Talk:Angels in Judaism

message: What is the relation between the Semitic words Malakh (Hebrew for angel), melek (Hebrew for king), Moloch (disputed Phoenician god or sacrifice), malik (Arabic for king), Melek Taus (the Yazidi angel), Solomon Molcho ("Solomon King/Angel", a Jewish Messiah claimant)?
User:Shirahadasha has removed my See also link in this article for not having references.
I am no expert on these languages, so I ask that somebody knowledgeable, explains in the corresponding articles whether the words are related or not.
I found however:
:mal'ak:
::Strong's Number:   04397
::from an unused root meaning to despatch as a deputy
::Mal'ak	TWOT - 1068a
:: 1. messenger, representative
::         1. messenger
::         2. angel
::         3. the theophanic angel 
:moloch: 	melek
:Melek:
::Strong's Number:   04428
::from (04427)
::Melek	TWOT - 1199a
::1. king 
::King James Word Usage - Total: 2523: king 2518, royal 2, Hammelech 1, Malcham 1, Moloch 1
:Malak
::Strong's Number:   04427	 
::a primitive root
::Malak	TWOT - 1199,1200
::   1. to be or become king or queen, reign
::         1. (Qal) to be or become king or queen, reign
::         2. (Hiphil) to make one king or queen, cause to reign
::         3. (Hophal) to be made king or queen 
::  2. to counsel, advise
::         1. (Niphal) to consider 
--84.20.17.84 10:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you care to add notes to the relevant articles to avoid future misunderstandings? --84.20.17.84 08:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: No, it doesn't show they come from "completely different" roots.  All they tooliken is one -alef.  mem as prefix is the agentive or participal fitt.  One person is the counsellee and other the counsellor.  See herald.  I'v filled out the history of the stems. -lysdexia 05:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malakh, melek, Moloch, malik 

message: Since there is no other article about the word "Malakh", I think that some mention that the word is also used as a proper noun or as "messenger" (depending on your interpretation) in the book of Malachi should go in the article. --84.20.17.84 08:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A disambig can be added to the top to steer readers to the relevant article if there is a risk of confusion. Content about Malakhi should go in Malakhi and/or Book of Malachi. This is an encyclopedia article on the concept, not a dictionary entry on the word. --Shirahadasha 15:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malachi 

message: On Etti Ankri's 2001 album "Yam" (Sea) the last song is also called Malakhim. Just FWIW. -andy 78.51.89.40 (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Song 

message: please note that in other languages mal'akh means locust its somtimes used as connotatin for the christian demon 'legion'
Above moved here for a pile of reasons stated in the title. Feel free to clean it up to Wikipedia's standards to put it back. Please do NOT put it back verbatim.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.82.142.13 (talk) 00:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Badly-written, uncited and unclear, thus disputable, entry under "etymology" title 

message: * Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)
* Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew)
* Wikipedia:RS 
In ictu oculi (talk) 05:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just went ahead and did it, someone else can revert if there's a convincing WP:RS case presented from mainstream English language sources. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 05:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Propose move to [[Angel (Judaism)]]

message: Per a post-close comment on 301655722 Angels' AfD, the titular number (and other related numbers) can be sourced and may be worth working into this article. czar · · 07:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  301655722 

message: I just read someone complain on soylentnews (a Slashdot imitator) about this article.  As far as I can tell their complaint seems to be correct: the majority of the article about angels in Judaism is a section that is "not part of mainstream Judaism".  Doesn't that create an undue weight problem?  It's like having a "medicine according to Christianity" article which is predominantly about how Christian Science opposes blood transfusions, or a "religion in America" article which is predominantly about Scientology.  (Hey, it's a religion, and it's in America, right?) Ken Arromdee (talk) 18:47, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. See my post below.238-Gdn (talk) 09:48, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue weight 

message: There are parts of the article that reflect Christian (and some other non-jewish) ideas, which seems out of place in an article about angels in Judaism. I'm not much good at editing, so I'd appreciate if someone could take a look and make changes where appropriate.
"In the King James Bible, the noun mal'akh is rendered "angel" 111 times, "messenger" 98 times, "ambassadors" 4 times."
The King James Bible is a Christian text, more relevant would be translation in the [JPS or NJPS translation, respectively, as this reflects Jewish ideas of what the original Hebrew means.
Several times throughout the article "Yahveh" is used to refer to the Jewish deity, but it's not the way Jewish people represent the [tetragrammaton] in English, YHVH or YHWH (the alphabetical equivalents of יהוה / yod-hav-vey-hav) seems more appropriate, or 'Hashem', which is the everyday Hebrew name for God, or 'Adonai', which is what YHVH is replaced with when reading aloud, it being taboo for Jews to vocalise the tetragrammaton. 
"some kind of God’s avatar or pre-incarnated Christ."
Christ is a Christian term (duh), and the individual it redirects and refers to is certainly not a Jewish religious figure, so I doubt this is a theory that Jewish people came up with or endorse (the reference given doesn't seem to be exclusively about Jewish ideas, which lends weight that this is a Christian reading). Under other circumstances i might suggest a redirect to messiah but in this case it's not appropriate, because Judaism doesn't hold with the idea that the Messiah is of divine origin more than anyone else. I say end the sentence after 'avatar'.
Both mal’akh and a deity, be it Yahveh or Elohim, are of masculine grammatical gender. 
Yahveh and Elohim are different words to refer to the same being, Yahveh being an Anglicization of the tetragrammaton, and Elohim being the hebrew for 'god' or 'diety'. 
A possible change could be to 
"YHVH and Elohim are of masculine grammatical gender" if the intended meaning was that other god's are refered to this way
Another possibility is that the original editor wanted to convey that both YHVH and Elohim, while refering to the same being, are of masculine grammatical gender, in which case i would suggest 
"Both mal'akh and terms for the Jewish diety, be it Yahveh or Elohim, are of masculine grammatical gender" and possibly adding in some other terms from [this page] that are grammatically masculine.
If neither was the intended meaning then simply "Both mal'akh and YHVH are of masculine grammatical gender."
:: I have hidden the entire section until someone finds a better place for it. 238-Gdn (talk) 09:45, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have to agree with this, the Tetragammon does not translate to Yahweh and it is quite insulting. Also, Elohim is not masculine, it is gender neutral, as HaShem (God) in the Jewish conceptualisation is without gender. I'll have a bash at editing in line with the above suggestion, but I too am not that good at editing, and really the entire section has been written from a Christian perspective. Kathoc (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I couldn't fix the bit on interpolation theory, and it wasn't really relevant... so I just deleted it. I'm sure someone will undo that if they have a problem. Kathoc (talk) 13:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian or Otherwise Non-Jewish References 

message: Shouldn't there be more than one Jewish angelic hierarchy listed?  Besides the hierarchy of the Rambam, there are the alternative hierarchies below.
=== Zohar ===
The Zohar, in Exodus 43a, also lists ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:
Rank	Angelic Class
1   	Malakim
2   	Erelim
3   	Seraphim
4   	Chayot
5   	Ophanim
6   	Hashmallim
7   	Elim
8   	Elohim
9   	Bene Elohim
10  	Ishim
=== Maseket Atzilut ===
Jacob Nazir, in his Maseket Atzilut, also listed ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:
Rank	Angelic Class
1   	Seraphim
2   	Ophanim
3   	Cherubim
4   	Shinanim
5   	Tarshishim
6   	Ishim
7   	Hashmallim
8   	Malakim
9   	Bene Elohim
10  	Erelim
=== Berit Menuchah ===
Abraham ben Isaac of Granada, in his Berit Menuchah, also listed ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:
Rank	Angelic Class
1   	Erelim
2   	Ishim
3   	Bene Elohim
4   	Malakim
5   	Hashmallim
6   	Tarshishim
7   	Shinanim
8   	Cherubim
9   	Ophanim
10  	Seraphim
=== Reshit Chochmah ===
Eliyahu de Vidas, in his Reshit Chochmah, also listed ten ranks of angels, beginning from the highest:
Rank	Angelic Class
1   	Chayot Ha Kodesh
2   	Ophanim
3   	Seraphim
4   	Cherubim
5   	Erelim
6   	Tarshishim
7   	Hashmallim
8   	Elim
9   	Malakim
10  	Ishim
=== 3 Enoch (Song-Uttering Choirs) ===
Shalashim
Parashim
Gibborim
Tseva'im
Gedudim
Memunim
Sarim
Chayalim
Mesharetim
Malakim
Degalim
Sabalim
64.180.15.26 (talk) 21:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Jewish angelic hierarchies? 

message: Shalashim
Parashim
Gibborim
Tseva'im
Gedudim
Memunim
Sarim
Chayalim
Mesharetim
Malakim
Degalim
Sabalim
64.180.15.26 (talk) 21:14, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  3 Enoch (Song-Uttering Choirs) 

message: the most important location for angels in Jewish liturgy is in "kedusha" where it references ophanim hayyoth and their relationship to seraphim.
Curious as to why it's not in the article 73.120.206.200 (talk) 07:20, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liturgy/hierarchy  

message: Under "Michael, Gabriel, Uriel, and Raphael" there is a quote which is attributed to Numbers Rabbah 2:10 as translated at https://www.jhom.com/topics/angels/talmud_fourangels.htm, where it is misspelled. The same quote (minus the typo) is given in the book Literary Passports: The Making of Modernist Hebrew Fiction in Europe. I tried to verify this quote and found that it was not a direct translation of any single excerpt of Numbers Rabbah 2:10, but seems instead to be a summary of its ending.
In light of this, I'm concerned that the JHOM article isn't a reliable source. However, my Medieval Hebrew is still at a beginner level, so the section needs attention from an expert in Medieval Hebrew to confirm. Ezqel (talk) 23:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreliable source quoted in Rabbinic Literature section