Andrei A. Orlov (Marquette University)
The Watchers of Satanail: The Fallen Angels Traditions in 2 (Slavonic) Enoch
… they became servants of Satan and led astray those who dwell upon the dry ground.
1 Enoch 54:6
… These are the Watchers (Grigori), who turned aside from the Lord, 200 myriads, together with their prince Satanail.
2 Enoch 18:3
The first part of 2 Enoch, a Jewish pseudepigraphon written in the first century C.E., deals with the heavenly ascent of the seventh antediluvian hero carried by his angelic psychopomps to the abode of the Deity. Slowly progressing through the heavens while receiving detailed explanations of their content from his angelic interpreters, in one of them, the patriarch encounters the group of the fallen angels whom the authors of the apocalypse designate as the Grigori (Watchers).1 The detailed report of the group’s transgression given in chapter 18 of the text which mentions the angelic descent on Mount Hermon, leading to subsequent corruption of humanity and procreation of the race of the Giants, invokes the memory of the peculiar features well known from the classic descriptions of the fall of the infamous celestial rebels given in the Book of the Watchers. This early Enochic booklet unveils the misdeeds of the two hundred Watchers led by their leaders Shemihazah and Asael. What is striking, however, in the description given in the Slavonic apocalypse, is that in contrast to the classic Enochic account, the leadership over the fallen Watchers is ascribed not to Shemihazah or Asael, but instead to Satanail.2 This reference to the figure of the negative protagonist of the Adamic story appears to be not coincidental. The careful examination of other details of the fallen angels traditions found in the Slavonic apocalypse unveils that the transference of the leadership over the Watchers from Shemihazah and Asael to Satanail, represents not a coincidental slip of pen, or a sign of a lack of knowledge of the authentic tradition, but an intentional attempt of introducing the Adamic development into the framework of the Enochic story, a move executed by the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse with a certain theological purpose.
I previously explored the influence of the Adamic story on the Enochic account of the Slavonic apocalypse, especially in the materials of the longer recension, noticing an unusual readiness of its authors for the adoption of traditions and motifs from the Adamic trend, a tendency which appears to be quite surprising for a Second Temple Enochic text.3
Indeed, Adam’s story occupies a strikingly prominent place in 2 Enoch. The traditions pertaining to the first human can be found in all the sections of the book. 4 In these materials Adam is depicted as a glorious angelic being, predestined by God to be the ruler of the earth, but falling short of God’s expectations. Although the bulk of Adamic materials belongs to the longer recension, which includes, for example, the lengthy Adamic narrative in chapters 30-32, the Adamic tradition is not confined solely to this recension. A number of important Adamic passages are also attested in the shorter recension. The extensive presence of Adamic materials in both recensions and their significance for the theology of the Slavonic apocalypse indicates that they are not later interpolations but are part of the original layer of the text.
It should be noted that such an extensive presence of Adamic materials in the intertestamental Enochic text is quite unusual. In the early Enochic circle reflected in 1 (Ethiopic) Enoch, Adam does not figure prominently. His presence in these materials is marginal and limited to a few insignificant remarks. Moreover, when the authors of the early Enochic booklets invoke the memory of Adam and Eve, they try to either ignore or “soften” the story of their transgression and fall in the garden. Scholars previously noticed this remarkable leniency of the Enochic writers towards the mishap of the protological couple in the texts “concerned with judgment and accountability.”5
This either modest or unusually positive profile which the Protoplasts enjoy in the early Enochic circle can be explained by several factors. Scholars previously observed that early Enochic and Adamic traditions appear to be operating with different mythologies of evil.6 The early Enochic tradition bases its understanding of the origin of evil on the Watchers’ story in which the fallen angels corrupt human beings by passing on to them various celestial secrets.7 In contrast, the Adamic tradition traces the source of evil to Satan’s transgression and the fall of Adam and Eve in Eden — the trend which is hinted at in Genesis 3 and then fully reflected in the Primary Adam Books which explain the reason for Satan’s demotion by his rejection to obey God’s command to venerate a newly created Protoplast.8
While in the early Enochic circle the presence of the Adamic traditions appears to be either marginalized or silenced – it looms large in 2 Enoch. In my previous research I suggested that the extensive presence of the Adamic motifs in the Slavonic apocalypse has a profound conceptual significance for the overall theological framework of the Slavonic apocalypse.9 It appears that the purpose of the extensive presence of Adamic themes in 2 Enoch can be explained through the assessment of Enoch’s image in the text who is portrayed in the Slavonic apocalypse as the Second Adam – the one who is predestined to regain the original condition of the Protoplast once lost by the first humans in Eden.10 In this context many features of the exalted prelapsarian Adam are transferred to the seventh antediluvian hero in an attempt to hint at his status as the new Protoplast, who restores humanity to its original state. This new protological profile of the elevated Enoch in the Slavonic apocalypse thus can serve as an important clue for understanding the necessity of the extensive presence of the Adamic traditions in 2 Enoch.
Moreover, it appears that the appropriation of the Adamic lore in 2 Enoch is not limited solely to the figure of the main positive protagonist – the seventh antediluvian patriarch, but also extended to the story of the negative angelic counterparts of the Enochic hero – the Watchers whose portrayals in the Slavonic apocalypse also become enhanced with novel features of the Adamic mythology of evil, and more specifically, with the peculiar traits of the account of its infamous heavenly rebel – Satan. Such interplay and osmosis of two early paradigmatic trends, which in John Reeves’ terminology is designated as the mixed or transitional template, has long-lasting consequences for both “mythologies of evil” and their afterlife in rabbinic and patristic environments.11 The purpose of this paper is to explore the Adamic reworking of the Watchers traditions in the Slavonic apocalypse and its significance for subsequent Jewish mystical developments.
I. 2 Enoch 7: The Watchers in the Second Heaven
There are two textual units pertaining to the Watchers traditions in 2 Enoch. One of them is situated in chapter seven. The chapter describes the patriarch’s arrival in the second heaven where he sees the group of the guarded angelic prisoners kept in darkness. Although chapter seven does not identify this group directly as the Watchers, the description of their transgressions hints to this fact. The second unit is situated in chapter eighteen which describes Enoch’s encounter with another angelic gathering in the fifth heaven, the group which this time is directly identified as the Watchers (Grigori). Although our study of the traditions of the fallen angels in the Slavonic apocalypse will deal mainly with these two passages found in chapters seven and eighteen, some attention will be paid also to the Satanail traditions situated in chapters twenty nine and thirty one.
Traces of the Enochic Template
In chapter 7 of the longer recension of 2 Enoch the following description is found:
… And those men picked me up and brought me up to the second heaven. And they showed me, and I saw a darkness greater than earthly darkness. And there I perceived prisoners under guard, hanging up, waiting for the measureless judgment. And those angels have the appearance of darkness itself, more than earthly darkness. And unceasingly they made weeping, all the day long. And I said to the men who were with me, “Why are these ones being tormented unceasingly?” Those men answered me, “These are those who turned away from the Lord, who did not obey the Lord’s commandments, but of their own will plotted together and turned away with their prince and with those who are under restraint in the fifth heaven.” And I felt very sorry for them; and those angels bowed down to me and said to me, “Man of God, pray for us to the Lord!” And I answered them and said, “Who am I, a mortal man, that I should pray for angels? Who knows where I am going and what will confront me? Or who indeed will pray for me?”12
Several scholars have previously recognized the connection of this passage about the incarcerated angels with the Watchers traditions.13 One of these scholars, John Reeves, argues that
… this particular text obviously refers to the angelic insurrection that took place in the days of Jared, the father of Enoch. The prisoners in this “second heaven” are in fact those Watchers who violated the divinely decreed barriers separating heaven and earth by taking human wives and fathering bastard offspring, the infamous Giants….14
Another scholar, James VanderKam expresses a similar conviction when he remarks that the angelic group depicted in chapter seven “remind us of the Watchers and their mutual oath to commit the deeds that led to their imprisonment in 1 Enoch 6-11.”15
VanderKam’s suggestion that the theme of the angels “plotting together” found in 2 Enoch 7 might allude to the Watchers’ council on Mount Hermon and their mutual oath is important. The Watchers tradition reflected later in the text in chapter 18 further strengthens the possibility that the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse were familiar with the early Enochic tradition of the bounding oath taken by the Watchers on the infamous mountain.16
Another important detail that hints to the possibility of the presence of the Watchers tradition in the passage is that the angels choose to ask the patriarch about interceding with God. This request for intercession before God appears to allude to the unique role of the seventh antediluvian hero reflected already in the earliest Enochic booklets where he is depicted as the envoy bringing petitions of intercession to God on behalf of this rebellious angelic group. John Reeves suggests17 that the petition pressed upon the exalted patriarch by the imprisoned angels in 2 Enoch 7 is reminiscent of the language found in the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 13:4)18 where the Watchers ask the patriarch to write for them a prayer of intercession.19 From 1 Enoch 13:6-7 we learn that this prayer was prepared by the seventh antediluvian hero and later was delivered by him in a vision to the Creator.20
All these features demonstrate that the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse appear to be well cognizant of some peculiar details of early versions of the Watchers story and were using these various characteristics of the early Enochic template in their depiction of the group of incarcerated angels in chapter seven, thus implicitly hinting to their audience at the angels’ identity as the Watchers.
Finally there is another piece of evidence that further confirms the identity of the mysterious imprisoned group as the Watchers. Although the angelic group kept under guard in the second heaven is not directly identified in chapter seven as the Watchers, this chapter connects the unnamed angels with another celestial gathering which the patriarch will encounter later in the fifth heaven. 2 Enoch 7 anticipates this encounter when it explains that the group in the second heaven “turned away with their prince and with those who are under restraint in the fifth heaven.” Later upon his arrival to the fifth heaven the patriarch sees there another angelic group which his celestial guides identify as Grigori (Slav. Григори)21 – the Watchers. During that identification a reference is also made to the group in the second heaven which puts this group also in the category of the Watchers: “These are the Grigori (Watchers), who turned aside from the Lord, 200 myriads, together with their prince Satanail. And similar to them are those who went down as prisoners in their train, who are in the second heaven, imprisoned in great darkness.” Later, in 2 Enoch 18:7, when Enoch himself addresses the Watchers he tells them that he saw “their brothers” and “prayed for them.” These details again appear to be alluding to the group in the second heaven who earlier asked the patriarch to pray for them.22 As we can see the two angelic groups in the second and fifth heavens are interconnected by the authors of the apocalypse through the set of cross-references situated in both chapters.
Traces of the Adamic Template
We began our study by mentioning that the Watchers account situated in chapter 18 exhibits the clear features of Adamic tradition when it names Satanail as the leader of the fallen Watchers. In the light of this later reaffirmation, it is also possible that the subtle traces of the Adamic template may already be present even in the description found in chapter seven.
A close look at chapter 7 demonstrates that along with implicit traces of the Enochic traditions of the fallen Watchers the passage also exhibits some familiarities with the Adamic mythology of evil by recalling some features of the story of Satan’s fall.
One of the pieces of evidence that catches the eye here is the peculiar title “prince” by which the passage describes the leader of the incarcerated angels. Already Robert Henry Charles noticed that although the passage found in chapter 7 does not directly name Satanail as the leader of the rebellious angels, the reference to the fact that they “turned away with their prince” (Slav. с князом своим)23 invokes the similar terminology applied to Satanail later in chapter 18:3 which tells that the Watchers (Grigori) turned aside from the Lord together with their prince ( Slav. с князем своим)24 Satanail.25 Charles’ suggestion appears to be plausible, and in the light of the identical formulae attested in chapter 18 it is possible that the Sataniel tradition is already present in 2 Enoch 7. If it is so, here for the first time in the Slavonic apocalypse the chief negative protagonist of the Adamic lore becomes identified as the leader of the fallen Watchers.
Another possible piece of evidence that hints to the presence of the Adamic mythology of evil in 2 Enoch 7 is connected with the motif of the imprisoned angels bowing down before Enoch. Both recensions of 2 Enoch 7:4 portray the incarcerated angels in the second heaven as bowing down before the translated patriarch asking him to pray for them before the Lord.
I previously argued26 that this tradition of angels bowing down before Enoch appears to stem from an Adamic mythology of evil27 since it invokes the peculiar details of the Satan story attested in the Primary Adam Books28 and some other Jewish, Christian and Muslim materials.29 In order to clarify the Adamic background of the Watchers tradition found in 2 Enoch 7 one should take a short excursus in the later Enochic developments reflected in the Hekhalot materials.
In the later Enochic composition, known to us as the Sefer Hekhalot or 3 Enoch, the Adamic motif of the angelic veneration similar to 2 Enoch also appears to be placed in the context of the Watchers tradition(s). Thus, 3 Enoch 4 depicts the angelic leaders Uzza, Azza, and Azael, the characters whose names are reminiscent of the names of the leaders of the fallen Watchers,30 as bowing down before Enoch-Metatron.
There are scholars who view this motif of angels bowing down before Enoch found in Sefer Hekhalot as a relatively late development which originated under the influence of the rabbinic accounts of the veneration of humanity.31 Yet, there are other researchers who argue for early “pseudepigraphical” roots of this Hekhalot tradition of the angelic veneration of Enoch. One of these scholars, Gary Anderson, previously noticed the early pseudepigraphical matrix of this peculiar development present in Sefer Hekhalot and its connections with the primordial veneration of the Protoplast in the paradigmatic Adamic story where Satan and his angels refuse to bow down before the first human.32 Moreover, some conceptual developments detected in 2 Enoch also point to early pseudepigraphical roots of the tradition of veneration of Enoch by angels. Scholars previously suggested that the Adamic motif of angelic veneration was transferred in the Enochic context not in the later Hekhalot or rabbinic materials but already in 2 Enoch where the angels are depicted as bowing down several times before the seventh antediluvian hero. Besides the previously mentioned tradition of the imprisoned angels bowing down before Enoch found in chapter seven there is another, even more explicit appropriation of the motif of angelic veneration, found in 2 Enoch 21- 22 where God tests angels by asking them to venerate Enoch. These chapters depict Enoch’s arrival at the edge of the seventh heaven. There, God invites Enoch to stand before him forever. The Deity then tells his angels, sounding them out: “Let Enoch join in and stand in front of my face forever!” In response to this address, the angels do obeisance to Enoch saying, “Let Enoch yield in accordance with your word, O Lord!”33 Michael Stone previously noticed that the story found in 2 Enoch 21–22 is reminiscent of the account of Adam’s elevation and his veneration by angels found in the Life of Adam and Eve.34 Stone notes that, along with the motifs of Adam’s elevation and his veneration by angels, the author of 2 Enoch appears also to be aware of the motif of angelic disobedience and refusal to venerate the first human. Stone draws the reader’s attention to the phrase “sounding them out,” found in 2 Enoch 22:6, which another translation of the Slavonic text rendered as “making a trial of them.”35 Stone notes that the expression “sounding them out” or “making a trial of them” implies here that it is the angels’ obedience that is being tested. Further comparing the similarities between Adamic and Enochic accounts, Stone observes that the order of events in 2 Enoch exactly duplicates the order found in the primary Adam books. Stone concludes that the author of 2 Enoch 21–22 was cognizant of the traditions resembling those found in Armenian, Georgian, and Latin versions of the Life of Adam and Eve. He also emphasizes that these traditions did not enter 2 Enoch from the Slavonic Life of Adam and Eve, because this form of the tradition does not occur in the Slavonic Vita.36
Keeping in mind these remarkable parallels it is now time to return to the tradition of Enoch’s veneration by the incarcerated angels found in chapter seven of 2 Enoch in order to further explore its connection with the Adamic story of angelic veneration.
Several details of the story from 2 Enoch 7 seem also to be alluding to the Adamic template:
a. In 2 Enoch 7, similar to the Adamic accounts, the sin of the imprisoned angels is disobedience to the Lord’s commandments.
b. The agents of the rebellion are a group of angels with “their prince.” This recalls the information found in the Adamic accounts where not only Satan, but also other angels under him, refuse to venerate Adam. As we remember, the longer recension of 2 Enoch 18:3 directly identifies the prisoners of the second heaven as the angels of Satanail.
c. Finally, in the text the imprisoned angels bow down before a human being (Enoch). An additional important detail here is that the patriarch is addressed by the fallen angels as a “man” – “a man of God.” The combination of the motif of angelic bowing with a reference to the human nature of the object of veneration is intriguing and again might point to the protological Adamic account where some angels bow down before the human and others refuse to do so.
II. 2 Enoch 18: The Watchers in the Fifth Heaven
Traces of the Enochic Template
It is time now to proceed to the second textual unit dealing with the Watchers traditions situated in chapter 18 of the Slavonic apocalypse. In the longer recension of 2 Enoch 18 the following description can be found:
… And those men took me up on their wings and placed me on the fifth heaven. And I saw there many innumerable armies called Grigori. And their appearance was like the appearance of a human being, and their size was larger than that of large giants. And their faces were dejected, and the silence of their mouths was perpetual. And there was no liturgy in the fifth heaven. And I said to the men who were with me, “What is the explanation that these ones are so very dejected, and their faces miserable, and their mouths silent? And (why) is there no liturgy in this heaven?” And those men answered me, “These are the Grigori, who turned aside from the Lord, 200 myriads, together with their prince Satanail. And similar to them are those who went down as prisoners in their train, who are in the second heaven, imprisoned in great darkness. And three of them descended (соидошася три) to the earth from the Lord’s Throne onto the place Ermon. And they broke the promise on the shoulder of Mount Ermon. And they saw the daughters of men, how beautiful they were; and they took wives for themselves, and the earth was defiled by their deeds. Who … in the entire time of this age acted lawlessly and practiced miscegenation and gave birth to giants and great monsters and great enmity. And that is why God has judged them with a great judgment; and they mourn their brothers, and they will be outrages on the great day of the Lord.” And I said to the Grigori, “I have seen your brothers and their deeds and their torments and their great prayers; and I have prayed for them. But the Lord has sentenced them under the earth until heaven and earth are ended forever.” And I said, “Why are you waiting for your brothers? And why don’t you perform the liturgy before the face of the Lord? Start up your liturgy, and perform the liturgy before the face of the Lord, so that you do not enrage your Lord God to the limit.” And they responded to my recommendations, and they stood in four regiments in this heaven. And behold, while I was standing with those men, 4 trumpets trumpeted in unison with a great sound, and the Grigori burst into singing in unison. And their voice rose in front of the face of the Lord, piteously and touchingly.37
Already in the very beginning of this passage the angelic hosts situated in the fifth heaven are designated as Grigori (Slav. Григори),38 the term which represents “a transcription of the Greek word for the Watchers.”39 Unlike in chapter 7, where the identity of the celestial gathering remains rather uncertain, here the authors of the text explicitly choose to name the angelic group. The text then provides some details of the angels’ appearance. When the Slavonic apocalypse describes them, an intriguing comparison is made about the size of these angelic hosts, who are depicted as beings “larger than the large giants” – a reference which might also invoke the Giants traditions – a conceptual trend which in early Enochic booklets is often intertwined with the Watchers story.
The text then describes the Watchers’ faces as being dejected, emphasizing also their perpetual silence. Enoch, who appears to be puzzled by the view of this silent and depressive angelic company, then asks his angelic guides about their strange dejected looks and their non-participation in the angelic liturgy. In response he hears the story that further provides the array of crucial motifs that invoke the memory of the account of the Watchers’ descent as it is described in the early Enochic circle. Two significant details here are the references to the number of the descended Watchers as two hundred (myriads)40 and the designation of the place of their descent on earth as Mount Hermon (Slav. Ермон/гора Ермонская). It is well-known that the numeral two hundred in relation to the descended Watchers is attested already in the Book of the Watchers – one of the earliest Enochic booklets, whose text also locates the place of the Watchers’ descent at Mount Hermon.41
2 Enoch 18:4 then supplies another portentous detail by describing how the Watchers broke the promise on the shoulder of Mount Hermon. The reference to the “promise” (Slav. обещание)42 that the Watchers “broke” on the shoulder of the infamous mountain is intriguing and appears to hint to the early Enochic tradition of the binding oath taken by the Watchers. The passage found in chapter 6 of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 6:3-6) unveils the motifs of mysterious promises and curses with which the rebellious angels decided to bind themselves, thus securing their ominous mission and fellowship.43
The descriptions of the Watchers’ transgressions provided in 2 Enoch 18 are also noteworthy. The references to the Watchers’ marriage to the human women, the procreation of the race of monstrous Giants, the enmity and evil that this infamous bastard offspring created on earth – all these features again betray the authors’ familiarity with early Watchers and Giants traditions attested already in 1 Enoch 7.44 It is also curious that 2 Enoch specifically emphasizes the sin of interbreeding (miscegenation) (Slav. смешение),45 an important sacerdotal concern of intermarriage that looms large in the early Enochic circle.
Another typical “Enochic” detail of chapter 18 is the reference to God’s sentencing the Watchers under the earth “until heaven and earth are ended forever.” This motif also appears to stem from the early Enochic lore where the fallen Watchers are depicted as imprisoned under the earth until the day of the final judgment.
All aforementioned details point to familiarity of the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse with the features of the original Enochic template.
Yet, despite the efforts of the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse to harmonize the plethora of early Enochic motifs into a coherent symbolic universe, the Watchers’ account reflected in chapter 18 appears to be not entirely without contradictions. One of the puzzles here is a discrepancy about the location of the angelic group encountered by the patriarch earlier – the incarcerated rebels, whose memory is invoked again and again in chapter 18.
Thus, in 18:3 Enoch’s angelic guides connect the Watchers in the fifth heaven with the angelic group in the second heaven depicted earlier in chapter 7:
And similar to them are those who went down as prisoners in their train, who are in the second heaven, imprisoned in great darkness. (2 Enoch 18:3)
Later, in verse seven, Enoch himself reaffirms this connection between the two angelic groups when he unveils to the Watchers in the fifth heaven the sad destiny of their rebellious brothers in the lower realm:
And I said to the Grigori, “I have seen your brothers and their deeds and their torments and their great prayers; and I have prayed for them. But the Lord has sentenced them under the earth until heaven and earth are ended forever.” (2 Enoch 18:7).
It is apparent that both passages about angelic rebellious groups in chapters 7 and 18 are interconnected by a series of allusions and familiar motifs intended to persuade the reader that both groups are interrelated and now are separated because of their previous deeds. Yet, 2 Enoch 18:7 exhibits a clear contradiction when Enoch reports to the Watchers in the fifth heaven that God has sentenced their brothers “under the earth.”46 Several scholars previously noticed this topological discrepancy about the exact location of the second group of Watchers. 47 Reflecting on the textual contradictions about the location of the imprisoned Watchers, one of these scholars, John Reeves, observes that
2 Enoch is peculiar in that it places the prison for the incarcerated Watchers in heaven itself. This transcendent location contradicts the explicit testimonies of other works where these rebellious Watchers are held; viz. beneath the earth (1 Enoch 10:4-7; 12-14; 88:3; Jub. 5:6, 10; 2 Pet 2:4). Moreover, a later passage in 2 Enoch is simultaneously cognizant of this latter tradition: “And I said to the Watchers, I have seen your brothers, and I have heard what they did; … and I prayed for them. And behold, the Lord has condemned them below the earth until the heavens and the earth pass away …” The reference in this text is surely to the imprisoned Watchers that Enoch had previously encountered in the second heaven. But here, while touring the “fifth heaven,” the imprisoned Watchers are spoken as being “beneath the earth”!48
It is possible that the discrepancy pertaining to the location of the imprisoned angels can be explained by the topological peculiarities of the Slavonic apocalypse whose main theological emphasis is centered on the ascension of the translated hero into the heavenly realm. Yet, possibly cognizant of the various early traditions of the patriarch’s tours into other (subterranean) realms, where Enoch observes the places of the punishment of the rebellious Watchers, the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse try to reconcile (not always seamlessly) these earlier traditions with their ouranological scheme.49 In this respect the phrase “I saw a darkness greater than earthly darkness”50 used in the description of the incarcerated angels in the longer recension of 2 Enoch 7:1, deserves some additional attention. It appears that this phrase strives to underline the otherworldly, possibly even subterranean, nature of the darkness encountered by the patriarch in the second heaven. Clearly the text wants to emphasize that it is a darkness of another realm by comparing it with “earthly darkness.” Later, in verse 2 this comparison with the earthly darkness is repeated again, this time in the portrayal of the angels’ appearance: “And those angels have the appearance of darkness itself, more than earthly darkness.”51
Traces of the Adamic Template
Besides the references to the Enochic template, the passage from chapter 18 also reveals also the authors’ familiarity with the Adamic mythology of evil and the peculiar details of its demonological settings. Moreover, it appears that the interaction between the two paradigmatic templates in 2 Enoch can be seen not merely as an attempt at mechanical mixture of the elements of both trends but rather the progressive movement toward their organic union when the mutual interaction is able to generate a qualitatively different tradition which is not equal anymore to their initial parts. Thus one can see here the consistent effort to “fuse” two mythological streams into a new coherent ideology – an enormously difficult creative task carried out masterfully by the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse. One of the crucial signs of such qualitative transition can be seen in the literary destiny of the main protological and eschatological opponent of the Adamic tradition – Satan(ail),52 who is now invited into the new unfamiliar entourage of the rival mythological trend, where he is being fashioned as the leader of the rebellious Watchers.
“These are the Grigori, who turned aside from the Lord, 200 myriads, together with their prince (с князом своим) Satanail….” (2 Enoch 18).
The fact that this identification represents not just an accidental slip of the pen or an interpolation, but a sign of the consistent and well-designed theological strategy of the text becomes evident if we compare the description found in chapter 18 with the Watchers tradition found in chapter 7. There again the group of the incarcerated Watchers is described by the authors as the rebellious group who turn away with their prince:
These are those who turned away from the Lord, who did not obey the Lord’s commandments, but of their own will plotted together and turned away with their prince (с князем своим)… (2 Enoch 7).
Both passages are interconnected through identical Slavonic terminology since the leader of the rebellious angels in both cases is designated as a prince (Slav. князь).53 It appears that in the theological tapestry of the Slavonic apocalypse, chapter 7 plays an important role by serving for its readers as a sort of a preliminary initiation into a new mythology of evil – the demonological setting where both, the identities of the Watchers and their new leader Satanail are still concealed, thus anticipating their full conceptual disclosure in the later chapters.
But how really novel and original was this conceptual move for the Enochic trend? It should be noted that the leadership of Satan over the fallen Watchers is unknown in the earliest Enochic booklets. Yet, in the late Second Temple Enochic text, the Book of the Similitudes, one can see the extensive appropriation of the Satan terminology, both in the generic and in the titular sense.54 One of the instances of the “generic” use of such terminology can be found in 1 Enoch 40:7 where the term “satans” appears to designate one of the classes of angelic beings55 whose function is to punish56 or to put forward accusations against those who dwell on earth: “And the fourth voice I heard driving away the satans, and not allowing them to come before the Lord of Spirits to accuse those who dwell on the dry ground.”57
The first possible steps towards the transitional template in which Satan becomes the leader of the fallen Watchers might be discernable in the Similitudes 54:4-6 where the “hosts of Azazel” are named as the “servants of Satan”:58
And I asked the angel of peace who went with me, saying: “These chain-instruments – for whom are they being prepared? And he said to me: “These are being prepared for the hosts of Azazel, that they may take them and throw them into the lowest part of Hell; and they will cover their jaws with rough stones, as the Lord of Spirits commanded. And Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel – these will take hold of them on that great day, and throw them on that day into the furnace of burning fire, that the Lord of Spirits may take vengeance on them for their iniquity, in that they became servants of Satan and led astray those who dwell upon the dry ground.59
Scholars argued that the term “Satan” was used here not in the generic but in the “titular” sense.60 If it is so this portentous conceptual development is relevant for our study of the Sataniel tradition found in the Slavonic apocalypse, since it might provide additional proof that the extensive adoption of Adamic mythology of evil in 2 Enoch was not a later Christian interpolation, but a genuine Enochic development possibly stemming from other late Second Temple Enochic booklets.
Yet, despite its promising nature, the origin of the Satan tradition found in the Parables remains clouded in mystery. It is really difficult to discern from this terse and enigmatic passage found in the Similitudes 54 if the authors of the book did really have the knowledge of the full-blown Adamic template, including the story of the angelic veneration, or if they were merely borrowing the titular usage of Satan from the biblical materials. Scholars previously noticed this peculiar tendency of the Similitudes for the extensive and open adaptations of some biblical titles in relation to Enoch – a novel development in comparison with the earliest Enochic booklets whose authors deliberately tried to maintain distance from the “biblical” books.61 In the light of these developments it is possible that titular usage of the name “Satan” similar to many of Enoch’s titles found in the Similitudes might have here biblical roots. Nevertheless, it remains intriguing that the extensive appropriation of Satan terminology is found in such a transitional Enochic booklet as the Parables, a text which similar to the Slavonic apocalypse, tries to dramatically enhance the exalted profile of the seventh antediluvian patriarch leading this character into the entirely new, one might say “divine,” stage of his remarkable theological career by identifying him with the preexistent son of man.
Now it is time to return to the Slavonic apocalypse where the mutual interaction between two mythologies of evil appears to be exercising a lasting influence not only on the story of the Watchers but also on the account of the negative protagonist of the Adamic stream – Satan(ail) who is now acquiring some novel features from the Enochic tradition.
The longer recension of 2 Enoch 29 elaborates the story of Satanail’s fall by enhancing it with some new intriguing details. It describes that after his transgression (described there as the violation of the ranks of the angelic hierarchy in an attempt to exalt himself) Satanail was cast out from heaven with his angels.62 The text further unveils that after his demotion “he [Satanail] was flying around in the air, ceaselessly above the Bottomless (Slav. бездна).”63 This reference to the Slavonic word бездна, (which more precisely can be translated as “pit” or “abyss”) as the place of punishment of the fallen angel, invokes the memory of the Asael/Azazel story from 1 Enoch 10 where the leader of the fallen angels is thrown by the angel Raphael into the subterranean pit.64
Here again one can see the profound dialogue between two formative traditions of the fallen angels that alters or enhances the features of the original templates, reshaping the stories of their infamous heroes.
III. The Transitional Template and its Afterlife in the Shicur Qomah and Hekhalot accounts
Our investigation of the mixed demonological template found in 2 Enoch is important not only because it witnesses to the portentous dialogue between Enochic and Adamic mythologies of evil but also because it helps to illuminate another important theological transition taking place for the first time in the Slavonic apocalypse – that is the paradigm shift from the Jewish apocalypticism to early Jewish mysticism, thus in many ways anticipating future developments inside the Enochic lore and serving as a blueprint for the later Watchers traditions reflected in the Shciur Qomah and Hekhalot lore.65
In this respect it is therefore useful to discuss some early signs and facets of this ideological transition taking place at the end of the Second Temple period through the exploration of several pioneering aspects of the Watchers traditions found in 2 Enoch and the afterlife of these novel developments in later Jewish mysticism.
I have previously argued about the formative value of Enochic traditions reflected in the Slavonic apocalypse for late Jewish mysticism and particularly for the Enochic developments attested in Sefer Hekhalot.66 My previous research was mainly concentrated on Enoch’s figure. Yet, in the light of the current investigation it becomes clear that the lessons which 2 Enoch provides for the later Hekhalot developments appear to be not limited solely to the transformation of the narrative involving the chief positive protagonist of the Enochic tradition – the seventh antediluvian hero, but also involve the peculiar reworking of the story of its anti-heroes – the fallen Watchers. In this section of my study I would like to concentrate on two motifs found in 2 Enoch that appear to be anticipating future Jewish mystical developments: the motif of the three watchers and the theme of the liturgical duties of Enoch-Metatron.
This study has already drawn attention to the intriguing fact that the Slavonic apocalypse operates with the tradition of the descent of the three Watchers. Several manuscripts of 2 Enoch 18 tell that “three of them [the Watchers] descended to the earth from the Lord’s Throne onto the place Ermon.” This passage invokes the memory of a peculiar tradition found in the later Enochic lore reflected in Sefer Hekhalot that mentions three ministering angels – Uzza, Azza, and Azael, enigmatic characters, whose names are reminiscent of the infamous leaders of the Watchers – Shemihazah and Asael.67 Sefer Hekhalot contains two textual units which deal with Uzza, Azza, and Azael. One of them is situated in chapter four and another in chapter five.
3 Enoch 4:1-10reads:
R. Ishmael said: I said to Metatron: “… why, then, do they call you ‘Youth’ in the heavenly heights?” He answered: “Because I am Enoch, the son of Jared…” … “… the Holy One, blessed be he, appointed me (Enoch) in the height as a prince and a ruler among the ministering angels. Then three of the ministering angels, Uzza, Azza, and Azael, came and laid charges against me in the heavenly height. They said before the Holy One, blessed be He, “Lord of the Universe, did not the primeval ones give you good advice when they said, Do not create man! … once they all arose and went to meet me and prostrated themselves before me, saying ‘Happy are you, and happy your parents, because your Creator has favored you.’ Because I am young in their company and a mere youth among them in days and months and years–therefore they call me ‘Youth.’”68
As has already been noticed in this study this specimen of the late “Enochic” lore found in Sefer Hekhalot is significant for our investigation because it attests to the conceptual matrix of the mythology of evil very similar to the one found in the Slavonic apocalypse, where the Enochic trend attempts to emulate the paradigmatic features of the Adamic story. It is possible that the influence of the Adamic template in the Hekhalot passage is even more decisive than it might appear at first glance since besides the theme of the angelic veneration of the seer it also invokes the motifs of the protological situation of the creation of humanity and the angelic opposition to this act of the Deity. Although the tradition of the veneration of Adam is not mentioned directly in this unit – it is indirectly (similarly to the Slavonic apocalypse) reaffirmed by the veneration that angels offer to Enoch. As has been mentioned already in this study, previous scholars have noticed the presence of the pseudepigraphical matrix of the Adamic tradition in this passage.69
In Sefer Hekhalot 5 the tradition about three “Watchers” takes another, this time clearly “Enochic” turn, by connecting Uzza, Azza, and Azael with the familiar theme of the corruption of humankind through a reference to the angels’ illicit pedagogy, a motif known already in the earliest Enochic mythology of evil:
What did the men of Enosh’s generation do? They roamed the world from end to end …. They brought down the sun, the moon, the stars and the constellations …. How was it that they had the strength to bring them down? It was only because Uzza, Azza, and Azael taught them sorceries that they brought them down and employed them, for otherwise they would not have been able to bring them down.70
It is noteworthy that both passages about three fallen angels from Sefer Hekhalot have distinctive features of the mixed template, very similar to the one found in the Slavonic apocalypse. Both texts are trying to bring the whole array of the Adamic motifs, including the account of the angelic veneration, into the framework of the Watchers story. Although the transmission history of the post-Second Temple Enochic traditions is clouded in mystery – it is possible that the developments detected in the Slavonic apocalypse exercised a formative influence on the later Enochic lore, including Sefer Hekhalot. In this respect it is noteworthy that despite the tradition of the fallen angels’ opposition to God’s creation of humans found in several places in rabbinic literature,71 the motif of the three watchers appears in Jewish milieus only in Sefer Hekhalot. 72
Enoch as the Celestial Choirmaster of the Watchers
Another portentous aspect of the Watchers traditions found in 2 Enoch that appears to exercise a long-lasting influence on later Jewish mystical developments is its liturgical dimension. The repeated and persuasive invocation of the idea of angelic veneration in many ways hints (directly and indirectly) to this peculiar sacerdotal aspect, since this motif is often placed in the Second Temple and rabbinic materials in the context of celestial worship. In this respect one should not ignore the persistent liturgical concern that permeates the Watchers story in the Slavonic apocalypse.
Indeed, the authors of the Watchers narratives of 2 Enoch do not shy away from expressing their interest in the theme of the heavenly liturgy. Thus, when Enoch sees the “dejected” Watchers in the fifth heaven, the passage immediately invokes the tradition of angelic worship by pointing to the Watchers’ non-participation in the celestial liturgical praxis:
And their faces were dejected, and the silence of their mouths was perpetual. And there was no liturgy in the fifth heaven. “What is the explanation that these ones are so very dejected, and their faces miserable, and their mouths silent? And (why) is there no liturgy in this heaven?”
The liturgical dimension of the Watchers tradition in 2 Enoch is intriguing and deserves further investigation. Yet, in order to apprehend the full meaning of this tradition for the later Enochic developments a short excursus in the Hekhalot and Shciur Qomah materials is necessary.
The later Merkabah materials emphasize the crucial role that Enoch-Metatron occupies in celestial worship by serving as the leader of the angelic hosts.
3 Enoch 15B provides the following description of his spectacular liturgical office:
Metatron is the Prince over all princes, and stands before him who is exalted above all gods. He goes beneath the throne of glory, where he has a great heavenly tabernacle of light, and brings out the deafening fire, and puts it in the ears of the holy creatures, so that they should not hear the sound of the utterance that issues from the mouth of the Almighty.73
A similar description in another Hekhalot text (Synopse §390)74 elaborates further Metatron’s unique liturgical role:
One hayyah rises above the seraphim and descends upon the tabernacle of the youth whose name is Metatron, and says in a great voice, a voice of sheer silence: “The Throne of Glory is shining.” Suddenly the angels fall silent. The watchers and the holy ones become quiet. They are silent, and are pushed into the river of fire. The hayyot put their faces on the ground, and this youth whose name is Metatron brings the fire of deafness and puts it into their ears so that they could not hear the sound of God’s speech or the ineffable name. The youth whose name is Metatron then invokes, in seven voices, his living, pure, honored, awesome, holy, noble, strong, beloved, mighty, powerful name.75
These enigmatic passages reveal that one of Metatron’s duties in the heavenly realm involves his leadership over the angelic hosts delivering heavenly praise to the Deity. The testimonies that unfold Metatron’s liturgical role are not confined solely to the Hekhalot corpus, but can also be detected in another prominent literary expression of early Jewish mysticism represented by the Shicur Qomah materials. The passages found in the Shicur Qomah texts attest to a similar tradition in which Metatron is portrayed as a liturgical leader. Thus, Sefer Haggomah 155-164 reads:And (the) angels who are with him come and encircle the Throne of Glory. They are on one side and the (celestial) creatures are on the other side, and the Shekhinah is on the Throne of Glory in the center. And one creature goes up over the seraphim and descends on the tabernacle of the lad whose name is Metatron and says in a great voice, a thin voice of silence, “The Throne of Glory is glistening!” Immediately, the angels fall silent and the cirin and the qadushin are still. They hurry and hasten into the river of fire. And the celestial creatures turn their faces towards the earth, and this lad whose name is Metatron, brings the fire of deafness and puts (it) in the ears of the celestial creatures so that they do not hear the sound of the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, and the explicit name that the lad, whose name is Metatron, utters at that time in seven voices, in seventy voices, in living, pure, honored, holy, awesome, worthy, brave, strong, and holy name.76
In reference to these traditions Martin Cohen notes that in the Shciur Qomah tradition Metatron’s service in the heavenly tabernacle appears to be “entirely liturgical” and “is more the heavenly choirmaster and beadle than the celestial high priest.”77
It is evident that the tradition preserved in Sefer Haqqomah cannot be separated from the microforms found in Synopse §390 and 3 Enoch 15B since all these narratives are unified by a similar structure and terminology. All of them also emphasize Metatron’s leading role in the course of the celestial service.
It is possible that this tradition of Enoch-Metatron as the one who encourages and prepares angels for their liturgical praxis in heaven might have its early roots already in 2 Enoch.
As we remember in the beginning of chapter 18 the patriarch is depicted as the one who laments about the absence of angelic liturgy in the fifth heaven and the silence of the Watchers. In the light of the Hekhalot and Shciur Qomah materials, his concern about the pause in the angelic liturgical routine appears to be not just a matter of curiosity. Further in the same unit Enoch encourages the celestial Watchers to start their liturgy before the face of God. The longer recension of 2 Enoch 18:8-9 relates:
And I [Enoch] said, “Why are you waiting for your brothers? And why don’t you perform the liturgy78 before the face of the Lord? Start up your liturgy,79 and perform the liturgy before the face of the Lord, so that you do not enrage your Lord to the limit.” And they responded to my recommendation, and they stood in four regiments in this heaven. And behold, while I was standing with those men, 4 trumpets trumpeted in unison with a great sound, and the Watchers burst into singing in unison. And their voice rose in front of the face of the Lord, piteously and touchingly.80
One can notice that the imagery of this account represents a rather vague sketch that only distantly alludes to the future prominent liturgical role of Enoch-Metatron. Yet here, for the first time in the Enochic tradition, the seventh antediluvian patriarch dares to assemble and direct the angelic creatures for their routine job of delivering praise to the Deity.
It is also significant that, despite the fact that in 2 Enoch 18 the patriarch gives his advice to the angels situated in the fifth heaven, he repeatedly advises them to start the liturgy “before the Face of the Lord,” i.e., in front of the divine Kavod, the exact location where Youth-Metatron will later conduct the heavenly worship of the angelic hosts in the Shicur Qomah and Hekhalot accounts.
These later specimens of Jewish mystical lore provide an important interpretive framework that allow us to discern the traces of these later fully developed liturgical traditions already in 2 Enoch. In this respect the Slavonic apocalypse can be seen as the crucial conceptual nexus loaded with several portentous transitions that become instrumental in shaping the angelological template prominent in the later Shicur Qomah and Hekhalot lore.
In light of the developments discernable in 2 Enoch it is possible that the unique liturgical role that Enoch-Metatron occupies in the Merkabah tradition in relation to the celestial creatures is linked to the tradition of his veneration by the angels. Already in the Slavonic apocalypse the celestial citizens recognize the authority and the leadership of the seventh antediluvian hero by bowing down before him. This peculiar ritual of recognition of the celestial leader appears not to be forgotten in the later mystical lore. In this respect it is striking that in the aforementioned liturgical passages from the Shicur Qomah and Hekhalot accounts various classes of angels, including the class named Nyry( (the Watchers), are depicted with “their faces towards the earth” while Enoch-Metatron puts fire in their ears. It cannot be excluded that one can have here the liturgical afterlife of the familiar motif of the angelic bowing before the translated hero. It is noteworthy that already in early Adamic lore that constitutes the background of the developments found in 2 Enoch – the theme of the angelic veneration of Adam is placed in the larger framework of divine worship – where the Protoplast appears to be understood not as the ultimate object of veneration but rather as a representation or an icon of the Deity through whom angels are able to worship God.81
In conclusion of our study of the intriguing relationships between the Enochic and Adamic templates of the fallen angels in the Slavonic apocalypse we should again draw attention to the broader theological concerns and circumstances for such striking metamorphoses of two previously relatively independent trends. As has been already pointed out in our study, one possible reason why many Adamic themes, including the motif of the angelic veneration, were brought for the first time in 2 Enoch into the framework of the Enochic developments, was the changing status of the main hero of the Enochic tradition. It appears that in the Slavonic apocalypse the story of the exalted protagonist of the Enochic lore seems to be stepping into the new era of its theological and anthropological development in which the patriarch undergoes a remarkable transition from an exemplar of the transformed angelomorphic humanity, as he appears in the early Enochic literature, to the new conceptual stage in which he is envisioned now as a specimen of the theomorphic humanity.
Scholars previously noted that many future roles of Enoch-Metatron as the lesser representation of the divine Name and the replica of the divine Body, the offices that clearly intend to exalt the translated hero above the angelic world – are already hinted in the Slavonic apocalypse. In this respect it appears to be not coincidental that the authors of the Slavonic apocalypse are repeatedly trying to emphasize the supra-angelic status of the translated patriarch and his unique position in relation to the Deity.82 The motif of the angelic veneration, a development borrowed by the Enochic authors from the rival Adamic trend, seems to help further affirm this new status of the elevated patriarch securing his unique place above the angels.
In light of these significant anthropological transitions leading Jewish mediatorial lore into the new era of its evolution, a brief look at another portentous theological account of the divine humanity, also written in the first century CE, might provide additional illuminating insights. Narrating Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness the Gospel of Matthew unveils the following tradition:
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them; and he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down (pesw_n) and worship me.” Then Jesus said to him, “Begone, Satan! for it is written, `You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’” Then the devil left him, and behold, angels came and ministered (dihko&noun) to him. (Matt 4:8-11. RSV).
It has been previously noticed that this passage where the Devil tempts Jesus by asking him to fall down (pesw_n) and worship the demon appears to be alluding also to the Adamic account of the fall of Satan who once refused to venerate the Protoplast.83 The ancient enemy of humankind appears to be trying to take revenge for his protological mishap involving the First Adam by asking now for the veneration and worship from the Last Adam – Christ. Yet, Jesus refuses to follow this demonic trap, and after he rejects Satan’s proposal – the motif of angelic worship is then invoked again, this time directly and unambiguously in the text. Matt 4:11 tells its readers that after the temptation was over, angels came to worship Jesus.84
Here, similar to the possibly contemporaneous tradition found in the Slavonic apocalypse, the motif of angelic worship hints at the new divine status of a human character and helps to understand the anthropological paradigm shift which is leading the restored humankind back into the new, but once before lost, abode of its divine existence85 – the dimension in which a long time ago humanity was exalted above the angels humbly venerated by them.
When Did Angels Become Demons?
According to familiar Christian mythology, demons are or were fallen angels. Satan was an angel who rebelled against God and was cast out of heaven. Other angels rebelled along with him and became his minions. These fallen angels became demons. The mythology also assumes that “demon” refers to the same being as “evil (or unclean or polluted) spirit.”1 Contrary to what may be common assumptions, this mythology was not shared by most ancient Jews, including those who wrote and translated the Hebrew Bible, most writers of ancient noncanonical Jewish texts, and Jews in general before the rise of Christianity. Moreover, that myth, in its complete form, is not found in the NT, though separate aspects of it may be discerned there. The Christian myth that equated fallen angels with demons arose in the second and third centuries c.e. It was an invention of late ancient Christian writers. From a historical point of view, therefore, we should not retroject the equation of demons with fallen angels back into the minds of NT writers. Angels became demons only beginning in the second century and only then at the hands of Christians.
The term “demon” is often used to refer to any and all malevolent superhuman (or supernatural) beings.2 Thus, all sorts of beings from the Hebrew Bible, ancient Judaism, and the ancient Near East-evil angels, various “disease demons,” Lilith, impure “spirits,” and many more-are lumped together as “demonic beings.” For this article, I do not include every nonhuman, intelligent evil being from any culture or any language in my category “demon.” I ask rather, When did what the ancient Jews called “angels” (Myk)lm) become identified with what the ancient Greeks called … or …? When later Christians asserted that the evil or fallen angels they inherited from Judaism were to be identified with ????????, they were not choosing merely a generic word for evil beings. They were equating the fallen angels of contemporary Judaism with those beings the Greeks worshiped as gods or demigods. They were making a new identification between two species derived from two separate cultures. That identification should not be reprojected into the minds of the NT writers.
1 Slav. Григори(ы) (Gk. e)grh&goroi). Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 16.
2 Slav. Сатанаил. Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 16.
3 Orlov, The Enoch-Metatron Tradition, 211-252; idem, “‘Without Measure and Without Analogy’: The Tradition of the Divine Body in 2 (Slavonic) Enoch,” in A. Orlov, From Apocalypticism to Merkabah Mysticism: Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha (JSJSup., 114; Leiden: Brill, 2007) 149-174; idem, “On the Polemical Nature of 2 (Slavonic) Enoch: A Reply to C. Böttrich,” in Orlov, From Apocalypticism to Merkabah Mysticism: Studies in the Slavonic Pseudepigrapha, 239-268.
4 2 Enoch 30:8-32:2; 33:10; 41:1; 42:5; 44:1; 58:1-3; 71:28.
5 Kelley Coblentz Bautch notes that “the portrayal of the [first] couple is softened in the Book of the Watchers; like ‘the holy ones’ mentioned in 1 En 32:3, they eat from the tree and are made wise (cf. Gen 3:6). No references are made to the serpent, deception, the reproach of God, and additional punishments that figure prominently in the Genesis account. In a text concerned with judgment and accountability, Adam and Eve do not appear as actors in the eschatological drama … the Animal Apocalypse from the Book of Dream Visions seems even more favorable in its depiction of the first couple. The Animal Apocalypse opts to recast exclusively events familiar from Gen 2 and 4…. [it] does not offer a recitation of the fall in the garden. There is no tree, forbidden or otherwise, no illicit gain of knowledge, no expulsion from Eden, and no recapitulation of any part of Gen 3….” K. Coblentz Bautch, “Adamic traditions in the Parables? A Query on 1 Enoch 69:6,” in: Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables (ed. G. Boccaccini; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007) 352-360 at 353-4.
6 In this respect Bautch observes that “… discussion of the Enochic corpus frequently takes up the literature’s distinctive view of evil. As is commonly asserted, Enochic texts posit that evil originates with the rebellious watchers who descend to earth: their prohibited union with women and teaching of forbidden arts lead to the contamination of the human sphere (for example, 1 En 6-11). This observation has led contemporary scholars to delineate two contrasting trends within Second Temple Judaism: one rooted in early Enochic texts like the Book of the Watchers where evil develops as a result of the angels’ sin, and the other that understands sin to be the consequence of human failings (e.g., Gen 3).” K. Coblentz Bautch, “Adamic traditions in the Parables? A Query on 1 Enoch 69:6,” in: Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables (ed. G. Boccaccini; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007) 352-360 at 354-5. On the subject of two mythologies of evil see also J. Reeves, Sefer ‘Uzza Wa-’Aza(z)el: Exploring Early Jewish Mythologies of Evil (forthcoming); M. Stone, “The Axis of History at Qumran,” Pseudepigraphic Perspectives: The Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (eds. E. Chazon and M. E. Stone; STDJ, 31; Leiden: Brill, 1999) 133-49 at 144-49.
7 John Reeves in his forthcoming research on the early Jewish mythologies of evil provides a helpful description of the main tenets of the Enochic paradigm of the origin of evil (or what he calls the “Enochic Template”). According to this template: “evil first enters the created world through the voluntary descent and subsequent corruption of a group of angels known as the Watchers. Their sexual contact with human women renders them odious to God and their former angelic colleagues in heaven; moreover, they also betray certain divine secrets to their lovers and families. The offspring of the Watchers and mortal women, an illegitimately conceived race of bloodthirsty ‘giants,’ wreak havoc on earth and force God to intervene forcefully with the universal Flood. The corrupt angels are captured and imprisoned, their monstrous children are slain, and humanity is renewed through the family of Noah. Noticeably absent from this particular scheme are references to Adam and Eve, the garden of Eden, or the serpent….” Reeves, Sefer ‘Uzza Wa-’Aza(z)el: Exploring Early Jewish Mythologies of Evil (forthcoming).
8 Reeves provides the description of the main features of what he called the “Adamic Template,” noticing the following crucial points: “(1) God resolves to create the first human being, Adam; (2) after Adam’s creation, all the angels in heaven are bidden to worship him; (3) a small group of angels led by Satan refuse to do so; (4) as a result, this group is forcibly expelled from heaven to earth; and (5) in order to exact revenge, these angels plot to lead Adam and subsequent generations of humans astray….” Reeves, Sefer ‘Uzza Wa-’Aza(z)el: Exploring Early Jewish Mythologies of Evil (forthcoming).
9 Orlov, The Enoch-Metatron Tradition, 211-214.
10 On the tradition of Enoch as the second Adam, see P. Alexander, “From Son of Adam to a Second God: Transformation of the Biblical Enoch,” in: Biblical Figures Outside the Bible (eds. M.E. Stone and T.A. Bergren; Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998) 102-104; M. Idel, “Enoch is Metatron,” Immanuel 24/25 (1990) 220-240.
11 Reeves detects the presence of the so-called “mixed template” that combines features of Adamic and Enochic “mythologies of evil” already in the Book of Jubilees. Reeves, Sefer ‘Uzza Wa-’Aza(z)el: Exploring Early Jewish Mythologies of Evil (forthcoming).
12 Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.112-114. The shorter recension of 2 Enoch 7 has the following form: “And those men took me up to the second heaven. And they set me down on the second heaven. And they showed me prisoners under guard, in measureless judgment. And there I saw the condemned angels, weeping. And I said to the men who were with me, ‘Why are they tormented?’ The men answered me, ‘They are evil rebels against the Lord, who did not listen to the voice of the Lord, but they consulted their own will.’ And I felt sorry for them. The angels bowed down to me. They said, ‘Man of God, please pray for us to the Lord!’ And I answered them and said, ‘Who am I, a mortal man, that I should pray for angels? And who knows where I am going or what will confront me? Or who will pray for me?’” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.113-115.
13 A. Rubinstein observes that “… there is evidence that the Slavonic Enoch is dependent on some features which are known only from the Ethiopic Enoch only. There can be little doubt that the Slavonic Enoch has a good deal in common with the Ethiopic Enoch, though the differences between the two are no less striking.” A. Rubinstein, “Observation on the Slavonic Book of Enoch,” JJS 13 (1962) 6.
14 J. Reeves, “Jewish Pseudepigrapha in Manichaean Literature: The Influence of the Enochic Library,” in: Tracing the Treads: Studies in the Vitality of Jewish Pseudepigrapha (ed. J.C. Reeves; EJL, 6; Atlanta: Scholars, 1994) 185.
15 J. VanderKam, Enoch: A Man for All Generations (Columbia: South Carolina, 1995) 159.
16 The longer recension of 2 Enoch 18:4 reads: “And they broke the promise on the shoulder of Mount Ermon.” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.132.
17 “… identity [of the imprisoned angels] as rebellious Watchers is further underscored by the petition they press upon Enoch ….” Reeves, “Jewish Pseudepigrapha in Manichaean Literature: The Influence of the Enochic Library,” 185.
18 This connection was also mentioned by Robert Henry Charles who noticed that “the angels ask Enoch to intercede for them, as in 1 En. xiii.4,” The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (2 vols.; ed. R.H. Charles; Oxford: Clarendon, 1913) 2.433, note 4.
19 “And they asked me to write out for them the record of a petition that they might receive forgiveness and to take the record of their petition up to the Lord in heaven.” Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.93.
20 “And then I wrote out the record of their petition and their supplication in regard to their spirits and the deeds of each one of them, and in regard to what they asked, (namely) that they should obtain absolution and forbearance. And I went and sat down by the waters of Dan in Dan which is south-west of Hermon and I read out the record of their petition until I fell asleep.” Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.93-94.
21 Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 16.
22 George Nickelsburg notices that the division of the fallen angels into two groups is also reminiscent of some early Enochic developments attested already in 1 Enoch. He observes that “in his description of the rebel angels the seer distinguishes between two groups, as does 1 Enoch: the egregoroi (‘watchers’), who sinned with the women (2 Enoch 18); and their ‘brethren’ (18:7), called ‘apostates’ (chap. 7), who may correspond to the angels as revealers.” G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah (2nd ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005) 222.
23 Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 6.
24 Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 16.
25 “their prince = Satanail, xviii, 3,” R. H. Charles, APOT, 2.433, note 3.
26 Orlov, The Enoch-Metatron Tradition, 221-222.
27 The motif of the prostration of angelic beings, including the Watchers, before the seventh antediluvian hero is unknown in the early Enochic circle reflected in 1 Enoch. A possible reference to another tradition of prostration – the theme of the giants bowing down before the patriarch might be reflected in the Book of Giants [4Q203 Frag. 4:6]: “they bowed down and wept in front [of Enoch …].” F. García Martínez and Eibert J.C. Tigchelaar (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (2 vols.; Leiden; New York; Köln: Brill, 1997) 1.409. Although the passage is extant in a very fragmentary form and the name of Enoch is not mentioned, Józef Tadeusz Milik, Siegbert Uhlig, and Florentino García Martínez have suggested that the figure before whom the giants prostrate themselves is none other than Enoch himself. For the discussion of this tradition see L. Stuckenbruck, The Book of Giants from Qumran: Texts, Translation, and Commentary (TSAJ, 63; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1997) 75-76.
28 The account of Adam’s elevation and his veneration by angels is found in Armenian, Georgian, and Latin versions of the Life of Adam and Eve 13-15. These versions depict God’s creation of Adam in his image. The first man was then brought before God’s face by the archangel Michael to bow down to God. God commanded all the angels to bow down to Adam. All the angels agreed to venerate the protoplast, except Satan (and his angels) who refused to bow down before Adam, because the first human was “younger” (“posterior”) to Satan.
29 The Slavonic version of 3 Baruch 4; Gospel of Bartholomew 4, Coptic Enthronement of Michael, Cave of Treasures 2:10-24, and Qur’an 2:31-39; 7:11-18; 15:31-48; 17:61-65; 18:50; 20:116-123; 38:71-85. The traces of the motif of veneration seem also present in the Temptation narrative of the Gospel of Matthew, where Satan asks Jesus to prostrate himself before Satan.
30 Annette Reed suggested that the tradition about Uzza, Azza, and Azael is “reflecting direct knowledge of the account of the fall of the angels in 1 Enoch 6-11.” A.Y. Reed, “From Asael and Šemihazah to Uzzah, Azzah, and Azael: 3 Enoch 5 (§§7-8) and Jewish Reception-History of 1 Enoch,” Jewish Studies Quarterly 8 (2001) 110.
31 On the tradition of the veneration of humanity in rabbinic literature see A. Altmann, “The Gnostic Background of the Rabbinic Adam Legends,” JQR 35 (1945) 371–391; B. Barc, “La taille cosmique d’Adam dans la littérature juive rabbinique des trois premiers siècles apres J.-C.,” RSR 49 (1975) 173–85; J. Fossum, “The Adorable Adam of the Mystics and the Rebuttals of the Rabbis,” Geschichte-Tradition-Reflexion. Festschrift für Martin Hengel zum 70. Geburtstag (2 vols; eds. H. Cancik, H. Lichtenberger and P. Schäfer; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1996) 1.529–39; G. Quispel, “Der gnostische Anthropos und die jüdische Tradition,” Eranos Jahrbuch 22 (1953) 195–234; idem, “Ezekiel 1:26 in Jewish Mysticism and Gnosis,” VC 34 (1980) 1–13; A. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism (SJLA, 25; Leiden: Brill, 1977) 108–115.
32 Commenting on 3 Enoch 4, Gary Anderson suggests that if “we remove those layers of the tradition that are clearly secondary … we are left with a story that is almost identical to the analog we have traced in the Adam and Eve literature…” G. Anderson, “The Exaltation of Adam and the Fall of Satan” in: Literature on Adam and Eve. Collected Essays (eds. G. Anderson, M. Stone, J. Tromp; SVTP, 15; Brill: Leiden, 2000) 107. He further notes that the acclamation of Enoch as the “Youth” in Sefer Hekhalot is pertinent since the reason 3 Enoch supplies for this title is deceptively simple and straightforward: “Because I am young in their company and a mere youth among them in days and months and years – therefore they call me ‘Youth.’” Anderson proposes that the title might have Adamic origins since the explanation for the epithet “Youth” recalls the reason for the angelic refusal to worship Adam in the Vita on the basis of his inferiority to them by way of his age. Anderson, “The Exaltation of Adam and the Fall of Satan,” 108.
33 Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.136, 1.138.
34 M.E. Stone, “The Fall of Satan and Adam’s Penance: Three Notes on the Books of Adam and Eve” in: Literature on Adam and Eve. Collected Essays (eds. G. Anderson, M. Stone, J. Tromp; SVTP, 15; Brill: Leiden, 2000) 47-48.
35 W. R. Morfill and R. H. Charles, The Book of the Secrets of Enoch (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1896) 28.
36 Stone, “The Fall of Satan and Adam’s Penance: Three Notes on the Books of Adam and Eve,” 47-48.
37 Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.130-132. The shorter recension of 2 Enoch 18 has the following form: “And the men picked me up from there and carried me away to the fifth heaven. And I saw there many armies and Grigori. And their appearance was like the appearance of a human being, and their size was larger than that of large giants. And their faces were dejected, and the silence of their mouths …. And there was no liturgy taking place in the fifth heaven. And I said to the men who were with me, ‘Forwhat reason are they so dejected, and their faces miserable, and their mouths silent? And why is there no liturgy in this heaven?’ And the men answered me, ‘These are the Grigori, 200 princes of whom turned aside, 200 walking in their train, and they descended to the earth, and they broke the promise on the shoulder of Mount Hermon, to defile themselves with human wives. And, when they defile themselves, the Lord condemned them. And these ones mourn for their brothers and for the outrage which has happened.’ But I, I said to the Grigori, ‘I, I have seen your brothers and I have understood their accomplishments and I knew their prayers; and I have prayed for them. And now the Lord has sentenced them under the earth until heaven and earth are ended. But why are you waiting for your brothers? And why don’t you perform the liturgy before the face of the Lord? Start up the former liturgy. Perform the liturgy in the name of fire, lest you annoy the Lord your God (so that) he throws you down from this place.’ And they heeded the earnestness of my recommendation, and they stood in four regiments in heaven. And behold, while I was standing, they sounded with 4 trumpets in unison, and the Grigori began to perform the liturgy as with one voice. And their voices rose up into the Lord’s presence.” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.131-133.
38 Robert Henry Charles was the first scholar who clarified the terminological background of the Slavonic word “Grigori.” He observed that “these are the Watchers, the e)grh&goroi, or Myry(, of whom we have so full accounts in 1 En. vi-xvi, xix, lxxxvi.” Charles, APOT, 2.439.
39 J. VanderKam, Enoch: A Man for All Generations (Columbia: South Carolina, 1995) 159. It is intriguing that the authors of the Slavonic translation of 2 Enoch choose to keep this word in its Greek phonetical form, possibly envisioning it as a technical term.
40 Some mss of 2 Enoch speak about 200 descended Watchers, others about 200 myriads of descended Watchers. Cf. the shorter recension of 2 Enoch 18:3 “These are the Grigori, 200 princes of whom turned aside, 200 walking in their train ….” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.131.
41 1 Enoch 6:6 “And they were in all two hundred, and they came down on Ardis which is the summit of Mount Hermon.” Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.67-69.
42 Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 16.
43 1 Enoch 6:3-5 “And Semyaza, who was their leader, said to them: ‘I fear that you may not wish this deed to be done, and (that) I alone will pay for this great sin.’ And they all answered him and said: ‘Let us all swear an oath, and bind one another with curses not to alter this plan, but to carry out this plan effectively.’ Then they all swore together and all bound one another with curses to it.” Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.67-69.
44 1 Enoch 7:1-6 “And they took wives for themselves, and everyone chose for himself one each. And they began to go in to them and were promiscuous with them. …. And they became pregnant and bore large giants, and their height (was) three thousand cubits. These devoured all the toil of men, until men were unable to sustain them. And the giants turned against them in order to devour men. And they began to sin against birds, against animals, and against reptiles and against fish, and they devoured one another’s flesh and drank the blood from it. Then the earth complained about the lawless ones.” Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.76-79.
45 Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 16.
46 Francis Andersen points to the fact that even though the phrase “under the earth” is not found in some manuscripts of the shorter recension (V and N) its “genuineness cannot be doubted.” He further acknowledges that the phrase “simply does not fit the cosmography of the rest of the book, and even contradicts this very ch. , which locates the other fallen angels in the second heaven….” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.132.
47 A. Rubinstein, “Observation on the Slavonic Book of Enoch,” JJS 15 (1962) 7-10; Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.114; Reeves, “Jewish Pseudepigrapha in Manichaean Literature,” 185; VanderKam, Enoch: A Man for All Generations, 159.
48 Reeves, “Jewish Pseudepigrapha in Manichaean Literature: The Influence of the Enochic Library,” 185.
49 Martha Himmelfarb suggests that “… in 2 Enoch the ascent is clearly a reworking of the ascent in the Book of the Watchers in combination with the tour to the ends of the earth….” M. Himmelfarb, “Revelation and Rapture: The Transformation of the Visionary in the Ascent Apocalypses,” in: Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium (eds. J.J. Collins and J.H. Charlesworth; JSPSS, 9; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991) 82. Cf. also G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah (2nd ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005) 221-223.
50 Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.112.
51 Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.112.
52 Rendering of the name of the chief negative protagonist of the Adamic tradition here not as Satan but as Satan-ail (el), with a theophoric angelic ending, appears to underline his original angelic status. In this context the change of the name to Satan (Slav. Сотона) and removing the theophoric ending signifies the expelling from the angelic rank, a tradition hinted in the longer recension of 2 Enoch 31: “Adam – Mother; earthly and life. And I created a garden in Edem, in the east, so that he might keep the agreement and preserve the commandment. And I created for him an open heaven, so that he might look upon the angels, singing the triumphal song. And the light which is never darkened was perpetually in paradise. And the devil understood how I wished to create another world, so that everything could be subjected to Adam on the earth, to rule and reign over it. The devil is of the lowest places. And he will become a demon, because he fled from heaven; Sotona, because his name was Satanail. In this way he became different from the angels. His nature did not change, but his thought did, since his consciousness of righteous and sinful things changed. And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam. In such a form he entered paradise, and corrupted Eve. But Adam he did not contact. But on account of her nescience I cursed him. But those whom I had blessed previously, them I did not curse; and those whom I had not blessed previously, even them I did not curse – neither mankind I cursed, nor the earth, nor any other creature, but only mankind’s evil fruit-bearing. This is why the fruit of doing good is sweat and exertion.” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.152-154.
53 Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 16.
54 Robert Henry Charles underlines the peculiarity of the Satan terminology to this section of 1 Enoch. R.H. Charles, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1912) 66.
55 Daniel Olson observes that “the author [of the Similitudes] could have deduced the existence of ‘satans’ as the class of malevolent angels from passages like Numbers 22, where the Angel of the Lord is twice described as coming, literally, ‘as a satan’ to block Balaam’s progress (vv 22, 32).” D. Olson, Enoch: A New Translation (North Richland Hills: Bibal, 2004) 80.
56 Matthew Black argues that in this passage “the satans are a special class of angels” that “have been identified with the ‘angels of punishment.’” M. Black, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch (SVTP, 7; Leiden: Brill, 1985) 200.
57 Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.128. See also 1 Enoch 41:9; 53:3; 65:6. The Satan tradition might also be indirectly present in 1 Enoch 69:6, the passage which describes an angelic leader Gadre’el who is credited there with leading Eve astray. On this tradition see D. Olson, Enoch: A New Translation (North Richland Hills: Bibal, 2004), 126; K. Coblentz Bautch, “Adamic traditions in the Parables? A Query on 1 Enoch 69:6,” in: Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables (ed. G. Boccaccini; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007) 352-360.
58 Matthew Black observes that “the idea that the watchers were the subjects of Satan is peculiar to the Parables, reflecting a later demonology….” M. Black, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch (SVTP, 7; Leiden: Brill, 1985) 219.
59 Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.138.
60 Daniel Olson notes that “… Satan the individual is mentioned once in the ‘parables’ (54:6), so it would appear that both the generic and the titular use are employed in this book, but caution is in order because ‘satans’ in Ethiopic can simply mean ‘the hosts of Satan’ and need not imply a wholly distinct category of evil spirits.” D. Olson, Enoch: A New Translation (North Richland Hills: Bibal, 2004) 80.
61 The Book of the Similitudes endows the seventh antediluvian patriarch with several roles and titles previously unknown in the early Enochic lore, such as “righteous one,” “anointed one,” “chosen one,” and “son of man.” One cannot fail to recognize that in contrast to other designations of Enoch found in the early Enochic materials, the titles from the Book of the Similitudes exhibit strong roots and connections with the motifs and themes found in the Bible, particularly in the Book of Isaiah, Psalm 2, and the Book of Daniel. Scholars have therefore proposed that these titles might be shaped by familiar biblical characters, such as the Servant of the Lord found in Deutero-Isaiah and the Son of Man found in Daniel 7. On the titles of Enoch in the Book of the Similitudes and their biblical roots see J. VanderKam, “Righteous One, Messiah, Chosen One, and Son of Man in 1 Enoch 37–71,” in: The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity. The First Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins (eds. J. H. Charlesworth et al.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992) 169–70.
62 2 Enoch 29:1-6: “And for all my own heavens I shaped a shape from the fiery substance. My eye looked at the solid and very hard rock. And from the flash of my eye I took the marvelous substance of lightning, both fire in water and water in fire; neither does this one extinguish that one, nor does that one dry out this one. That is why lightning is sharper and brighter than the shining of the sun, and softer than water, more solid than the hardest rock. And from the rock I cut off a great fire, and from the fire I created the ranks of the bodiless armies – the myriad angels – and their weapons are fiery and their clothes are burning flames. And I gave orders that each should stand in his own rank. Here Satanail was hurled from the height, together with his angels. But one from the order of the archangels deviated, together with the division that was under his authority. He thought up the impossible idea, that he might place his throne higher than the clouds which are above the earth, and that he might become equal to my power. And I hurled him out from the height, together with his angels. And he was flying around in the air, ceaselessly above the Bottomless. And thus I created the entire heavens. And the third day came.” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.148.
63 Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 28.
64 1 Enoch 10:4-6: “And further the Lord said to Raphael: ‘Bind Azazel by his hands and his feet, and throw him in the darkness. And split open the desert which is in Dudael, and throw him there. And throw on him jagged and sharp stones, and cover him with darkness; and let him stay there for ever, and cover his face, that he may not see light, and that on the great day of judgment he may be hurled into the fire.” Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, 2.87-88.
65 The similar development might be detected also in the Book of the Similitudes, an Enochic text already mentioned in this study which too exhibits some connections with the Merkabah tradition.
66 Orlov, The Enoch-Metatron Tradition, 148-208.
67 For the background of the tradition about Uzza, Azza, and Azael, see A. Y. Reed, What the Fallen Angels Taught: The Reception-History of the Book of the Watchers in Judaism and Christianity (Ph. D. diss.; Princeton, 2002) 337ff; idem, Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity: The Reception of Enochic Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005) 252ff.
68 Alexander, “3 Enoch,” 1.258-59.
69 Anderson, “The Exaltation of Adam and the Fall of Satan,” 107.
70 Alexander, “3 Enoch,” 1.260.
71 b. Sanh. 38B, Midrash of Shemhazai and Azael 2, and Zohar III.207b–208a.
72 The motif of the three Watchers is also found in several Tafsirs on the Qur’an. For the original texts, translations and extensive discussion of these traditions see Ф.И. Абдуллаева, Персидская Кораническая экзегетика: Тексты, переводы, комментарии (С.-Петербург: Петербургское Востоковедение, 2000).
73 Alexander, “3 Enoch,” 1.303.
74 MS New York JTS 8128.
75 P. Schäfer, with M. Schlüter and H. G. von Mutius, Synopse zur Hekhaloth-Literatur (TSAJ, 2; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1981) 164.
76 M. Cohen, The Shicur Qomah: Texts and Recensions (TSAJ, 9; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1985) 162-4.
77 M. Cohen, The Shicur Qomah: Liturgy and Theurgy in Pre-Kabbalistic Jewish Mysticism (Lanham: University Press of America, 1983) 134.
78 Slav. служите. Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 17.
79 Slav. служби ваше. Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 17.
80 Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.132.
81 See Georgian LAE 14:1: “Then Michael came; he summoned all the troops of angels and told them, ‘Bow down before the likeness and the image of the divinity.’” Latin LAE 14:1: “Having gone forth Michael called all the angels saying: ‘Worship the image of the Lord God, just as the Lord God has commanded.’”
82 Thus, in 2 Enoch 24 God invites the seer to the place next to him, closer than that of Gabriel, in order to share with him the information that remains hidden even from the angels. The shorter recension of 2 Enoch 24 puts even greater emphasis on the unique nature of this offer; in this recension God places the patriarch “to the left of himself, closer than Gabriel (Slav. Ближе Гаврила).” Andersen, “2 Enoch,” 1.143; Sokolov, “Материалы и заметки по старинной славянской литературе,” 90 (Ms. B), 117 (Ms. U). Crispin Fletcher-Louis writes that the fact that in 2 Enoch the seer is seated next to God “suggests some contact with the rabbinic Enoch/Metatron tradition.” C.H.T. Fletcher-Louis, Luke-Acts: Angels, Christology and Soteriology (WUNT, 2/94; Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1997) 154. Michael Mach also suggests that this motif is closely connected with the Metatron imagery. He notes that “the exaltation to a rank higher than that of the angels as well as the seating at God’s side have their parallels and considerable development in Enoch’s/Metatron’s transformation and enthronement as depicted in 3 Enoch.” M. Mach, “From Apocalypticism to Early Jewish Mysticism?” in: The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism (3 vols.; ed. J.J. Collins; New York: Continuum, 1998) 1.229–264 at 251.
83 On the Adamic background of the Temptation narrative in Matthew and Luke see J.A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke (2 vols.; AB, 28, 28A; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1981) 1.512.
84 A significant number of scholars believe that Matthew reflects the original order of the threefold temptation story, and that Luke represents the inversion of this original order.
85 Cf. Armenian LAE 14:1: “Then Michael summoned all the angels and God said to them, ‘Come, bow down to god whom I made.’”