Center for Advanced Judaic Studies, University of Pennsylvania

Review: The New Qumran Pesher on Azazel

Author(s): Sidney B. Hoenig
Review by: Sidney B. Hoenig
Source: The Jewish Quarterly Review, Vol. 56, No. 3 (Jan., 1966), pp. 248-253
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1453710
Accessed: 17-01-2016 01:37 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Center for Advanced Judaic Studies, University of Pennsylvania and University of Pennsylvania Press are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Jewish Quarterly Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 208.95.48.254 on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:37:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 THE NEW QUMRAN PESHER ON AZAZEL

DOCTOR JOHN M. ALLEGRO RECENTLY PUBLISHED additional material

from the Fourth Cave. 1 Though these fragments are collated as two
separate documents, the expression 3121 M6* 16*1 (from Genesis
6: 4), found in both, suggests the same context, namely, the fallen
angels (Nefilim). 2 These sparse texts, which contain lacunae, are
printed with translation and notes, but without any explanation of
their provenience, except that they are "of the wealth of the pseud-
epigraphical literature that must have been circulating within Judaism
at the turn of the era." Recognizably, Allegro's reference is to the
Book of Enoch, and the association is confirmed by the name Azazel
appearing in Document I, line 7: 1['?"] 'iVX tZ18Dlt?11"XTT)"s 1WO
t36= t;16*. That these new texts are of the "turn of the era,"
as suggested by Allegro, is questionable, however, when one analyzes
the entire context and the singular concepts therein.
It is well known that Azazel is first recorded in Leviticus i6 pertain-
ing to the scapegoat of the Day of Atonement, but that its specific
meaning there is vague. The "goat of Azazel" 3 iS only a vehicle for

1 "Some Unpublished Fragments of Pseudepigraphical Literature

from Qumran's Fourth Cave," The Annual of Leeds University
Oriental Society, IV, (i962-i963), Leiden i964.
2 The Fallen-Angels stories were not current in early Jewish
tradition of the Second Commonwealth. Philo, On the Giants, XIII
XIII (Loeb II, 474), notes: "Now the giants were on the earth in
those days" (Gen. 4I. 4). Some may think that the Lawgiver is alluding
to the myths of the poets about the giants, but indeed myth-making
is a thing most alien to him. . ." Similarly Josephus, Antiquities I, I5
writes: . . . "keeping his words concerning Him pure of the unseemly
mythology current among others." Only Apocalyptic literature
(Enoch, passim) contained these, then passing into Christian literature
(2 Pet. 2: 4; Jude 6). In later Jewish literature, Targum Jonathan
on Gen. 6.4, which is 3rd century, however notes it: '"?'T1Y1 'RtrI?Z
M=n 73 74 Ill tl. On the Fallen angels see, e.g. F. Macler,
Histoire de Saint Azazael, (Bibliotheque de l'ecole des Hautes Etudes),
I902; L. Jung, "Fallen Angels," JQR, XVI, I926, p. 326 ff; B. Heller,
"La Chute des Anges: Schemhazi, Ouzze et Azail," REJ, LX, 202 ff;
B. J. Bamberger, Fallen Angels, Philadelphia, I952.
3 It may refer to the "goat that departs" (TtR TYas in LXX-

XL4&pouq (Xo7ropLatc; Vulgate-hircus emissariaus) or to the place,

"a rugged cliff." It cannot refer to "demons" because, as shown, "in
no other cultule are scapegoats offered to demons". Only much later

This content downloaded from 208.95.48.254 on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:37:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 QUMRAN PESHER-HOENIG 249

elimination of sin and impurity, not an instrument of propitiation; 4

biblically, Azazel means "jagged rocks or precipice". 5 It is only in
the Book of Enoch 6 that Azazel first assumes a place among the
fallen angels. We read there (IO: 8): "The whole earth has been
corrupted through the works taught by Azazel; to him ascribe all
sin." In its specific mention of Azazel, the notice in Enoch, however,
is but an elaboration of an earlier reference in the book of Jubilees
(I0 : i): "The unclean demons began to lead astray the sons of Noah
and to make them err and destroy them."
This theme of demons or the angel Azazel "who makes them err"
is not found in any early Jewish literature of the Second Common-
wealth or of the first century. It appears only in the Midrash Noah
and in the Midrash Shamhazi-Azazel, which are early medieval.
Midrash Noah 7 reads: fzl nv1znl' trnitmm rnfilinn1flfl xrifzf
niztm*mn
.nnmYv*i
Midrash Shamhazi 8 states: nv7 ,
al r1f i fl f ni xT
tn 'tSt)
.n-vuS-v* w7ax -1=rviw**irpb:

(cf. Targum, Lev. I7,7, t8'YV3 = 11Wt)did the word Azazel come to
refer to a desert demon. See discussion of G. R. Driver: "Three
Technical Terms in the Pentateuch", JSS, I, 2 (April I956), 97-98:
The choice of the lots then is between that cast "for the Lord"
and that cast for "(the) rugged rocks, (the) precipice" (taken as
a proper noun): The first goat was slaughtered on the spot as a
sacrifice to the Lord, the second was taken into the wilderness
to the precipice called "Azazel" or "jagged rocks" and driven
over them to its death, carrying the sins of the people with it.
Driver also notes: "In the pseudo-apocrypha literature Azazel
becomes an evil demon . . "
4 Cf. Th. Gaster, Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, s.v. "Azazel",
I, p. 326.
5 Peake's Commentary on the Bible (Leviticus XVI), 2o8d (p. 248).
6 The Enoch texts in themselves are a composite compilation; much
of it belongs to the period after "the turn of the era." That the Enoch
texts come from earlier sources, as from an early Book of Noah, has
not yet been fully established. Cf. Charles, Pseudepigrapha II p. 68.
7 For Midrash Noah, see J. D. Eisenstein, Otzar Midrashim, 400;
Cf. S. Zeitlin, "Genesis Apocryphon," JQR, I957, p. 249.
8 For Midrash Abkir see Jellenik, Beth Midrash IV, I27. Middrah
Rabbah Deuteronomy, end, also makes reference to it. Cf. J. D.
Eisenstein, op. cit., 549 ff, giving Midrash Shamhazi and Azazel.
[Cf. also Rashi, Yoma 67a]. The Midrash concludes ?91V' 11 lnw?
-nTri5" :ix n,nr mrp
-x .xn vr -1=bsy-inm:"tt;* -nTri5" r=ilin
*n-11mvsTxt Rini 5Xr: tv rninm;n 17? T XTY
These views of propiation of the angel Azazel are very late. It should
be noted that the text mentions R. Yosef: . . . jor v naxr-rnri *xv

This content downloaded from 208.95.48.254 on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:37:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
250 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

The cognate phrases to those used in the above mentioned medieval

midrashim which convey the theme of "make them err" and apply
specifically to the angel Azazel's action are expressed distinctly in
these new fragments:
Document I line 8:] ?'T1t5
9 1.
line 9:] : ?"N*l? 1' fl
-*117 [.
and also in Document I, fragment 2 1. 2: fl?ZM I'n17Z flN'e.
To regard these fragments as originating in "the turn of the era",
nevertheless, is inconceivable, because of the presence therein of an
additional concept which is late. This is the notion of the extension
of divine mercy or propitiation through the utilization of the angel
Azazel who first "made them err". In Document II, Frag. i, lines 2-3
this counterstroke is contained in the phrase: * *. * ; 7Zp
7 .7r
rMln
=n - Azin Vln
rm n
fl'oi, 1iz v bt n nnns . But this direct
counterstroke of propitiation first appears only in the early third
century in rabbinic literature. Yoma 67a notes: a9177=1 "I' az1n
5Xvvl glt1 nvn 5v .1n ~TXTV
The "school of R. Ishmael" is not to be viewed necessarily as an
established academy; rather, it refers to the "perspective and the
teachings" of the school. 9 The text is therefore late tannaitic, and
the present new Azazel Pesher in its usage of phrases like 1I) MIMI1
ba "rn:nnriwsa * * *-sp thus reveals a dependence on this late
concept of the angel Azazel's requital, as first suggested by the school
of R. Ishmael.
A third aspect in this Pesher is Azazel's original opposition to the
divine plan to forgive the sins of Israel as inscribed (fun), presumably
in the Torah. 10
Document I, lines I-3, notes:
] bat n"p b
1*1170
nt39- 1 t3a = 2nr
rnin
5 axvii
ispSrPj*3
and below, lines 7-9:

Rtt
5nwr -,*:D"1V5" *9
R'1tt1 16flZ.He lived in the early 4th century and was interested in
haggadic esotericism.
9 Cf. Z. Frankel, Darkg ha-mishnah, Warsaw I923 p. I53; J. N.
Epstein, Mebo'ot l'sifrut ha-tannaim, Jerusalem I957 p. 538.
10 ?V1?Mis always utilized as referring to the primeval source of the
Torah for stressing predestination, historic foreknowledge, pre-exist-
ence or pre-ordination. The themes are apocalyptic, as in Daniel,
Jubilees and late Midrashim. Cf. rabbinic approach (Ber 32a or Sanh.
iii) which only reveals a persistent opposition to foretelling.

This content downloaded from 208.95.48.254 on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:37:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 QUMRAN PESHER-HOENIG 25I

and finally in Document II lines 3-4:

"rm-p1t3%5-nm: t*wvns -7mm

nrrnp riir* trb [ *4
This concept of the angel Azazel's original opposition is first revealed
in the medieval Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer, chapter 46: 11

rnn:inv":"n:n7nb:bs tin n-a*rnxai- lnnnrnnz

nx,> xtmb
1n"5 nn:1 r nn nmrennn"2rln unatla
v zr* w 17n ~nln"

Professor Louis Ginzberg already recognized this point when he

wrote: "The accusation of Israel by Azazel is certainly to be understood
to mean that in the beginning of creation he was the one to oppose
the forgiving of Israel's sins on the Day of Atonement as foreseen in
the Torah." 12
Upon recognition that this notion of the angel Azazel's original
opposition is a very late perception, 13 one can only deduce that the
present Pesher is but a part of the same literature as the early medieval
Midrashim, and is not of the intertestamental period.
A fourth phase in this Azazel Pesher, is the association of destiny
(w?111)with everlasting life (t7135 lrn). 14 These are recorded at least
twice in Document II, Fragment i, lines 4, 5, 6:
!2 rvi-T-1 t3%7
5nnmz n5vvn5 -mn nnsr -Ti-1prw-TS t5 [ 4
E10?W-tt19t? [
]N? hl?"]0 "I:tlVt *1w?11 5
t5117 vln ~ *6
Hence they are not just passing phrases.
The particular choice of words derives from the last phrase in the
book of Daniel 7121-1 rP 1"i?:3snif; -T hence the expressions
?n1z. * * * 131713=.Yet, the insertion of the phrase *117 V1n1twice
in the text, carried from an earlier sentence in the same chapter of
Daniel, is deliberate. It is remarkable that a rabbinic discussion
pertaining to the same theme of resurrection or everlasting life
utilizes precisely these exact verses as basic text, even as does this
Pesher. In Sanhedring2a we read: ... * ;ll:fl fn t"nf3M VIM*l73n
11 See also G. Friedlander, Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer, p. 363 note 8.
12 Legends of the Jews, V. I70-I7I.
13 See also Yoma 2oa and Nedarim 32a: 'Z7) '1?ZX
7?lti1l az1n
-lrat RM"foiionT
aTr1S1 ;r"5 iv5 ... 364 Wbl== Samael,
Azazel and Satan are used interchangeably. Cf. L. Ginzberg Legends
I, 236; V, 230; VI, i6o.
14 For ?T11 associated with 1175 "11, cf. Ben Yehuda's Dictionary
II, p. 73I.

This content downloaded from 208.95.48.254 on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:37:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
252 THE JEWISH QUARTERLYREVIEW

,*wz n5nv vln~ ;*ax ir-Ir -iv nrint irirn trxi xrnnn nnkt ktrz-
niirnirps 1s mraim
xinr n7v "Sex=- ( , wi-7)n5iv nmo-nn
rvinrip1n:
Since of all the sages in rabbinic literature it is only the last of the
Amoraim-Ravina and Rav Ashi-who so interpreted these particular
verses of Daniel, one must conclude that the Azazal Pesher author was
aware of this Amoraic usage. Hence the Pesher cannot be regarded
as early text.
A fifth aspect in this Pesher, deserving of special notice, is the
distinct usage of the word ? already mentioned. It is known that
this biblical word is found profusely in Qumran literature indicating
one's place, rank or destiny. 15 But the close and constant association
of destiny (w?l1) with judgment (=W73) and everlasting life (Z1*1 ""1),
as used here, is singularly a Karaitic mode of expression, not biblical
or talmudic. Thus we read in Yehudah Hadassi's Eshkol ha-Kofer:
*nhn: w-att5n5 t3rin no ,n torminn i ...**
="R)-*-msr1znmnm ret:i * pir Int ...
(131 twiliv
(nt3) *mntn;*s *nm: -tat5n v*w5 ittz :n -inDr-inrinn...
tr*rri 7r-1" "za 1-i- -1vin7nt3ntrnntim * * * ;lnnninmvo ...
trinn t*nt= D"tr*vr trmns zirnnD 5:D5 nv n rm ni ...
niiri rp~ 15nraim mi7 m-Tinn -tlt atvi-T -inattS nnivii
lvmntDoi r-1 7-rm rp5 rvinm -nT3swn 1:-1j7
airmDntn
(End of vol.).
That there was Karaitic influence on the theme of Azazel may also
be substantiated from Pesikta Rabbati, chapter 34, which is especially
late seventh century. Here we find a strange linking of Azazel with
the "mourners of Zion"-a distinct Karaitic characteristic.
xtvr1xtv flm7frlfmyrinxini ~ x Tbv=n rim nt3 i **...
nrim7=l
I-TImvnIn tw*-IM 7n ~n lg itm nx I-Tl"n 701
n azz
Furthermore, the Karaite Al-Kumisi, in his commentary on Genesis,'6
mentions the angel Azazel in the context of "punishment of man."

b6i]ur-itt nrmrrim2-5n=y =%yrnnnwz

Pixintv iiai tria* -liRz:1 tnx:Rn rnSvynizim

15 For n111in Qumran, see Concordance of Habermann and also

the usage in Hodayot III.4.
16 Cf. A. Marmorstein, j
a "zn a 1flp; "nn rnv,
'O?73j1! '927
Hazofe, VIII (Budapest I924), 56-57 (Adler MSS. 3753).

This content downloaded from 208.95.48.254 on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:37:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 QUMRAN PESHER-HOENIG 253

Such a unique combination in this Azazel Pesher of various late

concepts suggests only that these new documents belong to the period
of early medieval Midrash and Karaitic teachings, and are not to be
included into the literature of the Second Commonwealth.
Yeshiva University SIDNEY B. HOENIG

This content downloaded from 208.95.48.254 on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 01:37:17 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions