Explanatory Bible Prophet Ezekiel. Interpretation of the Bible, book of the prophet Ezekiel

is part of the OT (refers to the so-called great prophets). The author is traditionally recognized as the prophet. Ezekiel.

Text

I.p.k. in the New Testament

is used less frequently than the books of other great prophets of the Old Testament, and often this use is limited only to non-obvious allusions. Thus, the parable of the mustard seed, which “when it grows, becomes larger than all the grains and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and take refuge in its branches” (Matthew 13:32) interpreters compare with Ezekiel’s prophecy about the cedar branch planted Lord on the “high mountain of Israel”: this branch will also become “a majestic cedar, and all kinds of birds will live under it, all kinds of birds will live in the shade of its branches” (Ezek 17:23). In I.p.k. we are talking about bud. restoration of the Kingdom of Israel, which became a prototype of the Kingdom of Heaven, to which the words of Christ in the parable refer.

The parable of the Good Shepherd (John 10:11-18) uses a similar idea of ​​God as the true Shepherd, who will take His sheep from unfaithful shepherds and lead them from the dispersion to the mountains of Israel, where they will graze “in rich pasture.” (Ezek 34:10-14). The unification of the flock under the Head, Christ (“... there will be one flock and one Shepherd” - John 10. 16) is the fulfillment of the prophecies of I. p.k., for example: “On this land, on the mountains of Israel, I will make them one people, and one King will be king over them all...” (Ezek 37:22).

Thought of the prophet. Ezekiel that God wants the salvation of all people (“Do I want the death of the wicked? says the Lord God. Is it not that he should turn from his ways and live?” - Ezekiel 18.23; “Say to them: I live, says the Lord God: I do not want the death of the sinner, but that the sinner should turn from his way and live” - Ezekiel 33.11), used in the 2nd Epistle of St. Peter in explaining why, as some Christians believe, “the Lord is slow to fulfill his promise.” This apparent “slowness” is actually evidence of God’s long-suffering and His mercy towards sinners: “... He is patient with us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9).

Some semantic parallels with I. p.k. are contained in the Revelation of John the Apostle. Researchers note (see, for example: Neuss. 1912. S. 24) the similarity of the description of Him who sits on the throne of glory (Rev 4) with similar images from the visions described in I. p.k. (Ezek 1. 26-28; 10 . 1). This is manifested even in details that seem insignificant at first glance. So, Ezekiel compares the radiance he saw with a rainbow: “And I saw, as it were, flaming metal, as if the appearance of fire inside it all around... In the same form that a rainbow appears on the clouds during rain, this is the appearance of this radiance all around”; in the book Revelation around the throne revealed by St. John, there was a “rainbow... like an emerald” (Rev 4:3).

I. p.k. in the exegesis of the early and medieval Church

Apostolic men rarely use I. p.k., but in a number of cases they borrow important theological ideas from it. Thus, the author of Barnabas the Apostle Epistle, speaking about the rebirth of man in Christ, quotes a prophecy in which God promises to renew His people (Barnaba. Ep. 6. 14; cf. Ezek 11. 19). The description of the river, along the banks of which trees will grow, having life-giving power (Ezek. 47. 12), is interpreted as a prototype of the waters of Baptism (Barnaba. Ep. 11. 10-11).

In the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians sschmch. Clement, bishop Roman, Ezekiel is named among those men who “wandered in goatskins and sheepskins, preaching about the coming of Christ” (Clem. Rom. Ep. I ad Cor. 17. 1). To prove the need for repentance sschmch. Clement quotes the “inspired” words of the prophet: Eze 18.30; 32.12; 33. 11 (Clem. Rom. Ep. I ad Cor. 8. 2). As Old Testament evidence of the general resurrection, the promise of Ezekiel 37. 12-13 is cited (Ibid. 50. 4; Chapter 37 of I.p.k. will become one of the favorite Old Testament texts for Christian authors - Neuss. 1912. S. 24).

Sschmch. Justin the Philosopher substantiates, with the help of texts from I. p.k., a number of his arguments in polemics with the Jews: about the meaning of the Sabbath rest established by God - “so that His name should not be defiled” (Iust. Martyr. Dial. 21.2; cf.: Ezek 20. 20; text quoted from the Septuagint); about the temporary nature of the Old Testament commandments, the fulfillment of which in itself cannot grant salvation (Iust. Martyr. Dial. 44. 2; cf. Eze 14. 14-15; the text of the quotation differs somewhat from MT and LXX); that those who convert to Christianity are granted “mercy, love for mankind and the immeasurable wealth of God’s mercy” (Iust. Martyr. Dial. 47.5); and, finally, the need to convict sinners of their sins and convince Jews of the rightness of Christianity (Ibid. 82. 3; cf. Eze 3. 17-19). According to Justin, human history will end with a 1000-year messianic kingdom in Jerusalem, “as Ezekiel, Isaiah and other prophets declare” (Iust. Martyr. Dial. 80.5).

Sschmch. Irenaeus, bishop Lyonsky, in support of his idea that the commandments of the Old Testament were only “a means of teaching and a prophecy of the future,” and therefore their fulfillment did not provide salvation, quotes Ezekiel 20.24 (Iren. Adv. haer. IV 15.1; cf.: Ezekiel 20.25). The idea that the establishment of the Sabbath was given only as “a sign by which the race of Abraham would be recognized”, smch. Irenaeus also substantiates this with a quotation from Ezekiel 20.12 (Iren. Adv. haer. IV 16.1). Claiming the invisibility of God the Father, Irenaeus explains the content of the visions that were seen by the Old Testament righteous, including Ezekiel: they “did not see God, but what they saw was the likeness of the glory of the Lord and prophecies of the future” (Ibid. 20. 11). Fragments of the 37th chapter. I.p.k. are given to prove the future. resurrection from the dead (Ibid. V 15.1) and to confirm the opinion about the “earthly kingdom of saints” (Ibid. IV 34.1).

Eusebius of Caesarea mentions Op. sschmch. Hippolytus of Rome (III century) “On some parts of [the book of] Ezekiel” (Εἰς μέρη τοῦ ᾿Ιεζεκιήλ), from which only the ser. translation of a fragment devoted to the interpretation of Ezekiel 1. 5-10, where the 4 creatures revealed to Ezekiel are considered as symbols of the evangelists: the calf - Luke, the lion - Matthew, the man - Mark, the eagle - John (Neuss. 1912. S. 32-33). The commentary on I. p. k. martyr has also not been preserved. Quiz Petavsky, famous blzh. Hieronymus of Stridon (Hieron. De vir. illustr. 74).

Among the representatives of the Alexandrian theological school is already Clement of Alexandria. once quotes I. p.k., mainly those places in which we talk about the repentance of sinners and the mercy of God (Clem. Alex. Strom. IV 25; Ezek 44. 9-10, 27). Origen dedicated a separate commentary to I. p.k. (preserved fragment relating to Ezekiel 34. 17 - PG. 13. Col. 663-665) and 14 homilies (extant in the translation and processing of St. Jerome - Ibid. Col. 665 -767). I. p.c. is of particular interest to Origen, in particular because he considers Ezekiel a prototype of Christ (typus erat Christi - Ibid. Col. 672), as evidenced by the fact that God, turning to Ezekiel, constantly uses the name “Son of man”, which in the NT refers to Christ (Ibidem).

St. Kirill, bishop Jerusalem, uses the images of I. p. k. in the interpretation of the 1st member of the Creed (9th catechetical teaching) to prove that “it is impossible to see God with bodily eyes” (Cyr. Hieros. Catech. 9. 1). In his opinion, even the cherubim, who serve as the throne of the Most High, are incomprehensible, about whom Ezekiel tries to talk, using words understandable to everyone: “Reading this description made by the prophet, we cannot comprehend it” (Ibid. 9. 3). The second catechumen teaching of St. Cyril on repentance is to a large extent an interpretation “of the words of Ezekiel: “The righteousness of the righteous will be upon him”” (Ibid. 2. 1; cf. Ezekiel 18. 20; the Septuagint text used by St. Cyril differs slightly from the Synodal translation).

Tertullian often turned to the text of I. p.k. in polemics with the Jews and Marcionites (Jer 16. 3: Tertull. Adv. Marcion. III 13. 9; Adv. Iud. 9. 14; Ezekiel 16. 9: Adv. Marcion I 14. 3). In Adv. Iud. 11.2-5 he quotes the words of Ezek 8.12-18 about the fallen Israel, and also gives prophecies about the punishments sent by the Lord (Ezek 9.1-6). Tertullian uses expressions close to prophetic (cf. Eze 20. 13; 22. 8) when accusing the Jews of violating the Sabbath injunction (Idem. Adv. Marcion. IV 12. 13; Adv. Iud. 4. 2). In Adv. Marcion. II 10. 3-5 Ezekiel's words about the glory and fall of the king of Tire are interpreted as a prophecy about the actions of the devil.

Sschmch. Cyprian, bishop Carthaginian, based his understanding of Baptism on the text of Ezekiel 36.25-26 (Cypr. Carth. Ep. 69.12; 70.1).

Many eastern the fathers quoted I. p.k., pointing to the power of the prophet (Basil. Magn. De Spirit. Sanct. 23. 54), in which he could contemplate the greatness of God (Epiph. Ancor. 53. 2), because that he was filled with Divine wisdom (Greg. Nyss. In Cant. Cantic. 6.217). St. Gregory the Theologian recognizes Ezekiel as “the most amazing and highest of the prophets, the contemplator and interpreter of great sacraments and visions” (Greg. Nazianz. Or. 2 // PG. 35. Col. 473). St. Ambrose of Milan likens the prophet to “a cloud in which the holiness of the Divine Trinity was shown through the cherubim” (Ambros. Mediol. In Luc. X 42 // PL. 15. Col. 1814). Aphrahat often used I. p. k. in polemics with rabbis (Neusner J. Aphrahat and Judaism. Leiden, 1971. P. 257).

Blzh. Jerome of Stridonsky bases his interpretation of I. p. k., as in other commentaries, on his own translation of the book from Hebrew, but in some cases he draws on the LXX, although in the case of I. p. k. he considers this text as less reliable (Hieron. In Ezech. 1. 22-26; 5. 12-13). When interpreting the text, Jerome used 14 homilies of Origen, which he himself translated into Latin, as well as his commentary on I. p.k. (cf.: Hieron. In Ezech. 8. 15-16; Grützmacher. 1908. Bd. 2. S. 201). In addition, other commentaries were used, as can be seen from the interpretation of the prophetic vision of the throne in Ezekiel 1. 4-21, where at the very beginning Jerome gives 6 interpretations known to him (Dassmann. 1985. S. 169). As in other commentaries, in his interpretation of I. p.k. Jerome also used the works of Jewish commentators (Gr ü tzmacher. 1908. Bd. 2. S. 203-204).

Blzh. Theodoret, bishop Kirsky, in a commentary on I. p.k. (PG. 81. Col. 808-1256) seeks to determine the historical place of the prophet. Ezekiel among the Old Testament prophets and those events during which his ministry took place. This, according to Theodoret, should have happened 12 years before the beginning of Daniel’s prophetic ministry in Babylon (Theodoret. In Ezech. Praef.). Theodoret's interpretation is based on the text of the Septuagint, he comments on such theological themes as the glory of God, the universalism of the saving action of God, free will and human responsibility for his actions (Ashby G. W. Theodoret of Cyrrhus as Exegete of the OT. Grahamstown, 1972. S. 131 -133).

Several Previously, a commentary on I. p.k. was compiled by Polychronius Apameensis (died in the 1st third of the 5th century) (Polichronius Apameensis. Comment. in Ezech. (fragm.) in catenis (Mai. NPB. 1854. Vol. VII. Pt. 2. P. 92-127)); the text of this commentary is preserved in fragments in the catenas compiled by John Drungarius (Bardenhewer. Geschichte. 1962. Bd. 3. S. 323). Review of topics that interested Westerners. theologians in I.p.k., gives by Isidore of Seville in the book about the prophets. Thus, Ezekiel, whose name translated into Latin means “the power of God,” prefiguring the appearance of Christ, contemplates sublime mysteries in the stream of time (Isid. Hisp. De Ezech. 53. 8 // PL. 83. Col. 168-169 ). The interpretation of I. p. k. in the 22 homilies of St. had great authority. Gregory I the Great (ed. 601 in 2 volumes). The scope of interpretation (only for a small number of places of I.p.k.) shows that for St. It was important for Gregory to explain the spiritual content of the book as part of the program of identifying 4 levels of meaning of the biblical text (Greg. Magn. In Ezech. I 7.9).

Catenas based on fragments of interpretations of St. Ephrem the Syrian was compiled by Sevier of Edessa (c. 850-860) (Melki J. S. Ephrem le Syrien: Un bilan de l'édition critique // PdO. 1983. Vol. 11. P. 84). Several Nestorian interpretations arose later in the Syriac tradition , among which a completely independent, although with a noticeable influence of the commentary of Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus, was the commentary of Ishodad of Merv (c. 850) (Commentaire d"Iso"dad de Merv sur l"Ancien Testament / Ed. J.-M. Voste, trad. C. van den Eynde. Louvain, 1972. Vol. 5: Jeremie, Ezechiel, Daniel. P. XXI-XXVI. (CSCO. Syr.; 147)). The earlier commentaries of Abraham bet-Rabban (d. 569), as well as Henana of Adiabene (d. c. 610) have not survived (Baumstark. Geschichte. S. 115-116; Commentaire d "Iso" dadh de Merv sur l "Ancien Testament / Éd. J.-M. Vosté, trad. C. van den Eynde. Louvain, 1972. Vol. 5: Jeremie, Ezechiel, Daniel. P. XIV. (CSCO. Syr.; 147)).

In the West Church interpreters in a later period limit themselves to the exegesis of individual chapters of I. p.k., as well as the creation of catenas (Harvey. 1957. P. 2220). Rabanus Maurus compiles catenas from the works of Jerome and Gregory the Great (Rabanus Maurus. Comment. in Ezech. // PL. 110. Col. 497-1084C). Rupert Deutzsky appends to his treatise on the Trinity (De trinitate et operibus eius) an interpretation in I. p.k. (Rupertus Tuitiensis abbas. In Ezech. prophetam commentariorum // PL. 167. Col. 1419-1498). Richard of Saint-Victor owns exegetical interpretations on individual places of I. p.k. (Richardus S. Victoris Prior. In visionem Ezech. // PL. 196. Col. 527-600).

I.p.k. in Judaism

The theme of the vision of the heavenly throne became the exegetical basis for the mystical ideas developed in the literature of Hekhalot. Ezekiel's vision plays a large role in Heb. The Book of Enoch (see Enoch the third book), dedicated to the heavenly ascension of Rabbi Ishmael ben Elisha. When describing the divine merkavah (“chariot” - thus interpreting the heavenly throne opened to Ezekiel), references to I. p.k. are obvious (3 Enoch 24.15 and Ezekiel 1.14; 3 Enoch 24.18 and Ezekiel 10.12 ). Eze 48.35 is used in 3 Enoch 24.17 to describe the "chariot of the swift cherub." To explain the winds blowing under the cherub (3 Enoch 23.7), words from Ezek 37.1 are also quoted.

In 4QEzek 40.24 a vision of the heavenly throne is depicted, which in comparison with Ezekiel 1 has several. differences: next to the cherubs, various ranks of angels are mentioned, the throne is presented in the form of a chariot.

This vision and especially the description of the “ofanim” (the wheels of the heavenly chariot) were of great importance for the development of Jewish angelology. The Mishnah, Tosefta and Talmud use the term “merkavah” to designate the content of a vision or its biblical description; “maaseh merkavah” is an exegetical speculative system based on the biblical text (Halperin. 1980. P. 179). In addition to the books of Enoch, numerous quotations from and allusions to the visions of Ezekiel are contained in the Apocalypse of Abraham. The Treatise on the Heavenly Palaces (Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition / Ed. G. Sholem. N.Y., 19652. P. 103-117) contains a detailed description of the heavenly throne seen by Ezekiel. Along with warnings and prohibitions (Megillah 4.10; Chagigah 2.1), during the Tannaite period there are also quite positive references to the visions of the prophet (Tosefta, Megillah 3(4). 28; Halperin. 1980. P. 172-173, 179) in stories about the miracles of the disciples of Rabbi Yohannan ben Zakkai, which connected the glory of God revealed to the prophet with the Epiphany at Sinai (Ibid. P. 179-180, 182).

Later, the rabbis' distrust of the mysticism of the merkava increased. Tosefta Chagiga 2.3 reports about 4 rabbis who “entered the garden of mystical contemplation,” and only one of them was able to “return back” without harm to himself. According to Rabbi Eliezer, “at the [Red] Sea a simple maid saw what Ezekiel and the other prophets had never seen” (Mekhilta de Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai 3), i.e., the revelation was given to all of Israel, and not to individuals, in than modern researchers tend to see a hidden polemic with Christianity (Aberbach M., Wald S. G. Ezekiel in the Aggadah // EncJud. 2007. Vol. 6. P. 645). In later midrashim, Ezekiel is praised for his love for Israel, since he was considered worthy to perform the miracle of resurrecting the “dry bones” (Seder Eliyahu Rabbah 5.23). However, he is condemned for not initially believing in the possibility of this miracle, for which he paid with death in a foreign country (Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer 33).

E.P.S.

Some trends in modern biblical criticism I.p.k.

In the history of critical studies of I. p.k. there are no theories of the origin of this book that would be comparable in significance to the theories of B. L. Duma about the origin of the Book of the Prophet. Isaiah or with the analysis of the Deuteronomic layers in the Book of Prophets. Jeremiah Helga Weippert (Weippert H. Die Prosareden des Jeremiabuches. B., 1973). This is largely explained by the obvious signs of unity and integrity of I. p.c., which are pointed out by researchers. As R. Albertz notes, before the beginning. XX century in biblical studies, the prevailing opinion was the stylistic unity of the I. p.k. created by Ezekiel or a later author. The unity of the book was first questioned by Hölscher, who believed that only 170 verses (about 1/8 of the book) of the poetic texts of I. p. in Jerusalem", created by the author-editor in the 5th century. BC. In the 50-60s. XX century there was a widespread idea, supported by Zimmerli, that I. p.c. was the result of several. phases lit. creativity, ch. arr. students and followers of Ezekiel, who worked on additions to his prophecies. Among researchers of recent decades, there are those who support the idea of ​​the unity of the book and the authorship of Ezekiel, and those in whose works the identity of Ezekiel as the author sometimes disappears (Albertz. 2003. P. 347).

The historical and critical research of I. p. K. Zimmerli is based on the idea of ​​a dichotomy between the work of the prophet and the activities of his disciples. The basic principle of lit. The development of the book is the “fouling” of the authentic speeches of the prophet with additions and interpretations of his students and followers. At the same time, the stylistic unity of the book is preserved, since the students wrote in line with the same tradition as Ezekiel, developing his themes and ideas. According to Albertz, this is one of the most vulnerable points of Zimmerli's theory, since the heuristic value of dividing the texts of I. p. k. into the text belonging to the prophet and the text written by his disciples is minimal if there is no fundamental difference between the 2 groups of texts.

In addition to the general critical and exegetical topics associated with I. p.k., a number of studies are devoted to the interpretation of individual words and expressions, the understanding of which causes difficulties (“branches are brought to their noses” - Ezekiel 8.17; “idol of jealousy” - Eze 8.3; - adversity - Eze 7.7, cf. English translations: morning in the “King James Version”, your turn in the “New Jerusalem Bible”), as well as interpretations of individual passages and chapters of the book that are of particular interest or causing bewilderment and even rejection among modern people. reader (chapters 16; 18; 26-28; 37. 1-10(14); 38-39; 44).

One of the themes quite specific to the interpretation of I. p.k. is the influence on it of the literature and culture of Mesopotamia, with which the author had to come into close contact. Ezekiel’s familiarity with Babylonian culture is quite obvious at some points (see, for example, the only mention in the OT of liver fortune telling, common in Babylonia (Ezekiel 21:26)); in most cases, the painstaking work of a philologist is required to identify Mesopotamian parallels and allusions. R. Frankena notes Ezekiel's familiarity with the Mesopotamian epic of Erra, reflected in the use of certain lexemes (Zimmerli. 1979. Vol. 1). Later, another parallel with the epic of Erra was pointed out by M. Anbar, who discovered in Ezekiel 22.24 an allusion to the idea of ​​an exceptional city, which was not touched by the flood “on the day of wrath” (cf.: Epic of Erra 4.50: “ ...even Sippar, the eternal city, which the Lord of the Land did not allow the waters of the flood to drown..." - Anbar. 1979). A detailed comparison of I. p.k. and the Epic of Erra is the subject of a monograph by D. Boudy, which provides an overview of the general problems of the Mesopotamian context of I. p.

M. Astur suggested that the concept of the prophecy about Gog (chapters 38-39) goes back to the Mesopotamian mythological text known as “The Legend of Naram-Sin of Kuta,” created in the Old Babylonian period and popular in Neo-Assyria. period. This text, like Ezekiel 38-39, is dedicated to the invasion from the north (from Anatolia) by troops led by several. princes headed by one supreme leader (Astour. 1976).

D. Sharon analyzed the thematic and structural similarities of chapters 40-48 with the Gudea Cylinder containing the Sumerian. the text of the vision to King Gudea, in which the plan and size of the future were revealed to him. temple (Sharon. 1996).

A. K. Lyavdansky

I.p.k. in worship

According to the early Jerusalem Lectionary of the 5th-8th centuries. (see art. Jerusalem worship) I. p.k. was used during worship during Lent: the passage Ezekiel 18.1-20 was read on the 4th Monday (Tarchnischvili. Grand Lectionaire. T. 1. P. 63), Eze 34. 1-10 or 34. 1-27 - on the 4th Thursday (Ibid. T. 1. P. 65), Eze 39. 25-29 - on the 4th Sunday (Ibid. T. 1. P 62), Eze 37.21-26 - on the 6th Wednesday (Ibid. T. 1. P. 77), Eze 3. 17-21 - on the 6th Thursday (Ibid. T. 1. P. 78 ), Eze 31.3-13 - on the Week of Vai (Ibid. T. 1. P. 84-85), Eze 37. 1-14 - on Holy Saturday (Ibid. T. 1. P. 112-113); readings from I. p.k. for the holidays of the fixed cycle are also known: Eze 36. 25-36 and 47. 1-9 were read on the Epiphany, a passage of Eze 44. 1-3 was read on the feast of the Dormition of the Most Holy. Mother of God, Ezekiel 9. 2-6 - September 15 (after-feast of the Exaltation of the Cross).

In the Typikon of the Great Church. IX-XI centuries the following readings from I.p.k. are assigned: excerpt Eze 1.1-20 - for tritect on Holy Monday (Mateos. Typicon. T. 2. P. 68), Eze 1. 21-28 - for tritect on Holy Tuesday (Ibid.), Ezekiel 2.3-3. 3 - on tritekti on Holy Wednesday (Ibid. P. 70), Eze 37. 1-14 - on Holy Saturday at matins, Eze 36. 24-28 - in the evening before the feast of Pentecost, Eze 43. 27-44. 3 - on the day of the indictment (Ibid. T. 1. R. 4-6), the Nativity and Dormition of the Most Holy. Theotokos (Ibid. P. 18, 370), Presentation of the Lord (Ibid. P. 222).

In the Messinian Typicon of 1131, representing southern Italy. edition of the Studio Charter, the same readings from the I. p. k. are assigned as in the Typikon of the Great Church.

In modern Orthodox worship Ezekiel 43. 27-44. 4 is used as a proverb on holidays in honor of the Most Rev. Theotokos, Ezekiel 1.1-20 read at the 6th hour on Holy Monday, Ezekiel 1.21-2. 1 - at the 6th hour on Holy Tuesday, Ezekiel 2. 3-3. 3 - at the 6th hour on Holy Wednesday, Ezekiel 37. 1-14 - at matins on Holy Saturday, Ezekiel 36. 24-28 - at vespers on the Feast of Pentecost.

Lit.: Ewald H. Die Propheten des Alten Bundes. Gott., 18682. Bd. 2: Jeremja und Hezeqiel mit ihren Zeitgenossen; Smend R. Der Prophet Ezechiel. Lpz., 18802; Cornill C. H. Das Buch des Propheten Ezechiel. Lpz., 1886; Rozhdestvensky A.P., prot. Prophet's vision Ezekiel on the Chebar River. St. Petersburg, 1895; Gr ü tzmacher G. Hieronymus: Eine biogr. Stud. zur alten Kirchengeschichte. Lpz., 1901-1908. 3 Bde; Skaballanovich M. N. The first chapter of the Book of Prophets. Ezekiel: Experience of explanation. Mariupol, 1904; aka. Book of prophets Ezekiel // Lopukhin. Explanatory Bible. 1909. T. 6. P. 90-238; Das Buch Ezechiel auf Grund der Septuaginta hergestellt / Übers., krit. erklärt G. Jahn. Lpz., 1905; Neuss W. Das Buch Ezechiel in Theologie und Kunst bis zum Ende des XII. Jh. Münster, 1912; H ö lscher G. Geschichte der israelitischen und jüdischen Religion. Giessen, 1922; idem. Hesekiel, der Dichter und das Buch. Giessen, 1924; Torrey Ch. C. Pseudo-Ezekiel and the Original Prophecy. New Haven; L., 1930; Cooke G. A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Ezekiel. Edinb., 1936; Danielsmeyer W. Neue Untersuchungen zur Ezechiel-Septuaginta: Diss. Munster, 1936; Lods A. Histoire de la littérature hébraïque et juive, depuis les origines jusqu"à la ruine de l"état juif (135 après J.-C.). P., 1950; Ezechiel/Hrsg. J. Ziegler. Gött., 1952, 19772; Fohrer G. Die Hauptprobleme des Buches Ezechiel. B., 1952; Turner N. The Greek Translators of Ezekiel // JThSt. 1956. Vol. 7. P. 12-24; Harvey J. Ezéchiel // DSAMDH. 1957. Vol. 4. P. 2204-2220; Eichrodt W. Der Prophet Hezechiel. Gott., 1959-1966. 2 Bde; Frankena R. Kattenkeningen van een Assyrioloog bij Ezechiel. Leiden, 1965; Herrmann S. Die prophetischen Heilserwartungen im Alten Testament. Stuttg., 1965; Astour M. C. Ezekiel "s Prophecy of God and the Cuthaean Legend of Naram-Sin // JBL. 1976. Vol. 95. P. 567-579; Anbar M. Une nouvelle allusion à une tradition babylonienne dans Ézéchiel (XXII 24) // VT. 1979. Vol. 29. N 3. P. 352-353; Zimmerli W. Ezekiel: A Comment. on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel. Phil., 1979. Vol. 1: Chapters 1-24; 1983. Vol. 2: Chapters 25-48; Halperin D. J. The Merkabah in Rabbinic Literature. New Haven, 1980; Greenberg M. Ezekiel 1-20. Garden City, 1983; idem. Ezekiel 21-37. 1997; Dassmann E. Trinitarische und christologische Auslegung der Tronvision Ezechiels in der patristischen Theologie // Im Gesprach mit dem dreieinen Gott: Elemente einer trinitarischen Theologie: FS zum 65. Geburtstag von W. Breuning / Hrsg. M. Bohnke. Düsseldorf, 1985. S. 159-174; Hals R. M. Ezekiel . Grand Rapids, 1989; Allen L. C. Ezekiel 20-48. Dallas, 1990; idem. Ezekiel 1-19. Waco, 1994; Blenkinsopp J. Ezekiel: A Bible Commentary. for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville, 1990; Rooker M. F. Biblical Hebrew in Transition: The Language of the Book of Ezekiel. Sheffield, 1990; Bodi D. The Book of Ezekiel and the Poem of Erra. Gott., 1991; Boadt L. Ezekiel, Book of // ABD. 1992. Vol. 2. P. 711-722; Lust J. The Septuagint of Ezekiel according to Papyrus 967 and the Pentateuch // EThL. 1996. Vol. 72. N 1. P. 131-137; Sharon D. M. A Biblical Parallel to a Sumerian Temple Hymn?: Ezekiel 40-48 and Gudea // JANES. 1996. Vol. 24. P. 99-109; Block D. I. The Book of Ezekiel. Grand Rapids, 1997; Vol. 1:1-24. 1998. Vol. 2: 25-48; Masada. Jerusalem, 1999. Vol. 6: Hebrew Fragments from Masada / Ed. S. Talmon; Dimant D. Pseudo-Ezekiel // EncDSS. 2000. Vol. 1. P. 282-284; Page H. R. Ezekiel, Book of: Biblical Text // Ibid. P. 279-282; Kutsko J. F. Between Heaven and Earth: Divine Presence and Absence in the Book of Ezekiel. Winona Lake, 2000; Albertz R. Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the 6th Cent. B.C.E. Atlanta, 2003; The Book of Ezekiel: Hebrew Univ. Bible Project/Ed. M. Goshen-Gotshtein, Sh. Talmon. Jerusalem, 2004; Damsma A. An Analysis of Targum Ezekiel and its Relationship to the Targumic Toseftot: Diss. L., 2008; idem. An Analysis of the Dialect and Early Jewish Mystical Lore in a Targumic Tosefta to Ezekiel 1. 1 (Ms Gaster 1478) // Aramaic Studies. L.; N.Y., 2008. Vol. 6. N 1. P. 17-58; Scatolini Ap ó stolos S. Imagining Ezekiel // JHebrS. 2008. Vol. 8; http://www.arts.ualberta.ca/jhs/index.htm [Electr. resource].

Prophet Ezekiel and his book.

The personality of the prophet Ezekiel.

“Ezekiel” translated means “God will strengthen, give strength.”

Ezekiel was a Jerusalem priest, the son of Busius, and in his homeland belonged to the city aristocracy. He fell into Babylonian captivity with Jeconiah and the first party of Israelites consisting of 10 thousand people around 597 BC. In Babylon, he lived in the town of Tel Aviv (not far from the Babylonian city of Nippur) near the river Khobar (Kebaru), which, in fact, was not a river, but a canal. According to legend, it was dug up by Jewish settlers by order of Nebuchadnezzar and used for irrigation, channeling water from the Euphrates River through it.
In captivity he was not constrained: he had a wife (she was a great consolation to him, but she died in the 9th year of captivity - around 587. God forbade him to mourn her - 24:16-23), had his own house (3:24) , received the Jewish leaders there and conveyed to them the will of God (8:1) [Mitskevich V. Bibliology]. Also, Jews gathered in his house to talk about faith and listen to his speeches.

Around 593, in the 5th year of the captivity, Ezekiel was called to prophetic ministry (1:2), apparently at the age of 30 (Num. 4:30).

In his book, Ezekiel indicates the exact dates of events, considering the beginning of his captivity as the starting point. The last date in the book is 571 (29:17), after which, apparently, he died soon. From the book nothing more is known about the life of the prophet.

Tradition (told by St. Epiphanius of Cyprus) says that Ezekiel was a miracle worker: he delivered the settlers of Tel Aviv from the angry Chaldeans, transferring them like dry land through Chebar. And also saved me from hunger. Tradition has preserved the name of the prophet’s hometown – Sarir. In his youth (testifies St. Gregory the Theologian) Ezekiel was a servant of Jeremiah, and in Chaldea he was the teacher of Pythagoras (St. Clement of Alexandria. Stromata, 1, 304). Tradition also describes the death of the prophet: killed by the prince of his people for denouncing idolatry, buried in the tomb of Shem and Arphaxad on the banks of the Euphrates near Baghdad [A.P. Lopukhin].

Unlike many other prophets, Ezekiel's ministry took place from beginning to end outside the Holy Land.

Ezekiel was a divinely inspired interpreter of the Babylonian captivity and its meaning in the system of Divine Providence for Israel. He most likely wrote (rather than spoke) most of his prophecies for distribution to the people (2:9). Only sometimes does the prophet speak (24:6; 8:1; 14:1). But in general, “his tongue was tied to his throat and he was dumb” (3:27). Much more often he resorted to symbolic actions.

Call to ministry.

God calls Ezekiel in the 5th year of captivity, around 592 BC. The last date indicated in the book is 571 (29:17). That. The length of the prophet's ministry was about 22 years.
Ezekiel's calling is described in chapters 1-3. Here we see an incredibly complex description of what he saw on the Chebar River, namely a vision of the likeness of the Glory of God. After the vision, the Lord calls Ezekiel to serve and says: “I am sending you to the children of Israel, to a disobedient people...with a hardened face and a hard heart...” (2:3-5). A hand stretches out to him, holding a scroll, which unfolds in front of him and on which is written: “weeping, and groaning, and grief.” The prophet receives a command to eat this scroll, and he ate it, and it was “sweet as honey” in his mouth. And again the Lord turns to the prophet: “Arise and go to the house of Israel, and speak to them in My words; For you are not sent to the nations with unintelligible speech and an unknown tongue, but to the house of Israel... and the house of Israel will not listen to you... do not be afraid of them and do not be afraid of them, for they are a rebellious house” (3:4-9).

After the prophet spends seven days in amazement, the Lord says that from now on he is the guardian of the house of Israel, that he will speak and reprove. If he convicts the wicked of his sins, and he does not turn away from his sins and perishes, then the prophet is clean from his blood. But if he does not tell him the words of the Lord, and he perishes, then his blood is on the prophet, the iniquity of the sinner will turn on him. The Lord makes the fate of the prophet dependent on the fate of those people to whom he is sent, and says that the fulfillment of what is entrusted to him is beyond his power, but to speak and prophesy, i.e. he must risk his life, even without any hope of being heard [Jer. Gennady Egorov. Holy Scripture of the Old Testament].

Purpose of service.

In determining the main purpose of the ministry of the prophet Ezekiel, it is necessary to identify two periods of this ministry, for in each of them the purpose changed. The first period was before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple: the captives considered themselves innocent, did not realize the reasons for such a severe punishment for them, and hoped for a quick end to their suffering. Here Ezekiel rebels against vain hopes, predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, and shows that the Jews themselves are to blame for their troubles.

After the fall of the city and the Temple, Ezekiel tries to console his dispirited fellow tribesmen, preaching the imminent end of captivity, the future renewal of Jerusalem and the Temple, where the Lord Himself will then be.

Ezekiel was a “sign” to Israel (24:24) in words, in deeds, and even in personal trials (like Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah). But above all, he is a visionary. Although only four visions are described in the book, they occupy a significant place (chap. 1-3, ch. 8-11, ch. 37, ch. 40-48).

The origin of the book of the prophet Ezekiel.

The book was born, obviously, throughout the entire period of the ministry of the prophet Ezekiel: during his life he “wrote” (24:2), but finally collected it no earlier than the 27th year of captivity (29:17 is the latest date of the book).

Jewish tradition says that the book was collected and published by the great synagogue.

The wise Sirach refers to Ezekiel (49:10-11 – Ezek. 13:13, 18:21, 33:14, 38:22).

The book itself contains evidence of the authorship of Ezekiel: a first-person narrative, language with signs of Aramaic influence and the presence of Jews in captivity (in historical reviews of the language of biblical writers, special features are attributed to the period of the Babylonian captivity, which are also present in the writings of Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and also in Ezekiel), the content corresponding to the modern prophet’s era.

Features of the book.

1) One of the most important features of the book - its symbolism and description of unusual visions - is visible from the first lines: chapter 1 is written in an apocalyptic style. Ezekiel is considered the founder of Jewish apocalypticism.

Apocalypse is a type of prophecy that has the following features [holy. Lev Shikhlyarov]:

Special language: symbols, hyperboles, fantastic images;

Writing in moments of greatest suffering, catastrophes, persecution of faith, when the present is so bleak that all the aspirations of people turn to the distant future and even to the end of time (eschatology chapters 37-48).

Conveying an atmosphere of expectation for the speedy end of history, God’s judgment over the nations and the visible reign of Yahweh “on earth and in heaven.”

There is an opinion that apocalyptic allegories were invented for the sake of encryption from “outsiders.”

The book of the prophet Ezekiel anticipates the so-called. apocalyptic literature of later times (Dan., Rev.), replete with mysterious symbols, peculiar speeches (33:32), contemplation of the mysteries of the Lord in a state of “rapture,” parables (20:49), symbolic actions that Ezekiel performed more often than all other prophets (4:1-5:4, 12:1-7, 21:19-23, 37:15).

2) The priestly flavor of the book: love for the Temple, worship and ritual (chap. 8 and 40-44).

3) Seal of Babylonian origin:

The language is replete with Aramaicisms, revealing the decline of the Hebrew language, which reminds us that Ezekiel lived in a foreign country;

There is a controversial opinion that Ezekiel's cherubs appear under the influence of Assyro-Babylonian winged lions and oxen.

4) Sublime style (Ezekiel is even called the “Jewish Shakespeare”).

Symbolism of speeches and actions.

The Prophet Ezekiel widely and not partially, not fragmentarily uses symbols; he brings the symbolic image to the end and reveals the most perfect knowledge of the symbolized and the symbolized. For example, knowledge of Tire and shipbuilding (chap. 27), architectural design (40:5-ch. 43), the last war and a description of the military field with the bones of the fallen (ch. 39).

Sometimes its symbols are supernatural and divinely revealed (chapter 1), so you need to be very careful in understanding them; you cannot understand the book of the prophet Ezekiel literally. According to the testimony of the blessed Jerome and Origen, among the Jews the book of Ezekiel was forbidden to be read until the age of 30.

For its mystery and symbolism, Christian interpreters called it “the ocean or labyrinth of the mysteries of God” (Blessed Jerome).

Ezekiel is “the most amazing and highest of the prophets, a contemplator and interpreter of great mysteries and visions” (St. Gregory the Theologian).

Blzh. Theodoret called the book of this prophet “the depth of prophecy.”

Among apologetic scholars, there is a point of view according to which Ezekiel deliberately introduces symbolism in order to contrast it with the Assyro-Babylonian symbolism that surrounded the Jews in captivity. Orthodox interpreters do not agree with this, arguing that the symbols and images of Ezekiel, while of a biblical nature, are written in the Old Testament language, are explained from the Old Testament, and not with the help of pagan symbols.

And the prophet’s love for symbols, manifested both in style and in speech, is most likely explained by the specifics of his listeners, who did not want to listen. Therefore, Ezekiel does not stop at any images that are unpleasant to the ear, just to distract listeners from vice, just to frighten the lawless, just to get through (chap. 4, ch. 16, ch. 23).

Canonical dignity of the book.

The canonicity of the book of the prophet Ezekiel is evidenced by:

The Wise Sirach, who mentions Ezekiel among other sacred Old Testament writers (Sir.49:10-11 = Ezek.1:4,13:13, 18:21,33:14);

New Testament: often refers to Ezekiel, in particular the Apocalypse (chap. 18-21 - Ezek. 27:38; 39; 47 and 48 ch.);

In further Christian conciliar and patristic calculations, the book of the prophet Ezekiel takes its place in the canon of Holy books;

The Jewish canon also recognizes the book of Ezekiel.

Interpretations.

Origen: only 14 homilies have survived (not translated into Russian), the rest of his works on the interpretation of Ezekiel have been lost;

St. Ephraim the Syrian interpreted the book (but not all) in a literal-historical sense;

Blzh. Theodoret interpreted, but also not the whole book, and his work was not translated into Russian;

Blzh. Jerome interpreted the entire book historically and tropologically;

St. Gregory Dvoeslov wrote a mysteriously prophetic interpretation of chapters 1-3 and 46-47.

In Russian theological literature:

Article by F. Pavlovsky-Mikhailovsky. The Life and Work of the Holy Prophet Ezekiel (1878);

Article by archim. Theodora. Holy prophet Ezekiel. (1884);

Exegetical monographs for the first chapter:
Skaballanovich (1904) and A. Rozhdestvensky (1895).

Composition.

A) Four parts [Viktor Melnik. Orthodox Ossetia]:

1) prophecy about the judgment of Jerusalem (chap. 1-24);

2) prophecy about seven pagan nations (chap. 25-32);

3) prophecies written after the fall of Jerusalem in 587 (chap. 33-39);

4) prophecy about the new Jerusalem (chap. 40-48), written in the 70s of the 6th century.

B) Three parts [P.A.Yungerov]:

1) 1-24 chapters: 1-3 chapters - calling and 4-24 - speeches delivered before the fall of Jerusalem in order to show the legality and inevitability of death;

2) chapters 25-32: speeches against foreign nations after the fall of Jerusalem, delivered in different years of Ezekiel’s life;

3) 33-48 chapters: speeches and visions about the Jewish people after the fall of Jerusalem in order to console the Jews with the promise of future theocratic gifts and benefits.

IN) Five parts [Jer. Gennady Egorov]:

1) Vocation (chap. 1-3);

2) The denunciation of the Jews and the prediction of the fall of Jerusalem (4-24);

3) Prophecies about other nations (25-32);

4) The promise of return from captivity, the giving of the New Testament (33-39);

5)Vision of a new structure of the Holy Land, Jerusalem and the Temple (40-48).

G) Researcher E. Young, in addition to dividing into parts, made a detailed analysis of the content of the chapters of each part, which can be very useful when studying the book:

1)Prophecies spoken before the fall of Jerusalem (1:1-24:27):

1:1-3:21 – introduction – vision of the Glory of the Lord in the 5th year of the captivity, about 592 BC;

3:22-27 – second vision of the Lord’s Glory;

4:1-7:27 - a symbolic image of the destruction of Jerusalem: the siege (4:1-3), punishment for sins (4:4-8), symbolism of food as the consequences of the siege, what awaits the city and what is its fault (5: 5-17), additional prophecies about punishment (chap. 6-7);

8:1-8 – divinely inspired transfer to Jerusalem and contemplation of its destruction;

9:1-11 – punishment of Jerusalem;

12:1-14:23 – The Lord leaves the city for unbelief and following false prophets;

15:1-17:24 – the inevitability and necessity of punishment;
-18:1-32 – God’s love for sinners;

19:1-14 – lamentation for the princes of Israel;

2) Prophecies against foreign nations (25:1-32:32):

Ammonites (25:1-7);

Moabites (25:8-11);

Edomites (25:12-14);

Philistines (25:15-17);

Inhabitants of Tire (26:1-28:19);

The inhabitants of Sidon (28:20-26);

Egyptians (29:1-32:32);

3) Prophecies about restoration pronounced after the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar (33:1-48:35):

33:1-22 – about the New Testament, about God’s love for sinners; as well as official instructions about the prophetic mission;

34:1-31 – the time will come when the people will recognize the Lord and a true prophet will appear in their midst;

35:1-15 – devastation of Edom;

36:1-38 – revival of the Israeli people;

37:1-28 – about the prophet’s vision of a field of bones as a symbol of the resurrection of Israel and the world;

38:1-39:29 – prophecy about Gog and Magog.

Chapters 37-39 are a unified whole: after chapter 37 the question arises, can someone break the Jews' connection with God? The answer can be found in chapters 38 and 39: there will be such enemies, but the Lord will not abandon the Jews, for there is an eternal covenant with them, and God will destroy the enemies. Those. These chapters should serve as a consolation to the people.

38:8 describes the time of the appearance of enemies (as does 38:16) (cf. Acts 2:17, Heb. 1:1-2, 1 Pet. 1:20, 1 John 2:18, Jude 18). That is, when the last days come and Israel is established in its land (38:8), the promised Messiah will appear, and God’s Tabernacle will be among people (48:35), when the incarnate Son of God brings peace at the cost of the Cross, then the enemy will appear, who will try to destroy those for whom He died. But God will help you win.

The prophet Ezekiel speaks in Old Testament language, using appropriate imagery: he writes about the enemy after the promised redemption through a symbolic description of the great union that absorbed the forces of evil, playing up the contemporary union of states that sought to destroy the people of God (led by Gog). This union became a symbol of those who would oppose the Lord and His redeemed ones.

A symbol depicting the defeat of these enemies: Israel will burn the weapons of their enemies for seven years and bury their dead for seven months.

The nations united against Israel are interpreted ambiguously: perhaps Ezekiel means Gagaia (or Carchemish) when speaking of the head of the conspiracy, deriving from this name the names “Gog” and “Magog.” Perhaps these are the Moschi and Tibaren peoples. Or maybe Ethiopia, Libya, Homer (or the Cimmerians), Togarm (present-day Armenia).

Most likely, the prophet is not describing any historical event here, but simply means to comfort God's people by implying that God is much stronger than the most powerful enemy.

40:1-48:35 – a vision of the Church of God on earth, symbolically represented by the picture of the temple.
The prophet had to not only denounce, but also console. Therefore, it reminds us of the coming salvation. And being a priest, he uses the symbolism of priestly service, describing in detail the structure of the temple and worship.

This passage, like the entire book of the prophet Ezekiel, does not need to be taken literally (otherwise, say, from chapter 48 one can conclude that the temple must be outside Jerusalem).
The climax here at the end is in the words “The Lord is there.” These words express the essence of the time when God will be worshiped in truth.

The prophet does not say a word about an earthly temple in this place, about an earthly high priest: worship will be in spirit and truth.

That. here is described the messianic age when the Lord will dwell in the midst of His people. This is the place of the prophet's book - a sermon about Christ.

1)Vision of the Glory of the Lord and calling to ministry (1-3);

2) 13 diatribes against the Jews and symbolic actions depicting the fall of Jerusalem (4-24);

3) Accusatory speeches against the pagans: neighbors of the Jews (25), Tire (26-28, and in 28:13-19 the king of Tire is presented as the personification of the devil (cf. Is. 14:5-20);

4) Prophecy about Egypt (29-32);

5) Ezekiel’s new responsibilities after the fall of Jerusalem as consolation and reinforcement (33);

6) The Lord is the Shepherd of the reborn Israel (34);

7) About the punishment of Idumea;

8) About the revival of Israel (36);

9) The revival of dry bones as a prototype of the revival of Israel and the general Resurrection (37);

10) Apocalyptic prophecies about the enemies of the Church, about the extermination of the hordes of Gog (38-39, cf. Rev. 20:7);

11) About the new eternal Kingdom of God and the new temple (40-48; Rev. 21);

12) The prophecies of the last 14 chapters - about the last times - have common features with the mysterious visions of Daniel and the Apocalypse; they have not yet been fulfilled, so these passages should be interpreted with extreme caution.

Some visions, prophecies, symbolic actions.

Vision of the likeness of the Glory of God :

This was the first vision of the prophet Ezekiel. Immediately after this, God calls him to ministry. Described in the initial section of the book (chap. 1-3). The vision of the likeness of the Glory of God and the vision of the renewed Holy Land (in the final part of the book of the prophet) are extremely difficult to interpret.

This is how Bishop Sergius (Sokolov) describes what the prophet Ezekiel saw:

“The Prophet saw a large, menacing cloud moving from the north, around it there was an extraordinary radiance, inside - “like the light of a flame from the middle of a fire” and in it - the likeness of four animals with four faces and four wings and arms for each animal, with one head . The face of each was like that of a man (in front), that of a lion (on the right side), the face of a calf (on the left side), and that of an eagle (on the opposite side of the human face)” [Jer. Gennady Egorov. Holy Scripture of the Old Testament].

The prophet Ezekiel contemplates God Himself on the throne (1:26-28). Moreover, in contrast to similar visions of Isaiah (chapter 6) and Micah (the son of Iamlay - 1 Kings 22:19), the vision of the prophet Ezekiel is striking in its grandeur and symbolism.

As for the interpretation of this mysterious vision, after which the prophet Ezekiel “was amazed for seven days” (3:15), as mentioned above, one must be extremely careful and be guided by the teachings of the Church. Thus, according to the tradition of the fathers and teachers of the Church, by the four faces of animals and the eyes of unearthly chariots facing the four cardinal directions, it is customary to understand the omniscience and power of God, who rules the world through His servants - the Angels. And also the four faces are the four Evangelists.

The vault of heaven and the firmament are the firmament of heaven, which God created on the second creative day to separate the waters of heaven and earth (Gen. 1:6). The Throne of God was above or beyond this firmament. The rainbow is a symbol of God's Covenant with all mankind, not only with the Jews (Gen. 9:12).

The meaning of the vision in relation to the prophet’s contemporaries was to encourage, for the vision made it possible to realize the greatness and omnipotence of God, which is not limited by limits. This was to remind the captives that even in the land of resettlement they were under His authority and therefore must remain faithful to Him, not lose hope of salvation, keeping themselves clean from pagan wickedness. [Jer. Gennady Egorov].

The Church also sees a messianic meaning in this passage, according to which “he who sits on the throne” is the Son of God, the chariot is the Mother of God, which in church hymns is called the “chariot of the Intelligent Sun,” the “Fire-shaped chariot.”

After the vision, the Lord calls Ezekiel to serve. A hand reaches out to him, holding a scroll, which unfolds in front of him and on which is written: “weeping, and groaning, and sorrow” (2:10). The prophet receives a command to eat this scroll, and he ate it and it was “sweet as honey” in his mouth, despite the fact that such terrible words were written on this scroll.
M.N. Skaballanovich notes that in the book of the prophet Ezekiel there is a lot of material for biblical theology:

In particular, Chapter One provides important information on Christian angelology. The scientist claims that no one has spoken in such detail about cherubim;

The Prophet Ezekiel speaks about God like no one before him, revealing Him from the side of His “holiness” and transcendence. In the prophet Isaiah, God draws the heart to Himself and gives joyful hope. In the prophet Ezekiel, God makes human thought go numb before Him, but there is something sweet in this sacred horror. Also, Ezekiel is the first to so precisely distinguish between what in God is accessible to human understanding and what is not even accessible to name: chapter 1 describes God, and in 2:1 it says that the prophet saw only a vision of “the likeness of the glory of the Lord”;

The prophet Ezekiel contemplates “the radiance around God” (1:28). Skaballanovich says that only from this vision of Ezekiel is it possible to talk about God as Light;

God makes Himself known first of all as a voice, sound, indefinable by anything or anyone. The divine noise (“voice from the firmament” 1:25) is different from the noise of the appearance of the cherubim.

Philosophical and historical significance of chapter 1 of the book of the prophet Ezekiel: coverage of the Babylonian captivity as a sublime turning point in Old Testament history, which, along with the loss of paradise, the giving of the Sinai legislation and the end of the visible world, causes the appearance of God on earth, and differs from other appearances of God in that here He appears accompanied by cherubim.

Vision of the lawlessness of Jerusalem. Second Vision of the Glory of God :

The peculiarity of the book is that the prophet lives constantly in Babylon, but the action regularly takes place in Jerusalem. At the beginning of this vision, he says that the hand of the Lord took him by the hair and carried him to Jerusalem (Ezek. 8:3). There again the likeness of the glory of God appears to him. And so, he sees what is happening in the temple. He sees through a hole in the wall of the temple that in the temple, in hidden places, various animals are depicted, which were worshiped in Egypt and Assyria, he sees that there the elders of the house of Israel, known to him, perform incense for them. Then he sees how, after sunrise, these elders turn their backs to the altar of God and worship the sun. He sees women sitting at the gates of the house of the Lord and performing a ritual lament for the Canaanite god Tammuz. The prophet sees that everything is rotten from top to bottom. Then seven angels, six of whom hold weapons in their hands, and the seventh has writing instruments, go around the city: first, the one with the writing instruments marks with the letter “tav” on the forehead (i.e., a sign similar to the Cross) those who mourn about the abominations that are happening. After this, the remaining six angels, holding weapons in their hands, walk through the city and destroy all those who do not have this cross-like sign on their faces.

Then the prophet again sees the appearance of the Glory of God: as the prophet contemplates the idolaters and wicked leaders of the people, he sees the Glory of God departing from its usual place where it was supposed to dwell, between the Cherubim in the Holy of Holies. He first departs to the threshold of the temple (9:3), where he stops for a short time, then from the threshold of the temple he departs to the eastern gate (10:19) and from the middle of the city rises to the Mount of Olives, to the east of the city (11:23). Thus, the temple and Jerusalem find themselves deprived of the Glory of God. Here is a prediction of gospel events, of what will precede the establishment of the New Testament (Luke 13:34-35; Matt. 23:37). This is also the fulfillment of the Lord's warning given to Solomon and the people at the dedication of the temple (2 Chron. 7), as well as the warning of chapter 28 of Deuteronomy.

Those. the details of what will happen have already been set a long time ago, and when Ezekiel prophesies, he does not just announce something new, he recalls, sometimes literally repeating, what was said to Moses [Jer. Gennady Egorov].

Symbolic actions .

In addition to words, the prophet Ezekiel widely used preaching by deeds in his ministry. Thanks to this, his behavior bordered on foolishness, but it was a forced measure, applied by him at the command of God, when it was impossible to reach the people in any other way. His task was to convey the sad news about the upcoming long siege of Jerusalem and some of its details:

Prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem: Ezekiel places a brick in the middle of the village (chapter 4) and organizes a siege against it according to all the rules, with the construction of fortifications, a rampart, and battering machines. Then God tells him to lie first for 390 days on one side (as a sign of bearing the iniquities of the house of Israel) and 40 days on the other - for the iniquities of the house of Judah. God determines for him the measure of bread and water for these days as a sign of the measure of food in besieged Jerusalem (4:9-17).

God tells the prophet to “run the barber’s razor over the head and beard, then take the scales and divide the hair into parts. The third part shall be burned with fire in the midst of the city...the third part shall be cut up with a knife in its environs, the third part shall be scattered to the wind..." (5:1-2). This was done as a sign of what was to come for the inhabitants of Jerusalem: “a third part of you will die from the plague and perish from the city in your midst, a third part will fall by the sword in your neighborhood, and a third part I will scatter to all the winds and draw the sword after them.” (5:12).

Again the prophet hears the will of God: “go and shut yourself at home” (3:22), as a sign of the imminent siege of Jerusalem.

He breaks a hole in the wall of his house in front of everyone and takes things out - “this is a foreshadowing for the ruler in Jerusalem and for the whole house of Israel... they will go into captivity...” (12:1-16).

Proverbs.

1) Accusatory:

Jerusalem is compared to a grapevine (John 15:6), which is good for nothing, it can only be burned after harvesting, because it is of no value (chap. 15);

Chapter 16: Jerusalem is likened to a harlot, whom the Lord found abandoned as a child, “washed her with water, anointed her with oil, clothed her and shod her... adorned her... But she trusted in her beauty and began to commit fornication... and the Lord for this will judge her with the judgment of adulterers... and betray her her bloody rage and jealousy...";

Chapter 23: Samaria and Jerusalem are presented as two harlot sisters.

2) Prophetic (17:22-24): the parable of the cedar tree, the top of which is King Jehoiachin, from his descendants will Christ come. And “exalted” is Mount Golgotha ​​(Blessed Theodoret).

Prophecies spoken after the fall of Jerusalem .

After the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet Ezekiel changed the direction of his preaching. Even at his calling, the Lord gave him to eat a scroll on which bitter words were written, but which turned out to be sweet to the taste (3:1-3). So in the destruction of Jerusalem, after 573, the prophet tried to show sweetness to his people: after 573, Ezekiel talks about the prospects for the future, that God did not forever reject the Jews, that he will gather them and console them with many blessings. Here are some prophecies from this period:

-Prophecy about God the Shepherd and the New Testament:

Due to the fact that the Old Testament priesthood, called to be the shepherds of God’s people, forgot about its purpose (“you did not strengthen the weak, and you did not heal the sick sheep, and you did not bandage the wounded ones... but you ruled over them with violence and cruelty. And they were scattered without a shepherd..." 34:4-5) thus says the Lord God: “I myself will seek out my sheep and look after them... I will gather them from the countries and bring them into their own land, and I will feed them on the mountains of Israel... in good pasture... and I will give them rest... Lost I will find the sheep and bring back the stolen ones...” (34:11-16). Those. through the prophet Ezekiel, God reveals Himself in the new guise of God - the Savior who forgives sins. The image of the Shepherd was supposed to make a special impression on the people of God. The fact is that sheep in the east are an object of love and care (John 10:1-18), therefore, by comparing the Jews with sheep, and declaring Himself their Shepherd (34:12), the Lord makes them understand how much He loved them and how from now on God’s relationship with His people changes: God the Shepherd is no longer the Old Testament, but something new.

“And I will make a covenant of peace with them (34:25); ...and I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be cleansed from all your filthiness...and I will give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; And I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone, and will give you a heart of flesh, and will put My spirit within you... and you will walk in My commandments, and you will keep My statutes and do... and you will be My people, and I will be your God..." (36:25 -28).

Here, according to researchers, the prophet foreshadows the giving of the New Testament, the result of which should be a change in man: the law will become the inner content of life, the Holy Spirit will dwell in man as in a temple [Jer. Gennady].

In the context of chapter 34 of the book of Ezekiel, John 10 sounds new: the leaders of Israel lost their functions as intermediaries, the sheep were no longer subject to them. Therefore, only spiritual blindness prevented Christ’s listeners from understanding His preaching [Jer. Gennady Egorov].

But there remained among those listening to the prophet those who did not want to believe in the promises. The answer to these people of little faith was Ezekiel's vision of the mystery of regeneration (chapter 37). This chapter is understood ambiguously in theological literature. From a historical perspective, one can see here a prophecy that the people will return to their land, and from a prophetic perspective, an image of the future Resurrection. Chapter 37:3,9-10,12-14 is a parimia, and a unique one at that: it is read at Matins (usually parimias are not allowed at Matins) of Great Saturday after the Great Doxology.

Great Battle.

In chapters 38-39, the prophet Ezekiel first introduced the theme of eschatological battle into the Holy Scriptures: at the end of times there will be a great battle of the faithful with the enemies of the Kingdom of God (Rev. 19:19). In addition to the representative meaning (i.e., such a battle should really take place), there is also a teaching here, the main idea of ​​which was well formulated by the Evangelist Matthew: “The kingdom of heaven is taken by force, and those who use force take it away” (11:12).
The prophet most likely borrows the names of his enemies from legends about the warlike kings of the north: Gog - the Median king Gyges, Rosh - the king of Urartu Rusa, Meshech and Tubal - the tribes of the Caucasus and Northern Mesopotamia. They all represent a threat from distant lands.

Vision of the New Jerusalem (chapters 40-48).
This prophecy dates back to 573 (40:1). In the twenty-fifth year after our migration (40:1), the Spirit of God carried Ezekiel to Jerusalem “and set him on a very high mountain” (40:2). This mountain was not actually in Jerusalem, it is an image denoting that the ideal City of the Future is described here with the name “The Lord is there” (48:35) - i.e. there the highest goal of creation will be realized, there God will dwell with people. All the details given in the final part of the book have a hidden meaning.

From a historical perspective, these chapters were of great practical use: in the words of Jer. Gennady Egorov, the descriptions given served as instructions for those who returned from captivity when constructing a new temple and resuming worship. Ezekiel was a priest and remembered the old Temple.

But still, there is a much deeper hidden meaning here than just instructions for builders. This is a description of the Kingdom of God. It speaks of both Christ (43:10) and the return of the Glory of the Lord to the temple (43:2-4). The Revelation of John the Theologian borrows a lot from the text of Ezekiel, which means both sacred writers spoke about the same thing (for example, Rev. 4: 3-4).
The new temple has more slender forms, which indicates the harmony of the City of the Future: the outer wall is a perfect square (42:15-20) - an emblem of harmony and completeness, a cross on the four cardinal points means the universal significance of the House of God and the City.

The resurrected Old Testament Church meets the Glory of Yahweh coming from the east, from where the exiles were supposed to return. God forgives people and dwells with them again - this is a prototype of the Gospel Epiphany, but distant, because the Glory is still hidden from the eyes of people.
Service in the Temple is a reverent testimony that God is close, He, the scorching Fire, resides in the heart of the City.

The equitable distribution of plots of land signifies the moral principles that should underlie humanity's earthly life (48:15-29). The Gerim (foreigners)—the converted Gentiles—will also receive equal shares (47:22).

The “prince” is deprived of the right to own all the land, his power is now limited.

The Prophet Ezekiel is considered the “father of Judaism,” the organizer of the Old Testament community. But the City of God is something more, living water (47:1-9) is the mystical-eschatological plan of Ezekiel’s teaching: not only the order of the world in justice, but also a description of the Heavenly Jerusalem (Rev. 21:16).

The waters of the Dead Sea are stripped of their destructive power (47:8) to commemorate the Spirit's victorious power over imperfect nature and evil in the human race.
The structure of the New Testament land is accompanied by a clear liturgical charter (the same in the Apocalypse: elders, throne, worship). This speaks of the exceptional importance of worship in the new Heavenly reality, which is the harmonious worship and praise of God.

Vision of the Glory of God on the Cherubim

Ezek.1:1. And it was in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, in the fifth day month, while I was among the immigrants at the Chebar River, the heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God.

"AND". In addition to the book of the prophet Ezekiel, the following books begin with the conjunction “and”: Exodus, Joshua, Ruth, Judges, Kings, Jonah, Esther, 1 Mac. Consequently, for the ancient Jew such a beginning of the books did not represent something as unusual and strange as for us. But for most of these books, this beginning finds some explanation in the fact that these books are a continuation of the previous ones. At the beginning of the book of Ezekiel, “and” is especially unexpected. It should be noted that “and” stands here not only before the first sentence of the book, but also before the second, completely independent, but connected with the first relation of the time sequence (the second “and” in the Russian translation is rendered “when”). To impart roundness, smoothness and solemnity to the speech, which are so important at the beginning of the book, “and” is placed not only before the second sentence, but also before the first. This “and” has an analogy in Greek. μεν, lat. nam, itaque. Consequently, the beginning of the book of Ezekiel with “and” does not give reason to conclude that at the beginning of the book there was some lost section, for example, a story about another vision (Spinoza Tract, theol.-pol. p. 10) or information about a previous life of the prophet (Clostermann, Ezechiel in Studien u. Kritiken 1877, 391 etc.).

"In the thirtieth year." Ezekiel calls the year of his call to prophecy the thirtieth, without saying where this year came from the thirtieth. But in 2 tbsp. the prophet supplements this unclear date by noting that this year 30 was the 5th year of the captivity of King Joachim. There are the following explanations for this mysterious date. 1) The ancients (Origen, Ephraim the Syrian, Gregory the Dvoeslov, partly Blessed Jerome) meant here the 30th year of the prophet’s life. The following speaks for this understanding. consideration: “if this is the 30th year of the prophet’s life, then Ezekiel entered the prophetic ministry at an age when, under other circumstances, he should have received priestly ordination; in this year he received spiritual baptism into prophecy, as a rich replacement for the lost priestly ministry" (Kretschmar, Das Buch Ezechiel 1900). This was the fullness of age that, according to the fate of Providence, turned out to be necessary for the Savior himself to begin His ministry. But if this is the 30th year of the prophet’s life, then he should have added “my life.” 2) Others (for example, Targum, rabbis) think that the chronology here begins with the 18th year of Josiah, when the book of the law was found in the Temple of Jerusalem and when the Passover, which had not been celebrated for a long time, was solemnly celebrated, which marked the beginning of the religious and moral renewal of the Jewish kingdoms, and then of all Israel of that time, the beginning of a new era of his life. Indeed, about 30–32 years passed from this event to the calling of Ezekiel. Since in the year of the discovery of the book, God, through the prophetess Huldama, confirmed his threats about the impending disaster for Judea, then, in the opinion of Blessed. Theodoret and others, this year can be considered the beginning of the Babylonian captivity, especially since according to Ezekiel 4.6, from the calling of Ezekiel, 40 years of captivity remained for Judah, trace. the year of the prophet's calling was the 30th year of captivity. But, no matter how great the social significance of the mentioned event might have been, in the life of the Jews, of course, there were more important events, but they did not become eras: for example, the construction of the temple; there is no surviving news that Josiah introduced chronology from here; and the consequences of Josiah's reform were not such that other kings had reason to begin a new reckoning with it. Such an era under Ezekiel would have been too young for him to use without explanation. 3rd widespread opinion about 30 Ezekiel 1.1, that this is the 30th year of the Babylonian, so-called Nabopolassar era, from the accession of Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar: Nabopolassar reigned (according to the “Canon of Kings” of Ptolemy) 21, Joachim in Judea, on 4 the year of whose reign, according to Jeremiah 25.1, Nebuchadnezzar came to an end, after Nabopolassar he reigned for another 8 years and (omitting the reign of Jeconiah) 5 years from the captivity of Jeconiah will give 34 years. Since Ezekiel’s vision is marked by two eras and one of them is Jewish (2 v.), the first must be related to the Chaldean kingdom, where the prophet lived; Daniel designates the years according to the reigns of the Babylonian rulers (Dan 2.1, etc.), and Haggai, Zechariah and Ezra - the Persian ones, and the latter, like Ezekiel, designates the years of Artaxerxes with a bare number (Hag 1.1 cf. Zech 1.1; 1 Ezra 6.15). But not to mention the incomplete coincidence of this era with Ezekiel 1.1, it is not confirmed by other places in the Bible. 4) There is still a 30th anniversary here. But only rabbis use the jubilee counting, not the Bible (they begin counting jubilees with the entry of the Jews into Canaan). Although the destruction of Jerusalem was believed to be in the 36th year of the jubilee, why does the calling of Ezekiel fall on the 30th year of the jubilee, but perhaps. The rabbis based their account of jubilees precisely on Ezekiel 1.1-5. The newest exegetes suggest here a corruption of the text: Bertholet considers the date to be a gloss speaking about the year 30 of captivity, Heb. sense Luzzato (commentary 1876) with the damage to the “13th year of Nebuchadnezzar”, Kretschmar suggests here the omission of the words “my life”.

Although it is impossible to completely agree with any of the above explanations, it is remarkable that each of them, 30 years after the calling of Ezekiel, indicates one or another important event from which the prophet, indeed, could trace his chronology; but from which exactly it was led remains unknown, or, more precisely, left unknown to them. But might not this very silence provide the key to an explanation? Could the prophet himself indicate where the year of his vision came from? If this year fell on the 30th from any specific event in time, then nothing could prevent the prophet from naming this event. But the starting point for calculating some mysterious times and periods in the Bible is not always a specific single event in time: exegesis is powerless to decide exactly where the 400 years of “the resettlement of Abraham’s seed into a land that is not theirs” (Gen. 15.13) or the 70 weeks of Daniel should be calculated. as if the beginning of these symbolic dates is lost to human comprehension in sacred darkness. What happened to the prophet Ezekiel on Chebar was, as we will see, an event in the history of Israel important enough to have the same mysterious dates as the Egyptian slavery and the Babylonian captivity. It happened upon the fulfillment of the well-known and undoubted by its symbolism number of years “30” from something that could not have been named and indicated by a human finger. Full of secrets, the vision of the prophet Ezekiel on the river. It was fitting for Khovar to have a mysterious date. And nothing could the prophet so immediately and shockingly warn the reader about the terrible mystery of what he was preparing to tell, as by defining the very time of this with a symbolic and inexplicable number. This explanation of the date of Ezekiel 1.1 may seem strange to our European thinking, so to speak. But we must keep in mind that the first verse of Ezekiel with this date, impossible for us to hear, was read and copied for dozens of centuries in this form, with this naked number 30, and not a single scribe or rabbi thought about a possible mistake here, no one decided to correct Here the prophet finished his omission.

"In the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month." While other prophets indicate only the year of their calling (Jeremiah), others limit themselves to designating the reigns in which they served (Isaiah, Amos, etc.), and some do not name the time (as well as place) of their activity at all (Nahum, Habakkuk, Jonah), the prophet Ezekiel, in addition to the year, also indicates the month and day of his calling, because not a single prophet was called to his ministry so amazingly, thanks to which the day of his calling could not help but be imprinted in the soul of Ezekiel. And in general, “the later biblical writers show much more chronological care than the most ancient ones” (Gefernik, Commentar uber d. Pr. Ezechiel 1843). The month of the calling of the prophet was, of course, the fourth of the holy or Easter year, which alone is known to the sacred writers (Zechariah 1:7, 7:1; Esther 2:16, 3:7, 8:9), and not the civil year, which began with the month of Tisri (September), the very existence of which among the Jews is doubtful and is assumed based only on Lev.25.12. The fourth month is Easter. year corresponded to June–July. So, the calling of the prophet was in the midst of the eastern summer with its heat, interrupted at times by devastating storms: the vision of the prophet also began with the storm.

“When I was among the migrants,” lit. “And I am among the captives.” The auxiliary verb is omitted deliberately: the analogous Nehemiah 1.1 has it. With a verb, the expression could only have a specific meaning: the prophet was (at the time of the vision) in the company of captives; but “that someone was with the prophet during the vision does not allow us to think of an expression other than Ezekiel 8.1” (Kretschmar). Without a verb, the expression takes on the character of a general introduction by the author to the reader of his personality: “I am one of the settlers near the river. Khovar." However, wherever the prophet in the book mentions his first vision, he connects it with this river; Obviously, here too he names this river not only as his place of residence, but as the place of his vision. The peculiar way of expression (without “was” Nehemiah 1.1 and without “was”, “sat” Nehemiah 8.1) allows just such a double meaning in it. Epiphanies and visions repeatedly occurred on the banks of rivers and seas: Daniel had two visions on the banks of rivers; apocalyptic visions were given on the open sea. In terms of suitability for visions, waters can compete with the tops of mountains and deserts, these usual places of visions and epiphanies: in the sound of water something mysterious is always heard, the voice of the Almighty (Eze 1.24; Ps 41.7-8; Ps 92.3-4). Maybe Ezekiel in the described chapter 1. case, “he sat on the shore of Khobar, tuned by the sound of the waters to lofty thoughts, which had as their subject the terrible fate of him and his people” (Kretschmar). "Displacers" Heb. goals. This noun, coming from a root consonant and unambiguous with the Russian “gol” (“gola” - to expose Gen. 9.21, etc.) came into literary use with the Babylonian captivity (2 Kings 24.15) and became a special name for those languishing in captivity among the population of Judea spared by the conqueror (Ezek 11:15). More accurately conveys the meaning of this collective name slav. "captivity"; “migrants”, the meaning is softer than necessary; Westerners prefer a simple transcription - golah. With this one word, the prophet sufficiently described both the external conditions of his life and the state of his spirit. Contrary to the opinion of the newest biblical scholars (for example, Stade, Gesch. d. v. Isr. II, 1–63), the situation of the Jewish captives in Babylonia, at least at first, could not but be difficult: it was worth hard work to find a means of living in an unfamiliar country, where, of course, the worst plots of land, unnecessary to anyone, were allocated for the captives. Noteworthy is the fact that the prophet cannot name his place of residence, his city or village. He indicates only the river on the banks of which the Jewish colony to which he belonged lived. It was probably just an emerging, insignificant settlement created by the labor and sweat of captives, which had not yet received a name. And for future prophetic activity, God assigns Ezekiel not this initial residence, but another probably more significant and rich settlement of Tel Aviv (Ezekiel 3.15).

"Khobar" (according to the Masoretic text kevar) the prophet Ezekiel was first identified with Habor 2 Kings 17.6, probably a tributary of the Tigris, on which the captives of the Kingdom of Israel were settled by the Assyrian kings, then with Ptolemy’s Cαβορα (5, 6) also ʹΑβορρας (lib. 16) a tributary of the Euphrates, flowing from the Masian mountains and the Masia confluence yushnyh to the Euphrates near Karchemish. But both rivers are north of Chaldea. In the region, ancient Chaldea itself has not been preserved, and a river with a similar name is unknown among the monuments. But in lower Mesopotamia, not only rivers, but also the smallest canals were called nagar “river,” as the prophet Ezekiel Chebar calls them. Rawlison proposed that Khobar was a large canal in lower Mesopotamia, connecting the Euphrates with the Tigris and called nar-malkha "royal river"; During the time of Pliny, there was a legend that this canal was dug by the head of the region named Gobar (Knabenbauer, Ezechiel propheta 1890). More light on the location of Khovar is shed by the discovery made by Hilprecht in 1893 in Niffer, ancient Nitzpur, to the southeast. from Babylon; in the tables of treaties he found here (and published in the Babylonian expedition of the university of Pennsylvania) from the times of Artaxerxes I (464–424) and Darius II (423–405) it is called naru ka ba-ru twice, as the name of a large shipping canal, lying near Nippur; it is assumed that this is the current Shat-el-Nil, representing an ancient canal, 36 m wide; it leaves the Euphrates of Babylon, flows to the south-east, flows through the middle of the Niffer and flows again into the Euphrates at Warka, the ancient Erech (Uruk). “Kabaru” in Assyrian means “great”; the name indicates that it was one from the main prominent routes of Babylonia. The form "Kevar" instead of "Kavar" is explained by the dialectical pronunciation of the name, as from Babylon. Purat, Persian. Iphrates became Perat (Euphrates) in Hebrew, or this form is due to the punctators, who vocalized the kvr according to the familiar Perat .

"The heavens opened." “Understand the opening of heaven as occurring not as a result of the division of the firmament, but according to the faith of the believer, in the sense that the heavenly mysteries were revealed to him” (Blessed Jerome). From the description of the Khovar vision, it is not clear that during it the sky opened in the proper sense, as at the baptism of Christ, before St. Stephen, Paul, John the Theologian; rather, a heavenly vision descended to the prophet; These were all the visions of Ezekiel: these were heavenly scenes, but on earth (VIII-XI, XL-LIV). The expression refers not so much to the Khobar vision, which the prophet will begin to describe only from v. 4, but to the nature of the prophet’s entire activity: starting a book, the distinctive feature of which is visions, it was natural for him to warn the reader about this and note at what time this series began visions and the sky opened before him. This meaning and purpose of this expression is confirmed by the following. with the sentence: “and I saw visions of God,” where plural. h. shows that the prophet speaks about all his visions; if Ezekiel sometimes uses the plural. Part of this word in relation to one vision, then only when the vision is too complex and represents a whole series of pictures, such as, for example, about the vision of Chapters VIII-XI; but about vision XL-XLIV pl. h. (in Ezekiel 40) only in some codes. “Godly” can mean “which God produces” (genitivus subjecti), as well as “in whom they see God” (gen. objecti).

Ezek.1:2. On the fifth day month (this was the fifth year from the captivity of King Joachim)

If you keep in mind that 1 tbsp. does not yet speak about the Khobar vision, but in general about the beginning and nature of Ezekiel’s prophetic activity, then Art. 2 and 3 will not contain those seemingly insurmountable difficulties (ch. o. repetition) that make one suspect the authenticity of the entire beginning of the chapter (Corneille crosses out 1st article, others - 2nd article, etc.). Could the prophet begin the description of his first vision more simply and clearly with the words: “on (the one mentioned above) the fifth day of the month - it was the 5th year from the captivity of King Joachim - the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel,” etc.? From the usual (stereotypical) beginning of the prophetic books, Ezekiel made only this minor deviation that he preceded such a beginning with a remark (in the first century) regarding the abundance of visions in his book and about when and where these visions began, the sky opened before him, a remark, in view of the uniqueness of his book, it is far from superfluous. It is completely in the spirit of not only Hebrew, but also of any equally ancient language to convey the concept “on the mentioned, on the named day through” the repetition of the nearest numerical designation of it. – The mysterious and perhaps subjective date of Art. 1. the prophet in this verse translates to a simpler, clearer and more objective date, from which the reader can see at what time in the national life of Israel his call to prophetic ministry occurred. Other prophets date their speeches to the years of the reigns; for Ezekiel, who lived so far from his homeland, and even then news from there reached barely 1 1 2, years (cf. Eze 33.21 and Jer 39.1), it was inconvenient; Moreover, the kingdom of Judah soon fell. The chronology of Ezekiel sounds mournful: years of captivity instead of years of reign!

"Joachim." Eur. Joachin, this is a shorter spelling instead of the full Jehoahin (2 Kings 24.6; 2 Chronicles 36.8 etc.). Just like in Ezekiel, this king is called in 2 Kings 25.27 and LXX there they convey it as Ιωακειν, according to glory. Joachin. This is how it should be written here too. The spelling “Joachim” is erroneous and probably arose from confusion between this king and his father Joachim. In the book of the prophet Jeremiah this name is already written as Jehoiahu, in LXX Ιοχανιαξ (Jer 24.1), as here with them; the difference comes from the fact that the name of God, which is part of this word (it means “God will strengthen”), is placed here at the end of the word, and there at the beginning. The edition of this name “Jechoniah” has now become common. The captivity of Jehoiachin followed in the 8th year of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 21.12), and Nebuchadnezzar ascended the throne in 604 BC; track. Jehoiachin (with Ezekiel and others) was taken into captivity in 597–598, and Ezekiel was called in 592–593.

Ezek.1:3. the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel the son of Buzi, the priest, in the land of the Chaldeans, by the river Chebar; and the hand of the Lord was upon him there.

"The word of the Lord was." No matter how wonderful and unprecedented in all Old Testament history was the vision of the prophet Ezekiel on the river. Khobar, this vision had the greatest importance for him not from the side of its extraordinaryness, but from the side that through this vision he was called to his ministry, that it made him a prophet; through him God spoke to him for the first time in the same voice with which he spoke to his prophets. The expression “the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel” sounds solemn, placed here apparently out of place. The reader expects, after such an expression, an exposition of what exactly God said to the prophet, but instead, a picture of a vision, terrible in its grandeur, unfolds before him, and the reader begins to understand that the word of the Lord, which the prophet heard, was originally a silent word, a word without words , but all the more amazing and powerful. For the purpose of this solemnity, the expression “was” in Heb. expressed twice, through the indefinite with the indicative, as in Gen. 18.18: “Abraham will be great in tongue” - an emphatic (intensified, energetic) turn, for some reason not conveyed here as in Gen., LXX. The solemnity of speech also explains the fact that the prophet replaces here (cf. Ezekiel 24.24) the personal pronoun “I”, which he used to designate himself in the 1st article, with his own name and, moreover, his full one - with the addition of his father’s name and even the title of priest: “to Ezekiel, son of Buzius, priest."

The name “Ezekiel” is not applied to the present prophet (who is not named anywhere in the Old Testament, except for Sir. 49.10) and is found only in 1 Chronicles 24.16, as the name of the ancestor of the 2nd priestly order under David (there it is rendered by the slav. “Ezekiel” in Greek Εζεκηλ). The name (exact pronunciation is Yekhetskel, in Hebrew jargon – Khatskel) consists of the verb Khazak"to be strong" and the name of God Ate(Elohim) and means (like, and the name Hezekiah from “Chazak” and “Jehovah”): “God is strength”, “God will do, makes or make strong”; Origen (homil in Ez. 1) explains it as "the dominion of God," and in Hieron. Onom. Sacr. (II, 12) it is explained as “brave of God” or “possessing God.” “The name contains the beliefs of pious parents at the birth of their son” (Krech.). It meant that “Ezekiel will not have the heartfelt tenderness and sweetness of his contemporary Jeremiah, but for that he will have amazing strength of spirit (cf. in the same place with the name “Isaiah” - “salvation of God.” Gaffnik). Perhaps this was not the name of the prophet from birth, but an official one, adopted when he received a calling from God (Hengstenberg. Die Weissangungen des Pr. Ezechiels erklarte, 1867–1868). A hint of the name of the prophet is found in Ezekiel 3.8. The name of Ezekiel's father Buzi means "disdained", indicating perhaps the low position that for some reason the prophet's family occupied in Jerusalem (contrary to the assertion of some, based on Ezekiel 44.10-14, that the prophet belonged to the aristocratic priestly family of the Zadokids, which occupied the best places) ; The opinion of the rabbis is not based on anything that Buzius is identical with Jeremiah, who received such a nickname from those dissatisfied with his denunciations.

The application to "priest" is grammatical in Hebrew. language can be applied to both the nearest noun "Buzi" and Ezekiel. LXX, Jero and all ancient translations refer him to Ezekiel and rightly so, because the prophet himself, and not his father, should be most closely identified (cf. Jer 1:1, 28:1). If Ezekiel did not hold the position of priest, then the title was inalienable from him due to his descent along a well-known line from Levi. The priests were also taken into captivity with Jehoiachin (Jeremiah 29.1). The priestly origin of the prophet explains much in his book; but the prophet mentions him not only because, but also because he valued this title.

"In the land of the Chaldeans, by the river Chebar." The prophet's repeated reference to the place where his calling followed serves as one of the main reasons for the critic to suspect the integrity of Articles 1, 2 and 3. Valid in 3 tbsp. This indication is somewhat unexpected. Ewald (Die Propheten des Alten Bundes. 2 Aus. 2 V. Jeremja und Heseqiel, 1868) explains this repetition by saying that when the book was written, the prophet was already living in a different place.

“And the hand of the Lord was upon him there.” This expression is used in the Bible about any direct, miraculous and especially strong influence of God on man (1 Kings 18.46; 2 Chronicles 30.12; 2 Kings 3.15; Eze 3.14; Acts 13.11); but in Ezekiel it invariably precedes the description of each of his visions (Eze 1.3; Eze 3.22; Eze 8.1; Eze 37.1; Eze 40.1); track. he uses it to designate his state at the onset of the vision (ecstasy), as clearly produced by the immediate power of God and somewhat difficult for a person (cf. Dan 10.8 and the expression of the psalms: “the hand of the Lord is heavy upon me”).

Ezek.1:4. And I saw, and behold, a stormy wind came from the north, a great cloud and a swirling fire, and a brightness around it,

The description of the mysterious vision of the prophet on the river begins. How are. This vision, in which the prophet was shown heavenly beings (cherubim) and their supermundane activities and relationships, was revealed by purely earthly phenomena, natural phenomena, although reaching an unusual and even impossible degree in the natural course of nature: a stormy wind, a large cloud (cloud) and the appearance of what - a special fire. All these phenomena can be combined into the concept of a storm, which the prophet himself uses as a definition for the first of these phenomena - wind (“stormy”). It goes without saying that the present vision of God was preceded not by a simple and natural storm, but by a storm that can be called the storm of theophany. Such a storm was accompanied or preceded by many theophanies in the Old Testament, namely the most important of them - the one at Sinai (Exodus 19.16-18), to the prophet Elijah (1 Kings 19.11-12); God also spoke to Job from the storm (Job 38.1; cf. Zech 9.14; Ps 49.3). The appearance of a storm before and during Epiphany is understandable. If God can appear and be in a certain place on earth, then the earth in that place, like man, if not completely unable, then at least with difficulty can tolerate the presence of God on it; in the place where God “descends,” nature cannot come into any confusion. – The shock and trembling of nature at the Epiphany is expressed primarily in the wind, which is nothing more than excitement, trembling of the air. Therefore, epiphanies are often accompanied, like the present, by the wind: so the wind was accompanied by the appearance of God in paradise after the Fall (“and coolness,” like the famous “afternoon”, an inaccurate translation of Heb. laruah- “with the wind” in Gen. 3.8), the epiphany to David during one battle with the Philistines (1 Chr. 14.14-15), the appearance of Elijah at Horeb. In Art. 12 we will see that the wind seen by the prophet on Chebar had such an extraordinary quality that the name wind can hardly be applied to it, and it is not for nothing that LXX was translated here into Heb. ruach not ανεμος “wind” as in Ezekiel 13.11, but πνευμα, “spirit”.

"Coming from the north." Since God himself, the Glory of the Lord, came to the prophet in the wind (v. 28), all interpreters consider, not without reason, that this wind came from the north to be very significant, but they explain it differently. 1) The majority thinks that the north is taken as the place from where the most disastrous invasions of the Jews were made, from where Nebuchadnezzar’s attack was now threatened; Wed Jer 1.13-14. But the prophet is in the moment of vision precisely in the very north from where Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion was being prepared; the north in relation to this north will already be Media and other regions, from which nothing threatened Judea at that time. 2) Others think that the mention of the north refers to the then widespread opinion that in the northern part of the sky there is an entrance to the dwelling and castle of the gods; since the course of the sun makes one imagine the south inclined downward, the north appears to lie higher and with its high mountains - Lebanon, the Caucasus - reaching the sky. Usually the ancients imagined the gods living on one of these mountains, supporting the sky under the very pole (the Greeks on Olympus). This mountain is said to have been referred to by the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 14.13-14 (cf. Ps 17.3; Job 37.22; Job 38.1; Ezek 28.14). But if there existed and was known to the Jews a mountain with which similar beliefs of the pagan East were associated, then to every pious Jew such a mountain could only seem to be a place of special action of dark forces, a mountain of demons (who are the gods of the pagans); could Jehovah come from such a mountain in the opinion of the ancient Jew? 3) Finally, they think that the prophet represents Jehovah coming to him from His dwelling in Jerusalem, which has not yet been abandoned (cf. Chapters X-XI), from the temple. But Jerusalem is to the west of Babylon, not to the north.

The question will become somewhat clearer if we compare this case of the appearance of the Glory of God with other cases of its appearance. At least in some of these cases, God chose a deliberately known direction for his march across the earth, and in the choice of these directions one cannot help but notice some correct alternation and sequence. So before the prophet Ezekiel and his holy era, which was so critical for Israel. writers, if they ever talk about where the Lord and His glory come from, they always indicate the south as such a place: Deut. 33.2; Avv 3.3. At the end of the book of Ezekiel, where the prophet speaks of the future glorious St. land, distant future, the Glory of the Lord, heading to the new temple for eternal residence in it, comes from the East. Only from the west, the land of darkness and evil, the Lord never came.

"Great Cloud" God repeatedly appeared on earth in a cloud: thus He led Israel through the desert, was present in the tabernacle (Ex 40.34:38, cf. Eze 33.9-10) and in the temple (1 Kings 8.10-11). The participation of the cloud in the theophany had the meaning that with it God closed himself from those to whom he appeared. In this case, as at Sinai (Judges 5.4; Ps 67.9-10), the theophanic cloud was part of the storm that accompanied the theophany (cf. Job 38.1), was the cloud of this storm. But of course, just as much as the storm of theophany was superior to an ordinary storm, the theophanic cloud was superior to a simple, even the largest cloud (the prophet makes this clear by the definition “great”), surpassing a) in density, reaching the point of completely plunging the earth into darkness (Ps 17:10, 12, 96:2; Joel 2.2; Zeph 1.15; Deut. 4:11, 5:22; Heb. 12.18); b) lowness above the earth, reaching the point of completely sinking to the ground (Ps. 17.10, etc.), why such a cloud, trace. and the present must have been like a tornado. (Cook in The Holy Bible 1876 puts this word in the text of Ezekiel); hence the LXX addition about this cloud is clear, that it was “in it,” that is, in the wind, whirling and carried by it.

"And the swirling fire." Along with the wind and the cloud, fire came towards the prophet. These were three great whole visions, equal to each other, each terrible in itself and terrible in its combination. The definition given by the prophet to this fire is explained differently - according to Heb. mitlakahat(Russian “swirling”). This word is found only in Exodus 9 and also in application to fire, which, instead of hail, the 7th plague of Egypt, spilled over the earth. LXX, translating this word εξαστραπτων, “shine” (fire from lightning), they think that this is frequent lightning; but to denote lightning in Heb. language there is a special word barracks, used all the time even in the psalms with their figurative language. Mitlakahat reciprocal form of the verb lakhs"take". But it is difficult to find a meaning for this form of this verb. The majority, including our Russian translation of the Bible, following the Vulgate, understand this form from the verb lakhs about the appearance, outline, image of the fire burning, that it was a swirling, curling, curling fire, and not spreading (perhaps they say that the clouds of fire made their way throughout the cloud): others - constantly arising here and there. These explanations violate the meaning of the verb lakhs, which never loses its basic meaning of “to take” and in no voice can it have such a distant and artificial meaning as the Russian “to take”, in the sense of “to cling to each other”, “to form a circle”. And regarding fire lakhs can have only one meaning - “to embrace” the burning substance, “to devour it”; and the fire that came to the prophet could not help but burn something, and this should be mentioned in the definition given to fire. Since this fire went to the prophet, like the wind and the cloud, it burned everything that was in its path, and a trace. the very path of wind and cloud; it covered their common path (hence mutual - return form); it was a trace. the same fiery river that flowed in Daniel’s vision before the throne of God. Like the wind and the cloud, it did not arise from a natural cause, but was ignited by the descent of God, and it burned the place through which God walked. This is how Mount Sinai once burned, “the descent for the sake of God,” the path along which God passed before Elijah in Horeb, the thorn bush from which God made a revelation to Moses; fire and smoke passed between the cut parts of animals during the epiphany to Abraham (Gen. 15.17); when God is called “a consuming fire,” etc. this sign of His appearance is meant. In such fire, as in wind, thunderstorm, earthquake, the shock of nature at the appearance of God in it is manifested: in the air this shock is produced by a strong, stormy wind; the earth shakes and shakes from the appearance of God; the waters are agitated and noisy (Hab 3.10); flammable substances ignite and burn. It is known that the last coming of God to earth will be in “fiery fire.” (2 Thessalonians 1.8).

“And radiance around it,” that is, the fire spread radiance around itself. In order for this remark not to be idle, it must be assumed that the prophet wants to draw their attention to the special brightness and power of the radiance spread by the fire described above, and also to the fact that this radiance stood out too sharply in the darkness with which the huge cloud of theophany shrouded the surrounding area. In LXX, this remark appears before the words “fire shine,” where it seems to be more appropriate; then the pronoun “his” (“around him”) will refer to the cloud, and not to the fire, to which it cannot refer in Hebrew. i.e. due to its grammatical gender – masculine.

Ezek.1:5. and from the midst of it is like the light of a flame from the midst of fire; and from the middle of it the likeness of four animals was visible, and this was their appearance: their appearance was like that of a man;

"From the midst of it." Why “him”? In euros here is the feminine pronoun. R.; track. “it” cannot be attributed to the nearest noun “radiance”, which in Hebrew. m.r.; cannot be attributed to noun. "fire", which is too far; moreover, fire art. 4, as we saw, covered the earth under a phenomenon moving across it, and with radiance, light 5 v. God, who sat above the firmament, shone, as v. 27 shows; The pronoun cannot be attributed to a noun either. “cloud” which is even further away and m.r. What noun should it refer to? None.

As we will see further in article 5, the feminine pronoun with the preposition “from among” replaces a non-existent one in Hebrew. language neuter pronoun: “from the midst of this,” “from the midst of all this,” of everything the prophet had seen hitherto, “the light of the flame” shone.

"Light of the Flame", slav. “vision of ilektra” – both are tentative translations of Heb. hashmal gene, of which the second word is ΄απαξ λεγομενον (found only in Ezekiel and in this connection). The focus of everything seen hitherto was something that had the appearance (glorious “vision”, more precisely than the Russian “light”), the gene hashmal "ya. The Prophet could not say that it had a “likeness" demut or real appearance, outline mare Hashmalya; but only “like a gene.” Being words identical in outline to the word “eye”, which differs only in pronunciation (gain), gene used about a small surface, about a shiny point: maybe gene precious stone (Ezekiel 1.16), sparkling metal (Ezekiel 1.7), scabs of leprosy (Lev. 13.2), sparkling wine in a vat (Proverbs 23.31). Meaning gene the approximate meaning of the mysterious word is predicted hashmal(Russian translation “flame”, Slav. “ilektra”). It should mean some small, shiny object that sparkled and sparkled in the light and fire surrounding it. But what kind of object it was, all the efforts of the interpreters to say anything about it ended in almost nothing. Only in two places is this word still used by the prophet, and in both cases when describing the appearance of the One who appeared to him in a vision. Having a general resemblance to a man, the one who appeared to the prophet shone and glowed like fire, and above the loins, like hashmal(Eze 1.27) and how Zohar, “radiance”, “luminaries” (Ezek 8.2). That. the radiance of the fire and luminaries seemed insufficient to the prophet so that they could form an idea of ​​​​the light that he saw: this light stood out and shone brightly on the field of the fire itself (“from the middle of the fire”), differed in some shade from the light of the fire and surpassed him: the upper part of the image of the One who appeared shone with them, perhaps. His very face and body (as opposed to his clothes, which could be of fire). They wanted to formulate the concept of hashmal based on the etymology of the word, but it itself presents a riddle. In euros there is no root close to this word in the language; but such a root is sought in related languages ​​and on this basis they give the word a meaning: “golden copper” (cf. 1 Ezra 8.27), “polished copper”, “amber”, “hot or shiny metal”, the word is considered the ancient name for gold (Meyer) or pure fire, without smoke (some of the newest rabbis). Recent discoveries are beginning to shed light on the mysterious “hashmal” of the prophet Ezekiel. In the list of booty taken by Thutmes III from Nagar to the north. Syria (the list is placed on tablets found in the Karnak ruins), “Ashmer” or “Ashmal” is mentioned. Reminds me of “Khashmal” and Assyrian. "eshmaru", which is placed next to the gold, silver, precious stones and royal regalia brought by Asurbanipal upon the conquest of Susa from the treasures of this city. All this allows us to say about the hashmal that it was some kind of large and rare jewel, not inferior to gold and precious stones. In the prophet Ezekiel, it is indeed placed infinitely higher than topaz (more precisely, some precious stone “tarshish”, which in turn was placed much higher than gold - see Ezekiel 1.16) and higher than sapphire (see 26). LXX, also probably not understanding this word, like Peshito and Targum (leaving it without translation), decided to translate it ηλεκτρον for the following reasons: they, like modern interpreters, rightly thought that this word meant some -or a piece of jewelry and most likely a metal of high value; on the basis of Dan 10.6 (cf. Mk 9.3; Mt 28.3) they could believe that the light seen in this case by the prophet and different from the red light of fire was lightning-like light. But if we compare this light with the light (brilliance) emitted by any metal, then no comparison will be more accurate than the comparison with the electrum. Representing a mixture of 3 4 or 4 5 gold from 1 4 or 1 5 silver, this alloy was very valuable in ancient times, almost more expensive than gold (Plinius, Hist nat. ХXXIX, 4; Strabo 3:146), probably due to the difficulty of preparing it and its beauty; In the dazzling sparkle of gold, through such an admixture, a quiet and gentle shine of silver was added, just as “as the unbearable radiance of the Divinity was tempered in Christ by His union with humanity” (Blessed Jer.).

"From the middle of the fire." This addition, following the Vulgate, which translates it: “id est de medio ignis,” is considered an explanation for the expression: “from the middle of it” (at the beginning of the verse), made by the prophet himself; but this would be a pleonasm unheard of in Ezekiel. Therefore others believe that hashmal it was as if he were on fire; but noble metals melt in fire, not glow; and was it khashmal metal? These words receive the most natural meaning in the light of article 27: according to this verse hashmal shone precisely from the midst of the fire, but not the fire of Art. 4, and another mass of fire, with which He who sat on the throne was clothed like a robe. – LXX after “from the middle of the fire” they have the addition: “and the light in it”, made according to Art. 26, where more precisely from Hebrew. will be: “and light to him,” or “with him” (lo), i.e.: “and hashmal, ilektr was something (strongly) luminous, full of light, woven from light and brilliance.”

"And from the midst of it." The pronoun “his” in Hebrew. female R. here, as at the beginning of the verse, replaces cf. R. and means: “from the midst of all this,” that is, everything seen by the prophet hitherto - mysterious animals were seen: the wind carried them (v. 12), a cloud enveloped them, fire was kindled under them (v. 4) and between them (v. 13), and the electr - hashmal shone over their heads (v. 27, cf. 22). Slav. “in the middle” (without a pronoun) is not a discrepancy, but a skillful translation of an expression that is so unclear in Russian. lane

"Similarity". Heb. demut can mean the most distant, vague similarity, bordering on the opposite (Is 40.18-19 about the similarity of pagan gods to God), Western biblical scholars do not even dare to translate this word into a noun, but translate it descriptively: “something like”, “something like”; closer resemblance is signified in Ezekiel by other words, for example, mare (“kind”); The prophet uses “demut” about parts of the vision that are less noticeable and clear, which at the same time turn out to be the most important: about the faces of animals, about wheels, about the throne and the One sitting on it. Consequently, how far the similarity between the creatures seen by the prophet Ezekiel and animals extended, the word demut does not allow us to say. If the figures seen by the prophet were barely distinguishable, if they had vague outlines (contours, silhouettes) barely visible, the prophet could say that he saw “demut” of animals. To what extent the prophet could not clearly see the figures of animals, at least at first, is shown by the fact that before the 10th century. he cannot determine what kind of animals they were.

There were “four” of the mysterious animals that appeared to the prophet Ezekiel. This number is symbolic, as can be seen from the persistence with which it is carried out in this vision: 4 not only animals, 4 faces for each of the animals, 4 wings, 4 wheels. 4 is a symbol of spatial completeness, since it embraces all the countries of the world; therefore, the body seen by Nebuchadnezzar and signifying worldwide monarchies has 4 components; the prophet Daniel sees 4 beasts and their appearance is preceded by the struggle of 4 winds on the sea (Dan. 7); according to Ezekiel 14.21, if God wants to destroy a nation, he sends 4 plagues to it; the spirit that revived the dry bones in Ezekiel's vision came from the 4 winds (Ezekiel 37.9). Being the number of spatial completeness, 4 is therefore also a symbol of completeness, completion, filling, exhaustion, like 7 of eternity, infinity (space and time). As such, these numbers are applied to the calculation of the highest spirits - cherubim and archangels. What is remarkable is not the large number of these closest servants of the throne of God, in contrast to the thousands of thousands and tens of thousands of angels. – The “animals” that appeared to the prophet were cherubim, as the prophet later learned, when repeating the vision (in Chapter 1, therefore, he never calls them cherubim), and he learned that from the fact that God himself called these animals cherubim before him (Ezek 10.2). The image of animals for the cherubs could have been chosen instead of the human, because the animal must have a more complete, strong and concentrated sense of life and existence itself than a person, in whom this feeling is weakened by consciousness and reflection; and how can an animal be a better symbol than a human image of the most complete carriers of created life - the cherubim. Moreover, the life of animals is more mysterious to us than our life; therefore, serving as a symbol of a full and strong life, animals can serve as a good symbol of a mysterious life; hence the representation of the Messiah in the form of a lamb, a copper serpent, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove.

The expression “and such was their appearance - their appearance was like that of a man” means that the creatures that appeared to the prophet were as much like animals as they were like humans. The prophet expresses with this the general impression of the creatures that appeared to him. Therefore, it is unfair to look here for indications of certain particulars in their figure; so they say that the present expression of the prophet obliges everything in the figure of creatures to be thought human, excluding what is listed below (wings, legs), - therefore, for example, the body of creatures should be represented as vertical and not horizontal (Bertolet), the body as featherless and hairless (Hitzig) . Since the cherubs were as much like animals as they were like humans, their body had to be both vertical and horizontal; how the combination of such positions is possible is shown by the winged figures of lions and oxen with a human body discovered in Assyro-Babylonia. The impression from such creatures could not but be stunning, and sacred horror is felt here in the lines of the prophet, a horror that is not surprising if we take into account that the prophet came into contact with the nearest sphere of the Divine and saw the highest angelic spheres (and angels could not be visible to man without a strong shock his being).

Ezek.1:6. and each one had four faces, and each one had four wings;

The face is the most important part of the body, the one that most distinguishes every creature from other creatures - a part so essential that in many languages ​​the face is synonymous with the creature itself. Therefore, the assimilation of 4 faces to the cherubim means, first of all, their unattainable elevation above the limited human precision (“four faces signifies something divine in the cherubim.” Riehm, De natura et notione symbobica cheruborum, 1864, 21). With that singularity that serves as a distinctive feature of our personality and consciousness, cherubim in an incomprehensible way combine plurality in their personality. Then, thanks to so many faces in the cherubs, there could be no difference between the sides - there could not be a front, back and sides (Macarius the Great, conversation 1). Further, thanks to this, they could look simultaneously in all directions and, therefore, always see everything, which indicated the special height of their knowledge, reminiscent of the omniscience of God. Finally, thanks to the four faces, the cherubim could go without turning around to each country of the world, which gave them exceptional power over spatial limitations, signifying their greater freedom from spatial boundaries, compared to other creatures, reminiscent of the omnipresence of God. Since the four-faced structure of the cherubim was designed so that they would be able to go in any direction without turning, this goal could only be achieved if on each of their 4 sides they had not only a face in the proper sense, but and wings, and legs, then the word “face” here by the prophet does not designate just the front part of the head, but the front part of the entire body (in Hebrew it was said: the face of the earth, the face of the field, the face of clothing Gen. 2.6; Ex. 10, etc. ).

The wings of the creatures that appeared to the prophet were supposed to direct his thought to the sphere of their habitat - the heavenly (birds are called heavenly in the Bible for their wings: Gen 1.26; Ps 8.9, etc.) and show that this is their real, own sphere, like the sphere of birds - air , and fish - water. The wings of the seraphim and cherubim are intended to show that both are inseparable from heaven and are inconceivable without it, that the earth is a completely alien sphere to them, into which they can only temporarily descend, while the angels, who are nowhere in St. The Scriptures do not assimilate wings, they have a closer relationship to the earth. The wing serves the bird not only for flight, but also as a cover from external influences, both for itself and especially for its chicks - the purpose of the wing, which the Bible especially likes to dwell on (Ruth 2.12; Ps 62.8, etc.). And the wings of cherubs should have had such a purpose. The cherubim covered their body with two lowered wings (vv. 11, 23); and with two outstretched wings they covered, without a doubt, the same thing that the cherubim of the tabernacle and temple covered with their outstretched wings; and these latter covered with their wings the lid of the Ark of the Covenant, as a place of revelation of the Glory of God (hence the epithet “overshadowing cherub” Eze 28.14, etc.); The cherubim of Ezekiel’s vision also covered with their outstretched wings from the ground the vault on which the throne of God stood (v. 23). – The quadruple number of wings on cherubim, by its discrepancy with the usual number of wings on earthly creatures that have them, indicated a special elevation of their habitat. Such a number of wings was also unexpected in comparison with the image of the previous representation of cherubim and seraphim: the cherubim of the tabernacle and the temple had 2 wings, and the seraphim of Isaiah had 6. According to the generally accepted explanation, the cherubim do not have another pair of wings, since their only purpose is to overshadow the Ark, and not the movement of the Glory of God, as in Ezekiel; on the other hand, the cherubim of the prophet Ezekiel, being under the throne of God as its bearers, did not need a third pair of wings to cover their faces; in the Apocalypse, the cherubim, being not under the throne of God, but around it, already have 6 wings.

Ezek.1:7. and their legs were straight legs, and the soles of their feet were like the soles of a calf, and they sparkled like bright bronze (and their wings were light).

The Prophet points out 3 features of the legs of mysterious animals. 1) The first feature - straightness of the leg - is usually understood to mean that the legs of animals did not have knee bends and even no vertebrae or joints; This is how LXX understood the expression, translating here freely: “and their legs (part instead of the whole) are right”; the fragile structure of all the joints that make up the human and animal legs was unnecessary for those creatures that could move without walking (wings, wheels); therefore, the legs of the cherubim could have the advantage of perfect straightness, which gave the legs a special hardness and strength, so necessary for them in view of the fact that their owners bore a great, unimaginable weight - the glory (in Hebrew “kebod” - “heaviness”) of Jehovah. The legs of the cherubim did not bend or bow, raising their thoughts with this quality to the spiritual fortitude and power of those to whom they belonged. 2) The second feature of the legs was, according to Heb. text in their foot, which was like the foot of a calf. Thus, the cherubim in the lowest and most secondary part of their figure had the likeness of a calf. In the Old Testament, the calf after the lamb is the first sacrificial animal, a sacrificial animal ad honorem, so to speak, a sacrifice of special honor, which the high priest and “the whole community” offered for themselves, moreover, in cases of exceptional importance - for involuntary sin (Lev. 4) and when and others have the right and need for special closeness to God - on the day of cleansing (Lev. 16); this is a trace. the sacrifice of a bold approach to God, a special exaltation to Him, which only one of the people or the whole people as one can count on. Even the entire community of the sons of Israel, who are given the opportunity to atone for their sin, like the high priest, with a calf (Lev. 4.14), when (precisely on the day of atonement) they atone for their sin with this sacrifice and enter into terrible closeness to God, the high priest already offers a goat for sin ( Lev 5.15). Tempered and ascending with the smoke of its burning to the sky, the calf, one of the sacrificial animals, seems to represent the chosen one of God before the very throne of God (in the highest heavenly sphere, that is, exactly where the sphere of action of the cherubim begins). The Jew represented the sacrifice of a happy, gracious future in the form of calves (Ps 50.21); Let us also remember: “And God will be more pleased with a young calf that wears out its horns and wears its nose” (Ps 68.32). It is unfairly thought that the cherubim needed the calf’s foot for its round shape, thanks to which it always faces in all directions, while the human foot only faces one, which made it possible for the cherubim to move in all directions without turning in one direction or another. If we talk about the convenience of moving in different directions, then the human foot, although facing one direction, should take first place; if a round shape was required here for such reasons, then on what basis should the hoof of a calf (not an ox!) be given preference over a mass of homogeneous hooves? – LXX in this place give a completely different idea: ... and their feet are feathered. Greek πτερωτοι can mean winged, with wings (aligerus) or feathered, feathered (pennatus). All interpreters unanimously believe that the Hebrew reading here is more correct and the different readings of LXX are declared to be because the Alexandrian translators seemed incredible and tempting the presence of the legs of a calf on the cherubim in view of the sad significance that the calf was destined to have in the history of Israel. Although the Masoretic reading of the present sentence, as we have seen, gives a thought that is not only completely possible, but also one that emanates mystery and grandeur, it cannot be said that the thought given by LXX is not impossible and does not have its advantages - Moreover, both with the first and with the second meaning “feathered”. The wings on the legs of the cherubim could symbolize their speed, show that the cherubim did not run on their feet, but flew (although the cherubim were equipped with wings in the usual place of the latter - at the shoulders - v. 8, so there was no need for wings on the legs; Mercury has wings only on its legs). In the same way, the feathering of the legs of cherubs could have the same meaning as the feathering of birds - to make the body light and give it the ability to soar in the air (however, this goal by the feathering of the legs alone would be achieved to the smallest extent). And so reading the LXX already from its inner side, from the side of its thoughts, allows for objections. Moreover, by accepting it, it is impossible to explain the emergence of the Masoretic reading, while the first of the second is easier to explain. LXX, finding for well-known reasons the comparison with the calf inconvenient and unlikely in the mouth of the prophet, could here decide to freely convey the thoughts of the prophet; They thought that by comparing the legs of the cherubs with the legs of a calf, the prophet wanted to indicate their speed: they could convey the concept of “fast” through πτερωτος in order to strengthen and poetically decorate the thought. Besides the LXX, other ancient translations did not read “taurus” here: the Targum and Aquila read “round” (Hegel - taurus was vocalized as hagol “round”): but Symmachus, Pescito and the Vulgate agree with the Masorets. 3) The third feature of the cherubim’s legs was that they sparkled (nocetzim; cf. Isa 1.31; LXX: σπινθηρες “sparks”; rus. lane inaccurately “sparkled”), like copper of some special kind - kalal(Russian translation presumably: “brilliant”). To that sea of ​​light and fire, which surrounded the cherubim, who had fire under (v. 4) and among themselves (v. 13) and the unbearable radiance of the Divine above their heads (v. 27), the intermittent, fickle and generally weak light of a spark could not add nothing; track. the spark is not brought here for a lighting effect. Since sparks are produced by known objects when they are acted upon by other objects, the sparks from the feet of the cherubim were a sign that the latter were subject to alien influence. To get closer to the prophet, the cherubim needed to be on earth, walk or fly over it, enter its sphere, but this sphere is completely alien to them, more alien than to other angels, since their life and activity is the very throne of God and its footstool ; their contact with the earthly sphere, which is completely alien to them, can be compared to that rough touch on an object that gives a spark from it. The appearance of a spark from the feet of the cherubs was supposed to indicate the extraordinary strength and speed of their movement, as well as the special strength of their legs, which should not have been inferior to the strength of metal or stone. The Prophet adds that, judging by the sparks, one might think (“how”) that the animals’ legs were made of a special kind of copper. People usually look for indications of the extraordinary brilliance of these legs by comparing the legs of cherubs with copper. But can copper, even the best, give a shine that would suit this vision, where everything shines with a light that is barely comparable to anything and shines better than the best types of precious stones? The prophet should not speak about the shine of his legs, but about their iron strength (hence the straightness of the legs). At that time, copper took the place of iron (Isa. 45.2, etc.). Not inferior to iron in strength, copper has always been considered nobler, more elegant than iron and therefore suitable for comparison here (as in Dan 10.6; Rev 1.15). What has been said indicates the approximate meaning of that most precise definition of copper “dripped”, which Russian. lane conveys through “brilliant”, glory. “brilliant” (i.e., lightning-shaped, obviously according to Art. 4), both presumably, as in other ancient translations (Vulg. aes candens, like the Targum; Peshito and Arab. like LXX). You cannot look, as interpreters usually do, in the word kalal concepts of brilliance, radiance (since kalal means “light”, then, they say, it can also mean “light”, because light is lighter than darkness (!), or “polished” from the meaning “to be light, mobile”), and the concepts of hardness, strength, indestructibility; basic meaning of the word kalal was “to make small, insignificant” (Gen. 16.4-5, etc.); in this meaning, the word could easily be applied to red-hot metal, that is, placed in fire, which destroys, crushes, but cannot destroy it; this meaning of the word is confirmed by the meaning of the word “galil”, “fin”, “crucible” (cf. calere, “to heat”). – In LXX the 7th verse is against Heb. increase; “their wings are light (ελαφροι), that is, mobile (m.b.: elastic). Since the wing is essentially movable, this remark can only make sense if this quality in real wings has reached a significant, conspicuous degree. The Prophet in LXX wants to say that the wings of the cherubim were in constant motion; The peace into which ordinary wings must from time to time plunge for rest was alien to them. If such quality of wings does not contradict Art. 24s. 25b, then they would covertly indicate the sphere of habitation and action of the cherubim, which is not the solid earth, where you can stand and fold your wings, but the above-ground and supermundane spaces, where you can only soar.

Ezek.1:8. And the hands of men were under their wings, on their four sides;

Since “hands” determine the possibility of activity for a person and this most sharply distinguishes him from animals, for whom, due to the absence of hands, activity is impossible, but only life (nutrition), then the assimilation of hands by cherubs is intended to indicate their ability to perform activities similar to human ones. activities. This combination of the subtlety of human actions with the elemental power of an animal could not but be terrible and stunning for the gaze of the prophet. In the definition of “human”, as if superfluous with “hands”, one can see pleonasm or an echo of some surprise on the part of the prophet at the fact of the presence of hands here. Since the creatures that appeared to the prophet Ezekiel were winged, the natural place of the hands in their body was occupied by wings, and the prophet, in response to the reader’s natural bewilderment as to where the cherubim’s hands could be, notes that they “were under their wings.” – In view of the prophet’s silence about the number of hands of each cherub, a question was raised about this among interpreters, and the hands numbered from 1 to 16 for each cherub. There could not be more than two hands on each side of the four-faced cherub, since otherwise the number of hands would deviate from human ones and the prophet had to say about this. But how many hands should a cherub have in this case, such a question cannot be asked, because the prophet could not simultaneously see all 4 sides of the cherub (and probably only one), and what he did not see did not exist, so as here we are dealing with vision and not with external reality.

Ezek.1:9. and they had faces and wings, all four of them; their wings touched one another; During their procession they did not turn around, but walked each in the direction of their faces.

The words “all four of them had faces and wings” in their literal sense (that none of the 4 cherubs had faces and wings) would contain a completely unnecessary thought; therefore, the Targum conveys them: “and their faces and their wings were the same among all four of them,” which already went without saying and was unnecessary for the prophet to say; Peshito and Vulgate Heb. learnbagtam“on four of them” is translated “on their four sides,” which does not give a new thought compared to v. 6. and is bought at the price of inserting a new concept “side” into the text. It is best to see this expression as characteristic of the Hebrew. language and Ezekiel’s favorite phrase “nominative independent”: “as for the faces and their wings, they were like that for all 4 (cherubim): their wings touched one another,” etc. After the prophet in Art. 5–8 spoke about the faces, wings, legs and hands of cherubim, he now describes the most important parts of the body - faces and wings - closer; “In this way, the prophet especially highlights the faces and wings from all parts of the figure: in them the power of life is found primarily, in these the being of “animals” (Gefernik).

“Their wings touched one another.” The expression apparently indicates the contact of the wings of one cherub with each other, since the contact of the wings of different cherubs with each other should have been designated more separately, that is, to say that the wing of one cherub touched the wing of another. The meaning that such a contact of the wings of each cherub should have with each other is also clear: connecting one with the other on the body of the cherub, the wings would cover this body, thereby signifying the complete incomprehensibility for us of the being of the cherubs, an incomprehensibility however less than the incomprehensibility of the Divine, and perhaps and seraphim, whose face is inaccessible to human gaze. But the Vulgate and almost all interpreters are inclined to the opinion that this refers to the contact of the wings of different animals, and they are inclined not without reason. The concept of “their wings” could have been used by the prophet to designate the wings of all the cherubim together, without any distinction between the wings of one and the wings of another, trace. and contact is conceivable between all members of this equal union: the prophet does not say that only everyone’s wings (in Hebrew would be “leish”, as in v. 11 and 23) touched each other, but all the wings of all the cherubim touched. According to Art. 11, the two wings of the cherubim were stretched out - these wings could touch the edges of the wings of other cherubim, and the two wings were lowered, these wings could connect with each other on the body, covering it. The contact of individual cherubs with their wings 1) had the meaning that thanks to such a connection of wings, all the cherubs, as if with one impulse, walked in the same direction with the same speed; 2) could remind the prophet of the two wings of the cherubim of the Holy of Holies touching each other and show him that on these wings, as on the wings of the cherubim of the Holy of Holies, rests the Glory of God, the Shekinah. – LXX has a different idea here: omitting the second “their wings” of Heb. i.e., they connect the verb of the present sentence (Hebrew “hoverst” “contacted”) as a predicate with the beginning of the verse: and their faces “and their four wings holding each other.” According to LXX, the prophet wants to say that the faces and wings of the creatures he saw were constantly in the same relationship, as a result of which they formed one whole (“communion together” Ps 121.3). The four mysterious animals would thus reveal a close connection with each other, a certain inseparability of each other. They were connected to each other in a way that separate and independent objects on earth cannot be connected: they were connected by their faces and wings, which could never come out of the same position in relation to each other. But the LXX was able to attribute the verb “khavar” not only to the wings, but also to the faces of the cherubim, only due to the fact that they do not read in v. 9. "their wings." – The described position of the cherubim’s wings was so important that even the movement of the cherubim was subordinate to it, conformed to it. To maintain this position of their wings, the cherubs “did not turn around during their procession.” But this did not restrict the freedom of their movements: having 4 faces, they were at all times facing each of the 4 countries of the world and could walk without turning around to any of these countries, each walking in the direction of their face. The 3rd and 4th sentences of the verse have such a connection with the second. But in itself, the fact that the last part of the verse speaks of was of great importance. For the mysterious animals, the very structure of their being completely excluded the possibility of returning back. Every movement they made was a movement forward.

They moved only in a straight line in front of them, and not in a roundabout or circular manner. This meant that the spiritual forces represented by these animals “are never stimulated or retreated, but are directed further, forward” (Blessed Jerome).

They noticed (Müller, Ezechiel-Studien 1895, 15) that with this method of movement of the cherubs they could not always move from place to place in a direct way: if the purpose of their movement did not lie on the radii going from their location (o) to the four cardinal points , and at some point a, then the cherubs could move to this goal not by the shortest path along the diagonal oa, but by a roundabout path, describing two legs oba or osa. But this is not a design flaw in Bozhest. chariots: the vision could deliberately not take into account the subtlest ramifications of the wind rose, since the number 4 means in the Bible the entire set of directions, and as a sign that the divine chariot was above earthly conditions and spatial boundaries. – Vatican and some other Greek. The codes give a reading of Article 9 that eliminates from it everything that makes it so difficult to understand, namely; “and the faces of their four did not turn around as they walked; each one walked in the direction of its face.” But perhaps these codes “are trying here to come to the aid of the somewhat unnaturally constructed exposition of Ezekiel” (Kretschmar) by eliminating its roughness and imaginary contradictions and repetitions in comparison with Art. 11 and 23.

Ezek.1:10. The similarity of their faces is the face of a man and the face of a lion on the right side of all four of them; and on the left side the face of a calf in all four and the face of an eagle in all four.

The prophet only now speaks about the faces of the creatures that appeared to him, having already spoken about wings, arms, legs, even feet, probably because the faces of these creatures later than their other parts emerged from that cloud and whirlwind, shrouded in which the cherubim walked to the prophet. Perhaps these faces during the vision never appeared with all the clarity and distinctness for the prophet’s gaze: clouds shrouded in thick darkness, they perhaps emerged only with flashes of that fire that burned between the cherubim, and those lightnings that the darkness of the vision cut through the matter (v. 13). If man cannot see the face of God at all, then the face of the cherub, the creature closest to God, could not be fully shown to man. Hence the appearance in the description of the prophet here again of the concept of “likeness,” which was not used since Art. 5.

The first the prophet calls “the face of a man” either because of its comparative dignity with other faces or because it was the face turned towards him by all the cherubim. It is clear why the lion occupies the right side, the ox the left, and the eagle the last place. The appearance of such persons in the form of cherubs is usually explained in such a way that the face of a man expresses the intelligence of the creatures that appeared, the face of a lion expresses their strength, the face of an ox expresses strength and meekness, and the face of an eagle expresses pomp. But the strangeness of introducing animals and bestial forms into the images of the highest spirits is not weakened by this explanation; This is the mystery of prophetic contemplation, which can sooner be shed light on. considerations. The choice of animals was made so that representatives of the entire living world were included: four creatures have primacy in this world: among creatures, man, among birds, the eagle, among cattle, the ox, and among animals, the lion (Schemoth rabba 23). The kingdom of reptiles (which, in a broad sense, can also include fish) is excluded for obvious reasons. Thus, from each area of ​​earthly life, the best was taken as a likeness for the cherubim, as if the color of this life. If for the fullest possible expression of the idea of ​​the cherub the addition of animal forms to the human image was inevitably required (see explanation, present 5), then truly it was impossible to give a better connection than here. God himself is not ashamed to compare himself with these noble animals (Hosea 11.10; Exodus 19.4; Deut. 32.11, etc.). The plurality and diversity of animal forms here was required by “the completeness of the idea, which barely allows for sensual expression” (Gefernik), just as the Egyptian gods “had the form not of cattle, not of birds, not of beasts, not even of man himself, but of a form, especially artificially composed and arousing awe with its very novelty” (Apulei, Metam. XI).

Ezek.1:11. And their faces and their wings on top were divided, but each had two wings touching one another, and two covered their bodies.

The faces and wings of the cherubim were in such a close connection that it was impossible to talk about them except together, which is why the prophet from describing the faces again (cf. vv. 9 and 6) moves on to the wings and their relation to the faces. Both of them, forming the top of the whole phenomenon, represented, as it were, one harmonious and strictly measured system, in which not a single member could move without setting the other in motion. The description of this system of faces and wings of cherubim is given to the prophet in a section of chapters 9-12, which is clearly divided into 2 parts: 9-10 art. and 11–12 tbsp. and each of them begins with the words “and their faces and their wings.” The mutual connection of the members of this marvelously coordinated system is spoken of by the prophet in v. 9. expresses in concept hoverot(“contacted”, “held”), and here with the verb perudot“were divided,” glory. "prostrate." But in what sense could the prophet say of the faces and wings of the creatures that appeared to him that they were separated? The fact that they were not merged into one mass? But this itself followed from the very essence of the face and wing. However, one could still expect such an expression about the wings: with this remark the reader would be warned against such an idea about the connection of the wings, that this connection reached their complete merging into one wing, into one wing plane, but that on this area composed by the wings one wing is clearly demarcated it was from someone else. But what meaning could such a remark have in relation to persons? Is it the fact that the faces did not imperceptibly transform into one another, and each was visible as fully and clearly as if the others were not there? Obviously this is a verb parade, as well as havar Art. 9, which no one except Ezekiel uses about faces and wings and the usual meanings of which are difficult to apply to both, in the mouth of the prophet has some special meaning, and we must admit that we do not understand the prophet in this place , but we don’t understand because what he described in this section was, like much in this mysterious vision, not easily amenable to a clear and accurate description, as a result of which the prophet had to find new concepts for his description, adapting old words to them. The relationship between the faces and wings of the cherubs, like everything in these latter, was inexplicable and indescribable. The Alexandrian and Vatican Codes, the Coptic and Ethiopic translations do not have the first word “and their faces” in this verse, due to which the first sentence of the verse refers only to wings. And in this case, the verb perudot takes on a more understandable meaning; In addition to the meaning “were divided”, which goes to the wings, as we have seen, more than to the faces, this verb can also have the meaning “to extend” (to separate the wings from the body) about the wings, which is assigned to it here LXX. But we cannot guarantee that the reading of the indicated codes here is correct (one would rather expect the omission of an incomprehensible word in the sacred text than the addition of such a word).

“But each had two wings touching one another.” As in v. 9, the prophet here, having begun speaking about faces and wings together, moves on to one wings. He is already in the 9th century. said about the wings that they touched one another; Now this message is supplemented by the remark that only two wings of each “animal” were in contact, while the other two were lowered onto the body. And with regard to the pair of wings touching, the prophet in this v. makes an important addition to Art. 9. He says that the wings did not simply touch: “one to the other” (as inaccurately in the Russian translation), but “at one” (“leish”, actually “at the husband”, Greek ΄εκατερω), i.e. animal, with another (“ish” “husband”), while 9 tbsp. allowed us to think of contact only between the wings of the same animal. Consequently, between the cherubs there was a constantly closed place, fastened by their wings; in Art. 13 we learn what was the contents of this terrible place.

"And two covered their bodies." The two functions that are carried out by a natural wing - flight and covering the body - among the cherubs are divided between special wings, of course, for a more perfect performance of these functions: just as the cherubs could not help but constantly soar in the air, so they could not leave their bodies uncovered. The covering of the body with wings among cherubim is usually explained as a sign of reverence for God; bliss Jerome (with whom Blessed Theodoret also agrees) “the two wings with which the body is covered depicts the imperfection of knowledge”; rather, covering the body with wings could mean the incomprehensibility of the being of the cherubs themselves.

Ezekiel 1:12. And they walked, each in the direction that was before him; Where the spirit wanted to go, that’s where they went; They did not turn around during their procession.

First and third sentence of Art. 12 literally identical with Art. 9. Such literal repetitions are in the spirit of the prophet Ezekiel, who uses them as a means of drawing the reader’s attention to one or another thought. Thus, the prophet considered the fact that the cherubim did not turn around while walking to be very important; it struck him very much. But in the same with 9 art. expressions of Art. 12 compared to 9 tbsp. There is also a significant difference. There, the remark that each “animal” walked in the direction in front of him is preceded by the remark that the animals did not turn around during the procession; here these two remarks are put in the reverse order. In v. 9: “during their procession they did not turn around, but each walked in the direction of his face”; in v. 12: And they walked every one in the direction of his face; “during their procession they did not turn around.” In 9th century the main idea was that the animals never turned around, because this made possible the constant and always equal contact between their wings, which is the theme of verse 9. In verse 12, this idea is secondary, but the main one is that the animals could walk in the direction of each of their faces, which means in all directions; The main idea here is because the prophet now wants to point out how, given such indifference and equal accessibility to the cherubim of all countries of the world, their movement in one direction and not the other was determined. “Wherever the spirit was to go, they went” is how the prophet literally answers this question in Hebrew; this expression is explained by the LXX: “maybe even if the spirit walks, I go,” and Russian. lane “where the spirit wanted to go.” So “a special command to the 4 creatures in which direction the movement should take place was as little needed as in Isa VI the express command to one of the seraphim to take a hot coal from the altar. The entire chariot was permeated by one spirit and one will, which was communicated to creatures without the mediation of words” (Kretschmar). What kind of “spirit” is this that determined the movement of the Divine chariot? The fact that the word “ruach” (“spirit”), which had a wide variety of meanings in the language of the Jews, is used here without any explanation, as well as the member in front of it, leaves no doubt that what is meant here is “ruach” - “ wind" (slav. "spirit") 4 tbsp. There was nothing humiliating for either of them in the fact that the movement of the cherubim and the entire Divine chariot was determined by the movement of the wind, for that wind was not an ordinary wind. Just as the cloud that walked with that wind turned out to be filled with unearthly creatures for the prophet’s gaze, so the wind that walked before the Lord had to be, so to speak, worthy and capable of this; it must have contained something similar to what the cloud contained, if not higher and more excellent; in all the parts and agents of the present vision, even in such minor ones as the wheels, there was life, intelligence and consciousness. But while the prophet speaks about the “inner content” of the cloud, so to speak, he says nothing about the “uplifting” wind that walked in front of the cloud: his spiritual vision could not penetrate into the inner content of that extraordinary wind in the same way as it penetrated into the content clouds. Obviously, in this wind there was none other than the Spirit of God (“ruach elohim”), which in the book of Ezekiel, as often in general, appears to act through the wind: Eze 2:2, 3:14, 8:3, 11:24 ; 1 Kings 18.12; 2 Kings 2.16; Job 37:1, 9; John 3:8, 20:22; Acts 2:2. Of these cases, the most remarkable is the appearance of the Spirit of God in the 4 winds when dry bones were revived in the vision of Ezekiel and in a stormy breath when descending on the apostles. The Old Testament knew so much about the Holy Spirit!

Ezek.1:13. And the appearance of these animals was like the appearance of burning coals, like the appearance of lamps; fire walked among the animals, and a radiance came from the fire and lightning came from the fire.

With their mutually touching wings, the cherubs cordoned off a certain place, which, as could already be concluded from such an extraordinary fencing of it, had some special purpose. The description of this place is contained in Art. 13. The beginning of the verse in LXX is rendered in disagreement with the Hebrew. t.: “and in the midst of the animals there was a vision,” thus, according to LXX, the prophet in 13a already describes the place between the cherubim, and according to Heb. text and Russian lane even the cherubim themselves, what happened between them is spoken of only in the 13th century. It is the Hebrew. The text here describes the cherubim from the point of view of their color, which was fiery, so that they appeared entirely fiery and sparkled like lamps. But now almost everyone gives preference to LXX in this place: the prophet already spoke about the type of animals in v. 5, then it should have been said that it was fiery; and how could cherubim have the appearance of coals and lamps? they could only shine like both: and the radiance of a coal and a lamp is too different to serve as a comparison for the same object; probably the masorets simply wanted to finish what was unsaid by the prophet about the color of the cherubs. Thus, it can be considered certain that those coals and lamps for which the Heb. T. wants the cherubs to resemble, to be a new vision: they resemble the place that was cordoned off by the wings of the cherubs; The content is quite suitable for such a place. The coals between the cherubs are called burning, to show that they were not black and extinct, but red, still hot and in the very process of burning. The presence of coals here is explained by analogy with the vision of Isaiah, in which the seraphim takes a burning coal from the altar and which traces. suggests, like apocalyptic visions (Rev. 8:3, 5; Isa. 6.6), at the throne of God there is an altar with coals; although under his mysterious coals the prophet Ezekiel did not see the altar, and he could not be describing the heavenly sphere that Isaiah and John the Theologian described, but this does not prevent the coals between the cherubim from also giving a sacrificial character: the cherubim appear with symbols of constant burnt offering to God; the absence of an altar could indicate the highest and purest spirituality of this burnt offering. If God is a consuming fire, then the place on which He steps, seated on cherubim, i.e., closest to the cherubim, must burn, and the product of combustion is coal.

“Like the appearance of lamps.” Lamps before the throne of God are also found in the visions of the Apocalypse and are explained by the seer himself that these are “the essence of the seven spirits of God” (Rev 4.5) and “seven churches” (Rev 1:12-13, 20). Lighting a lamp before God is a rite of worship, signifying the warmth and dedication of serving God. If the “spirits of God” and “churches” appear before the throne of God not with lamps, but themselves turn into lamps, then this idea increases to extraordinary proportions. In Ezekiel, instead, the lamps appear in a clearly close, but not precisely defined, relationship to the cherubim, accompanying their appearance. But their symbolism is the same as in the Apocalypse: the spiritual burning of the entire being before God. There is a clear gradualness in the picture: coals, lamps, lightning; coals can occupy the bottom, turning into flames at the top and being discharged even higher by lightning.

« Fire walked among the animals." From euros literally: “she (“gi”) walked among the animals.” Who is she? Which noun does the pronoun f refer to? R.? There are two nouns ahead in the verse. r.: view (“demut”) and fire (“esh”; in Hebrew “burning coals” it is expressed: “coals of a burning fire”). The first one is too far away and its authenticity is doubtful; Moreover, how can a species of animals move between animals? The second occupies a too subordinate position: standing as a definition in “coals”, according to Heb. forms one word with it (casus constructus). But since all the contents of the space between the cherubim listed so far were fiery, there was fire in one form or another, then the reader of the prophet who (as in the Russian translation) will understand by “ha” - “she” will not be greatly mistaken is fire. Isn't it used here? R. instead of non-existent in Heb. language Wed R.? If the prophet wanted to say: “this (i.e., everything mentioned earlier - coals, lamps) walked among the animals,” how could he express “this” if not through “here” (“this”, “that”) or “ gi" ("it")? If such an understanding of “gi” were grammatically and impossible, then in the course of speech and the essence of the matter, nothing more than everything listed earlier should most likely be what “went among the animals.” The Prophet, at least so far, sees the cherubim only in motion; track. everything that was between the cherubim, the place between them with all its extraordinary content - coals, lamps, had to move, “go with” (“mitgalleket”) them. The reciprocal form of the verb “galak” - “to go”, placed here, indicates the exact relationship between the movement of what was between the animals (coals and lamps), and the movement of the animals themselves, as well as the mutual dependence of the movement of these fiery elements on each other: they moved not only as the animals moved and depending on their movement, but they also moved depending on each other: the movement of one of these elements caused the movement of the other; here everything was movement and life. LXX apparently gives a different reading of this passage: omitting “gi” (“she” or “it”), they agree on the verb “mitgalleket” (“walked”) with λαμπαδες and translates it συστρεφομενων “converting”: “like a vision of the candles of those converging among animals." Συστρεφεσθαι means joint circulation or circling, dependent on each other; Thus, this word in the LXX indicates that the lamps for which it serves as a definition rotate together, either with each other, or with coals, or with animals, or with all these together (which is most likely). We see that whether to refer to the lamps as the verb “mitgalleket” from the LXX or to read for it from the Hebrew. i.e. a special subject (“gi” “it”), the thought will be the same as what could give LXX the right to free translation here.

"And the radiance from the fire." From this remark, it is first of all clear that the coals and lamps, which were in constant motion, merged for the prophet into one mass of fire, which spread light around itself. At the same time, the remark shows that the radiance emanating from this fire was of special strength (otherwise there was no need to talk about it, since every fire gives radiance), as Heb. the word “nogah” (“shine”), which serves as a poetic trace. a particularly strong designation of light (Isa 4:4, 60:20, 62:1; Hab 3.11, etc.) and is used about the radiance of the Glory of God (Ezek 10.4). This was the radiance to which the prophet drew attention at the beginning of the vision (v. 4, where the same is in Hebrew “feet”): it illuminated the cloud that was coming towards him, since this cloud contained 4 cherubim , then this radiance, illuminating the entire bulk (“great cloud”) of it, served as an immeasurable, embracing the entire sky (“around it”, i.e., the clouds of v. 4) halo, worthy in size of those whom it surrounded. – The fire between the cherubim emitted more than just a quiet, gentle radiance (“to the feet” in Isaiah 62.7 about the morning dawn, Joel 2.10 about the radiance of the luminaries). It continuously (“emanated” in the Hebrew word “outgoing”) flashed like lightning. Of all the types of earthly light, lightning alone brings us, in addition to admiration, to some awe and therefore can serve as the best likeness of the light with which the Divinity shines. In addition, lightning can be called inner, hidden light, only temporarily breaking through and visible to man, and in this way it most closely resembles the divine light invisible to man (in the service of the Transfiguration: “carry the hidden lightning under the flesh of Your being”). Thanks to this, lightning in the Old Testament often acts as an attribute of theophany: Mount Sinai shone with lightning when God descended on it; lightning is mentioned in psalmic descriptions of expected or requested theophany (Ps 17 and others cf. Hab 3.4:11); in the Apocalypse, lightning comes from the throne of God (Rev 4.5). The fact that the fire between the cherubim emits lightning indicates the high degree of godlikeness of the cherubim: they shine with a glory reminiscent of the Divine glory.

Ezekiel 1:14. And the animals moved quickly to and fro, like lightning flashing.

The Russian translation of this verse is speculative; glory The Hebrew answers not much more. text: “and the living creature flows and turns like the vision of God.” The first half of the verse from Heb. letters “and the animals ran and returned” “your race.” The verbs are put in the indefinite mood, which here obviously replaces the final. The second verb is undoubtedly “to return”, and the first is απαξ λεγομενον and is considered the Aramaicized form of the verb “ruts” “to run”. The replacement of the final mood by the indefinite is not alien to the Hebrew language, both the ancient one: Gen 8.7, and especially the later one: Job 40.2; Dan 9.5:1; Zechariah 7.5; but in these places it is undefinable. does not stand without the indicative, sometimes serving only as an addition to it; and most importantly in these places we are dealing with oratorical and poetic speech, where undefined. could be used for liveliness of speech; here “it is not clear why the description suddenly had to become so vivid” (Smend). This forces many interpreters to see the indicative mood in these verbs. But if “ratso” can still be somehow made indicative (read “ratsu”, which would be 3 literal plural aor; from ruts, but the last letter - aleph - will be extra), then “shov” cannot, not touching the text. So the indefinite mood remains a mystery here. – And the meaning of “run” for the first verb is very problematic. Such an Aramaicization of the form, as suggested here with the verb “ruts,” “would have no analogy; the concept of running does not apply to cherubs” (Smend); and with such a meaning, the word would not correspond to the directly associated “returned”, which contains the concept of direction in movement, and not its speed (although, in addition to LXX, Pescito has “ran” here). In view of this, they propose to read instead of “ratso” - “yetsu” - “went out”, which would be in accordance with the Vulgate (ibant) and Targum (“turned around and walked around and returned”) and would require changing only one letter; but such a typo in the text is unlikely (the Hebrew rosh is very far from the small yod). - However, without knowing what the prophet wants to say about the movement of the cherub with the first verb, we extract from the second verb (“shev” “to return”) one not insignificant feature of this movement, that it had at times a return direction, a feature that is important for us in in view of the previous remark that the cherubim did not turn back; track. this last circumstance did not prevent them from moving back.

The movement of the cherubim, characterized by the words “ratso of yours,” is compared by the prophet with a movement as if base (Russian translation: “lightning”, Slavic: “vision of Vesekov”). And this new concept does little to clarify the verse, since the word “bazak” is απαξ λεγομενον and its meaning must be found by the root. Many, due to the infrequency of such a word in the Bible, assume that Russian. lane, here is a typo: instead of “bazak”, they think, there was “barak” - lightning. – As a matter of fact, it is possible that the cherubs of Chapter I. Eze had a movement similar to the movement of lightning: the design of a real chariot determined, as we saw in v. 9, the fact that the cherubs could not always move from place to place in a straight line, but sometimes had to walk along the legs of a triangle built on it; such a movement will be a zigzag movement, and lightning has precisely a zigzag movement. But the possibility of such an error in the text is unlikely: the letters Rosh and Zayin are not close in style; and why in 13th Art. “barrack” has not changed, but only in the 14th century, where the 13th century. did you expect a comparison with lightning? In later Heb. language and related languages, the root “azak” has the meaning “to scatter” (Talmud), “to scatter” (Arabic), “to crush” (Syr.). Since the whole phenomenon has a fiery appearance, then probably “bazak” is a special expression here “about some kind of scattering of fire, fiery splashes” (Gefernik), or about rays of light suddenly scattering over a wide space. Ancient translations agree in this exact understanding of this word - about rays, about light. While Theodotion (from which article 14 was taken into the text of LXX) leaves this word without translation, rewriting it in Greek letters - βεζεκ, Symmachus renders it ακτιςv αστραπης, Aquilla - ως ειδος απορροιας ΄αστ ραπες, Targum: “like a type of lightning.” Peshito puts here the related Syriac word bezek, the root meaning of which is “scattering,” but the present one is lost and is indicated by various siriologists and interpreters of Peshito in different ways: flame, lightning, meteor, falling star, rain of stars, whirlwind, even a hyacinth stone. Next, no matter how unclear the meaning of this comparison is, it can be recognized beyond doubt that this comparison is taken from the field of light phenomena. So, the only movement in nature that could be compared to the movement of the cherubs is the movement of light. Judging by the verb “to return,” used to characterize the movement of the cherubs, the movement of light could serve as a similarity for the movement of the cherubs in that the light always returns to its source and does not leave it. “Just as the ether is illuminated by the sparks of frequent fires and in the blink of an eye, lightning suddenly scatters in different directions and returns back, without losing the container and, so to speak, the source and substance of the fire, so these animals, continuing their path unhindered, hurry forward” (Blessed. Jerome). The Targum renders the verse as follows: “and the creatures (those), when they were sent to do the will of their Lord, who placed His greatness on high above them, in the twinkling of an eye they turned and went around and tore the universe, and the creatures returned together and were swift as the sight of lightning " Thus, the cherubim could move everywhere without leaving the throne of God, and without dragging it to any place; they could have, in addition to a common movement with the throne of God, their own, which, although not coinciding in direction with that movement, was simultaneously with it. Such a connection of such apparently incompatible things, says the prophet, is also given in nature, in one of its phenomena, which he calls “bazakh”. – There are some reasons to think that this verse was not in the text used by the LXX, and I agree with Blessed. Jerome, that in the LXX translation it was added from Theodotion: it is not in the Vatican, Venetian and one Parsons codes; into code. Alexandrian, Marshallian (VI-VII centuries), Chisian (IX-XI centuries), in the Syrian exapla (VII century) it is under the asterisk, next. brought in from the euro. text.

Ezekiel 1:15. And I looked at the animals, and behold, on the ground next to these animals, there was one wheel in front of their four faces.

A description begins of a new component of the vision - the wheels - which will occupy a considerable (vv. 15-21) section of the chapter; hence the solemn “and I looked.” – The addition “on animals”, which is not found in LXX, indicates a close connection between animals and wheels, such that wheels are only, as it were, part of animals. - “On the earth” in the proper sense, as shown in v. 19, by which the wheels sometimes rose from the earth (and not “on the basis of the heavenly arena”, or “on the earth that was visible in the sky”). Wheels are primarily a method of transportation adapted to the earth (like wings - air, a ship - water), therefore real wheels can be looked at as a link between the heavenly vision and the earth, of which this is the most perfect method of transportation. Descending to earth, God must reckon with its frailty, which does not allow for a better way of movement. The purpose of the wheels is to show that God moves on the earth itself, not above it. - “Near these animals.” “Beside” indicates the complete independence of the wheels in relation to the “animals” - the cherubs. In the book of Enoch, the Ophanim (“Ophaa” in Hebrew “wheel”) are numbered among the angelic ranks (chap. 61:10; 70:7). - “One wheel at a time.” Literally: “one wheel,” but Ezekiel 10.9 shows that there were 4 wheels; Wed Eze 1.16; units h. – dividing; Therefore, some people unfairly assume one wheel. Between the cherubim and the Glory of the Lord or the throne of God they carry, in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel there appears a new, independent and, judging by the attention paid to him by the prophet, a figure of great importance - wheels. The wheels suggest a chariot behind it; but the prophet does not indicate it, because the wheels intended in this vision, as in the vision of Daniel (Dan 7.9), for the movement of the throne of God, did not need a material connection with this latter and should, without this connection, mediate the movement of such an exceptional object; the cherubim themselves were the chariot in this case. Nevertheless, presuming behind them this or that chariot (in this case, a spiritual one), the wheels give the real epiphany the character of a solemnly majestic and rapid ride instead of a simple and slow procession, which has hitherto represented every epiphany. From now on, isn’t a special speed introduced into the actions of Divine Providence, usual at the end of every task, inevitable in the works of God at the end of time? "Before their four faces." Eur. “learnbagat panav”, lit. "It has four faces." Unit h. The pronoun is placed according to its meaning (contrary to grammatical agreement, since “animals” to which the pronoun refers is in the plural. h.), because we are talking about one wheel, which can be in the possession of only one animal. After the prophet’s remark that the wheels were near the animals, the reader expects from him the most precise indication on which side of the four-faced creature had the wheel near him. Such an indication should be given in the words being analyzed. “At (or “before”, as in Russian translation; colloquial: “for”) all four persons,” the prophet answers this question. The indication is already quite precise and definite, but at first glance it contains something unthinkable: one wheel was at one time in four different places. No wonder LXX omitted this “exact” instruction! But we must not forget that we are dealing with a vision. Just as 4 wings and 2 arms could be on 4 different sides of an animal at the same time, so could it be with the wheel; in visions, violations of the laws of space and time are allowed, which have no force in the sphere of existence affected by visions.

Ezekiel 1:16. The appearance of the wheels and their structure are like the appearance of topaz, and all four have the same likeness; and from their appearance and their structure it seemed as if there was a wheel within a wheel.

The verse contains a description of the appearance and structure of the wheels. Since the first half of the verse talks about the appearance of the wheels (that they were like topaz), the words in it “and their structure” seem redundant, just like the words “according to their appearance” in the second half of the verse, which talks about the structure of the wheels, “ why don't LXX read these words. – “View” – Heb. "gene" see art. 5. – “Topaz”. Eur. "tarshish"; from Ezekiel 10.9 we learn that it is a precious stone; it is mentioned among the precious stones in Ezekiel 28.13; in the breastplate of the high priest he was 1st in the 4th row (Exodus 28.17-20); according to Dan 10.6, the body of the One who appeared to the prophet was like a “tarshish”. The name is taken from the Phoenician colony in Spain on the river of the same name, present-day Guadalquivir, just as the famous type of gold was called Ophir (Job 22.24). LXX here they leave this word without translation (“Tarshish”), and in a completely identical place Ezekiel 10.9 they translate ΄ανθραξ, and in Exodus 28.20 they translate χρυσολιθος (the Vulgate here “tage” based on the epithet “ships of the Tarsians,” but in Ezekiel 10.8 and Ezekiel 28.13 – “chrysolite”; Targum: “good stone”; Peshito – transcription; Symmachus – υακινθος; Arabic translation – “yastis”). Thus, the most votes are for chrysolite; The chrysolite of the ancients, according to Pliny’s description, would most closely correspond to our golden-colored topaz. This color of the wheels corresponds to the wheels of Daniel’s vision, which were “blazing fire”, and the fiery content between the real wheels (Eze 10.12) and the harmony of colors in the vision: golden-red wheels, crystal-white firmament and sapphire-blue foot of the throne.

“And all four have one likeness.” And without such a remark, this would follow naturally from the fact that the prophet nowhere indicates the differences between the wheels; track. The remark wants to draw the reader’s special attention to the similarity of the wheels. The wheels were as similar to each other as animals, and just like animals there were four of them. Thus, the wheels, like animals, were directed immediately and equally to “all the ends of the earth.” All countries of the world were accessible to the Divine chariot with absolutely equal ease. It did not have a front or back, which in an ordinary chariot is characterized by the difference in wheels and their size. – In addition to complete similarity with each other, the indifference of the wheels in relation to different directions of movement was achieved by their special structure, which will be discussed later. "The wheel was within the wheel." Most interpreters rightly understand this expression to mean that the wheel was perpendicular to each other within the wheel. Next The verse says that the wheels could go to their four sides without turning around; track. they had 4 sides; the side of the wheel can only be called its semicircle; This means the wheel of vision should have consisted of 4 semicircles or 2 intersecting circles. Apparently, the image of the expression speaks against this: the term in the word “wheel”, “ofan”, moreover, is double, requiring one to think about being in each other about the previously mentioned wheels. Therefore, it is assumed that one or the other of the four wheels were located in each other, and this location was either only apparent, in perspective, or real. But the term with “ofan” can also give the idea that the intersecting circles from which each wheel was composed should not be represented as just components of one wheel, but as independent, although interconnected wheels; This relative independence of the component parts of the wheel would correspond to the combination of several persons in animals.

Ezekiel 1:17. When they walked, they walked to their four sides; They didn’t turn around during the procession.

The wheels had the same amazing ability to move in all directions as the cherubs. In cherubim, the ability of such movement was determined by their four-sidedness, in wheels by their four-sidedness; “They did not turn around as they walked” is a deliberately literal repetition of what was said about animals; For completeness of similarity, even the pronoun is placed in g. R. (in Heb.), although the wheel in Heb. m.r. This expression is thus repeated for the third time by the prophet (vv. 9, 12). Sounding like a refrain (a part of oratorical speech corresponding to the chorus in a song), its repeated repetition draws the reader’s special attention to this feature in the movement of the entire phenomenon - that it did not require turning when walking. In relation to wheels, this feature was even more surprising and therefore deserved to be pointed out: movement to the sides is even more impossible for ordinary wheels than for living creatures with sufficient flexibility of the legs.

Ezekiel 1:18. And their rims were high and terrible; All four of their rims around were full of eyes.

The beginning of a verse of letters. from euros it will be: “and their rims and their height.” Consequently, the words: “and their rims” (in Hebrew this is one word) stands completely independently grammatically from everything that follows, which is why LXX connects it with the previous verse and translates: “below their ridges”: “I do not turn (i.e. wheels ) always follow them, lower their ridges"; but in such a connection this word does not give any new thought and is idle: if the wheels did not turn around when moving, then the rims could not turn around. Meanwhile, in what follows we will talk specifically about the rims. Consequently, the grammatical independence of this word from the subsequent one must be explained as an independent nominative phrase. As in 9 and 11 art. this nominativ. The absolut prophet indicates the theme of the entire verse. And this was necessary, because the prophet, both before and after, speaks generally about wheels; now he wants to work on just one part of them - the rims. Such an episodic transition in the description is well marked by this phrase. - Having warned that he will now talk about the rims, the prophet points out three features of them, just as there were three features at the feet of the cherubim. The first is that they were “high”. Lit. from euros “and their height,” an expression that can be understood in such a way that those rims “represented an elevated and majestic appearance, which is usually unusual for wheels rolling in the dust of the earth” (Kretschmar). The expression: “the rims had height” sounds as unusual in Hebrew as in Russian; one could simply say: “and they were tall or great.” Moreover, if we talk about height, then we should rather talk about the height not of the rims, but of the wheels themselves; such a quality would have an understandable meaning for them: the high height of the wheels achieves the speed of the chariot. But on the other hand, to assume here that the text is damaged or to give Heb. the word “gova” (translated “height”) has another meaning, for example, “upper side” (“the rims had an upper side”), which is prohibited by the unanimous transfer of this place in all texts and the unanimous translation of the ancient “gova” feature height.

“And they were terrible.” Lit.: “and they have fear.” What this fear or horror of the rims consisted of is now said: there were eyes on them. Isn't this horror: eyes on wheels! Therefore, it is impossible to say with certainty. the interpretation is that it will remain unclear why the wheels or their rims were terrible, and there is no need to look for another meaning here, for example: “and I looked at the rims” (“irea” horror is consonant with “eree” “looked”), as does glory trans.: “and videh ta” (so do most Greek codices; but the Venetian and 5 minuscule, i.e. written in cursive, codices have: και φουεροι σαν, as does one ancient famous manuscript of Explanatory Prophecies: “and terrible behu” ).

“And the rims of all four of them... were full of eyes.” Not just equipped with eyes, but “full” (glorious translation) of eyes, abounding in them (γεμοντα δφθαλμων Rev. 4.8). - And so it was “at all four” wheels - a refrain addition (vv. 8, 10, 16; about the refrain, see v. 17), but together it strengthens the impression of the picture: four wheels and all dotted with eyes. – The addition of eyes to wheels is one of those purely Eastern symbols in which an idea of ​​special strength seeks expression, an idea that does not fit into natural ideas and concepts. And of course, what is represented in this symbol “is presented somewhat roughly and corporeally due to human weakness” (Blessed Theod.). Since the eye is the expression of inner activity, vitality, insight and wisdom, the eyes in the wheels indicate life and intelligence. The wheels are animated because a dead object cannot be an instrument of the Glory of God. The eyes, of course, were not inactive on the wheels: the wheels could look with them (“and they saw” Pescito has instead of “they were terrible”); the wheels looked where they were rolling; they rolled consciously: “the wheels were full of knowledge” (Blessed Theodoret). The wheels are equipped with eyes “to express the infallible confidence with which the Divine Throne moved” (Smend); “with watching eyes the wheels could not stray from the road” (Bertolet). Since wheels move the throne of God, we can say that through the eyes of wheels God Himself looks at the earth on which He walks. This symbol apparently found a special place among the captives and after the captive prophets: Dan 7.8; Zech 3.9; Zechariah 4.10 was, perhaps, a consequence of the eastern environment and symbolism, “as the ancient sculptural image of Jupiter in Larissa had 3 eyes and was attributed to Trojan, at least Asian, origin (Pausanias I, 24). (Gefernik); “wheels,” says the blessed one. Jerome, were such as the fables of poets depict the hundred-eyed or many-eyed Argus"; Wed the eyes and ears of the king (satraps) by Xenophon Sugor. VIII, 2; Mithra according to Zendavesta has 1000 ears and 10,000 eyes.

Ezek.1:19. And when the animals walked, the wheels walked beside them; and when the animals rose from the ground, then the wheels also rose.

The Prophet has already finished describing the wheels: having listed all the features of their appearance and structure in comparison with ordinary wheels, he also described their movement. Now the question arose about the relationship of wheels to animals: was there any connection between the two, similar to the connection between the animals pulling the chariot and the chariot itself? In Art. 19–21 the prophet gives the answer to this question that he could give. The relationship between animals and wheels was completely incomprehensible to the viewer. There was no visible connection between the two: “there was no drawbar or yoke on the animals: the divine chariot moved by itself: the animals were in front, the wheels moved behind them, heading in all directions without turning” (Blessed Theodoret). Nevertheless, “when the animals walked, the wheels walked beside them.” Such a joint movement of animals and wheels certainly implied a connection between both. This connection was even more clearly confirmed by the fact that the wheels followed the animals not only when the latter moved on the ground, but also when the animals were raised from the ground, the wheels also rose.” The wheel is a tool for movement exclusively on the ground; the presence of wheels in the air was an unnatural position for them, and if they accepted this position, then this proved their especially close connection with animals.

Ezekiel 1:20. Wherever the spirit wanted to go, there they went; wherever the spirit went, the wheels rose along with them, for the spirit of animals was in wheels.

Forced to return to the movement of animals, the prophet repeats the most important of what has been said about this movement. It differed from any other movement in many ways, but most of all in that it was determined in its direction in a special, mysterious way. Its qualifier was “spirit”. Eur. “where was the spirit to go” glory. translates: “Where there are clouds, there is also spirit”; That. the verse asks for a new concept of “cloud”; in parallel 12 tbsp. this word does not exist and therefore LXX is suspected of adding here: they could read the preposition “gal”, “na”, “to” as “woof”, “cloud”, or replace this last concept “ruach” “spirit”, which, indeed it is not clear why, the Hebrew text puts it twice (this substitution could have been made on the basis of 1 Kings 18.45, where the cloud appears before the wind during a thunderstorm); By putting “cloud,” LXX obviously meant the cloud that the prophet saw in v. 4, and under the spirit was the wind, which revealed the vision; meaning of glory lane like this: where the cloud went, the wind went there, and the animals and the wheels went there. – Why is it said about the wheels “rising” and not walking? “They rose up” here hardly has its exact meaning – separation from the earth: in verses 19 and 21, where it has such a meaning, “from the earth” is added to it; here it means “to rise from a place,” “to leave a place,” “to move” (Numbers 23.24, etc.); if this verb carries its usual meaning here, as in v. 19 and 21, then it gives the idea that animals with wheels hovered in the air rather than walked on the ground. – The Prophet also indicates the reason for such agreement in the movement of wheels and animals: “for the spirit of the animals was in the wheels.” “Animal spirit” more precisely: “animal spirit” – unit. h. (gahaya). “The prophet calls animals four animals that are inseparably connected to each other and move in exactly the same way” (Smend). The Prophet more than once assigns such a collective name to 4 animals (he calls them all - in the singular “animal”): Ezekiel 1.22; Ezek 10.15:20, like his wheels, are also designated by the collective name “Gilgal” (Ezek 10.2:13). The animals were so closely related to each other that the prophet in v. 11. considers it necessary to warn that their faces and wings were still separated. In general, cherubs are thought of in such inseparability from each other that almost nothing is said about them separately. Part of this name is almost never used. – Since in relation to the cherubim there can be no talk of spirit as their soul, here we obviously mean the spirit, which, according to Art. 12 determined their movement. LXX, Peshito, Vulgate, translates here "spirit of life", but "haya" instead of "hamim" in the meaning of "life" is used only in poetry; this word in this meaning cannot stand with a member, as it does here; then - if wheels generally only have a living soul, then it does not follow that they should move like animals.

Ezek.1:21. When they walked, they walked too; and when they stood, they stood; and when they rose from the ground, then the wheels also rose along with them, for the spirit of animals was in wheels.

The agreement in the movement of wheels and animals was so remarkable that the prophet once again draws attention to it by briefly repeating everything that was said about it. He complements this repetition with an indication that when the animals stopped, the wheels also stopped with them - a circumstance that is far from obvious in itself due to the fact that the wheels were in no way connected with the animals. Thus, “21 Art. combines the two preceding verses with the addition of a new one and concludes them” (Hitzig). In addition to this purpose - it serves as a conclusion to the description of the remarkable harmony in the movement of animals and wheels, the verse also has another purpose: it paints us a picture of the general movement of the entire phenomenon. From it we learn that the phenomenon did not always proceed, but sometimes stopped, and that it sometimes walked along the earth, and at times rushed above the earth, “rose from the earth” - important information and still not reported by the prophet in such completeness and clarity. The verse ends with a literal repetition of the final words of the previous verse: “for the spirit of the beasts was in the wheels,” one of Ezekiel’s literary devices (refrain, see v. 17), meaning to draw attention to the thought repeated with such literalness. “This causal sentence stands twice because the main force lies in it” (Kretschmar). “It is said twice: “for the spirit of life was in the wheels,” so that we should not at all consider the wheels to be something that we see in the lower parts of carts, carts and chariots, but living beings, even higher than living beings” (Blessed Jerome).

Ezekiel 1:22. Above the heads of the animals there was a semblance of a vault, like the appearance of an amazing crystal, stretched from above their heads.

"Animals", in Heb. again, as in verses 19 and 21, “strange” (Cornille) singular. h. (instead of which, however, 3 Hebrew manuscripts in Kennicott, LXX, Targum, Peshito and Vulgate have plural parts) 4 cherubim here, as in those verses, are considered as one organic being. – The word “similarity” warns the reader about the mystery of what is now being described. The Prophet again (vv. 5, 10, 13) sees something to which only a similarity on earth can be indicated: about the wheels it is not said that their likenesses were visible; Afterwards this word will be used only when describing the throne and Him who sits on it. - “Vault”, glory. "firmament". The Hebrew “rakia” (στερεομα, firmanentum) in the Old Testament is not used in any other meaning than the firmament. True, the absence of a member makes it possible that here the word does not mean the vault of heaven; but since Jehovah has His throne in heaven, “rakia” here can only mean the sky, the firmament. But it was not the firmament that we usually see, but only a likeness of it, much superior to its prototype. LXX before “firmament” also have the particle “like”, ωσει (as if); if this particle is genuine, then the similarity of the firmament that appeared to the prophet with the visible one becomes even less and is reduced to a weak similarity. The visible and sensible can give a very insufficient idea of ​​the invisible sky.

Moses and the “elders of Israel,” who saw the place where God stood, found that with its pure and transparent light it resembled the firmament of heaven: “like the vision of the firmament of the heavens in purity” (Exodus 24.10). The Prophet Ezekiel for the vault that he saw above the heads of the cherubim does not find it sufficient to compare only with the firmament and also compares it with “kerah”, Russian. lane crystal. “Kerach” means either cold, frost (Gen. 31.40; Jer. 36.30), or ice (Job 37:10, 38:29); the second meaning is more rare and seems to be later, it must be recognized as the main one, because the root of this word is “to be smooth” and therefore initially it should have been applied to water that had become smooth from the cold. But since the appearance of ice, no matter how pure and transparent it may be, is not at all so magnificent as to serve as a strong comparison for this case, the LXX and almost all the ancients (only Targum - “ice”) settled on crystal or crystal as an object , which is more ice would fit here. Although “kerah” is not used anywhere in the meaning of crystal (in Job 28.17 “gavish” is translated through “crystal”), they think that a crystal could be called this either because of its resemblance to ice or because, according to the ancients, it is produced by frost (Pliny , Hist, nat. ХXXVII, 8, 9). It is assumed that Bl. John, who had in mind Ezek 1.22 in Rev. 4.6, is inclined to this meaning of the word; although he rather combines both meanings when he says that before the throne of God there was “a sea of ​​glass, like crystal.” In the book. Job's crystal (if this is how "gavish" needs to be translated) is apparently placed lower than the gold of Ophir, but along with ordinary pure gold (Job 28.17-18); track. in ancient times it was of great value and, perhaps, was worthy of being included in the majestic vision, where everything, even the wheels, seemed made of the best precious stones. The floors in the richest palaces of the ancient East were covered with crystal or glass; in the Koran (sur. 25, n. 44), the Queen of Sheba mistakes the crystal platform in front of Solomon’s throne for water. But if by “kerah” we mean crystal, then it is not clear why the prophet calls it such an uncommon name. The Prophet needed a mineral that would represent the best combination of complete transparency with a stone fortress and could serve as a good symbol of heavenly purity and clarity. Maybe “kerakh” was the native name (Assyrian kirgu - “fortress”) of a mineral that was, as it were, numb pure water, like our diamond of pure water (but diamond in Hebrew is “shamir” and in a polished form, hardly was known then). – For the mysterious object, called “kerah” by the prophet, he learns the no less mysterious definition of “gannor” (Russian translation: “amazing”), which LXX does not have in the code. Alexandrian and Vatican, in Coptic and Ethiopic translations. The root meaning of this word is “terrible” (Vulgate and Peshito horribilis, but Targum - “strong”) but in those two places in the Old Testament where it is used (Judg. 6.13; Job 37.22), it means fear and awe inspired by the appearance of God or angel. And in such a special meaning, this word is appropriate here: that crystal, which hung in the form of a firmament over the heads of the cherubim, of course inspired awe in the prophet because it made him feel his high, unearthly purpose; the prophet suddenly felt himself in front of a real, open sky, and this feeling could not but fill him with horror. - “Over their heads.” Instead of this tautological indication of the LXX, most of the best codes have a more natural one: “on their wings,” with which the prophet more accurately determines the position of the firmament: it was not directly above their heads, but above the wings, which were slightly raised above their heads (v. 11).

Ezekiel 1:23. And under the arch their wings stretched out straight one to the other, and each one had two wings that covered them, each one had two wings that covered their bodies.

The prophet dramatically postpones the description that one might already expect - what was in the firmament - to the end and again returns to the description of the view in which the cherubs rushed towards him with thunderous beats of their wings; to the picture of this deafening flight (see 23–25) Art. 23 serves as an introduction in which the prophet recalls what was already described in vv. 9 and 11. relative position of the wings. The Prophet, therefore, speaks about this for the third time, which shows the importance of this particular vision. But 23 Art. does not simply repeat the data of Articles 9 and 11; he more precisely defines the way in which the wings of the cherubim were extended to each other: they extended directly to each other, i.e. b. constituted one horizontal plane lying at the base of the firmament; This position of the wings was all the more surprising because even during the flight they did not leave this always-present, mathematically precisely calculated position in relation to each other. From euros lit.: “the wings were straight (yesharot) to each other”, the expression is somewhat strange (as earlier, in v. 9 and 11, the position of the wings was determined by the barely understandable words “hoverot” and “perudot”, as if the wings were in difficult transmitted position to each other), why LXX put the expression 11th Art. “stretched out”, completing it according to Ezekiel 3.13 πτερυσσομενον “soaring” (but there in Slav. “winged”), i.e. flying, waving (another Slavic translation “quivering”), and not calmly just stretched out. – The Prophet considers it necessary again, as in Art. 11, to stipulate that the cherubim had only two outstretched wings; the other two were omitted, because their purpose was to cover the body. In euros this thought is expressed by a dividing sentence: “one (leish) of them had two (wings) covering, and the other (uleish) two of them covering their body”; Wed Isa 6.2. In LXX, the thought here is conveyed in one sentence with the addition of the concept “conjugated” (the wings covering the body were connected to each other); but in code. The Cisian and Syriac exaplaques also have a second sentence (και δυο καλυπτουσαι αυτοϊς) under the asterisk. Although the last thought of Art. 23 is not new, but its repetition, in addition to emphasizing it, sheds new light on it, placing it in the same connection as here; The cherubim only covered their body (lit. “torso”) because they were under the firmament and the throne of God, and not in front of it, like the seraphim.

Ezekiel 1:24. And as they walked, I heard the sound of their wings, like the sound of many waters, like the voice of the Almighty, a strong noise, like the noise of a military camp; and when they stopped, they lowered their wings.

And the flight of large birds makes considerable noise; and here winged lions and oxen flew. The roar from this flight occurred right under the surface; as a result, the whole place positively thundered; the footstool of Jehovah was supposed to amaze all the senses with its grandeur—not just sight, but also hearing. The prophet does not find a sufficient comparison for the noise coming from there; hence this heap of comparisons. But the comparisons used here are Heb. t. and rus. lane unfairly referred to as the same subject. Several Greek codes (Venetian, 5 minuscules, Blessed Theodoret and Slavic transl.) make a successful addition to the Hebrew. i.e., putting in the first two comparisons “always soaring”: when the cherubim flew, the sound of their wings was like the sound of many waters and like the voice of the Almighty. But the cherubs did not always fly, but sometimes walked or otherwise moved on the ground in some other way, and sometimes stopped completely. In both cases, their wings could not make noise, at least as much as when flying; The prophet notes that when the cherubim walked (“when they walked” in the Hebrew word stands not where it should be placed in the Russian translation, but before the third comparison), a “strong noise” was heard from their wings (“kol hamulla” cf. Jer 11.16; m. b. “haman” Eze 7.11; 1 Kings 18.41; d. b. a kind of dull noise), similar to the noise in a military wall. When the cherubim stopped, their wings were at rest and, of course, could not make noise.

“Like the sound of many waters.” The biblical writers' favorite comparison for loud noise: Eze 43.2; Isa 17.12; Jer 10.13; Rev 1:15, 14:2; Ps 92.4. Many waters can mean rain, the sea, or most likely the mountain streams with waterfalls that are frequent in Judea; all this gives a large, but indefinite and vague sound, most suitable here. – The roar heard by the prophet was not at all like the “sound of many waters”: it was stronger than him. If we look for comparisons for it, the prophet continues, then it can only be compared with the voice of God himself (“like the voice of the Almighty”). “What is the use of searching for a likeness worthy of a thing and not finding it anywhere? It is enough to point out the Acting One and show them the power of noise” (Blessed Theodoret). The “voice of the Almighty” can also be understood as the real voice of God (heard, for example, at Sinai); This understanding is favored by the addition to this comparison in Ezekiel 10.5: “when He speaks.” But among biblical writers this expression (“voice of God”) is a common paraphrase for thunder: Ps 28.3-5; Job 37.2-5; Rev 19:5-6. Finally, “the voice of God” can also mean any large, piercing and terrible noise, just as “cedars of God” and “mountains of God” are large cedars and mountains. All these understandings can be combined: the comparison of the prophet wants to name the greatest possible noise on earth, reaching the degree that the Jew designated in various qualities by the high definition of God; but no noise can compare in power with the deafening peals of thunder, during which the universe seems to tremble; if anything could be stronger than this noise on earth, then perhaps theophanic thunder, which of course was stronger than natural and which is meant in the indicated places of the psalms, the Apocalypse and Job. Whatever the “voice of the Almighty” may mean, at any rate this epithet indicates a louder noise than the first comparison; In addition, the second comparison complements the first, defining the noise heard by the prophet on its other side - by degree and strength, while the first comparison defines it by quality. It is not without purpose that God is called here by the rare name Shaddai (Russian translation of “Almighty”, slav. “Saddai”). God is called by this name on especially important and solemn occasions: Gen 17.1; Numbers 24.4; in the book of Job this name appears 30 times. This is some kind of mysterious name of God, perhaps expressing the elemental, world power of the Divine; see Gen. 17.1. As a noun, Shaddai occurs only in poetry; in prose it has El in front of it, and on the basis of Ezekiel 10.5 some. Greek codes and glory. the translation is read and here in front of it is “God”.

The prophet compares the noise produced by the wings of the cherubs as they walk with the noise of a military camp, which is produced by huge armies preparing for battle on both sides. Wed. Gen 32.3; therefore the Targum: “like the voice of the angels on high.” Naturally, the procession of the heavenly army is accompanied by the noise of a military campaign. And this loud military noise, reminiscent of the noise of an entire camp, comes from only 4 creatures! – The noise of the cherubim’s wings should have stopped when they stood: then they did not flap their wings, lowering them. Instead of “lowering” the glory. has “pochivakha” (making “wings” the subject of it, and not “animals”, as in Russian translation), which is correct, because according to Art. 12 and 23, the two pairs of wings of the cherubim were constantly outstretched. – At 7 euros. manuscripts (6 in Kennicott and 1 in Rossi) and in some Pescito lists there is no 24th century at all. The Vatican Codex only reads from this verse: “And I heard the voice of their wings as they walked, like the voice of many waters; and as they stood, their wings rested”; thus, from a number of comparisons of Vat. code. gives only one thing; everything superfluous against this stands in the Marshallian Codex under an asterisk with the mark θε (from Theodotion). In view of the fact that the reading of Vat. codex stands alone (confirmed only by the Marsh. codex, and in other cases agreeing with it), one can suspect this code, which generally tends to bypass difficult passages by skipping them, in correcting the verse according to Ezekiel 43.2, where only one comparison is given - with the sound of waters.

What kind of “voice from the vault” it was, various assumptions are made. The first thing that comes to mind is the assumption that this voice belonged to the One above the firmament, who indicated where the animals should stop. The second half of the verse could then mean that “at the call from above, the chariot finally stopped before Ezekiel and now the prophet could give a description of the throne and Him who sat on it. But such an understanding is hindered by 1) what Jehovah first says in Ezekiel 2.1; 2) the chariot was already standing when the voice sounded; 3) the fact that the animals, obedient to the voice from the firmament, finally stopped, could not be said like this: “as they stood, their wings drooped.” Other assumptions about this voice are also untenable. He “could not be an echo coming from below, neither by the nature of things, nor because Ezekiel, by his location, could not hear him. He could not come from the throne that was at rest. It could not come from Jehovah himself, be the noise of His feet, because Jehovah does not step, but sits. If it were thunder, then it could be defined more precisely, called by its proper name” (Hitzig). This list needs to be supplemented with Kretschmar’s witty guess that by the voice from the firmament one must “understand the noise caused by the conceivable circle of Jehovah, the army of the Lord; for he who sits on the throne is Jehovah, who follows. appears like a king, must be like one, surrounded by a countless crowd of servants, without whom an Eastern person cannot imagine a king; “a loud noise, like the noise of a military camp” must be transferred from Art. 24. in 25, where it will denote the awe-filled whispering that ran through the multitude of heavenly armies when the Divine chariot stopped and Jehovah had to begin to speak; Ezekiel does not dwell in more detail on the description of the Divine court, but hurries past those around him to the main Person. It would be too resourceful a thought for the prophet to assume in the reader, who must, from the existence of noise around the Lord, draw a conclusion about the army surrounding Him. The mystery of the voice that the verse speaks of, and the complete impossibility of establishing any connection between the two halves of the verse, as well as the literal similarity of 25b to 24c. led even older interpreters to the idea of ​​damage to the text here. This idea is also supported by the history of the text: 9 Hebrew manuscripts and some Peshito errors omit the entire verse; The Chisian Codex marks it with an asterisk; the second half of the verse is not in Hebrew 13. hands., in the codes of Alex. Vatik., translations in Coptic and Ethiopian, thanks to which the verse there takes on the following form: “and there was a voice from the firmament.” This reading is smooth, but this smoothness is also suspicious: how could it turn into the roughness that is represented by the modern Hebrew and the Greek codes that agree with it?

Actually, only the second half of the verse cannot be explained, representing such a jarring repetition of the recent 24th century. But such a repetition of final expressions in the spirit of Ezekiel and Chapter I represents more than one example of this author’s technique (“they did not turn around as they walked,” “for the spirit of life was in the wheels”). Such repetition replaces the prophet’s current emphasis on expressions. So the repeated expression cannot stand in very close connection with neighboring sentences (vv. 9, 12); it has its goal not in another sentence, but in itself: the prophet uses a distant occasion to recall the thought expressed earlier. One need not read these final repetitions and the thread of description will not be broken; this is what should be done here; needed in the 1st half of the art. see the continuation of the description, and in the second - a break in it, caused by the desire to return to the previously expressed thought; “there was a voice from the vault - it could be heard, for when the animals stopped, their wings made no noise.” – If so, then the first half of the verse can be explained completely independently of the second. It is remarkable that there is no immediate definition for the “voice from the vault.” No less remarkable is the fact that the verbum finitum was used for the first time about this voice: and there was a voice. These two circumstances give the voice from the vault an exceptional and very high and honorable place: “above the firmament” - a truly Divine place. At the same time, this voice, through its lack of any definition, is given a certain mystery and incomprehensibility. Already for the noise from the wings of the cherubim, the prophet could hardly find a similarity between earthly noises. For a voice from the firmament, he doesn't even try to make any comparison. All this proves the Divine nature of this “noise”. And in fact, why couldn’t God, by his appearance, produce, in addition to everything else, a special Divine noise? Such noise (“voice” - “stake”) was already accompanied by His first appearance, described in the Bible (in paradise); the stunning noise from His appearance (“voices” - “beat”) is also spoken of in the description of the Sinai Epiphany. God first of all and most closely reveals Himself in the world through a “stake,” a voice, His Word. And the cherubim “could not bear the voice of God Almighty, heard in the sky, but stood and marveled, and with their silence pointed to the power of God, who sat in the firmament” (Blessed Jerome).

Ezekiel 1:26. And above the vault that is above their heads, was the resemblance of the throne in appearance is as if made of sapphire stone; and above the likeness of the throne was the likeness of a man above it.

“The likeness of a throne in appearance is as if made of sapphire stone.” Lit.: “Like the likeness of a sapphire stone, like a throne.” Thus, the original text leaves it unknown whether the throne was sapphire or whether the sapphire was something separate from the throne. LXX are inclined to the last thought: “like a vision of a sapphire stone, the likeness of a throne on it”; “on it”, excessively venerable against Heb. t., definitely says that the throne was on sapphire and that the trace. It was not the throne that was sapphire, but something underneath it - the foot of the throne or something else is unknown. But whether the throne was sapphire or something else, the appearance of this stone here is significant. This is a stone that bears the name of the brilliance itself (“safar” - “to shine”), considered one of the most beautiful stones (Isa 54.11; Rev 21.19), not inferior in price to gold (Job 28.6:16), a stone of blue color in any case (even if it is not identical with our safir) according to Pliny (Hist. nat. 87, 9) it is blue, occasionally with red, and glitters with golden dots (hardly our lapis - lazuli). Sapphire adds impenetrability to the light blue of the sky, which is why it is brought here for comparison. “Just as a crystal points to everything that is completely pure and luminous in the sky, so sapphire points to the hidden, hidden and unattainable secrets of God, “who laid down darkness for His blood” (Blessed Jerome) “This similarity points to a mysterious and invisible nature” ( Blessed Theodoret). – The prophet sees a throne, about which there could be no doubt whose it is. Rising to an unattainable height (cf. Isaiah 6.1), shrouded in flames and flooded with a light unbearable to the eye, the heavenly throne, of course, barely allowed itself to be seen, and the prophet now had to mentally complete what he saw. Hence the “similarity” with such a definite object as a throne, hence the silence about the light and material of the throne (unless we consider it sapphire). – The throne presupposes a king. So God appears to the prophet Ezekiel, first of all, as a king. God was not the first to appear to the prophet Ezekiel in the form of a king; but the appearances of God in this form began shortly before Ezekiel. The representation of God on the throne arose during the time of the kings: Moses is honored with the appearance of God in the form of a burning fire in a bush, Elijah in the desert wind, Samuel hears the calling voice of God. The appearance of God in the form of a king is first introduced by Micah: 1 Kings 22.8:17-22, followed by the vision of Isaiah. The development of such an idea could not but be influenced by the emergence and strengthening of royal power: there could not be a better image on earth for God, like a sovereign king in all the splendor of his greatness. The splendor of Nebuchadnezzar's court could indirectly influence the revival of the idea of ​​God as King, and in the prophet Daniel we find an even more complex representation of the Heavenly King and His holy Court than in Ezekiel (Dan 7:9-10, 13-14).

“And above the likeness (repetition of the concept to strengthen the thought) of the throne there was, as it were, the likeness of a man,” lit.: “likeness, as it were, the appearance of a man.” This image could barely emerge in the sea of ​​light with which it was flooded. If the throne was vaguely visible (“likeness”), then the concept of visibility was almost not applicable to the One sitting on it. Hence this accumulation of restrictive words: “similarity”, “as if”, “kind”. In this regard, the prophet Ezekiel, however, did not receive less than what was given to other God-seers. “The elders of Israel and Moses were shown only the place where God stood; Isaiah saw the seraphim surrounding the throne of God; Ezekiel sees the bearers themselves, and the bearers of the immediate throne of God” (Kretschmar). Actually, “God is nowhere to be seen” (John 1.18). If Moses, Isaiah and Daniel say that they saw the Lord (e.g. sitting on the throne), then this brief expression of theirs should probably be understood in the light of Ezekiel's precise and detailed description: they did not see the face of God appearing (which could not be shown to Moses: Exodus 33.23), seeing d.b. only the vague outlines of the image of God.

Ezekiel 1:27. And I saw, as it were, burning metal, as it were, the appearance of fire inside it all around; from the sight of his loins and above, and from the sight of his loins and below, I saw, as it were, a kind of fire and radiance was Around him.

In the setting of the King who appeared to the prophet, precious stones, which usually adorn kings and their crowns, occupied an obviously secondary position: they were relegated to such parts of this setting as the wheels of the throne and its foot. They did not decorate the one who sat on the throne. All their beauty and brilliance could not add anything to the light with which the Seated One shone and with which the radiance of the hashmal unknown to us could only be compared (from this it is only clear what kind of jewel the hashmal was and how mistaken the interpreters are when they assume it is, for example, amber or any kind of copper). “It is noticeable that the prophet is very modest in this last part of his picture: he barely outlines the outline of the divine phenomenon; the radiance it cast seemed to blind him and hide details from him” (Reis). “And I saw.” For the first time after 4 tbsp. and twice in this verse: the extraordinary importance of the moment “Like flaming metal.” Lit. “like a kind of hashmal”; thus, “khashmal” in Russian. conveyed here in disagreement with Art. 5; where it is translated (as presumably as here): “light of flame”, glory. in 5 tbsp. and here it is the same: “like the vision of an electr.” Like the hashmal (see v. 5) He who sat on the throne shone; but the prophet replaces the direct description of his image (for example, “and his appearance was like the appearance of hashmal”) with this cautious expression. On the throne was a barely visible human form; in fact, what could be seen on it was only the light of hashmal. “However, it wasn’t just this radiance that came from the throne. The light of hashmal was joined by fiery light. The relationship in which the second stood, simply a fiery light, to the first is expressed by the following unclear phrase: “as if there was a kind of fire inside (“bet” is a word not commonly used anywhere, unless one considers it equivalent to “byte” “house”) of it (actually “her” , i.e., either a human image on a throne or a hashmal; both according to the Hebrew language) around.” The phrase can either have the following meaning: it (the human figure? Khashmal?) seemed all fiery, or inside: the Khashmal a circular fire was visible. – The further words of the verse more accurately describe the radiance of Him who sat on the throne. In the described way, like hashmal and fire, the One who sat shone “from the sight of his loins and above”; and “from the sight of his loins and below” the prophet “saw as if ... fire,” alone without hashmal. This whole description is much clearer in Ezekiel 8.2, where the same Image shines below the loins only like fire and above like hashmal and dawn (hence, in the Russian translation the semicolon should be translated to “him”). The Prophet expresses himself extremely carefully. The luminous body of God splits into two parts; If God is generally represented in human form, then what people call loins (“the appearance of loins”) would be the boundary between the two parts, which shone unequally. Since the image was in a sitting position, the vertical part of it from the waist upward shone like hashmal and fire, and the lower part only like fire. The lower part of the image, located closer to the ground, and first of all open to human eyes, shines with a more moderate light - like fire (but not like simple fire, but “as if it were a kind”, something like fire), perhaps because shrouded in clothing falling in wide folds all around (cf. Is 6.1); the upper one, probably imagined to be naked, at least partially - on the neck, chest, shines with the most dazzling brilliance that we can imagine (this was that bright radiance that the prophet noticed even when the cloud had just surfaced on the horizon - v. 5); but the upper part, next to the radiance of the hashmal, had the radiance of fire: perhaps He who sat on the throne, shining with a light similar to the radiance of the hashmal, was dressed with fire, like a robe. - “And the radiance is all around Him,” that is, He sat on the throne. The personal pronoun returns the speech to the main subject of the verse, which is also indicated without any explanation by the pronoun “His loins.” Around the entire light image of God there is a bright sphere of light, with which the appearance is more closely described in Art. 28, like rainbow.

Ezekiel 1:28. In what form does a rainbow appear on the clouds during rain, this is the appearance of this radiance all around.

“A rainbow (and exactly like the real one) in what form it appears on the clouds during rain. The inaccessible is separated from the sphere surrounding it. While He Himself shines with an extraordinary light, the circle circled around Him flickers, as it should, with a more softened, gentle light” (Hitzig). The bright light from the throne of God is refracted into the colored radiance of the rainbow, which moderates it. Representing a variety of colors, both the most beautiful, and gradually transforming into others, constituting, as it were, the greatness of God reflected in the sky, the rainbow also appears in other cases in theophany: Rev. 4.3; Rev. 10.1 - mainly for the meaning it acquired after the flood. “This kind” is famous: “this is the standing”, probably the scribe took δρασις for στασις; so only, except for glory. transfer to Venice. code. and the blessed one Theodorit.

The sign and meaning of Ezekiel’s vision on Chebar still remain and will probably remain for a long time as much of a mystery as this prophet’s closely related and even more mysterious vision of a new temple (XL-XLIV ch.) and apocalyptic visions. Nevertheless, exegesis presents many attempts to unravel the mystery of the Khovar vision, the most important of which are the following: 1) St. Fathers, although they do not pass by in complete silence the mysterious vision of Chapter 1. Ezekiel, they say little about him, dwelling more on individual dark words and expressions of the prophet than on revealing the thoughts of the entire vision. Nevertheless, we also find in them an attempt, albeit a half-hearted one, to indicate an idea to a vision. In 4 mysterious animal visions, some of them saw the image of 4 evangelists, and considered the whole phenomenon a foretelling of the widespread spread of the kingdom of Christ on earth. The reasons for this understanding were the following: the evangelists are also like animals in vision 4; they have the same number of faces, since each is destined to go into the whole world; they look at each other, since each agrees with the others; they have 4 wings, since they disperse to different countries and at the same speed as if they were flying; in the sound of the wings they saw the gospel that went out to the whole earth; in the 4 different faces of animals they saw an indication of the character and content of each of the Gospels. Besides the blessing. Jerome (who accepts this explanation of Chapter I of Ezekiel in the preface to the interpretation of Matthew, and in the interpretation of Ezekiel is afraid to follow it entirely) and Gregory Dvoeslov, in whom we find a detailed development of this explanation; it was already known to St. Irenaeus of Lyons (Against heresies III, 16, 8). From the second it became quite widespread in the Western Church, where it was dominant during the Middle Ages. As for the Eastern Church, its fathers, who were engaged in the explanation of Chapter I. Prophet Ezekiel (St. Ephraim the Syrian and Macarius the Great, Blessed Theodoret), we do not find any indication of this explanation. The fact that it was not unknown in the Eastern Church can serve as some evidence other than St. Irenaeus, iconographic monuments, sometimes depicting the evangelists in the form of 4 “animals” of Ezekiel and the Apocalypse. Our church charter, appointing Proverbs from Ezekiel I-II ch. on Holy Week during the hours when the Four Gospels are read, also has in mind this explanation of ch. I. Ezekiel. – This explanation deserves attention due to its antiquity. It is based on the true idea that the vision of the prophet Ezekiel could not help but point, at least in part, to Christian times, from which it was separated by only a few centuries. God, who lived among the Jewish people in the temple on the cherubim, from now on seemed to change His residence on earth, not wanting to limit it to one people and one country. He had to reveal himself to the pagans, which happened through the preaching of the Gospel. All this could be expressed by the removal of the Glory of God on the cherubim from the Jerusalem Temple, described in Chapters X and XI. Ezek., to what description of ch. I. serves as a preparation. But, on the other hand, in the form of mysterious animals the prophet contemplated, as he himself says in Ezekiel 10.20, none other than cherubim. Church art had the right to choose these images to represent the evangelists, but this choice does not oblige us to follow such a distant allegorical explanation.

Now they prefer to explain Ezekiel’s vision from immediate historical circumstances and find in it indications primarily of the era of the prophet and the content of his predictions and books. Since this appearance of God to Ezekiel was for him a calling to prophetic preaching, the general content of the sermon also determined the form of the appearance. Ezekiel's sermon revolved around two main subjects: the destruction of the old temple (VIII-XI chapters) and the creation of a new one in the renewed Jerusalem (XI-XLIII). From here God appears to Ezekiel in a temple-like setting - on cherubim. But since God has to carry out judgment on his people, the consequence of which will be the destruction of the temple and captivity, he appears at the same time as a formidable judge. Since this judgment will not end in the complete destruction of the chosen people, but in its restoration, God, in His appearance, surrounds Himself with symbols of mercy. From these three principles all the details of Ezekiel's vision are explained. It opened with signs of a formidable, destructive nature - a stormy wind, a large cloud (cloud), fire, which indicated the impending invasion of Judea by the Chaldeans (hence the appearance of the vision from the north). The gentle radiance of the ilectra and the rainbow could serve as a sign of God’s propitiation, the cessation of anger. Appearing as a formidable but merciful judge, God appears to the prophet, at the same time as the God of the covenant, although avenging the violation of this covenant, but having no time to restore it. For this purpose, God appears seated on the cherubim, between which He had His sojourn in the temple above the Ark of the Covenant. Between the cherubs there were burning coals, which suggest an altar underneath - this main accessory of the temple. Even such a minor item as the laver has not been forgotten from the temple furnishings: in the Temple of Solomon it was movable and equipped with wheels; therefore, those wheels that were in the charge of Ezekiel near the cherubim point to him. That. and God appears to Ezekiel, like Isaiah, in the temple, but this temple is made movable as a sign that Jehovah has to temporarily withdraw from the Jerusalem temple. This explanation of Ezekiel's vision, with slight variations, is repeated by most interpreters old and new. Although the main principles established by this explanation are correct, it does not start from one beginning; all thoughts extracted by this explanation from the vision, even if they are given by the vision, are not the thoughts of the whole vision, but of its individual parts, and must be united in some higher, fundamental thought. Moreover, although these thoughts are lofty and important, they are not new in prophetic literature; Meanwhile, the Khobar vision in the book of Ezekiel gives such an impression that it wants to say something new, to give a new revelation.

From this side, more attractive are those attempts to explain Ezekiel’s vision that try to find one thought in the entire vision. So Kimhi (rabbi of the 13th century) and Maldonat (Jesuit † 1583) think that 4 animals in the prophet Ezekiel, like in Daniel, designate 4 great successive kingdoms; but this explanation obviously reduces the cherubs to the level of mere symbols. Schroeder’s explanation has the same drawback, according to which animal visions represent the life of the world in all the integrity of its powers, and God appears in the present vision as the living God, in His glory, which is the life of the world (cf. Chapters XXXVII and XLVII and 1 John 1.2). – An interesting interpretation of the Ezekiel vision given by the Jesuit Hebrans in the Revue biblique 1894 October, which can be called astronomical. The main components of the vision according to it symbolize the movement of the firmament and various phenomena on it. The very firmament is represented in the vision under the image of a huge wheel, “ gilgal" (Ezek 10.13), which, as the places where this word is used show, is not a wheel in the usual sense of the word, but means something having the spherical shape of a globe (Hebrans, based on Ezek 1.15 in Hebrew, concludes that in a vision there was only one wheel.) The stars in the vision are represented by living eyes, with which the tall and terrible rims of the wheels looked at the prophet (according to Hebrans "y one wheel). The animals of Ezekiel's vision are the signs of the zodiac, invented, as we know, by the Chaldeans. To complete the analogy, the fire that walked between the animals corresponded to the sun and its apparent movement in the firmament according to the signs of the zodiac. The purpose of Ezekiel's vision was to show Israel that its God is the true ruler of the sky, stars and luminaries that the Chaldeans idolized (God in the vision sits above the firmament and animals). But not to mention the fact that there are four wheels in the vision (Ezekiel 1.16), and not one, as is necessary Hebrans "y "galgal" (the name of the wheels in the vision according to Ezekiel 10.13) means a kind of whirlwind (see vol. X: 13 ), and not a ball in general; the wheels could not personify the vault of heaven because this vault appears later in the vision as a special independent part of it (v. 22). If the wheels in the vision did not mean the vault of heaven, then neither did the eyes on them not stars. Further, the signs of the zodiac with the animals of Ezekiel's vision have only this in common, that the first, and even then not all, and the second are animals, animal figures; the signs of the zodiac, carved on one Babylonian table of the 12th century BC, bear little resemblance animals of Ezekiel's vision: so on this board there is one image of a two-headed animal - “and the animals of Ezekiel, says Hebrans, had 4 heads; another animal had outstretched legs - and the legs of the animals of the vision were “straight” (1). Finally, if the Babylonians idolized animals that represented the constellations (they even called them “lords of the gods”), then it turned out that the God of Israel surrounded Himself in His present appearance with images of pagan gods; Is such a view acceptable? But this explanation may also contain some truth: under the movement of the cherubim, which is described in such detail in the vision (vv. 9, 11, 12, 14, 17, 19–21, 24–25), one cannot help but understand some activity of these highest beings; this activity, by the very position of the cherubim at the throne of God, cannot but be world-wide (cosmic), cannot but affect the world at its very foundations, and influence the course of the entire life of the world.

The following can be said with certainty about the thoughts of Ezekiel's vision. The appearances of God, which included the Khobar vision of the prophet Ezekiel, generally occurred at the most important moments in the history of the covenant concluded by God with the Jewish people. They marked its beginning (the epiphany to Abraham, esp. Gen. 15.1, Jacob’s vision of the ladder); then the epiphanies are repeated during the renewal of God’s covenant with the peoples of Abraham, when the small family of this patriarch became a large people (the appearance in the bush, Sinai), and then whenever the covenant is in danger. Moreover, the magnitude of the danger and, in general, the importance of this or that moment in the history of the covenant determines the greater or lesser majesty of the theophany; So one of the most majestic epiphanies after Sinai was during the time of the prophet Elijah - this prophet - when one could think that only one person remained faithful to the covenant with God in all of Israel. Since the appearance of God to Ezekiel on Chebar was distinguished among the epiphanies by its majesty, it means that the time of this theophany - the era of Ezekiel - was a particularly important moment in the history of the covenant, perhaps no less important than the era of Moses, a critical moment. At the Sinai covenant, God promised to give part of humanity what He once deprived all of humanity for violating His commandments, that the gift of the Promised Land to the Jews had such a deep meaning, this can be seen by comparing everything that was connected with such a gift: not only that Palestine by nature was boiling with honey and milk, God promised to use special acts of providence to influence its abundance and fertility before the Sabbath year, etc. With the Word, a new paradise was planted for man, although no longer in Eden: Lev. 26.4ff, Gen 13.10; Hos 2.18 and Ezek 36.35; Isa 51.3; Joel 2.3. God wanted to return to Israel almost everything that he had taken from Adam, to make a change in the very conditions of human life created by sin, even in purely natural ones. Centuries of experience have shown that Israel, like Adam, cannot fulfill its obligations under the covenant with God. The time has come for God, if not to cancel, then at least to limit His great promises to His people, to expel man from paradise a second time. During Ezekiel's time, this turnaround was taking place: God was taking away the Promised Land from His former people. She was about to be turned into the desert by the invasion of the Chaldeans (Ezekiel VI). And she was never able to fully recover from this invasion; at least, after captivity, she does not surprise everyone, as before, with her fertility and abundance. Ezekiel mourned the end of the land of Israel (ch. VII). God deprived His former people of His immediate proximity: since the time of captivity, Israel has had few prophets; it also does not have the former temple with the Ark of the Covenant and the Glory of the Lord above it. Such an important change took place during Ezekiel's time with the Sinai covenant. It is clear why God now appears as majestically as at Sinai, and in a setting reminiscent of the Sinai epiphany. – Among other epiphanies, Khovarskoye is distinguished by the presence of cherubs, who occupy a very prominent place in it - they are the main figures of the entire phenomenon. Although cherubim appear here not for the first or only time in the economy of human salvation, their appearance in the history of this economy is extremely rare. It is not difficult to list all the cases of this appearance known from the Bible: the first took place at the time of the fall of mankind, when the cherubim (Gen. 3.24: in Hebrew and Greek plural) were entrusted with the protection of paradise taken from people; then, after the conclusion of the Sinai covenant, the cherubim overshadow the Ark of this covenant and are present in the tabernacle, which should be concluded on the basis of their images above both; finally, after appearing in the visions of the prophet Ezekiel, they appear again only in the visions of John the Theologian, which, as we know, have as their subject the final struggle of the church with the forces of the world and its final victory, that is, the end of time. What all these cases have in common is that they take place at especially important moments of God’s providential influence on the earth, at moments of such or similar importance as the end of the world or the profound upheaval that humanity was about to experience during the Fall. What the prophet Ezekiel contemplated on Chebar thus. stood in some relation to the initial history of fallen humanity and to the end of this history and our world. This is also proven by the undoubted connection of this vision with the last vision of the prophet Ezekiel in ch. XI-XLVII. And this vision refers to those times when Israel, restored to its former rights, renewed and holy, will live in the Promised Land, completely different from the old land, with a new temple. Since the salvation of Israel will take place in the last times, when the fulfillment of tongues comes, then in the last chapters of his book the prophet Ezekiel obviously describes that new earth and that new Jerusalem, which the Apocalypse speaks of. And now the Glory of God enters the new temple that this land will have in the same form in which it appeared on Chebar and in which it came out of the old temple destroyed by the Chaldeans. So the appearance of God, described in Chapter I. book Ezekiel, so exceptional that it will have an analogy only in that mysterious time when “there will be no time” (Rev 10.6). At the same time, this theophany had a great analogy with what was accomplished through Moses at Sinai. But this analogy is an analogy of the opposite: the Glory of God, which had been dormant since the time of the Sinai legislation in Israel, in the time of Ezekiel passed “from the threshold of the House to the cherubim” (Ezekiel 10.18) to be removed from the criminal people. Israel could console itself with the hope that she would return to him in the described chapters XL-XLVIII. It's time. For such a turn in the direction of providential activity, which took place during the time of Ezekiel, God needed to “raise up His power,” “shake the heavens and the earth,” and for this to appear on cherubim, which “shake the world when they walk” (Targum on Ezekiel I, 7).

Contents, division and origin of the book. The Prophet Ezekiel can be called a divinely inspired interpreter of the Babylonian captivity, its meaning and significance in the system of God's providence for Israel. Originally a priest taken into captivity with Jehoiachin, the prophet Ezekiel acted among the rural colonists of Jewish captives, leaving Babylon for his great co-worker, the court prophet Daniel. The result of over twenty years of activity of the prophet (and cf. 12) was his great book. But unlike Isaiah and Jeremiah, Ezekiel, a captive removed from his compatriots scattered throughout Chaldea, probably simply wrote (rather than spoke) his prophecies for dissemination among the people (): we only sometimes see him speaking directly to the people () or elders (and even then to those who came to him) (); in addition, he performed symbolic actions in front of the people, in general “his tongue was tied to the larynx and he was mute” (), opening his lips only in exceptional cases (). Therefore, in the book he often cites passages from previous writers - a technique more likely to be a writer’s than an orator’s. But in view of this, one cannot agree with the rationalist interpreters of Ezekiel that he is a writer rather than a prophet: one can prophesy in writing; and thanks to the nature of the prophetic gift, which can be called literary, the book of Ezekiel compares favorably with other prophetic books by its strict unity of content, consistency and systematicity.

Through a series of prophetic speeches, visions and symbolic actions, Ezekiel first, denouncing the wickedness of Judah, predicts the fall of Jerusalem and the final captivity of the people, and after the destruction of the kingdom, he predicts the death of the direct and indirect culprits of this destruction, the old and modern enemies of Israel (the surrounding pagan peoples), and comforts Israel bright pictures of a great future, i.e. the book naturally falls into two completely equal parts, 24 chapters each: accusatory and consoling, of which the second is almost equally divided into speeches against pagan peoples (chap. XXV-XXXII), indirectly comforting for Israel, and predictions directly comforting for him (chap. XXXIII-XLVIII). As for the particular division of the book, it is given by the prophet himself in the form of dates for his speeches. He dates his speeches by the years of Jeconiah’s captivity, which was also his captivity, and he named the following years: 5th (), 6th (), 7th (), 9th (), 10th ( ), 11th (; ; ), 12th (; ), 25th (), 27th (). Next, individual prophecies are arranged in the book in chronological order, excluding , which, obviously, is inserted into the finished book. In view of this, it is closest to assume that the book arose gradually from individual passages written in the indicated years.

Features of the book of the prophet Ezekiel are a) mystery and abundance of visions. The Prophet Ezekiel is rightly considered the founder of Jewish apocalypticism, the emergence of which was facilitated by the then bleak situation of Israel, which involuntarily directed all aspirations to the distant future, to the end of times (eschatology chapters XXXVII-XLVIII). Hence, the book of the prophet Ezekiel is filled with visions, one more majestic than the other, which impart to it an extraordinary sublimity of content (Divine revelation resorts to visions when the secret communicated to man does not fit into words and concepts). Blazh. Jerome calls the book of the prophet Ezekiel an ocean and a labyrinth of the mysteries of God (on Ezekiel XLVII). The Jews forbade those under thirty years of age from reading the first and last chapters of this book (Mishna, Schabb. I, 13b.). But with such a lofty content of the book, the Christology of the prophet Ezekiel is not rich and is significantly inferior to Isaina. This is because Ezekiel, in his prophetic contemplations, deals with only two so separated in time, but obviously close in essence, moments in the history of Israel: the era of the Babylonian captivity and the era of the final restoration of Israel at the end of time; the long intermediate period, when Israel lost the glory of God (Shekinah), which dwelt in the temple on the cherubim, and thanks to this was reduced to the level of an ordinary people, as if it did not exist for the eyes of this great Jew, although during this period something so important for all mankind happened event as the appearance of the Messiah. Therefore, the prophet Ezekiel could not speak much about the time of the first coming of the Messiah, Who became the joy of the tongues rather than of Israel, which rejected Him; his thought was more directed to the time close to the second coming, when all Israel would be saved.

A characteristic feature of the book of Eze is further b) its priestly flavor. The author's touching love for the temple, its worship and rituals (see special chapters VIII and XL-XLIV), zeal for the law and ritual purity (). c) Seal of Babylonian origin. Cherubim ch. I in many ways reminiscent of Assyro-Babylonian winged oxen and lions. XL et c. The chapters, with their artistic architectural details, take us vividly into the environment of Nebuchadnezzar’s enormous buildings. Depending on life in Babylon, which was then the center of world trade, where upper and lower Asia, Persia and India met, there is also what no prophet describes like Ezekiel, peoples and countries (Schroeder, Lange Bibelwerk, Der Propheth Jeesekiel 1873, § 7).

The syllable of the prophet Ezekiel. Ezekiel often amazes the reader with brilliant and lively images, having no equal in this regard. It is difficult to imagine anything more stunning than his vision of a field filled with “dry green” bones, anything more majestic than the description of the glory of God in Chapter I. anything more vivid than his picture of the port of Tire (XXVII ch.). The attack of Gog (XXIII-XXIX ch.), the blasphemous service of idols in the temple and God’s wrathful vengeance for him (VIII-XI ch.) are pictures that are not erased from memory (Trochon, La Sainte Bible, Les prophetes - Ezechiel 1684, 9) . called Ezekiel the most amazing and sublime of the prophets. Schiller (according to Richter) read Ezekiel with great pleasure and wanted to study Hebrew in order to read it in the original. Grotius compared him to Homer, and Herder called him the Jewish Shakespeare.

Nevertheless, in places the language of the prophet Ezekiel is “dark, rough, drawn out; expressions turn out to be insufficient for his rapid thoughts” (Trochon, ib). Already blessed. Jerome finds in the style of the prophet Ezekiel very little grace, but without vulgarity (letter to Paul). Smend, Bertholet (Das Buch Jesekiel 1897) and others point out the following shortcomings of Ezekiel's style. This is a writer who loves to spread, and these spreads sometimes get in the way of plasticity and force. Many stereotypical phrases (such as, for example, “I, the Lord, have said,” “you will know that I am the Lord”), which should sound especially solemn, tire the reader. The songs and allegories in which Isaiah was such a master are somewhat artificial in Ezekiel (chap. VII, XXI, XIX); Of the songs, he is quite successful only in lamentable ones; in allegories, the subject and the image are gradually mixed up, it is not carried out to the end; images turn to different sides (; ; ); often he turns to the same images (cf. chapters XVII, XIX and XXXI; XVI and XXIII). Reflection in Ezekiel prevails over intuition; he is too rational and balanced to be a poet; Moreover, his adherence to established, objective values ​​of the cult is little reconciled with poetry. – Since divine inspiration does not change a person’s natural talents, but only directs them to serve revelation, then admitting Ezekiel to the full extent of such shortcomings of style would not harm faith in his divine inspiration. But it seems that the prophet’s newest critics are making demands on him that were completely unattainable for his era. Moreover, as Bertolet says, in modern times they are realizing more and more that Ezekiel was unfairly reproached with many things that should be attributed to damage to the text.

Language The prophet Ezekiel presents many phenomena that clearly belong to a later time. Smenda takes up 2 pages with a list of Ezekiel's phrases that bear the stamp of later times. In particular, his language turns out to be heavily imbued with Aramaisms (Selle, De aramaismis libri Ez. 1890). The language of the prophet does not resist the invasion of the degenerate popular dialect. Numerous anomalies and grammatical deviations reveal the decline and intimacy of the Hebrew language and remind us that the prophet lived in a foreign country (Trochon 10). At the same time, the language of the prophet testifies to the great originality of his mind with a large number of words and expressions not found anywhere else (΄απαξ λεγομενα).

Authenticity The book of the prophet Ezekiel is not disputed even by those rationalists whose critical knife did not leave a living place in the Bible. Ewald says: “The slightest glance at the book of Ezekiel is enough to convince us that everything in it comes from the hand of Ezekiel.” DeWette agrees with him: “that Ezekiel, who usually speaks of himself in the first person, wrote everything himself, this is beyond doubt” (Trochon 7). However, isolated objections to the authenticity of the book have been made for a long time. This is, for example, what was said in 1799 by an English anonymous author of the Revue biblique against chapters XXV-XXXII, XXXV, XXXVI, XXXVIII and XXXIX. Of the newest objections to the authenticity of the book (eg Geiger, Wetzstein, Vemes), the most significant are Zunz (Gottedienstliche Vortrage der luden 1892, 165–170), who dates the book of Eze to the Persian era between 440 and 400, and Zeinecke (Geschichte des Volkes Israel II 1884,1–20), relating it to the Syrian era - 164. Both assumptions caused serious refutation in rationalistic science itself (Kuenen, Hist. - crit. Einl. II, § 64). It is curious that in St. canon, the book of Ezekiel was accepted by the Jewish synagogue not without hesitation, the reason for which was, mainly, disagreement with the Pentateuch of the rites of the future ideal temple, chapters XL-XLVIII: “if not for Ananias ben Hezekiah (a rabbi contemporary to Gamaliel, the teacher of Apostle Paul) , then the book of Ezekiel would be considered apocryphal; what did he do? They brought him 300 measures of oil and he sat down and explained it” (i.e., he sat over the explanation for so many days that 300 measures of oil burned out, Chagiga 13a; cp. Menahot 45a. Schab. 13b.). But according to Baba Batra (14b) “the men of the great synagogue (Ezra and others) wrote the book of Ezekiel, along with the 12 prophets, Daniel and Esther” (i.e., of course, they included it in the canon). – The testimony of Josephus (Ant. 10:5, 1) that Ezekiel wrote two books presents many difficulties for biblical criticism. Perhaps Joseph considers the two parts of the book to be independent: the book about the destruction of Jerusalem and the book about its restoration. It is less likely that Josephus is explained in such a way that chapters XXV-XXXII or XL-XLVIII were a separate book.

Text The books of the prophet Ezekiel are ranked, together with the text of 1 and 2 Kings, as the most damaged in the Old Testament. Although discrepancies between the Hebrew-Masoretic text and the LXX translation in the book of Ezekiel are not as frequent as in the Psalter, where they exist, they are very significant; often in both texts a completely different thought is given (see; ; and esp. -), so that the interpreter has to choose between two readings. Since the time of Hitzig (Der Plophet. Ezechiel erkiart. 1847), Western biblical scholars of all directions have considered the text LXX in the book of Ezekiel, or rather the Masoretic. Cornille says that while he was reading the book of Ezekiel in the Hebrew text, this prophet made a heavy impression on him and he could not deal with him; when he began to read it in the Greek text, “the fog that shrouded the meaning of the book began to clear and a text of unique rare beauty and majesty with a powerfully fascinating originality appeared to the amazed gaze” (Das Buch. d. Pr. Ez. 1886, 3) . Providing a smoother text in comparison with the Hebrew, the LXX translation in the book of Ezekiel is distinguished by its extraordinary accuracy, much greater than in other books, thanks to which it can be a reliable corrective to the Masoretic text.

The book of the prophet Ezekiel is a prophetic book of the Old Testament. At first glance, it is a collection of incoherent visions of the prophet Ezekiel. Ezekiel's visions, however, are a reflection of the immensity of the glory and power of the Lord. The symbolism of the prophet's visions is a way to comprehend the mystery of things. It is through visions that Ezekiel speaks with God, in visions the will of God is revealed to him.

Visions and prophecies are placed in the book in chronological order.

Read the book of Ezekiel.

The book of Ezekiel consists of 48 vision chapters:

The prophet Ezekiel served as a priest. His prophetic activity fell during the terrible times of the Babylonian Captivity. Ezekiel was taken to Babylon with the first group of captives. It is believed that his prophetic activity lasted at least 22 years from 593 to 571. BC e.

Interpretation of the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel.

The book of the Prophet Ezekiel was written under King Nebuchadnezzar. Jewish exiles in Babylonian captivity tried to preserve their religion in a foreign land. Now they had a new understanding of the prophecies of Jeremiah, who had previously been persecuted. They needed a new prophet, which Ezekiel became.

Ezekiel lived in difficult times and found himself in a difficult situation. On the one hand, he prophesied in a foreign land and not just among pagans, but among pagans who had their own culture and quite strong state power at that time. The entire Old Testament Church had to withstand and preserve itself in these conditions. The prophet Ezekiel clearly understood the importance of his tasks:

• Save your own religion
• Oppose the religion of the pagans, which seemed attractive to many.

At the center of the work is the glorification of the glory of the Lord. The same thought is repeated more than 60 times: God says that all his actions are necessary for man to realize the power and glory of the Lord.

And the slain will fall among you, and you will know that I am the Lord.

...and they will know that I am the Lord; It was not in vain that I said that I would bring such disaster upon them.

And you will know that I am the Lord when the slain lie among their idols around their altars...

Ezekiel is often called the divinely inspired interpreter of the Babylonian captivity. An interesting fact is that according to many researchers, Ezekiel rarely prophesied among the people; he wrote down the prophecies and they were read.

Literary features of the book of the prophet Ezekiel.

The peculiarity of the presentation style is that the prophet Ezekiel lived in a special world - on the edge of the unknown sacred world. His poetic language influenced apocalyptic writers, especially the work of the Apostle John.

The Book of Visions of Ezekiel has the clearest chronology of any prophetic book.

In book 2, the central themes are the judgment of the Jews (chapters 1 - 24) and the future restoration (chapters 33 - 48). Between these themes there is a third – balancing one. This is the theme of God's Judgment of other nations. Ezekiel predicts death for those responsible for the destruction of Jerusalem.

The book of Ezekiel is replete with proverbs and sayings. Many passages are in the nature of parables, visions, and allegories. The high drama of the visions did not leave the prophet’s contemporaries indifferent.

Due to the fact that the prophecies of Ezekiel were originally conceived as a literary work, and not as a speech to be pronounced, they are distinguished by their integrity and unity of form and content, as well as the consistency of their presentation.

The following style features should also be noted:

• the mystery of visions,
• priestly coloring,
• living imagery.

Summary.

Chapters 1 - 3. Introduction to the book of Ezekiel. Ezekiel's first visions, he embarks on the path of prophetic work. The Spirit makes the prophet the guardian of the house of Israel.

Chapters 4 – 11. Description of the sinfulness of Judea and Jerusalem. Reasoning about the necessity and inevitability of God's judgment over the people of Israel.

Chapters 12 – 19. Reasoning that one should not have false optimism in the current situation.

Chapters 20 – 24. History of the corruption of Judea and Jerusalem.

Chapter 25. The coming judgment on Ammon, Moab, Edom and the land of the Philistines.

Chapters 26 – 28. The coming judgment of Tyre. Future destruction. Lament for Tyre. Trial of Sidon.

Chapters 29 – 32. The coming judgment on Egypt. The sinfulness of the Egyptians. Prophecy of the fall of Egypt at the hands of Babylon. The destruction of Egypt. Taking the Egyptians into captivity. The fate of Egypt and Assyria in comparison. Prophecy about Pharaoh. About the death of the Egyptians.

Chapter 33. Ezekiel about his destiny.

Chapter 34. Prophecies about false shepherds.

Chapters 35 – 37. Prophecies about the death of the enemy and the deliverance of the people.

Chapters 38 – 39. The wrath of the Lord will be directed towards Gog and Magog.

Chapters 40 – 43. Prophecy about the new temple.

Chapters 44 – 46. About a new type of ministry.

Chapters 47 – 48. About a new land for God's chosen people.