Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T12:14:00.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intermediaries in Jewish Theology: Memra, Shekinah, Metatron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

George Foot Moore
George Foot Moore
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Christian interpretation of the Old Testament was early set upon finding in it a figure corresponding to the Son, or the Word (Logos), in the New Testament, a divine being, intermediary between God the Father and the world in creation, revelation, and redemption. For Christian theology, with its philosophical presumptions, a God who visibly and audibly manifested himself to men in human form and action was necessarily such a being; the Supreme God, in his supramundane exaltation or his metaphysical transcendence, could not be imagined thus immediately to intervene in mundane affairs. In this assumption and to a considerable extent in their particular interpretations the Fathers had a precursor in the Jewish theologian Philo.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , January 1922 , pp. 41 - 85
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1922

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I. Memra

1 The Targums were generally supposed to represent a traditional exegesis older than the Christian era.

2 For a single example, M. Kähler, ‘Christologie, Schriftlehre,’ Protestantische Real-Encyclopaedie, S ed. iv, 7: Eigenttimlich ist dem nachkanonischen Judentum die Umsetzung der anschaulichen Ausdriicke fur das-Walten Gottes in der Welt, namentlich auch seines offenbarenden Wirkens, in gewissermassen selbstständige Werkzeuge Gottes; das schöpferische und offenbarende Wort wird im Memra hypostasiert, die Gnadengegenwart Gottes bei seinem Volk in der Schechina; dazu kommt bei den Rabbinea noch der Metatron; alle diese Mittelwesen gleichen den Engeln und sind, wie auch der Geist Gottes, geschaffen.

3 ‘Christian Writers on Judaism,’ Vol. XIV (1921), pp. 227, 233, and elsewhereGoogle Scholar.

4 See Ginzberg, L., ‘Anthropomorphism,’ Jewish Encyclopedia I, 621–625Google Scholar, and the literature there noted.

5 Moreh Nebukim, Part i, cc. 27–28.

6 Nor created ad hoc. All miraculous events that occur at a given moment of time seemingly at variance with the order of nature were really constituted part of that order at the creation of the world. ‘The Eight Chapters,’ c. 8 (ed. J. I. Gorfinkle, New York, 1912, p. 46, and ibid, translation, pp. 90 f., with the references there given in a note); Maimonides, Commentary on Mishnah, Aboth 5, 6; Moreh, Part ii, c. 29. Cf. Munk, Le Guide des Egarés,. I, p. 296 n.

7 For brevity and simplicity I have restricted myself to examples from Onkelos and the Targums on the Prophets, which had an authority not conceded to the rest. Whatever peculiarities the Palestinian Targums present,. Ginsburger's investigation proves that in them also there is no personification of memra or shekinta, to say nothing of ‘hypostasis.’ In the transliteration of Hebrew and Aramaic I have not marked the quantity of the vowels. Readers who know the language do not need this assistance any more than: in Latin; those who do not will be none the wiser for it.

8 ‘In the Targums anthropomorphic expressions are put aside altogether.’ Oesterley and Box, Religion and Worship of the Synagogue, p. 153.

9 In translating from the Targums, I employ ‘Y.’ where they have the customary abbreviation for the name.

10 Milla sometimes stands in the Palestinian Targums where Onkelos. has pitgama. The variation has no significance.

11 ‘The memra of Y. said,’ and the like, occurs only in Palestinian Targums, and apparently with especial frequency in the Fragmentary Targum. See Ginsburger, p. 267f.

12 See below, p. 54.

13 מרה אח פי יהוה. English versions often, ‘rebel against the commandment of the Lord.’

14 See also 1 Sam. 12, 14, 15; 1 Kings 13, 21, 26, etc.

15 עכר אח פי יהוה.

16 Num. 22, 18; 24, 13; 1 Sam. 15, 24, etc. For the expression cf. the Targum on Isa. 40, 5; 58, 14, ‘for by the edict (memra) of Y. it is thus decreed’ (gezir ken). See also Num. 14, 35.

17 מעל, רכר כ׳, מאם.

18 Compare the shifts of the Greek and Latin versions in Exod. 3, 18 and 5, 3. They translate קרא, ‘call.’

19 From motives of reverence Onkelos uses this verb for the oath of God; when men swear he employs the usual Aramaic verb.

20 כמערך, with a buffer preposition.

21 See also Gen. 21, 22, 23; 26, 28; 28, 20; 31, 5, 42; 39, 21, 23, etc.

22 A more drastic figure is similarly paraphrased in Ezek. 16, 8, ‘I spread my skirt over thee’; Targum, ‘I extended protection by my word (memri) over thee.’

23 Edited by M. Ginsburger, Pseudo-Jonathan … nach der Londoner Handschrift (Brit. Mus. add. 27,031). Berlin, 1903.

24 It is to be observed that memra does not occur without a genitive — ‘the word of the Lord,’ ‘my word,’ etc., or a circumlocution for the genitive, ‘a memar from before the Lord.’ ‘The Memra,’ ‘the Word,’ is not found in the Targums, notwithstanding all that is written about it by authors who have not read them.

25 The commonest—and in many phrases awkwardest—of these is קרם, ‘before, in front of.’ For examples see Ginsburger, pp. 278–280, or the Lexicons.

26 For this reason alone the attempt to elucidate memra by the dibbur of the Midrash is out of place, even if the usage of dibbur were not misstated.

27 Consequently, the theory that derives the Logos-Word of John 1, 1–5 straight from the Palestinian memra is fallacious.

28 Yekar is elsewhere the ordinary translation of the Hebrew kabod, in Greek δόξα.

29 For other examples, see Maybaum, p. 49 f, Ginsburger, p. 277 f. In similar cases Onkelos sometimes has memra, sometimes shekinta.

30 Bar. Sukkah 5a (top); cf. Mekilta on Exod. 19, 20 (ed. Friedmann f. 65b).

31 Bereshit Rabbah 19, 7 and parallels.

32 Aboth de-R. Nathan 34, 5.

33 Exod. 29, 34 f., 1 Kings 8, 10 f., cf. Isa. 6, 1–4.

34 Sanhedrin 39a.

35 Pesikta ed. Buber, Shemini Asereth, f. 193a-b; Pesikta Rabbathi ed. Friedmann (Supplement), f. 202b. For the exegetical derivation see the editors’ notes, and Bacher, Agada der paläst. Amoräer LT, 220 f. n. To the same homilist Song of Songs 2, 8 f. suggests God's springing from synagogue to synagogue and from school to school to bless the Israelites (Pesikta Rabbathi, f. 72a; less complete text, Pesikta ed. Buber f. 48b).

36 אלהים נצכ כערח אל. In the first deduction ערח אל is taken in the sense of מוערי אל in Psalm 74, 8; the second takes ערח as ‘congregation,’ which consists of at least ten men (general rule based on Num. 14, 27). See Bacher, Agada der paläst. Amoräer II, 221.

37 Berakot 6a. On Exod. 20, 21 cf. Onkelos, ‘In every place where I make my presence (shekinti) to rest, thither will I send my blessing unto thee and will bless thee.’