When I began this thread I considered going through the Book of Enoch chronologically rather than in the order it appears in the ancient texts. This had the advantage of beginning with the Book of the Luminaries (or, The Astronomy Book) which was what got me interested in the first place. But I wound up bowing to the textual logic. You really have to start with the Book of the Watchers, since this is the section that establishes the template for the entire text.
After the Book of the Watchers, next in the ancient texts come the Book of the Parables (or, the Book of the Similitudes), which turns out to be the last of the sections composed and included in the Book of Enoch. But there is a logic in this as well. With the Book of the Watchers and the Book of the Parables we will have established bookends between which the rest of the text can firmly sit. The Book of the Watchers draws us back into the dim mists of Ancient Near Eastern culture, and the Book of the Parables both looks back and points forward.
So then, the Book of the Parables of Enoch.
In the complete texts that survive only in the Ethiopic language Ge’ez, BoP constitutes chapters 38-71. It is the longest section of the entire 1BoE, twice as long as the BotW. I’m going to mostly deal with specific issues as they arise in the text but I will make some introductory remarks. But first let me make some comments, especially for anyone who might just now be joining this thread.
Although I’ll have plenty of opportunity from now on to refer back at the BotW, I’m going to repeat as little material as I can get away with. So, I invite anyone who is interested to go back and read what I’ve already posted. But, best of all is for you to plunk down the $20 and ** you do not have permission to see this link ** yourself. Some of the best advice I ever got in school was to stick to primary texts. What that means is before you read about a work, read the work yourself. No, you won’t get everything but at least you’ll know the lay of the land. And it’s a story. You’ll get more out of it than you might think.
And we should reward the fine folks at Fortress Press/** you do not have permission to see this link ** for figuring out that there is a non-specialist audience for this kind of thing and issuing an affordable edition of the text. (An insight still beyond the grasp of many in the academic press!)
So what the heck am I doing here? This is not a commentary or a book review. I would call it a Reader Response. There is another level of appreciation available when you write about what you read. So I’m being selfish in a way. If anybody else gets something out of this I am pleased. All I can tell you is, I’m enjoying it! It follows that my comments will be selective. I am following George Nickelburgs’ two volume critical commentary which I found at an estate sale. Such a critical commentary delves into issues that are interesting but not always my primary focus, myth and cosmic imagery. If you are interested by all means get the commentary but start with the affordable edition. (Hint: Approach it like a weird fantasy novel.)
But the shelves groan with writings about the 1BoE so I will supplement my reading with other works. I have already provided a basic bibliography and will add a few new books as I go along. So penetrate these deep waters to the level of time and opportunity available to you.
ps: As before I invite comments and responses.
Ok before I plunge ahead let me add a couple of books I have used as references that focus explicitly on the Book of Parables.
I have referred before to the Enoch Seminar where scholars gather and discuss issues raised by study of the text. The ES has been ongoing for more than twenty years and has produced much literature (and now videos). The subject of the Third Enoch Seminar in 2005 was in fact, the Book of Parables. Most of the scholarly heavy hitters, including George Nickelsburg who wrote the commentary, participated and produced articles.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
I have been a fan of Andrei Orlov’s work for a while. His focus is Jewish mysticism and its effect on early Christianity. This book does not deal exclusively with the BoP but the text does factor heavily in his discussions. Plus, the book is about a lot of other cool stuff.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Prof Orlov manages a site produced under the auspices of Marquette university. It’s a bit off subject but Orlov likes to get his stuff out there so… Behold!
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Note that some of those links are to standalone chapters of Orlov’s books including the one I linked to here.
Wow I just noticed that my first post in this thread was almost exactly a year ago. Ten pages. More than 180 posts. I want a raise! And none of that manna stuff this time!
Ok, like the man said. Shut up and play your guitar!
I’m going to deal with most issues as they arise in the text but there are some issues that bear consideration before I start. The Book of Parables has some of the same problems as the Book of the Watchers but also has its own peculiarities.
First, origin and dating.
Alone among the material that makes up 1Enoch, we have no surviving text, fragments or otherwise, from Qumran. We have no surviving Greek texts, fragmentary or otherwise. All that survives is the more or less complete text in classical Ethiopic (Ge’ez). So we are largely left to internal evidence for dating and provenance. Fortunately there are clues.
BoP has episodes and themes that mirror the other parts of 1Enoch. It draws heavily from older Jewish texts and shares much with texts both Jewish and Christian. (If the writers of the NT did not know BoP, they are nevertheless drawing from the same conceptual well. Early commentators even assumed BoP was a Christian text!)
There are few but significant internal markers. The text refers to the Parthian invasion of Judaea that occurred in 40 BCE. It also assumes that the city of Jerusalem still exists. It addresses specific social conditions similar to those found during the reign of King Herod the Great (37- 4 BCE). So the consensus among scholars now is that BoP is the latest of the material in 1Enoch and most likely sits comfortably in the latter half of the 1st century BCE. I’ll dig a bit more deeper as we go of course.
All the commentators I read mention the elegance of the composition. This is good because as a result textual issues tend to stand out fairly clearly. There is one section that is obviously corrupted and there are pretty clearly interpolations.
Once again the character of Enoch is central to the text. Enoch describes his revelations in first person. In BoW we saw him go from being a righteous human to being the scribe and intermediatory between heaven and earth. In BoP Enoch is fully settled into that role and is about to be elevated into an even higher status. (Details to follow.)
BoP is a full blown apocalypse. Enoch has three distinct visions that are interpreted for him by divine beings.
Ok I’ve left out a lot, the best parts in fact, because it will be easier to deal with in the text as it comes.
I’ve intentionally made this intro stuff short because once we get into the text it will require some extended discussions.
I will have many opportunities to chase rabbits and I will do my best not to waste any of them!
Next, why is it called the Book of Parables, or Similitudes, anyway? Does this have anything to do with Jesus’ parables?
The Book of the Parables of Enoch begins with chapter 37 which serves as an introduction. (And once again we’ll have cause to wonder who was responsible for the whimsical chapter and verse divisions.)
1 The vision of wisdom, that Enoch saw – the son of Jared, the son of Malalel, the son of Cainan, the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam. (Unless otherwise noted all translations of 1En are by George Nickelsburg.)
The custom among these ancient writers was to use the opening line as the title of a work so technically the title of this section of 1En would be
The vision of Wisdom that Enoch saw.
The genealogy is lifted from Genesis 5. The book opens like a classic prophecy. (See Isaiah 1:1. Nickelsburg notes the classic association between vision and prophecy. He points out that in the LXX the word order of Is 1:1 is almost identical to this text.)
Ok, but the second part of the 1BoE has become known as the Book of Parables, or, the Book of Similitudes. So the natural question is, what do we mean by “parable”? I suppose we know the word best by its association with Jesus in the NT. It seems to have been his natural way of teaching his disciples. But even there when you examine its use closely it begins to slip and slide. Are the parables of Mustard Seed and the Yeast, the Sower, the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son all really doing the same thing? (Mark even presents us with the paradox of the parable being used to obfuscate and to conceal meaning.)
If you trace back the use of the word the ambiguity and fluidity is there from the beginning. In Ethiopic (Ge’ez) it is messale; in Greek, parabole; in Aramaic, matal; in Hebrew, mashal. This is one of those pesky words that has multiple meanings depending on context. As befits a critical commentary, Nickelsburg has a long section on the etymology of the word in all its forms, citing plenty of examples. For my purposes I’m simply going to point out that it can apply to multiple genres of expression; the same word is used in discourses, taunts, oracles, verses of scorn and satire. Given this fluidity it’s probably best to appreciate it rather than be annoyed by it. Ambiguity provides subtleties of expression.
One aspect of course is comparison. Analogy. The kingdom of heaven is like —. The BoP rests on such comparisons between the righteous and the sinners, the powerful and the oppressed, and their respective fates after judgement. In older sources this text was called the Book of Similitudes. Originally a “similitude” was any sort of comparison whether like or unlike. In English it has come to denote similarity between items. In the BoP we have not similarity but contrast. This is why scholars have moved away from using the term “similitudes” in favor of “parables”. (Interestingly Nickelsburg suggests that a better title would be the Book of Comparative Discourses but acknowledges that at this point it would be a non-starter. Parables it is.)
2 This is the beginning of the words of wisdom, which I took up to recount to those who dwell on the earth,
Listen, O ancients, and look, you who come after-
the words of the Holy One,
which I will speak, in the presence of the Lord of Spirits.
3 It is profitable to speak these things at first ,
And from those who come after, let us not withhold the beginning of wisdom.
4 Until now there had not been given in the presence of the Lord of Spirits
such wisdom as I have received according to my insight,
according to the good pleasure of the Lord of Spirits,
by whom the lot of everlasting life has been given to me.
5 Three parables were imparted to me,
and I took them up and spoke to those who dwell on the earth.
The BoP contains unique divine wisdom, mediated through Enoch from God, the “Lord of Spirits” . Enoch speaks both to his own antediluvian generation and also, to “those who come after”, the generation of the author of the text. The concept of Wisdom, hokmah, goes way back into the Hebrew scriptures, carrying with it a whole host of associations. Wisdom has both an exoteric and an esoteric usage. It is both expertise in earthly affairs and the ability to penetrate hidden divine secrets. In the BoP wisdom is an entity that belongs in the divine realm. Second Temple Judaism was the great age of the divine mediator and here Wisdom, like Logos, has become not only a property of God but a hypostasis with a separate existence. The person of Wisdom is surely one of the sources of the concept of the Holy Spirit.
The most frequent title for God in the BoP is “Lord of Spirits”. The “spirit” is both the inner disposition of humans and the term for angels and other divine creatures. We have to get beyond our tendency to regard the spiritual as the immaterial. That came much later. Here, the divine fauna are tangible, embodied.
Note Enoch’s exalted status here. …the lot of everlasting life has been given to me. Yet as we will see Enoch is yet only part way on his journey to transcendence. As scribe of God and divine intermediary he will deliver to us three messale.
(Interestingly Nickelsburg suggests that a better title would be the Book of Comparative Discourses but acknowledges that at this point it would be a non-starter. Parables it is.)
No doubt a good call on their part.
Wow I just noticed that my first post in this thread was almost exactly a year ago. Ten pages. More than 180 posts.
It doesn’t seem like it’s been a year.
Wonderful posts. I’ve learned and am learning a lot.
Wonderful posts. I’ve learned and am learning a lot.
Thanks, that pleases me. You know, I’ve learned a lot too!
The First Parable (Chapters 38–44)
The Coming Judgment of the Wicked
The First Parable.
When the congregation of the righteous appears,
the sinners are judged for their sins,
and from the face of the earth they are driven;
And when the Righteous One appears in the presence of the righteous,
whose chosen works depend on the Lord of Spirits,
and light appears to the righteous and chosen who dwell on the earth;
Where (will be) the dwelling place of the sinners,
and where (will be) the resting place of those who have denied the Lord of Spirits?
It would have been better for them, if they had not been born.
When his hidden things are revealed to the righteous,
the sinners will be judged,
and the wicked will be driven from the presence of the righteous and chosen.
And thereafter, it will not be the mighty and exalted who possess the land,
and they will not be able to look at the face of the holy,
for the light of the Lord of Spirits will have appeared on the face of the holy, righteous, and chosen.
And then the kings and mighty will perish,
and they will be given into the hand of the righteous and holy,
and from then on, no one will seek mercy for them from the Lord of Spirits,
for their life will be at an end.
– 1 En chpt 38:1-5 Unless I mention it all translations from Nickelsburg.
Right from the start we encounter themes and characters that will show up all through the BoP. Here at first I won’t do a deep dive other than pointing them out. As we proceed the text opens up and we’ll have plenty of opportunity to chase rabbits. As I said already I will not squander any opportunity to do so. Seriously though there’s a lot interesting stuff here.
Although the main body of the text is divided into three discrete Parables, we should imagine this as one long vision. Enoch is already present in the divine realm. He is fulfilling his role as interpreter and mediator between God and humans. All the commentators I’ve read take time to point out the elegant composition of this text. One fortunate side benefit is that both textual corruptions and interpolations stand out like sore thumbs. Both are present.
Right from the start we are invited to observe a conflict between the “the congregation of the righteous” and the “sinners”, their nature and their fates in the world to come. As in the Book of the Watchers the field of action where the conflict takes place is on earth but not confined to it. Every earthly act has cosmic significance. Also, like in the BoW, note that “righteousness” does not seem to consist of devotion to strictly ethical precepts. (Absolutely no mention in this text of the Torah or the Temple cult.) “Righteousness” is an appreciation of, and devotion to, the divinely established order. “Sin” is a violation of that order.
We encounter a significant new figure in the narrative. Who is the “Righteous One” to later be described as “chosen”, “Messiah”, and “Son of Man”? Here let me just point out this figure takes charge in the field of action I described. God, the “Lord of Spirits”, has withdrawn from the field of action and operates almost exclusively through this intermediary. We’ll spend a lot of time with this person.
The sinners are repeatedly described as the “mighty and exalted” or the “kings and mighty”. We’ll spend some time with them too. Through them we are provided clues as to the social and political situation that might have inspired this apocalyptic text.
As I said, we are presented with a contrast between the fates of both the righteous and the sinners. The sinners are destroyed in the Parousia. It would have been better for them, if they had not been born. Rather chillingly mercy will end because there will be no one left to be merciful to.
The righteous will not be merely winners in a war. There fate is to be exalted and divinized. …and they [sinners] will not be able to look at the face of the holy, for the light of the Lord of Spirits will have appeared on the face of the holy, righteous, and chosen. The righteous are identified by the very qualities ascribed to the “Righteous One”. There are cosmic visions in this text, and we will have an opportunity to look at the eschatological cosmology revealed herein, but we’ll also notice that the episode that was the centerpiece of the BoW, the rebellion and punishment of the Watchers, has been somewhat marginalized in the narrative.
Also, like in the BoW, note that “righteousness” does not seem to consist of devotion to strictly ethical precepts. (Absolutely no mention in this text of the Torah or the Temple cult.) “Righteousness” is an appreciation of, and devotion to, the divinely established order. “Sin” is a violation of that order.
If you would, expand a little on what this righteousness entails.
BJH1960 said
Also, like in the BoW, note that “righteousness” does not seem to consist of devotion to strictly ethical precepts. (Absolutely no mention in this text of the Torah or the Temple cult.) “Righteousness” is an appreciation of, and devotion to, the divinely established order. “Sin” is a violation of that order.
If you would, expand a little on what this righteousness entails.
This one of the most interesting aspects to the Book of Enoch. Actually this difference in approach to “righteousness” is one of the chief reasons some scholars posit the existence of an “Enochian” Judaism in distinction (and opposition) to “Mosaic” Judaism, the Torah and the Temple cult in Jerusalem.
Great stuff.
Thanks, Stephen.
Also these heavenly “luminaries”, stars, sun and moon, not to mention earthly forces like the winds and the lightnings and thunders, were treated as beings with an active will to obey God. (And the ability to disobey as well.)
Fascinating. Especially the idea they can disobey God.
The Descent of the Angels and Enoch’s Ascent to Heaven
In those days, sons of the chosen and holy were descending
from the highest heaven,
and their seed was becoming one with the sons of man.
In those days, Enoch received books of jealous wrath and rage,
and books of trepidation and consternation.
And in those days, a whirlwind snatched me up from the
face of the Earth,
and set me down in the confines of the heavens.
– 1 En 39:1-3
Before I proceed let me note that I don’t intend to quote every verse of the Book of Parables. As I said it is twice as long as the Book of the Watchers and I couldn’t quote all of that one so I won’t here. However the beginning of the First Parable functions as a setup for the rest of the book so it’s worth spending a bit of time on it.
I made a comment that the foundational story of the BoW, the rebellion of the Watchers, is somewhat marginalized in this section but let me clarify. Here in chpt 39 we have a mention of the original sin (pardon the pun) of the Watchers, their forbidden relations with human women. However, aside from two other brief references, one definite (69:4-5) and one supposed (56:3-4) this is the only time this aspect of the Watcher’s rebellion is mentioned. All other references to the sins of the Watchers in the BoP concentrate on their transmission of forbidden knowledge to the inhabitants of the earth. We already saw this tendency in the BoW with the double tradition of Shemihazah and Azazel.
*See posts #48,#88,#108 (jeez what’s with the “8s”?) I will try to do this kind of note when I make a reference back rather than simply assuming everyone has memorized all my posts. I mean, I know you have, but still…*
I discussed the reasons why this shift might have occurred. In the original story humans were victims. When the Noah stories entered the traditions and humans were being punished by the Flood this required some culpability on the part of humans in their fate. This seems to be the way the writers dealt with this internal tension created by the addition of the Flood stories. They began to back off on the older account. Azazel increases while Shemihazah decreases.
Also, what we see here and in the following passage is a bit of a recapitulation of not just the sins of the Watchers but of Enoch’s career in the BoW.
Grammar Alert! This will serve as your trigger warning. Ha!
Seriously though, what I know about Ge’ez grammar you would not be able to find in a microscope but in this case it casts an interesting light on the text to know what’s going on. If you want a scholar’s take of course read Nickelsburg but for our purposes I think I can sum it up fairly straightforwardly.
In most European languages expressions of perfect tense, actions completed in the past, and expressions of simultaneous action are usually differentiated, sequential actions distinguished from simultaneous actions. Not so in Ge’ez. Using certain constructions you can express simultaneous actions, occurring in past, present and future, using perfect tense. It’s weird to us but you can even express a completed action that occurs in the future.
So why am I telling you this?
The events described in these passages sometimes take place in the past, sometimes are ongoing and sometimes will take place in the future. And sometimes taking place at all times. The text plays on this ambiguity often making the decisions of the translators quite difficult. But everybody eventually comments on the elegance of the composition so I think we can assume the author(s) is doing this quite consciously. (And you can see how effective this can be. A prophecy is treated like a completed action that takes place in the future.)
Enoch is recapitulating his original vision of the BoW by describing it as if it is happening now but he is also projecting what will happen in the Parousia – all in the same vision! His implied audience is both his own generation of antediluvians and the “future” generation that is reading the book. In one of the other threads we discussed abrupt changes in point of view. Here we have that but also with that is added abrupt changes in time sense. Welcome to the apocalypse!
And there I saw another vision—the dwellings of the holy ones,
and the resting places of the righteous.
– 1En 39:4 etc
As I said, here at the beginning of the First Parable Enoch is recapitulating his original vision recorded in the BoW. In a condensed recap we follow Enoch from his ascent to Heaven, his vision of the divine Throne Room and his tour of the cosmos. But here a new figure is added.
And in that place [Heaven] my eyes saw the Chosen One of righteousness and faith,
and righteousness will be his days,
and the righteous and chosen will be without number before him forever and ever.
– 1En 39:6 etc
Ok I’m going to spend a long time discussing the identity of this “chosen one” but I’m going to hold off until the Second Parable where he is presented more explicitly.
Next we have praise passages.
In those days I praised and exalted the name of the Lord of Spirits… -39:9 etc
&
Those who sleep not [The Watchers] bless you,
and they stand in the presence of your glory;
And they bless and praise and exalt, saying,
“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Spirits,
he fills the earth with spirits.” –39:12 etc
There is a very interesting passage at 39:14.
And my face was changed,
for I was unable to see.
There is a sense here that not only is Enoch experiencing the vision but that he is being, well let’s use the word, “Transfigured” by the vision. In the BoW Enoch is a wise and righteous man who ascends to Heaven. He becomes divine scribe and intermediary. Earlier in the BoP there was a hint that he had been granted eternal life. Now there is a sense in which he is being physically transformed. It won’t stop here!
One more quick note. It is becoming apparent that if some of the writers of the NT (especially the Revelation of John) didn’t know this text, then they sure as heck drank from the same well!
As in the BoW Enoch ascends to the Divine Throne Room and beholds the Heavenly Court. (Once again it’s striking how closely the divine court is modeled on the Ancient Near Eastern concept of a royal court. We again note the irony of the Heavenly Court being an idealization of an earthly royal court while in turn the earthly royal court uses the heavenly court as a justification and rationale for its authority. The first century BCE version of a feedback loop!)
And after that I saw a thousand times thousand
and ten thousand times ten thousand
-they were innumerable and incalculable –
who stood before the glory of the
Lord of Spirits. – 40:1
Here we encounter the interesting concept of the myriad; our usage in English is derived from the Greek myrioi, “ten thousand”. We live in a world where we are at least somewhat familiar with huge numbers, billions, trillions, however hard they may be to internalize. We easily forget that mathematical concepts are historical artifacts (leaving aside the vexed philosophical question whether math is invented or discovered). There was a time before the concept of “zero” was known or invented. For these ancients the myriad, the concept of “ten thousand”, became a stand-in for everything that exists. Even now colloquially, “myriad” retains that idea.
Although the ancients could count higher than “ten thousand”, it was considered the practical limit in everyday life and often the highest single, named unit in daily language. In order to represent larger numbers ancient systems of multiplication used blocks of “ten thousand” as a foundation. Twenty thousand was represented as two myriads. Here, as in this passage, a hundred million was a “myriad myriad”.
But euphemistically, as stated in the text, the idea was a countless host as befitting the divine assembly.
Interestingly you find the same idea in a culture as far removed as the Chinese Daoist concept of wan, the “ten thousand things”, the totality of all that exists.
I looked, and on the four sides of the Lord of Spirits I saw four figures,
different from those who sleep not. I learned their names,
because the angel who came with me announced as their names to me,
and showed me all the hidden things. 40:2 etc
Here in the divine assembly we encounter the equally ancient idea of the quaternary, a fundamental, symbolic, organizing image based on the number four. It came to represent wholeness and harmony.
There were four elements: Earth, Air, Fire and Water
Cardinal points: North, South, East, West
Four seasons and their associated festivals: Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter and festivals associated with the equinoxes and solstices.
(This idea is why Irenaeus insisted there must be four gospels and four only.)
This concept survives to this day, colloquially, when someone refers to the “four corners of the earth”.
In this conception God sits on his heavenly throne at the center of the cosmos. In each direction stands an archangel, each with his function and the duties appropriate to his station. We’ve met these folks before in the BoW. Here they are identified as Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, and Phanuel. Here is a bit of a mystery. The first three are still familiar, being adopted by later lore and legend. In the original listing in chpt 10 it was Sariel who was the fourth archangel. Now Sariel has disappeared and we have the only reference to Phanuel in the literature. (He’s not in the canonical Bible at all.)
One of Phanuel’s duties is very interesting.
And the fourth voice I heard driving away the satans,
he did not allow them to come before the Lord of Spirits,
to accuse those who dwell on the earth. 40:7
Not yet the Devil, here we find the old idea of the “satan”, the “accuser”, which seems to have been a functionary in the divine assembly whose job resembled that of a heavenly prosecuting attorney. We find out that there were more than one! Phanuel bars them from the presence of God. Odd since the situation as we will see unfolding is the final judgement. Perhaps this means that the trial is over and sentence has been pronounced on sinners. The righteous have been vindicated. The “satans” are out of a job!
And sure enough Enoch beholds a vision of the coming judgement. (Remember my comments above about the grammar issue. This is a vision of a future judgement expressed as if it has already been accomplished.)
And after this, I saw all the secrets of heaven,
how the kingdom is divided,
and how human deeds of men are weighed in the balance.
There I saw the dwelling places of the chosen…
My eyes saw there all the sinners who deny the name of the Lord of Spirits,
being driven away from there,
and they are dragged them off and they could not remain… 41:1-2
Less expansive here than in the comparable description in the BoW, Enoch beholds the fates and the disposition of the righteous and sinners at the judgement. Please note how the fate of the sinners is described as they are “driven away” and “dragged off”. This locution will become important as I later consider passages that hint at a possible historical scenario behind the BoP. This also affects considerations of dating the text. No, I’m not done with that yet.
Note: Chpts 41 & 42 are textually corrupted in the surviving manuscripts. Based on internal evidence it appears that, although complete, some passages are out of their original order. Nickelsburg has attempted a reconstruction and I couldn’t find anybody who objected to his attempt so I will proceed with the assumption that his reconstruction is correct. And sure enough if you read the adjusted chpts without verse numbers they flow logically. But this will explain why my quotes may seem out of order. If you are interested in how textual scholars work, Nickelsburg’s comments about his reconstruction in his commentary are highly informative. I’m not going to spend a lot of time on it but if anyone has questions I’ll see what I can do.
Stephen said
Here we encounter the interesting concept of the myriad; our usage in English is derived from the Greek myrioi, “ten thousand”. We live in a world where we are at least somewhat familiar … with huge numbers, billions, trillions, however hard they may be to internalize. We easily forget that mathematical concepts are historical artifacts (leaving aside the vexed philosophical question whether math is invented or discovered). There was a time before the concept of “zero” was known or invented. For these ancients the myriad, the concept of “ten thousand”, became a stand-in for everything that exists. Even now colloquially, “myriad” retains that idea.
Although the ancients could count higher than “ten thousand”, it was considered the practical limit in everyday life and often the highest single, named unit in daily language. In order to represent larger numbers ancient systems of multiplication used blocks of “ten thousand” as a foundation. Twenty thousand was represented as two myriads. Here, as in this passage, a hundred million was a “myriad myriad”.
When I was teaching in China, it was similar, the “won” being 10,000, and “won won” being 100 million. I had to remind both my undergraduate and International MBA students taking their subjects in English that “a billion” is not a “won won”, but rather, “10 won won”, since in Macro we often work in billions as a kind of “small amount of GDP”, since in economies with GDP in the tens of trillions of USD, an individual billion will be below the precision of measurement, down there amongst the rounding errors.
When I was teaching in China…
I’m a huge fan of Chinese literature, old novels and Tang poetry. I would love to be able to navigate in Chinese. (I guess I’m too lazy – or too old – at this point to make the attempt.) I had a friend in school who taught English in South Korea for a time and he told me of his adventures in learning the language. There are certain formal phrases of greeting you use depending on gender. Early on the reaction when he made a mistake was amused encouragement often enough but sometimes people were deeply offended. Ain’t language wonderful!
***
The next part of the BoP is the closest to what I think most would consider as an actual parable. So let’s call it
The Parable of Wisdom and Iniquity
Wisdom found no place where she might dwell,
so her dwelling was in the heavens.
Wisdom went forth to dwell among the sons of men,
And found no home.
Wisdom returned to her place,
And sat down in the midst of the angels.
Iniquity went forth from her chambers,
Those whom she sought not she found,
She dwelt among them,
Like rain in a desert
And dew in a thirsty land.
– 42:1-3 (I should cop to the fact that this translation combines what I regard as the best parts of Nickelsburg and the old R H Charles translation from the 1890s. Plus a slight modification I made myself with no offense to the sense of the passage. Your homework assignment will be to take the two translations and see which parts are which. This will count as 50% of your final grade. Bonus points if you can suss out my own contribution. Ha!)
Someone could write a book about the Hebrew Biblical concept of Wisdom and its significance for the idea of the Divine Feminine in Judaism. In fact, someone has done this and I cannot let the opportunity pass by to recommend again one of my own favorite books.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Even relentlessly patriarchal traditions, hard as they try, cannot cancel the Divine Feminine. Remember that Second Temple Judaism is the great age of the Divine Hypostasis. Hokhmah (Hebrew), Sophia (Greek) , Tebib (Ge’ez), whatever you call her, she will not be denied. More than woman, not quite goddess, she walks where she wills.
The ultimate irony here is that Wisdom went looking for a home on earth and was rejected. Iniquity wasn’t looking but she found more than she needed. It is not Wisdom who fertilized the earth but Iniquity. Wisdom rests in contemplation of the Divine Order of the Cosmos. If you’ve been following my recent posts you’ll note a pattern developing.
Just as the First Parable provided a synopsis of the Book of the Watchers’ account of his ascent to the heavenlies, his vision of the divine throne room and his vision of the fate of the righteous and damned in the Judgement, it concludes with Enoch’s journey through cosmic geography. Since this aspect is what sparked my own interest in the first place I’ll spend some time on it.
And there my eyes saw the secrets of the lightnings and the thunder,
and the secrets of the winds…
and the secrets of the clouds and dew…
And there I saw closed storehouses out of which the winds are divided,
the storehouses of the hail and winds,
the storehouses of the mist, and of the clouds…
– 41:3
Note that back in 14:8 the lightnings and the winds transported Enoch to the heavens. In chpts 17 & 18 we have described Enoch’s cosmic journey and the sights he beheld. The winds are active powers that cause the movements of the sun, moon and stars. In the ancient world motion was associated with intelligence and while everything is dependent on the will of God, it is better to think of these phenomena as living willful creatures, heavenly fauna, rather than impersonal forces.
And these living forces need a place of rest. The idea of storehouses for the winds and the lightnings seems strange to us, used to thinking of occasional processes described by physics, but there were a numbered amount of lightnings and winds, each with a designated function and purpose. They existed from the beginning of the world, and when they are not active, they lie in wait.
In the next section of !st Enoch, the Book of the luminaries (or, the Astronomical Book), much will be made of the “Gates”, the entrances and exits through which the divine wildlife pass, attending to their duties.
And I saw the storehouses of the sun and moon,
from which they emerge and to which they return,
how the one is more praiseworthy than the other,
and their splendid orbits,
how they do not leave their courses,
neither extending nor diminishing them,
and how they keep faith with each other,
in accordance with the oath that binds them.
– 41:5
Here Enoch speaks directly of the heavenly luminaries. We will hear much of them in the next book. Note the bolded line. One of the most important aspects of the BoL is the controversy between the Solar and the Lunar calendars. It won’t be much of a spoiler to reveal that the BoL is definitely on the side of the Sun! Again note the place of the active cosmic will in the keeping of the divine order.
For the sun makes many revolutions for a blessing
and a curse,
the path of the moon is light to the righteous
and darkness to the sinners.
In the name of the Lord who distinguished between light
and darkness,
who divided the spirits of humanity,
who strengthened the spirits of the righteous
in the name of righteousness.
– 41:8
That “distinguished” is subtle. For these ancients creation is not something out of nothing. Creatio ex nihilo was still a looong way down the road. Like the good Ancient Near Easterners they were, “nothing” was simply unimaginable. The God, or the gods, formed the world out of a pre-existent formless chaos, fashioning it, shaping it, dividing it, strengthening it. Without the God’s active engagement, creation was always on the edge of sliding back into formlessness. I think we are to imagine the waste places of the earth as this very edge of formlessness. (This focuses a new light on Jesus’ sojourn in the wilderness.)
Also don’t slide over that last clause. Contra-Wittgenstein, here the “name” of the thing is the essence of the thing. The “Chosen One” who we will meet more intimately in the Second Parable is often described as the “name” of God, and is invariably associated with the community of the righteous. It’s hard for many American Christians to grasp but these ancients had no concept of “personal salvation”. You were “saved” because you were part of the body. The key to understanding was to figure out how to become part of the body.
Now it gets weird. But of course if there weren’t mysteries in the Enochian universe we would soon grow weary and disenchanted.
And I saw other lightnings and the stars of heaven;
I saw that he called them by their names,
and they listened to Him.
I saw a righteous balance,
how they were weighed according to their light,
according to the breadth of their spaces
and the day of their appearing,
how their revolution produces lightning,
according to the number of the angels,
and they keep faith with one another.
– 43:1-2
As I wrote, motion was associated with intelligence. The stars were considered living beings. To the later Stoics and their Middle-Platonic contemporaries, they were pure pneuma, “spirit”, although I always hasten to add that this was by no means an immaterial existence! You can see the stars. They have bodies. (This was a major theological issue for the Neo-Platonists and their Christian descendants. If the stars are spirits how come we can see them?)
(It is interesting to note that already in the fifth century BCE the Greek philosopher Anaxagoras had speculated that the stars were big burning rocks and that our sun was also a big burning rock seen from up close. Good old hard-headed Anaxagoras. His remarkable prescience was rewarded by a charge of impiety. He was sentenced to death but ultimately exiled from Athens. Of course we remember Anaxagoras, pbuh, while his accusers are justly forgotten.)
We’ve already seen how the stars who sinned by not appearing at the right time were punished. See 18:14 & 21:1. Enoch sees a “righteous balance” because in this conception, righteousness is balance. And here we get a hint of the hierarchy of the stars. They are measured by their brightness, how large they appear and by the time of their appearing. Of course astrology was centuries old at this point. Many scholars also consider this discussion of “stars” to also include the classical planets, the ones visible to the naked eye.
The meaning of the part about how the revolution of the stars causes lightning and the nature of the relationship between the angels and the stars is not immediately apparent. I will note that the ancient Sumerians had different words depending on whether you’re describing a planet/star, or, naming the divinity associated with that planet/star. There is some kind of distinction being made between the thing and the god that animates the thing.
Now you’d think the angels would explain this stuff to Enoch wouldn’t you?
And I asked the angel who went with me
and who showed me what was hidden:
‘What are these?’
And he said to me:
“The Lord of Spirits has shown you a parable
concerning them;
these are the names of the holy ones
who dwell on the earth
and believe in the name of the Lord of Spirits
for ever and ever.”
– 43:4
Well, ok. This is one of those passages that makes less sense every time you read it. We were talking about the stars and lightnings. Ok, granted, the “holy ones” are usually associated with the righteous Watchers. But, who dwell on “the earth”? We were taking about the stars in heaven and their association with the lightnings.
Finally, we go sailing over the edge.
Also another thing I saw regarding the lightnings:
how some stars arise and become lightning,
and cannot part from their form.
– 44:1
Sooo, some stars turn into lightning and get stuck, unable to go back to being a star? Well, dangit, don’t do that! (But perhaps there are unsuspected rewards to becoming lightning.) You know, the funny part is that to the author this all probably made perfect sense. I think the best approach here is to let these passages stimulate your imagination. If you need an explanation make it up yourself.
I have occasionally touched on the whimsical chapter/verse divisions found in the Enoch material. You will note here that chpt 44 is one verse. It concerns stars and lightnings which (or who, I guess) were being discussed in chapter 43, itself boasting only 4 verses. Why not simply make 44:1 into 43:5? I investigated the issue and near as I can figure, the bulk of the chapt/verse divisions were done in Ge’ez during the 16th century. In the 1890s when R H Charles first issued his English translation he made some revisions. Other than that, Deponent sayeth not.
Here endeth Parable the First.
BruceRMcF said
I wonder whether stars that become lightning and cannot return to their star form are shooting stars, because we always seem to see shooting stars shooting “down”, but not “up”.
That’s an interesting suggestion. Makes sense. One of the most fascinating aspects of reading these ancient texts to me is to see phenomena that we explain scientifically and regard as tame described outside that context. How utterly terrifying lightning or shooting stars must have seemed!
Stephen said
This thread was inspired mainly by two circumstances. BJH1960’s thread going through The Song of Songs and my finding a cheap copy of George Nickelsburg’s two-volume commentary on the B 0f E at an estate sale. The latter is considered the current critical commentary on the subject and given my interest I thought it would also be fun (at least for me ha) to write about it as I read.
ok, first what this is not. It’s not a review of Nickelsburg’s book although I will use it as a template. It’s not a scholarly essay. I make no claims to completeness. I will focus on what interests me. I’ll skip the minutiae of interest only to scholars. (The introduction to the first volume alone is 125 pages!) So I suppose I should make my own point of view explicit.
I have been interested in Space and Astronomy since I was very young. At some point I also picked up a fascination with ancient cultures. I suppose it was inevitable that at some point these wires would get crossed and a circuit formed involving the astronomical and cosmological views of ancient cultures. You can tell a lot about a culture by its view of the cosmos. Astronomy is the oldest of the sciences and in the ancient world, a world lit only by fire, humans sat and brooded over what they saw in the heavens. The impulse seems to have been universal and all these cultures eventually came to some conclusions. (So you’ll forgive me a bit later when I go on and on about solar and lunar calendars and such. That’s why I got on the bus.)
The Book of Enoch conserves an ancient, even primordial view of the cosmos in which these ancient thinkers imagined they lived. It draws from Ancient Near Eastern mythic concepts that go back millennia. It was influenced by Hellenism and passed ideas on to Judaism and Christianity as they formed and developed. It influenced gnosticism and Medieval Jewish mysticism. It’s well nigh impossible to underestimate the influence of this book.
So what the heck happened? Why did the Book of Enoch “drop off the radar” so to speak? Why is it not part of the Western canon? (In fact there are certain sects of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church that include it among their apocrypha.) Even more interesting why did Judaism itself eventually reject it?
First some background:
The Book of Enoch is also referred to as First Enoch because there are two other later works ascribed to or about the figure of Enoch. Second Enoch is a Christian work perhaps based on an older Jewish apocalypse. Third Enoch is part of the Jewish mystical Hekhalot literature. These latter two works are not part of the discussion although they are mighty interesting in their own right. When I say Enoch or the Book of Enoch I will mean exclusively the earlier work.
Enoch was preserved by the Ethiopian church and the only complete copies we have are in Ge’ez, the ancient Ethiopic liturgical language. Forty-nine fragments exist of which twenty-nine are complete. However, none of these predate the 16th or the 17th century! When this work was first introduced to the West in the 18th century many scholars considered it a forgery. It was only the discovery of Greek fragments that convinced everyone that it was much older. And then the discovery of Aramaic fragments at Qumran pushed its provenance back further still.
So this is where we are. The Book appears to have been originally composed in Aramaic, translated into Greek, and then into Ge’ez. There is some internal evidence that the translators into Ge’ez might have had both Greek and Aramaic texts at their disposal. (Nickelsburg, the good commentator, spends pages on this but I will not.) Of course, as you would expect, there are many textual variations among the fragments.
At Qumran were found eleven different fragments coming from that many different texts. In Aramaic we have about 1/5th of the original text comparing them to the complete versions in Ge’ez. But the only texts found at Qumran with as many or more different fragments of separate texts are Genesis, Isaiah, Jeremiah and the Psalms! Clearly Enoch was very important to the community at Qumran.
In Greek we have two major fragments dated from the 5th or 6th centuries and several minor ones. All in all in Greek we have about 28% of the original text. This sounds more dire than it actually is since one of those major fragments is an almost complete copy of the portion of the work known as the Book of the Watchers (chs 1-36), considered the foundational part of the entire work.
Translations:
If you go online you’ll see easily available copies of a translation done by a scholar named R H Charles. Charles was a scholar and translator active in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. His translation of Enoch was issued in the 1890s. You see it all over because of course its been in the public domain for decades. Charles only had access to the Ge’ez versions and some few Greek fragments. However, Charles is still a well regarded scholar in the field and if you’re a normal person simply interested in reading the story then have at it! You can find free PDF downloads online. Why not?
The Book of Enoch (as well as the second and third by the way) is included in the first volume of James H Charlesworth’s The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Charlesworth had access to the Ge’ez and the Greek fragments available. (If you find it odd that he did not accommodate the Aramaic since his edition post-dates the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls I refer you to the long, sad story of how the texts at Qumran were distributed to the scholarly community.) A nice two volume edition to have. Lots of good stuff.
George Nickelsburg’s two volume critical commentary for Hermeneia reflects all the extant material, Aramaic, Greek and Ge’ez. But most people who aren’t scholars are not going to want to invest $80 a volume. I wouldn’t had I not stumbled upon a cheap copy at the aforementioned estate sale a while back.
HOWEVER, and for this the fine folks at Hermeneia deserve a big ole hug, there is an inexpensive paperback edition (less than $20!) that includes Nicklesburg’s complete translation with a shorter intro and added notes! What is missing is the critical apparatus including line by line commentary which frankly, most people won’t miss at all. This volume is so easily attainable I would say if you’re really interested, by all means spring for it!
***
ok this is enough for my first post. My next post will be a bibliography of books that I have read and enjoyed over the years about Enoch. In books the bibliography comes at the end but I figured it would be better to have it all up front instead of people having to roam through all my posts looking for stuff. All written by well regarded scholars who are currently active in the field.
Can someone get me up to speed and tell me what the question of the OP is? And, to jump ahead, can someone (preferably the OP creator) demonstrate to me that there are good grounds for answering the question. Let me explain the last request. I have over the last several years grown very disenchanted with many “doctoral proposals” and “academic theories” that deal with documents whose dates we cannot pin down more specifically than “200BC-100BCE”. There’s a point where someone needs to say, “Let’s stop wasting money on funding more and more theories. It is not just a waste of money. The whole endeavor suggests to academia that we are in fact “advancing knowledge”, and we aren’t.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
2 Guest(s)