Talk:Jewish angelic hierarchy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Judaism (Rated Stub-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Kabbalah (Rated Stub-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kabbalah, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Kabbalah 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Article name[edit]

Can anyone possibly justify this hideous neologism? It cannot possibly have the meaning ascribed to it; it's an etymological disaster. Given that the subject ought to be covered, I strongly suggest renaming to Jewish angelic hierarchy. TCC (talk) (contribs) 10:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I would be OK with this rename. I don't know of any preference for a particular English term, and I don't believe a Hebrew term would be helpful for the English Wikipedia. --Shirahadasha 06:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced content[edit]

Removing table as provided to Talk. Reason is that the interpretive translations and names of archangels provided are unsourced. I believe there's reason to doubt that this material describes Maimonide's angelic hierarchy. As the Archangel article explains, the Jewish concept that comes closest to the Christian concept of an "archangel" is found in the Kabbalah, and Maimonides, a rationalist, did not follow that approach. Best, --Shirahadasha 22:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Choir of Angels Translation Archangel
Chayot Ha Kadesh Living Ones Metatron
Ophanim Wheels Raziel
Erelim (see Isaiah 33:7) Thrones Tzaphkiel
Hashmallim (see Ezekiel 1:4) Brilliant Ones Tzadkiel
Seraphim Fiery Serpents Khamael
Malakhim Messengers, angels Raphael
Elohim Godly Beings Haniel
Bene Elohim Sons of Gondly Beings Michael
Cherubim, (see Talmud Hagigah 13b) Strong Ones Gabriel
Ishim ("manlike beings", see Daniel 10:5), Souls of Fire Sandalphon

I appreciated your turning the article into a table. Wanted to point out that some of the material you added is unsourced and I believe does not necessarily represent what the article describes, Maimonides' system of angel classification. For example, you added material about archangels, but I don't believe it likely that Maimonides had the concept of associating archangels with ranks as the table described and it's not clear to me Maimonides had the concept of archangels at all. As another example, the material you added associates Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael with different kinds of angels, but Jewish tradition generally describes them as being of the same kind. Similarly, some of the interpretive translations you added are unsourced and may not be authentic. It's worth noting that Maimonides was a rationalist, not a Kabbalist, so concepts associated with the Kabbalah do not necessarily represent his system of angeology. Best, --Shirahadasha 22:26, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Would it be more acceptable if the article were divided into two havles, a Maimodes half and a Kabbalah half? Use headings to differentiate them? I can find source for the Kabbalah content. Harvestdancer 04:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Would you find it acceptable if the Jewish article were divided into two parts, the first part being a Maimonides section and the secon a Kabbalah section? Harvestdancer 04:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, with two caveats. The first is that (per the article title) the article is on traditional Jewish interpretations and sources. The Kabbala has influenced a number of religious traditons as well as popular culture generally, so I believe that popular and other interpretations of the Kabbala that aren't specifically Jewish might better belong on a separate article. The second is that (per: WP:OR) I believe the article should avoid presenting a composite from different points of view but should help the reader identify which source has what view, so I'd suggest a separate table giving Kabbalistic interpretations. "Kabbala" encompasses a wide range of sources and interpretations, so it would be valuable to identify whose interpretation of Kabbala is being presented. Best, --Shirahadasha 15:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
What if I create a different article, of the kabbalistic angelic hierarchy? Harvestdancer 15:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome to do that, as long as it's reliably sourced. You'll probably find that there are editors interested in keeping traditional jewish and popular-culture POVs separately attributed, but that shouldn't affect the appropriateness of the topic. Best, --Shirahadasha 19:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I will look up good sources. I know about RS, and I will try to find the best RS I can. I'm just fishing for opinion on whether the addition should be here or on a new page. Your comment about "traditional Jewish interpretations" for this article ... that's exactly why a separate section would work, because one section would be the traditional interpretation and the other the Kabbalistic interpretation. Nothing in the title suggests that the interpretation is instrinsically traditional. Harvestdancer 21:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

(Outdent) Just to be clear, the Kabbalah is a traditional Jewish text and one of the main texts of Hassidic Judaism, but like the Bible, it has different interpretations and means different things when interpreted by different people and groups. Many Jews would not consider some of the work published by, for example, the Kabbalah Centre, Llewellyn Worldwide, or Shambhala Publications, all of which publish books on the Kabbalah, to represent a mainstream Jewish viewpoint. Best, --Shirahadasha 00:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

On reflection, why not just go ahead, be bold, and start an article called Kabbalistic angelic hierarchy or whatever, use whatever sources you were planning on? People can then do whatever they want -- add additional viewpoints and sources, merge it with this one, whatever people want to do. Best, --Shirahadasha 01:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I will Be Bold and make a new article ... as soon as you tell me how to cite a book. I know how to cite an internet site, but books ... I've read WP:CITE and WP:RS but I'm still not sure. Jason Harvestdancer | Talk to me 16:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean, some of the content is unsourced? The entire thing is unsourced. Also, how can Chayot Ha Kadensh be Ranked Number one in the article, if in the actual Chayot artcile, they are described as being of equal rank to the Cherubim? Wolf ODonnell 13:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi! You don't have to be perfect about citation form to start an article as long as you provide the essential material. Please give author(s), title, publisher, date of publication, and if possible the ISBN number. We can work with that. Best, --Shirahadasha 04:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

MERGE[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was unopposed support for merging. Robophilosopher (talk) 09:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

At the moment both this article and "Jewish Kabbalistic Hierarchy" are stubs. I think that rather than focusing on making this article and the other longer, they should be combined. As a moderately observant Jew who has spent a good deal of time studying Kabbalah, I know that at its base, Kabbalah is an integral part of Jewish ideology, particularly within Orthodox Judaism where Kabbalah has become the mainstream in the past two centuries. Although you make a valid point that it has expanded to other faiths, you can say the same for almost every Jewish tradition. Because of Judaism's position as the founding Abrahamic religion, and because Judaism, Christianity and Islam have spread all over the world, you would be hard pressed to find a Jewish school of thought, especially one as large as Kabbalah, which has not been adopted by other faiths. Additionally, the two articles are almost exactly the same. The real difference is that Maimonides' hierarchy came first, and is likely the basis of the Kabbalistic hierarchy, making Maimonides' appear less developed. Therefore, I think that the logical step would be to fold Kabbalistic Angelic Hierarchy into Jewish Angelic Hierarchy and have the article emphasize how Maimonides created the system first, and subsequent Kabbalistic scholars expanded it to what it is today. Then, if necesary, a third section can detail the effects of this hierarchy on subsequent faiths such as Christianity. This would also be a good place to name influences that may have caused Maimonides' system to develop, such as Zoroastrianism, and Babylonian influences.

- Phelps.Benjamin@gmail.com 11:26 Feb. 22, 2008

I totally agree with the two previous opinions here and here, Kabbala is a development from Judaism that continues to influence not only mainstream Judaism but Christianity and Theosophy as well. I will do this in the next few days if no controversy arises.

Strongly Agree with the merge. :—-— .:Seth_Nimbosa:. (talkcontribs) 09:34, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I fourth the opinion. Strongly Agree.

      -SeraphNB  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seraphnb (talkcontribs) 12:16, 26 April 2011 (UTC) 

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.