Copyright © 1994 by
Andrews University Press. Cited with permission.
AZAZEL IN EARLY JEWISH TRADITION
ROBERT
HELM
The term" Azazel,"
which appears four times in the prescriptions
for the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:8, 10, 26), has
elicited much debate.
Although
many scholars have identified Azazel with a demonic
figure
to whom the sin-laden scapegoat was dispatched,1
the term remains
undefined in the biblical text. This article will
attempt to demonstrate
that two noncanonical
Jewish works, 1 Enoch and the Apocalypse of
Abraham, reveal a tradition in
which Azazel was regarded as a demon,
and in which the scapegoat rite was utilized as a
symbol of demonic
expulsion. Hence it will be argued that a segment
of ancient Jewish
apocalypticists found a symbol of
eschatological victory over demonic
forces in the rite involving Azazel
and the scapegoat.
Azazel
in 1 Enoch
Although 1 Enoch is attributed to the antediluvian prophet by that
name, its pseudonymous nature is readily apparent.
In reality, it is a
composite work, produced by several authors who
probably wrote
during the three centuries preceding the Christian era.2
In its current
form, 1 Enoch
is a collection of five smaller documents: "The Book of
Watchers"
(chaps. 1-36), "The Book of Parables" (chaps. 37-71), "The
Astronomical Book" (chaps. 72-82),
"The Book of Dreams" (chaps.
83-90),
and "The Epistle of Enoch" (chaps. 91-108).3 It is not
known
1 The following works are
examples of literature to this effect: Bernard J. Bamberger,
The Torah: Leviticus, A Modern Commentary (
Congregations,
1979), 160; M. M. Kalisch, A Historical and Critical Commentary on the
Old Testament (London: Longmans,
Green, Reader, and Dyer, 1872), 2:328; Nathaniel
Micklem, "The Book of Leviticus," IB (1953), 2:77-78; Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus
1-16, AB
(1991),
1021; Martin Noth, Leviticus, trans. J. E. Anderson (Philadelphia: Westminster,
1965), 125.
2 The Apocryphal Old Testament, ed. H. F. D. Sparks (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1984),
173-177.
However, some scholars assign "The Book of Parables" to the first
century of
the Christian Era, or possibly even later.
3 Ibid.
217
218
ROBERT
HELM
when these five "books" were combined, nor
is it entirely clear in what
language or languages they were originally
composed.4 The complete
text of 1
Enoch is known only in Ethiopic, although Greek, Latin, and
Aramaic
fragments survive as well.5
In common with the general tenor of
apocalyptic literature, the
view of reality presented in 1 Enoch consists of a sharp contrast between
the present evil age, which will end in judgment,
and the new age of
bliss that is to follow.6 The book also
stresses the relationship between
the locus of human activity and the cosmic or
heavenly realm.7 Thus
it contains both temporal and spatial dimensions.8
The spatial dimension
becomes evident in the narrative of Semyaza (chaps. 6 and 7), in which
Semyaza leads his angel cohorts into rebellion
by cohabiting with the
daughters of men, thus giving birth to giants and
defiling the earth. The
background for this story is obviously Gen 6:1-4.
The figure of Azazel
is abruptly introduced in 1 Enoch 8:
And Azazel
taught men to make swords, and daggers, and shields
and
breastplates. And he showed them the things after these, and the
art of
making them: bracelets, and ornaments, and the art of making
up the eyes
and of beautifying the eyelids, and the most precious
and choice
stones, and all kinds of colored dyes. And the world was
changed.
And there was great impiety and much fornication, and
they went
astray, and all their ways became corrupt. (1
Enoch 8:1-3)9
This
sudden interruption of the Semyaza narrative is
usually attributed
to the editorial fusion of two independent
traditions.10 However,
Hanson
offers an alternative hypothesis. He takes it to be a case of
4 It is generally
believed that 1 Enoch was composed in
Aramaic. See D. S. Russell,
The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Patriarchs
and Prophets in Early Judaism (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1987), 26. However, Charles argues
that "The Astronomical Book" was
originally written in Hebrew; see The Apocryphal Old Testament, 176.
5 Apocryphal Old Testament, 170-173. Also see John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic
Imagination (New York: Crossroad,
1984), 33.
6 George W. E. Nickelsburg, "The Apocalyptic Construction of Reality
in 1 Enoch,"
Mysteries and
Revelations,
Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha
Supplement
Series
9, ed. John J. Collins and James H. Charlesworth
(Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1991), 58.
7 Ibid.,
54.
8 Ibid.,
53.
9 Apocryphal Old Testament, 190-191.
10 Leonhard
Rost, Einleitung in die alttestamentlichen Apokryphen und
Pseudepigraphen
einschliesslich der grossen
Qumran-Handschriften (Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer, 1971), 103.
See
also Paul D. Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel,
and Euhemeristic Heroes in
1 Enoch 6-11," JBL 96 (1977): 220.
AZAZEL IN EARLY JEWISH
TRADITION 219
paronomasia, in which the name of one of Semyaza's subordinates,
Asael, invited a comparison with the Azazel of Lev 16.11 Regardless of
which of these positions is favored, it is apparent
that the appearance
of the name" Azazel"
in the Enoch passage functions as a significant
link with the Day of Atonement ritual described in
Lev 16.
It must be admitted that the demonic
nature of Azazel is only
implicit in Lev 16. However, 1 Enoch 8:1-3
depicts him in terms that
are explicitly demonic. In fact, his characteristics
approach the satanic
in this passage, although he is never identified
as Satan.12 Nevertheless,
he is portrayed as a corrupter and tempter of
humanity, and the main
source of antediluvian impiety.
First
Enoch 10:4-6 describes the eschatological punishment of
Azazel:
And further the Lord said to
Raphael, Bind Azazel by his hands and
his feet,
and throw him into 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
forever, 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.13
This
quotation is worthy of careful consideration, as Hanson finds a
direct link between the binding of Azazel
in 1 Enoch 10 and the rite of
purgation associated with the scapegoat in Lev 16.14
These two passages
do indeed exhibit a number of striking parallels.
First, it should be noticed that
just as a man was appointed to lead
the scapegoat away to the desert (Lev
directed to bind Azazel
and banish him to the desert which is in Dudael
(1 Enoch 10:4). Second, both passages are
concerned with purification
from sin. Hanson rightly recognizes the close
relationship between Lev
11 Hanson,
221.
12 The terms
"demon" and "demonic" are to be distinguished from
"Satan" and
"satanic." A "demon" is any malevolent spirit
being. However, in Judeo-Christian
tradition, Satan is regarded as the demonic leader
of the angels who fell from heaven,
God's
primary adversary, and the chief tempter of humanity,
including Adam and Eve.
First Enoch 8:1-3 contains a
description of Azazel's masterful temptation of the
entire
world; in this, his characteristics approach the
satanic. Also 1 Enoch 69:1-2 lists
him
among the fallen archangels. See Apocryphal Old Testament, 190-191, 251.
13 Ibid.,
194-195.
14 Hanson, 221-222.
15 Ibid.,
224.
220
ROBERT
HELM
were transferred to the scapegoat through the laying
on of hands.16
Thus
the removal of the goat resulted in cleansing and renewal for the
entire camp. Likewise in 1 Enoch all sin was to be "written down"
against Azazel; his
expulsion would usher in the restoration of the
earth, which had been ruined by the angel rebellion.
Notice God's command to Raphael:
And restore the earth which the
angels have ruined, and announce
the
restoration of the earth, for I shall restore the earth, so that not
all the
sons of men shall be destroyed through the mystery of
everything
which the Watchers made known and taught to their
sons. And
the whole earth has been ruined by the teaching of the
works of Azazel, and against him write down all sin. (1 Enoch
10:7-8)17
Hanson argues for the existence of a
further parallel between
1 Enoch 10 and the rendition of
Lev 16 in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (also
known as Jonathan Ben Uzziel
or Targum of Palestine).18 He believes
that the formulation, ". . . split open the
desert which is in Dudael, and
throw him there" (1 Enoch 10:4), is related to Pseudo-Jonathan's
use of
rFaPA
(send or
cleave) instead of HlawA (send), in reference to
the
expulsion of the scapegoat from the camp of
Inasmuch
as rFaPA can denote "to
cleave" or "break open," as well as "to
send,"20 Hanson suggests that the
author of the Enoch text employed
a subtle paronomasia by playing alternate word
meanings over against
each other, thus attaining the notion of the desert being
opened to
receive Azazel.21 It is of interest
that in certain Akkadian texts, demons
are said to inhabit desolate wastelands after
leaving the netherworld
through a crack or hole in the ground.22
Hence this Akkadian literature
16 M. C. Sansom, "Laying on of Hands in the Old
Testament," ExpTim
94 (1982-
1983):
324.
17 Aprocryphal Old Testament, 195.
18 According to Hanson,
this particular Targum "bears close affinities
with 1 Enoch"
(223).
Although the date of Pseudo-Jonathan has been debated,
its foundations apparently
go back to pre-Christian times. See Ernst Wurthwein, The Text of the Old
Testament,
trans. Erroll F. Rhodes
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987),78. Thus it is likely
that both
1 Enoch and the original form
of Pseudo-Jonathan were approximately contemporaneous
in development.
19 Hanson,
223.
20 Ibid.
Also see "rFaPA" in BDB.
21 Hanson,
223.
22 Hayim
Tawil, "Azazel the
Prince of the Steppe: A Comparative Study," ZAW 92
(1980):
48-50.
AZAZEL IN EARLY JEWISH
TRADITION 221
may represent an ancient source parallel to the
thought expressed in
both Lev 16 and 1
Enoch 10.
These foregoing comparisons suggest
that the imagery associated
with Azazel's punishment
in 1 Enoch 10 is adapted from the
description
of the scapegoat's expulsion in Lev 16. But why
does the author of the
Enoch
text link the goat designated "for Azazel"
with Azazel himself?
That
the scapegoat was regarded as the focus of evil, a visible representa-
tive of the demonic, is a
probable solution to this problem. It should be
recognized that the Hebrew ryfiWA can denote either a male goat or a
demon.23 Perhaps this fact
influenced the author of the Enoch text in
his perception of the scapegoat as a demonic
figure. Also, the possibility
that lzexzAfEla can be understood as
"in behalf of Azazel" is worthy of
consideration.24 If this rendition of
the Hebrew noun and its inseparable
preposition is accepted, the scapegoat may be
regarded as representing
Azazel
himself.
Thus the expulsion of the goat from the camp would
serve as a model for the banishment of sin and its
demonic source.
Several additional references to Azazel also appear in 1
Enoch.25
However,
they all describe him as fulfilling the role of a fallen
archangel, intent on deceiving the human race.
Thus 1 Enoch confirms
the fact that "Azazel"
was understood in demonic terms by a segment
of Jewish apocalypticists.
Furthermore, it appears that they regarded
the scapegoat rite of Lev 16 as a representation of
Azazel's eschatolog-
ical punishment.
It is possible that the authors of 1 Enoch developed the Azazel
tradition directly from data contained in Lev 16.
Alternatively, it may
be that a larger, unpreserved tradition served as
a source for certain
elements appearing in both Lev 16 and 1 Enoch. That the figure of
Azazel is introduced without explanation in Lev 16
suggests the
existence of some type of background source.
Gen 6:1-4 is another source which
may underlie the references to
Azazel in 1
Enoch.
The "sons of God," described in the Genesis
pericope as cohabiting with the
"daughters of men," are interpreted in
the Enoch material as fallen archangels, including Semyaza and Azazel
(cf. 1 Enoch 6; 69:1-2).26 Also, the
fact that Azazel is portrayed in
23 See BDB.
24 Gerhard Hasel, "Studies in Biblical Atonement II: The Day of
Atonement," in The
Sanctuary and the
Atonement,
ed.
(Washington,
DC: Review and Herald, 1981), 122-123.
25 See 1 Enoch 13:1-2;
54:1-6; 55:4; 69:2 in Apocryphal Old
Testament, 199, 233-234,
235,251.
26 Apocryphal Old Testament, 188-189, 251.
222
ROBERT
HELM
1 Enoch 8:1-3 as corrupting
humanity by teaching certain arts of
civilization probably reflects the
influence of the culture-hero myth,
which was widespread in ancient society.27
The culture-hero myth
posits the appearance of supernatural beings in early
history, who
taught the arts of civilization to humanity. In most
versions of the
myth, the culture-heroes act as the beneficiaries of
human beings.
However,
negative versions also exist, which describe the teaching of
destructive arts, as in 1 Enoch.28 It seems likely that a combination of
elements derived from these diverse sources
explains the enlarged role
played by Azazel in the
Enoch material.
Azazel
in the Apocalypse of Abraham
The origin of the Apocalypse of
Abraham is even more obscure than
that of 1
Enoch. Currently, it is only represented in the Codex
Sylvester
and in certain manuscripts of the Palaea interpretata, all of
which are in the Slavonic language.29 Some
scholars believe that the
Apocalypse
was first composed in Hebrew and later translated into
Slavonic, in the 11th or 12th century A.D. However, this has been
disputed.30 Charlesworth
proposes A.D. 80-100 for the period of its
composition,31 but these dates are
likewise uncertain. The fact that the
burning of the temple is mentioned in chapter 27
probably indicates
that at least a portion of the book is to be dated
after A.D. 70.32 In any
case, it seems apparent that the book existed in its
present form by the
fourth century A.D., as it is mentioned in the
Clementine
Recognitions.33
Uncertainty also exists in regard to
the authorship of the
Apocalypse of Abraham, although it is usually
considered a composite
work. Most of the material in the Apocalypse derives
from Jewish
27 For the relationship
between the culture-hero myth and the development of the
Azazel tradition in 1 Enoch, see Hanson, 226-231.
28 Ibid.,
229.
29 Apocryphal Old Testament, 364.
30 R. Rubinkiewicz,
"The Apocalypse of Abraham,"
The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha, ed. James Hamilton Charlesworth (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983),
1:682-683.
31 James Hamilton Charlesworth, The Pseudepigrapha and Modern Research with a
Supplement, SBL Septuagint and
Cognate Series 7S, ed. George W. E. Nickelsburg and
Harry
M. Orlinsky (Chico, CA: Scholars, 1981),68.
32 Apocryphal Old Testament, 366.
33 Ibid.
AZAZEL IN EARLY JEWISH
TRADITION 223
sources.34 However, Charlesworth and others posit chapter 29 as a
Christian
interpolation.35
A number of references to Azazel appear in the Apocalypse.36
The
first of these is introduced in chapters 13 and 14,
where Azazel is
described as an unclean bird which flies down on
the carcasses of the
animals that Abraham has sacrificed (cf. Gen
15:9-11).37 But he is no
ordinary bird, for he enters into a verbal
dispute with Abraham. His
demonic character soon becomes evident, as an
angel refers to him as
"wickedness" (Apocalypse
of Abraham 13:7).38 The angel goes on to utter
an interesting rebuke against him:
Listen fellow, be ashamed of
yourself and go. For you were not
appointed
to tempt all the righteous. Leave this man alone: you
cannot
beguile him for he is your enemy, and the enemy of those
who follow
you and dote on what you want. The garment that of
old was set
apart in the heavens for you, is now set apart for him;
and the
corruption that was his has been transferred to you.
(Apocalypse
of Abraham 13:12-15)39
These verses depict Azazel as an evil spirit who tempts the
righteous. Furthermore, they imply that he has fallen
from heaven, and
that his celestial office is subsequently to be
given to Abraham.
Particular
attention should be devoted to the last part of v. 15, as the
transference of Abraham's corruption
to Azazel may be a veiled
reference to the scapegoat rite (cf. Lev
Azazel
also figures prominently in Abraham's vision of the
temptation of Adam and Eve:
And I looked into the picture, and
my eyes ran to the side of the
garden of
Eden. And I saw there a man, immensely tall, alarmingly
solid, such
as I had never seen before, who was embracing a woman
that was
the man's equal both in her appearance and her size. And
they were
standing under one of the trees in
that tree
looked like a bunch of dates. And behind the tree there
34 Ibid.,
365-366. However, this does not prove indisputably that the author or
authors of the Apocalypse were Jewish. See p.
366. Nevertheless, it is convenient to
classify the work as a part of early Jewish
tradition.
35 Charlesworth, 69. Some, however, would argue that
this chapter suggests Christian
authorship for the entire Apocalypse.
36 Apocryphal Old Testament makes use of the variant spellings, "Azazil" and
"Azazail,"
in the Apocalypse of Abraham.
37 Apocryphal Old Testament, 378-379.
38 Ibid.,
378.
39 Ibid.
224
ROBERT
HELM
stood what
looked like a snake, with hands and feet like a man's,
and wings
on its shoulders, three on its right and three on its left.
And they held in their hands a bunch
from the tree; and they were
eating--the
two I had seen embracing. And I said, Who are these
who are
embracing each other? Who is it who is between them?
And what is the fruit they are
eating, Mighty Eternal One? And he
said, This
is the human world: this is Adam, and this is their desire
upon the
earth: this is Eve. And what is between them is the
wicked path
they started on towards perdition, namely Azazil.
(Apocalypse
of Abraham 23:3-9)40
Once
again, Azazel assumes the role of tempter, appearing
in the form
of a winged snake, and beguiling the couple into
eating the forbidden
fruit. Thus his demonic nature is apparent in this
passage as well.
Additional
minor references to Azazel are found in chapters 20,
22, and
29;41 however they are quite incidental and have no real
bearing on the
issues addressed in this article.
That Azazel
is portrayed as a demon in the Apocalypse
of Abraham
cannot be denied. In fact, the Apocalypse associates him with two
themes which Judeo-Christian tradition applies to
Satan, namely, his
expulsion from heaven and his temptation of Adam
and Eve under the
guise of a snake. These constitute further
significant developments as
the figure of Azazel
progressively merges with what might be termed
the satanic.
The Influence of the Mishnah
and the Targums
Only three direct references to
"Azazel" appear in the Mishnah,
none of which sheds any light on the meaning of the
term.42 However,
Tractate
Yoma is
helpful in elucidating the practice of the scapegoat rite
in early Judaism, as it treats this topic fairly
extensively.
Yoma 6:8 has special pertinence to the present
discussion, as it
identifies UdUdHa
tyBe (house of sharpness), the desert location outside
both link UdUdHa
tyBe (house of sharpness) with "Dudael,"
mentioned
in 1 Enoch
10:4 as the place of Azazel's banishment.44
Although the
40 Ibid.,
385.
41 Apocryphal Old Testament, 383, 384, 389.
42 These references
merely refer to the casting of the lot which was designated "for
Azazel." Cf. Yoma
4:1; 6:1, The Mishnah,
trans. Herbert Danby (
1983), 166, 169.
43 Yoma 6:8; see the variant
readings contained in footnote 6. (cf:n.
47)
44 See Hanson, 223-224.
Also see Godfrey R. Driver, "Three Technical Terms in the
Pentateuch,"
JSS 1 (April 1956): 97.
AZAZEL IN EARLY JEWISH
TRADITION 225
Mishnaic traditions did not exist in written form
when 1 Enoch was
composed, they probably had an oral history
reaching back to that
time. Hence it seems likely that a common element
exists in both of
these passages, in which case yet another connection
between the
expulsion of the scapegoat and the banishment of Azazel is established.
Targum Onkelos offers minimal relevant data to
this study.
However,
its rendition of Lev 16:8 deserves consideration: "Then Aaron
should place lots upon the two goats, one lot for the
Name of the Lord,
the other for Azazel."45 The use of
the Aramaic phrase, "for the Name
of the Lord" (or "Yahweh") (yAy;Da xmAw;li),46 is interesting and calls for
explanation. It is possible that "Name"
was inserted into the text to act
as a kind of buffer between Yahweh and humanity,
as is often done in
the targams to minimize
anthropomorphism.47 This sentence structure
no longer contains a direct parallelism between
Yahweh and Azazel.
This
could indicate that the compilers of the Targum
regarded the term
"Azazel" as
denoting something other than a personal being. However,
the evidence for this deduction is so scanty that
it can hardly be held
with any certainty.
Targum Pseudo-Jonathan's use of rFaPA (send or cleave) in connec-
tion with the scapegoat's
expulsion has already been considered in the
section devoted to the Enoch material.
A quotation from this Targum's version of Lev 16 contains addi-
tional data pertinent to the
discussion:
And Aharon
shall put upon the goats equal lots; one lot for the
Name of the Lord, and one lot for Azazel: and he shall throw them
into the
vase, and draw them out, and put them upon the goats.
And Aharon
shall bring the goat upon which came up the lot for
the Name of
the Lord, and make him a sin offering. And the goat
on which
came up the lot for Azazel he shall make to stand
alive
before the
Lord, to expiate for the sins of the people of the house
of
rocky
desert which is Beth-hadurey.48
It
is clear that Pseudo-Jonathan's
description of the choosing of the goats
is far more innovative than that of Targum Onkelos. The
insertion of
45 "The Targum Onqelos to
Leviticus," The Aramaic Bible,
trans. Bernard Grossfeld,
ed. Kevin Cathcart,
Michael Maher, and Martin McNamara (
Glazier, 1988),
46 Targum Onkelos, ed.
A. Berliner (Berlin: Gorzelanczyck and Co., 1884),
128.
47 See footnote
4 in The Aramaic Bible, 33.
48 "The Targum of
Uzziel on the Book of Leviticus," in The Targum of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel
on
the Pentateuch, trans. J. W. Etheridge (London: Longman,
Roberts, and Green, 1865), 196.
226
ROBERT
HELM
the phrase, "for the Name of the Lord,"
appears here as well; however,
there are also more significant additions which
resemble the Mishnaic
and Enoch texts. In particular, Pseudo-Jonathan parallels the Mishnah,
in that the scapegoat is destined to die.49
The reference to the scapegoat's
death in "a place rough and hard
in the rocky desert which is Beth-hadurey" merits careful scrutiny, as
it closely parallels the description of Azazel's punishment in 1
Enoch
10:4-5.
Hanson equates "Beth-hadurey" with the
"Dudael" of the Enoch
passage.50 Moreover, Pseudo-Jonathan's "rocky
desert" has its counter-
part in the "desert which is in Dudael" and "jagged and sharp stones"
of Enoch. Thus it is clear that the author of the
Enoch passage, in his
account of Azazel's
banishment, was dependent on certain traditions
involving the removal of the scapegoat, which were
recorded in Targum
Pseudojonathan.51
Conclusion
From the preceding analysis, it is
evident that the authors of the
apocalyptic texts known as 1 Enoch and the Apocalypse of
Abraham
regarded Azazel as a
demon. In fact, a number of attributes commonly
associated with Satan appear in the depictions of Azazel contained in
these works. Furthermore, the author of 1 Enoch 10 apparently
conceived of the scapegoat rite (especially as it
is formulated in the
Mishnah and in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan) as a paradigm of Azazel's
banishment. Thus ancient Jewish traditions appear
to be in agreement
with the interpretation which finds in the expulsion
of the scapegoat a
type or model of the eschatological defeat of
demonic power.
49 Compare Yoma 6:6, The Mishnah, 170,
with The Targums
of Onkelos and Jonathan
Ben Uzziel
on the Pentateuch,
196, 198.
However, Yoma
6:6 describes how the scapegoat
was pushed over a cliff to its death, while
Pseudo-Jonathan specifies that it would be
50 Hanson, 223-224.
51 Hanson also draws
attention to Pseudo-Jonathan's
"close affinities with 1 Enoch"
(223).
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
www.andrews.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: