Sefer HaIkkarim, Maamar 2

The name of God expressed in the letters, yod, he, vav, he, is called the Shem ha-Meforash, which means the separate name. The root parash is often used by the Rabbis to denote something that is separate and different from another. Thus they speak of “flesh that is separated (ha-poresh) from a living animal”; “He who separates himself (ha-poresh) from the foreskin.” Men who are different from others and superior in virtue and saintliness are called Perushim. This is the explanation given in Sifre.

In the Talmud, treatise Sotah, we find the following discussion: “The Bible says, ‘On this wise ye shall bless’; ‘on this wise,’ denotes the use of the Shem ha-Meforash. We can not suppose that another appellation is permitted, for it says, ‘So shall they put My name upon the children of Israel,’ ‘My name,’ means the name that is peculiar to Me.” We thus see in this explanation that the meaning of the expression Shem ha-Meforash is the name that is separate from the other appellations and is peculiar to God alone. For the other names are applied to God by reason of His activities, or by reason of some other aspect of His being, other than His necessary existence. Thus the word Elohim denotes power, and therefore can be applied to others also, as for example to angels and judges. Similarly Adonai, which denotes lordship, is applied to others besides God. Also in the case of other names the same is true. They are applicable to God and to other beings either as pure homonyms or on the basis of some analogy. But the tetragrammaton can not be applied at all to any being other than God, because it denotes God as the necessary existent, as Maimonides says in chapter sixty-one of Part One of the Guide of the Perplexed. But this is a matter in which no other being shares. Hence the name is called Shem ha-Meforash (distinct and separate name).

And yet we sometimes find this name applied metaphorically to other beings, as in the biblical verse, “And the Lord (Jhvh) went before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way …,” while in a subsequent verse we read, “And the angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud removed from before them, and stood behind them.” The explanation of this usage is that names are metaphorically applied to things other than that which they properly designate, for two reasons. One is because there is some similarity, though a remote one, between the two things. The other is because the name points in a distant manner to the thing in question, as an instrument points to the owner of the instrument. Thus the Bible, in speaking of the Messiah, says, “But they shall serve the Lord their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them.” The reason for this is because the Messiah resembles David in his kingship, or princehood. The expression, “And My servant David shall be king over them,” has reference to the Messiah’s being descended from the seed of David, and points to the permanence of David’s kingdom, as is specified in another passage, “And David, My servant, shall be their prince forever,” which is no doubt a reference to David himself. For since the rule of his descendants is permanent, he is a prince forever. Similarly, the Bible calls the ark by the name of God, though it is a vessel artificially made, because it points to God, the giver of the Torah, which was in the ark. Thus, we read, “And it came to pass, when the ark set forward, that Moses said: ‘Rise up, O Lord’ … And when it rested, he said: ‘Return, O Lord, unto the ten thousands of the families of Israel.’ ” Also Joshua said concerning the ark, “Behold the ark of the covenant, the Lord of all the earth, passeth on before you over the Jordan.” The ark is not the Lord of all the earth, but he calls it so, because it owes its existence to the Lord of all the earth. So he calls it by the name of the Lord of all the earth, because it is the usage of language to call a thing by the name of the master of the thing, or the one from whom the thing emanates, or to ascribe the act of the master of the thing to the thing because by means of it the act is realized, as in human language the act of an agent is attributed to the instrument by means of which the act is done. Thus we say, the eye sees, the ear hears, though sight and hearing are functions of the soul, and the eye and the ear are merely instruments or organs by means of which the act is accomplished.

For both of these reasons at once Moses called the name of the altar, Adonai-nissi (Lord my miracle), because the altar is an instrument by means of which miracles are performed, and also because it points to God, who performs the miracles. In the same way the Bible calls the name of the Messiah, “The Lord our righteousness,” because he is the medium through whom we obtain justice from God. For this reason he is called by the name of God. Similarly Jerusalem is called, “The Lord is there,” because it is a place where the glory of the Lord was revealed more constantly than anywhere else. And this is also what the Rabbis meant when they said, “Do not read, Adonai Shammah (the Lord is there), but Adonai Shemah (the Lord is her name), i. e. the name of Jerusalem is the Lord, for the reason mentioned above. So we find that Abraham called the name of the place, Adonai-jireh (the Lord seeth), because there was seen an act which pointed to God, who sees and provides.

In the same way the Bible calls the Shekinah or the glory which was seen or apprehended in a prophetic vision, “the Lord,” as in the expressions, “And when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, … and the Lord said, I have surely seen the affliction of My people that are in Egypt”; “I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and lifted up.” It is also called the God of Israel, as in the expression, “And they saw the God of Israel.” Also God, “And they beheld God.” Thus we see that the Bible calls the Shekinah or the visible glory, “Lord,” “God,” and “God of Israel,” though no creature can see God, as is said, “For man shall not see Me and live.” The Bible also calls an angel God. Thus, concerning the angel who appeared to Gideon, the Bible says, “And the Lord turned towards him, and said: ‘Go in this thy might’ … And the Lord said unto him, ‘Surely I will be with thee …’ ” Throughout the entire narrative the Bible calls the angel by the name of the Lord.

The Bible also applies the term “glory” to various things. It is sometimes applied to the face of God Himself, who can not be seen. Thus when Moses asks of God and says, “Show me, I pray Thee, Thy glory,” God replies, “Thou canst not see My face.” Here glory is applied to the face of God. The Bible also applies the term to something that is visible to the senses, “And the glory of the Lord appeared unto all the people”; “And the appearance of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire in the top of the mount”; “And in the morning, then ye shall see the glory of the Lord.” The reason for this is because the object which is visible to the senses symbolizes something that is hidden and not visible, which is called the face of the Lord, and the glory of the Lord. This is why the prophets took the liberty to refer to a thing that was visible to them by the name of a hidden thing that was not visible, namely God, with the result that they spoke with an angel or the glory that was visible to them as if they were speaking with God. Thus Elijah addressed the angel who appeared to him or who spoke to him, in the second person, as though he were God, “For the children of Israel have forsaken Thy covenant, thrown down Thine altars, and slain Thy prophets with the sword.” The reply was, “Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord … but the Lord was not in the wind … but the Lord was not in the earthquake …” Then he heard a voice speaking to him out of the stillness and saying, “What doest thou here, Elijah?” and was then commanded by God what he should do. Now there is no doubt that Elijah was not guilty of the error of thinking that the one who spoke to him first was God, for he said to him, “Go forth and stand upon the mount before the Lord,” and yet he addressed him as though he were speaking to God Himself, when he said, “For the children of Israel have forsaken Thy covenant.”

In relation to the expression, “Come up to the Lord,” the Rabbis raise the question that the expression should have been “Come up to Me.” Such a question is not raised in connection with the expression above quoted in relation to Elijah, “And stand upon the mount before the Lord.” No question is here raised why it does not say, “And stand before Me,” because they felt nothing strange in the case of Elijah that he should have been addressed by an intermediate being. In the case of Moses it was different. After the revelation on Sinai, Moses attained the high privilege of speaking to God face to face. Hence the Rabbis think it unusual that Moses should be told, “Come up to the Lord,” from which it would seem that he was speaking to an intermediate being, and not to God Himself. Their explanation is that the intermediate being was Metatron, whose name is the same as that of his Master, and who is the Prince of the Presence, but not such a subordinate being as in the case of the other prophets who were addressed by other angels and intermediate beings. And yet the prophets took the liberty to address them as though they were speaking to God, because they were the media through whom divine prophecy came to them. This is the meaning of the statement of the Rabbis, “Great is the power of the prophets, who compare the creature to the Creator.” The meaning is, Great is the power of the prophets, who take the liberty to do an important thing like this. The reason for their doing this is because an angel is a medium of prophecy or an instrument through whom a sign or a miracle is performed, which indicates God’s will and purpose being realized upon the beings of the world. And it is customary among mankind to speak of an order which comes from a messenger or official or general of the king as being the command of the king, and the representative is addressed with respect as if he were the king himself This is why the Bible calls him by the name of God, and the prophets speak of him as if he were God.

Angels are immaterial beings and not subject to those accidents to which material beings are liable, like envy, hatred, strife. They are free from all evil. They have no pride, nor desire to do evil or sin. They always choose what is good and right in the eyes of God. For this reason when they are sent to mankind they are given permission to speak in the name of the One who sent them. We see this clearly in many instances when the visible speaker is an angel and yet he speaks in the name of the One who sent him. Thus the angel said to Hagar, “I will greatly multiply thy seed.” To Abraham he said, “I will certainly return unto thee when the season cometh round.” “Will return unto thee,” is conditional upon God’s sending him, as Rashi explains, for we do not find that the angel ever returned to Abraham. Jacob also says, “And the angel of God said unto me in the dream: Jacob; and I said: Here am I”; while at the end of the dream it is said to him, “I am the God of Beth-el, where thou didst anoint a pillar, where thou didst vow a vow unto Me.” But Jacob did not make his vow to the angel, but to God. Similarly an angel said to Abraham, “For now I know that thou art a God-fearing man, seeing that thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from Me.” But Abraham offered Isaac to God alone. In the case of Gideon, also, the angel said to him, “I will be with Thee.” Also in the case of Moses, in the beginning of the vision of the burning bush, the Bible says, “And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him”; while when he begins to speak to him he says, “I am the God of thy father, … I have surely seen the affliction of My people that are in Egypt …” This proves that an angel speaks in the name of the One who sent him. This matter deserves notice.

The reason for all this is because the angel can not disobey the command of God and alter the message or speak on his own responsibility. For the reason he is called angel is not because he is a separate intellect, but because he comes with a mission from God. If he changed the message he would no longer be an angel. Moreover he is not allowed during his mission to say or do anything which he was not commanded by God to say or do. This is the reason why an angel sent with a divine mission refuses to reveal his own personal name, or his special power, apart from the mission with which he is entrusted. Thus, when Jacob says to the angel, “Tell me, I pray thee, thy name,” the latter replies, “Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name?” Similarly the angel said to Manoah, “Wherefore askest thou after my name, seeing it is hidden?” He also said, “Though thou detain me, I will not eat of thy bread, and if thou wilt make a burnt-offering, thou must offer it unto the Lord.” The meaning is, if you offer me a burnt-offering, I will not accept it, and it will do you no good, for I do not appear to you in my personal capacity, as representing my own individual power. Hence it will be of no benefit to you to know my name and my personal power, for this might lead you into error, and you might imagine that I have some personal and independent power in this mission, which is not true. Therefore, “if thou wilt make a burnt-offering, thou must offer it unto the Lord,” for the power and the mission come from Him.

For this reason, too, a person who worships an angel in his personal and individual capacity is guilty of “cutting the plants” and of idolatry, which is forbidden in the commandment, “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me,” as our Rabbis explain in the Mekilta, and as will be made clear in the eighteenth chapter of the Third Book. But if one worships an angel in his capacity as a messenger of God, there is no offence. In the same way when one does obeisance to an official of the king in his individual capacity and power, accepting him as a master, and not as one who has power delegated to him from the king, he is guilty of treason to the king. But if he does obeisance to the official as a representative of the king, he does honor to the king. For this reason it was permissible for Joshua to bow down to the angel when he appeared to him in Jericho and said, “I am captain of the host of the Lord; I am now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and bowed down …” For though genuflection is one of the four modes of worship which, like sacrifice, incense and libation, are forbidden to be practised even in honor of angels, nevertheless since the genuflection in that case was in honor of God, and the angel was His messenger, it was permissible. But if one prays to an angel or bows down to him in his personal capacity, as possessing independent power which is signified in his name, he is liable under the prohibition, “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.” This is also the opinion of Nahmanides.

This shows the error of those who mention the names of the angels in their prayer. For they use the names of the angels for the power which they exert in their personal capacity. But this is precisely what is forbidden in the commandment, “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me,” as we said before. The origin of the error is because there are certain prayers of ancient authorship containing certain special names of angels. Hence they thought that it is permissible to include all the names in the prayer. But it is not so. No name may be mentioned in prayer except those which are peculiar to God, but no other. This is why the science treating of these things is called Cabala (lit. tradition), because tradition must be followed in the study and the practice of it, else one is liable to commit an error and to worship as God some one other than the Lord.

To make the matter clearer, I will give an illustration. We find in ancient prayers the name Mzpz, and one might think it is the name of one of the angels. But this is not true. It is merely another form of the tetragrammaton, which is derived by a substitution of letters according to the correspondence known as at bash. Similarly, kvzv bmvksz is a transformation of Jhvh El(o) henu (the Lord our God), by changing every letter in Jhvh El(o) henu for the letter which follows it in the alphabet. Thus yod becomes kaf, he becomes vav, and so on. This is the reason why no one is permitted to make use of any of the statements of the Cabalists on his own responsibility, unless he has that particular matter by direct oral tradition from a Cabalist. Opinions in that science are forbidden except to one who has received the tradition from a wise man. The written word alone can not be used as authority. This is why it is called Cabala, as the name signifies.

I was obliged to make this observation because I have seen men fall into error by reading the Zohar and other cabalistic books without having any oral tradition. They presume upon their own opinion, exhibiting their great wisdom, and transgress the permitted boundary, reflecting upon things upon which reflection is forbidden. The greatest of the modern Cabalists, Nahmanides, has said by way of admonition that the words of the Cabalists can not be understood or known by any kind of reason or intelligence, but only through oral communication by a wise Cabalist to an intelligent person. Independent opinion in the matter is folly and the cause of great harm. This is what Nahmanides says in his commentary on the Pentateuch. To sum up, Take heed unto thyself and be very careful lest thou be caught and fall into their snare, for they forsake the paths of uprightness and walk in ways of darkness. For those who make a study of the Cabala independently, without having an oral tradition from a learned Cabalist, know and understand nothing and walk in darkness.