Talk:Angels in Judaism

Judaism High‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible Mid‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology High‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Malakh, melek, Moloch, malik

What is the relation between the Semitic words Malakh (Hebrew for angel), melek (Hebrew for king), Moloch (disputed Phoenician god or sacrifice), malik (Arabic for king), Melek Taus (the Yazidi angel), Solomon Molcho ("Solomon King/Angel", a Jewish Messiah claimant)? User:Shirahadasha has removed my See also link in this article for not having references. I am no expert on these languages, so I ask that somebody knowledgeable, explains in the corresponding articles whether the words are related or not. I found however:

mal'ak:

Strong's Number: 04397

from an unused root meaning to despatch as a deputy

Mal'ak TWOT - 1068a

1. messenger, representative

1. messenger

2. angel

3. the theophanic angel

moloch: melek

Melek:

Strong's Number: 04428

from (04427)

Melek TWOT - 1199a

1. king

King James Word Usage - Total: 2523: king 2518, royal 2, Hammelech 1, Malcham 1, Moloch 1

Malak

Strong's Number: 04427

a primitive root

Malak TWOT - 1199,1200

1. to be or become king or queen, reign

1. (Qal) to be or become king or queen, reign

2. (Hiphil) to make one king or queen, cause to reign

3. (Hophal) to be made king or queen

2. to counsel, advise

1. (Niphal) to consider

--84.20.17.84 10:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The source you provided shows that malakh (messenger or angel) and melekh (king) come from completely different Hebrew roots. This isn't surprising, because they're spelled with different Hebrew letters which happen to sound the same in Modern Hebrew due to phonetic simplifications and hence result in similar-looking English transliterations. Please do be careful to look these things up before adding content of this nature to Wikipedia. If you're not familiar enough with the sources involved to be able to use and interpret entries like this, it might be best not to attempt to add this type of material. Best, --Shirahadasha 04:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to add notes to the relevant articles to avoid future misunderstandings? --84.20.17.84 08:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't show they come from "completely different" roots. All they tooliken is one -alef. mem as prefix is the agentive or participal fitt. One person is the counsellee and other the counsellor. See herald. I'v filled out the history of the stems. -lysdexia 05:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.86.166.34 (talk)

Malachi

Since there is no other article about the word "Malakh", I think that some mention that the word is also used as a proper noun or as "messenger" (depending on your interpretation) in the book of Malachi should go in the article. --84.20.17.84 08:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A disambig can be added to the top to steer readers to the relevant article if there is a risk of confusion. Content about Malakhi should go in Malakhi and/or Book of Malachi. This is an encyclopedia article on the concept, not a dictionary entry on the word. --Shirahadasha 15:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Song

On Etti Ankri's 2001 album "Yam" (Sea) the last song is also called Malakhim. Just FWIW. -andy 78.51.89.40 (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Badly-written, uncited and unclear, thus disputable, entry under "etymology" title

please note that in other languages mal'akh means locust its somtimes used as connotatin for the christian demon 'legion'

Above moved here for a pile of reasons stated in the title. Feel free to clean it up to Wikipedia's standards to put it back. Please do NOT put it back verbatim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.82.142.13 (talk) 00:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Propose move to Angel (Judaism)

In ictu oculi (talk) 05:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just went ahead and did it, someone else can revert if there's a convincing WP:RS case presented from mainstream English language sources. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 05:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

301655722

Per a post-close comment on 301655722 Angels' AfD, the titular number (and other related numbers) can be sourced and may be worth working into this article. czar · · 07:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight

I just read someone complain on soylentnews (a Slashdot imitator) about this article. As far as I can tell their complaint seems to be correct: the majority of the article about angels in Judaism is a section that is "not part of mainstream Judaism". Doesn't that create an undue weight problem? It's like having a "medicine according to Christianity" article which is predominantly about how Christian Science opposes blood transfusions, or a "religion in America" article which is predominantly about Scientology. (Hey, it's a religion, and it's in America, right?) Ken Arromdee (talk) 18:47, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. See my post below.238-Gdn (talk) 09:48, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Christian or Otherwise Non-Jewish References

There are parts of the article that reflect Christian (and some other non-jewish) ideas, which seems out of place in an article about angels in Judaism. I'm not much good at editing, so I'd appreciate if someone could take a look and make changes where appropriate.

"In the King James Bible, the noun mal'akh is rendered "angel" 111 times, "messenger" 98 times, "ambassadors" 4 times." The King James Bible is a Christian text, more relevant would be translation in the [JPS or NJPS translation, respectively, as this reflects Jewish ideas of what the original Hebrew means.

Several times throughout the article "Yahveh" is used to refer to the Jewish deity, but it's not the way Jewish people represent the [tetragrammaton] in English, YHVH or YHWH (the alphabetical equivalents of יהוה / yod-hav-vey-hav) seems more appropriate, or 'Hashem', which is the everyday Hebrew name for God, or 'Adonai', which is what YHVH is replaced with when reading aloud, it being taboo for Jews to vocalise the tetragrammaton.

"some kind of God’s avatar or pre-incarnated Christ." Christ is a Christian term (duh), and the individual it redirects and refers to is certainly not a Jewish religious figure, so I doubt this is a theory that Jewish people came up with or endorse (the reference given doesn't seem to be exclusively about Jewish ideas, which lends weight that this is a Christian reading). Under other circumstances i might suggest a redirect to messiah but in this case it's not appropriate, because Judaism doesn't hold with the idea that the Messiah is of divine origin more than anyone else. I say end the sentence after 'avatar'.

Both mal’akh and a deity, be it Yahveh or Elohim, are of masculine grammatical gender. Yahveh and Elohim are different words to refer to the same being, Yahveh being an Anglicization of the tetragrammaton, and Elohim being the hebrew for 'god' or 'diety'.

A possible change could be to "YHVH and Elohim are of masculine grammatical gender" if the intended meaning was that other god's are refered to this way Another possibility is that the original editor wanted to convey that both YHVH and Elohim, while refering to the same being, are of masculine grammatical gender, in which case i would suggest "Both mal'akh and terms for the Jewish diety, be it Yahveh or Elohim, are of masculine grammatical gender" and possibly adding in some other terms from [this page] that are grammatically masculine. If neither was the intended meaning then simply "Both mal'akh and YHVH are of masculine grammatical gender."

I have hidden the entire section until someone finds a better place for it. 238-Gdn (talk) 09:45, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with this, the Tetragammon does not translate to Yahweh and it is quite insulting. Also, Elohim is not masculine, it is gender neutral, as HaShem (God) in the Jewish conceptualisation is without gender. I'll have a bash at editing in line with the above suggestion, but I too am not that good at editing, and really the entire section has been written from a Christian perspective. Kathoc (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't fix the bit on interpolation theory, and it wasn't really relevant... so I just deleted it. I'm sure someone will undo that if they have a problem. Kathoc (talk) 13:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Other Jewish angelic hierarchies?

Shouldn't there be more than one Jewish angelic hierarchy listed? Besides the hierarchy of the Rambam, there are the alternative hierarchies below.

Zohar

The Zohar, in Exodus 43a, also lists ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:

Rank	Angelic Class
1	Malakim
2	Erelim
3	Seraphim
4	Chayot
5	Ophanim
6	Hashmallim
7	Elim
8	Elohim
9	Bene Elohim
10	Ishim

Maseket Atzilut

Jacob Nazir, in his Maseket Atzilut, also listed ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:

Rank	Angelic Class
1	Seraphim
2	Ophanim
3	Cherubim
4	Shinanim
5	Tarshishim
6	Ishim
7	Hashmallim
8	Malakim
9	Bene Elohim
10	Erelim

Berit Menuchah

Abraham ben Isaac of Granada, in his Berit Menuchah, also listed ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:

Rank	Angelic Class
1	Erelim
2	Ishim
3	Bene Elohim
4	Malakim
5	Hashmallim
6	Tarshishim
7	Shinanim
8	Cherubim
9	Ophanim
10	Seraphim

Reshit Chochmah

Eliyahu de Vidas, in his Reshit Chochmah, also listed ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:

Rank	Angelic Class
1	Chayot Ha Kodesh
2	Ophanim
3	Seraphim
4	Cherubim
5	Erelim
6	Tarshishim
7	Hashmallim
8	Elim
9	Malakim
10	Ishim

3 Enoch (Song-Uttering Choirs)

Shalashim

Parashim

Gibborim

Tseva'im

Gedudim

Memunim

Sarim

Chayalim

Mesharetim

Malakim

Degalim

Sabalim

64.180.15.26 (talk) 21:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Liturgy/hierarchy

the most important location for angels in Jewish liturgy is in "kedusha" where it references ophanim hayyoth and their relationship to seraphim.

Curious as to why it's not in the article 73.120.206.200 (talk) 07:20, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

came here to say this too. also found in shabbat liturgy esp tehilim in shabbat liturgy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.45.53 (talk) 05:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable source quoted in Rabbinic Literature section

Under "Michael, Gabriel, Uriel, and Raphael" there is a quote which is attributed to Numbers Rabbah 2:10 as translated at https://www.jhom.com/topics/angels/talmud_fourangels.htm, where it is misspelled. The same quote (minus the typo) is given in the book Literary Passports: The Making of Modernist Hebrew Fiction in Europe. I tried to verify this quote and found that it was not a direct translation of any single excerpt of Numbers Rabbah 2:10, but seems instead to be a summary of its ending.

In light of this, I'm concerned that the JHOM article isn't a reliable source. However, my Medieval Hebrew is still at a beginner level, so the section needs attention from an expert in Medieval Hebrew to confirm. Ezqel (talk) 23:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]