171
surrenders to the hero the celestial library and even the pen from his
hand (65).
These developments are intriguing and may provide some insights
in the puzzling tradition about the angel of the presence in the Book of
Jubilees (66). The Jubilees, like the Enochic account, has two scribal
figures; one of them is the angel of the presence and the other, a human
being. Yet, the exact relationship between these two figures is difficult
to establish in view of the scarcity and ambiguity of the relevant
depictions. Does the angel of the presence in the Jubilees pose, on the
fashion of Uriel, as a celestial scribe who is responsible for initiation
of the adept into the scribal duties? Or does he represent the heavenly
counterpart of Moses who is clearly distinguished at this point from
the seer? This clear distance between the seer and his celestial identity
is not unlikely in the context of the traditions about the heavenly
counterpart. In fact, this distance between the two identities — one in
the figure of the angel and the other in the figure of a hero —
represents a standard feature of such accounts. Thus, for example, in
the already mentioned account from the Book of the Similitudes Enoch
is clearly distinguished from his heavenly counterpart in the form of
the angelic son of man throughout the whole narrative until the final
unification occurring in the last chapter of the book. The gap between
the celestial and earthly identities of the seer is also discernable in the
targumic accounts about Jacob’s heavenly double where the distinction
between the two identities is highlighted by a description of the angels
who behold Jacob sleeping on earth and at the same time installed in
heaven. This distance between the identity of the seer and his heavenly
twin is also observable in the Exagoge where the heavenly man
transfers to Moses his regalia and vacates for him his heavenly seat.
There is, however, another important point in the stories about the
(65) 2 Enoch 22,10-11 (the shorter recension) “Lord summoned Vereveil, one
of his archangels, who was wise, who records all the Lord’s deeds. And the Lord
said to Vereveil, ‘Bring out the books from storehouses, and give a pen to Enoch
and read him the books.’ And Vereveil hurried and brought me the books mottled
with myrrh. And he gave me the pen from his handâ€. ANDERSEN, “2 Enochâ€, The
Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, I, 141.
(66) When one looks closer to the angelic imagery reflected in the Book of
Jubilees it is intriguing that Moses’ angelic guide is defined as an angel of the
presence. As has been already demonstrated that the process of establishing
twinship with the heavenly counterpart not only reflected in the initiatory
procedure of becoming a servant of the Face it is also always presupposes the
initiation performed by another angelic servant of the Face.