4

Could someone explain me the meaning of יקוק קטן as a reference to the Metatron? Why is the Metatron ‘described/entitled this way? I’ve found many writing about this online quoting Sanhedrin 38b, Yevamot 16b, Zohar and other sources. But I’m not sure if these are reliable.

msh210
  • 73,729
  • 12
  • 120
  • 359
Y.Talmid
  • 721
  • 3
  • 6
  • See also Exodus 7:1. –  Sep 22 '20 at 15:48
  • @Lucian not the same there Moshe is made elohim to pharaoh, elohim can also refer to judges, people with a certain power. While the metatron is refered to with the fourlettername, HaShem. – Y.Talmid Sep 22 '20 at 17:44
  • Not the same, but definitely similar, one idea giving rise to the other, differences notwithstanding. –  Sep 22 '20 at 17:52

1 Answers1

2

This concept derives from this text in T'hillim:

תְּחַסְּרֵהוּ מְּעַט, מֵאֱלֹהִים

So the article 'METATRON' in Jewish Encyclopedia:

'The Zohar defines his nature exactly by declaring that he is little lower than God (after Ps. viii. 6; Yalḳ. Ḥadash, 7, No. 51).'

Though the Targum translates מֵאֱלֹהִים in T'hillim 8:6 as 'angels,' Aquila translates this as theos ('God').

The title you mention comes from 3 Enoch 12.5. Enoch says in 4.3 that he had been taken from earth to heaven, and in 12.5 he narrates the giving of the title to him.

God clothes Metatron in a garment of glory, puts a royal crown on his head and calls him "the Lesser YHWH"

R. Ishmael said: Metatron, the Prince of the Presence, said to me:

(1) By reason of the love with which the Holy One, blessed be He, loved me more than all the

children of heaven. He made me a garment of glory on which were fixed all kinds of lights, and He

clad me in it.

(2)And He made me a robe of honour on which were fixed all kinds of beauty, splendour, brilliance

and majesty.

(3) And he made me a royal crown in which were fixed forty-nine costly stones like unto the light of the globe of the sun.

(4) For its splendour went forth in the four quarters of the Araboth Raqia', and in (through) the seven heavens, and in the four quarters of the world. And he put it on my head.

(5) And He called me THE LESSER YHWH in the presence of all His heavenly household; as it is written (Ex. xxiii. 21): "For my name is in him".

Clifford Durousseau
  • 1,804
  • 10
  • 26
  • So it’s a description of the position of Metatron rather as a description of the nature/essence of Metatron? – Y.Talmid Mar 24 '19 at 07:43
  • @ Y. Talmid. Metatron is another name for Enoch. Enoch was a man. – Clifford Durousseau Mar 24 '19 at 09:36
  • One version of the myth says that Metatron was created by G-d as a high-level angel with many responsibilities. A second myth claims that Metatron was originally a human named Enoch, a man who ascended to heaven a few times and was eventually transformed into a powerful angel. Although Enoch is identified with the chief angel/emmisary/mesenger Metatron, what do you mean when stating ‘he was a man’, what do you imply with these words? If Metatron stil exost he isn’t human right? – Y.Talmid Mar 24 '19 at 13:13
  • Although the connection of Metatron and Enoch is assumed by some of the Kabbalists the identification of Metatron with Enoch isnot found in Talmudic scriptures, nor the Zohar. It seems only because ofcertain words and verses from the book of Enoch people assumed it. – Y.Talmid Mar 24 '19 at 13:56
  • 1
    @Y.Talmid It’s not explicitly in the Talmud, true, but it is in Midrash Alpha Beta of R’ Akiva (Nusach 1, §17), Yalkut Shimoni (Nach 452:12), and Pesikta Chadesa (§35), and Tosfos cite this tradition in their comments to Yevamos 16b (DH passuk), as well as Rashba in his comments to Bava Basra 121b (DH Achiyah). It’s not true that it’s not in the Zohar, as it indeed appears in I:27a and three times in III:188b-189a. – DonielF Mar 24 '19 at 14:33
  • @DonielF good references, but I noticed, looking at the ‘origins of Metatron’, the identification of Metatron with Enoch is not explicitly made at all. Ofcourse there are some commentaries and arguments made why Enoch is identified with Metatron, but there are also some who shed a different light on it all. I wonder if Metatron isn’t a concept, title or state of being rather as a being on it’s own. – Y.Talmid Mar 27 '19 at 09:34
  • @Y.Talmid What is not explicit about “Chanoch, he is Metatron”?! I’m hesitant to take Metatron metaphorically, as many of the places he’s mentioned in the Gemara don’t lend themselves to being metaphorical. Certainly the concept of angels isn’t to be taken metaphorically. (I know Pseudo-Yonasan isn’t really a source, but he quotes this Midrash, too, for what it’s worth.) – DonielF Mar 27 '19 at 11:07
  • @DonielF You misunderstood me, Michael is a name, while angel is a term to define what Michael is. So my question was if the same could apply to ‘Metatron’. Regards Chanoch, that’s an interpretation, which you quote. – Y.Talmid Mar 27 '19 at 14:53
  • @Y.Talmid I’m still not following. There is an angel, and his name is Michael. There’s another angel, and his name is Metatron. Previously, Metatron was a human named Chanoch. What’s the problem? – DonielF Mar 27 '19 at 14:54
  • @DonielF first one has to ask from where it’s derived that Metatron exist? One should be able to present well- argued arguments in order to come to the conclusion Metatron exist. From there on one could ask what or whom Metatron is (and why it can’t be something else). The point I want to make is that after answering the first question it seems all interpretative afterwards (interpretations build upon interpretations and so on). Do the oldest sources known to us indeed state Chanoch was the Metatron? Or was this an interpretation afterwards? – Y.Talmid Mar 27 '19 at 17:17
  • @Y.Talmid “Oldest sources known to us” is a tricky term to define, by the very nature of Torah SheBa’al Peh. If the Zohar was indeed written by Rashbi, that makes that a pretty solid source that they are one and the same. – DonielF Mar 27 '19 at 17:49