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.
172 Andrei Orlov
heavenly counterparts that could provide portentous insight into the
nature of pseudepigraphical accounts where these stories are found.
This aspect pertains to the issue of the so-called “emulation†of the
biblical exemplars in these pseudepigraphical accounts that allows
their authors to unveil new revelations in the name of some prominent
authority of the past (67). The identity of the celestial scribe in the form
of the angel of the presence 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.
Can the tradition of unification of the biblical hero with his angelic
counterpart be part of this process of emulation of the exemplar by an
adept? Can the intermediate authoritative position (68) of the angel of
the presence, predestined to stand “from now and forever†between the
Deity himself and the biblical hero, serve here as the safe haven of the
author ’s identity representing thus the important locus of mystical and
literary emulation? Is it possible that in the Jubilees, like in some other
pseudepigraphical accounts, the figure of the angel of the presence
serves as a transformative and literary device that allows an adept to
enter the assembly of immortal beings consisting of the heroes of both
the celestial and the literary world?
Could it be 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
(67) On the process of the emulation of the biblical examplars in the Second
Temple literature, see H. NAJMAN, Seconding Sinai. The Development of Mosaic
Discourse in Second Temple Judaism (SJSJ 77; Leiden 2003); IDEM, “Torah of
Moses: Pseudonymous Attribution in Second Temple Writingsâ€, The
Interpretation of Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity. Studies in
Language and Tradition (ed. C.A. EVANS) (JSPSS 33; Sheffield 2000) 202-216;
IDEM, Authoritative Writing and Interpretation. A Study in the History of
Scripture (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University 1998).
(68) This “intermediate†authoritative stand is often further reinforced by the
authority of the Deity himself through the identification of the heavenly
counterparts with the divine form. On this process, see our previous discussion
about the blurring the boundaries between the heavenly counterparts and the
Deity mentioned earlier in our study.
FOLLOW US