thick, and hard), so that in might originally united the divine and human natures in Himself have designated: what is hard, firm, hence: (Maldonatus, Pradus). J. F. Starck compares brass, solid metal in general, while it would then also the pillar of cloud and fire (Exod. iií. 2), have been transferred more definitely to a pecu- specially for the exiles!] Usage always employs liarly bright brass.] To an impression of peculiar "As the In the The Fire-Picture of the Four Living Creatures (vers. 5-14). brightness the context of our passage points with only of things, never of persons. indisputable necessity; nor must this brightness look of chasmal" means, moreover, not merely: be conceived of apart from the fire, since it pro- as the aspect thereof, as it looks, but this as well: ceeds out of the midst of it, and ry has the as it, so to speak, looks, looks on us. more exact definition side by side most poetic way, Umbreit, at all events, underwith it. The question may, however, be asked, stands y: "the eye of metal, as the same whether what is glaringly bright and destructive concentrates itself when melting in a look of the is to be indicated thereby, or not rather a glory greatest brightness (the so-called silver look!); of look that is full of life, which is favoured not perhaps it was a technical expression of the merely by the immediately appearing kernel of smelters, possibly compounded of win and D : fire and the picture of the " chajoth," but also by the ingenious remark of Keil, that in all the fulness of brass, when the brass appears in the fulness of its brightness." J. D. Michaelis transthree passages on has its reference to Him lates: "a great cloud, under which the lightnings who is enthroned above. We shall thus be com- flashed through one another, and gilded its edge pelled to abide by the view hinted at above on by the reflection (an aurora round about it), but the "brightness round about it," inasmuch as in in the middle it looked like glowing metal in the the whole vision the "brightness" appears not midst of the fire." indeed separated from the fire, but yet distinct from it, although not contrasted with it. [The Syriac translator has simply omitted the difficult word in question here, but at ver. 27 and ch. viii. 2 he has given a conjectural interpretation: Ver. 5. Not only what the prophet sees, but "divine look. The Chaldee Paraphrase keeps even his seeing itself is something progressive. it as it stands. The Sept. and Vulg. translate it It is by no means as if Ezekiel had first sketched by xTpov, electrum, which must not be con- the outlines, and were now depicting the interior founded with "amber" (sucinum). Neither can also, for he has reproduced for us in ver. 4 alike the name be given to this latter from 1xTpov, inside and outside what was first seen, but his nor (as Buttmann, Mythologus 11., will have it) seeing itself grows more penetrating, and what can the converse be the case, for the colour of looked upon him out of the midst of the fire amber is of too mild a brightness for it, the com- (hence the repetition ), like chasmal lookparison of the same with the precious metals may ing out of the fire, shapes itself in the progressive rest on much else, and the meaning: amber, leads advance of the vision to -17. Derived as it is to a derivation from axu, aznapov, pov (the from 7, and cognate with the Sanscrit sama drawer, draw-stone), while λspov is derived from (similis), is not so much form, as : likeTop (the beaming sun, as, Empedocles so ness, similitude, a substantival "like as," and is named the element of fire), or at least a more fiery used of what is living, but also of what is without brightness than that of amber was the synonym. life (ver. 26). With respect to the four The brightness of amber does not certainly corre- (not "beasts," as Luther makes them, following spond sufficiently to the comparison in our verse, the Vulg.), see what is said in the introductory where a metal, not precious stones of any kind, is remarks to vers. 4-28. (According to Hofmann, thought of; nor does the transparency of its Ezekiel was in this way "to become aware that brightness suffice here. Now the serpov, every-what he saw was not a thing, but a life. The where mentioned along with gold and silver, was, intention was to represent to the prophet what according to the testimonies of the ancients (see there is about the presence of Jehovah the judg Pape, Greek Lexicon), a natural metallic mixture ment on His unholy people announced itself of three or four parts of gold and one part of therein. Creature life, into which the unbroken silver, which was also artificially prepared. fulness of the being of God pours itself, in order (According to Oken, the "electrum' of the therein to become a manifoldness of power, serves Mountain of Serpents in Siberia is gold, with an the eternal God for the purpose of making Himalloy of 36 per cent. of silver.) Hitzig, Bleek self present to His world.") Formerly: the judg (Vorles. über die Apokalypse), and others mention ment of God rushing on, now: how not merely the peculiar xazoλísavov (Rev. i. 15, ii. 18), the power of the Chaldeans, against which one which is said to be compounded of the Greek hoped at Jerusalem to accomplish everything χαλκός and the Hebrew (white-shining with human leagues (Introd. § 4, 2) and one's own prudence, but the whole creation in the entire brass), but which might also mean "brass from universe, heaven and earth, is ready to execute Lebanon" (EBRARD, PESCHITO, ETHIOPIC VERS.). this judgment of the living God! This threaten The Talmudists explain in as from, ing character the vision obtained from its connection with ver. 4, and from the circumstance "quickness," and b, "rest (or "speaking" that the chajoth came forth out of the fire and "silence"). It passed also for the name of (HENGSTENBERG). But in this way, at the same an angel with the Rabbins, and in fact for that time, its symbolical character is manifest: life of Ezekiel's teacher. (See Leigh, Crit. S. p. 174.) out of fire!-7 (ver. 1) is “vision,” what is It has even been read backwards: ups, and understood of the Messiah (Calov. Bib. Ill.), who : how it is seen, hence: "apseen (ft); 77: : pearance." As to the plural form and in ver. 13, and with Dy in ver. 16, comp. Ewald, Ausf. Lehrb. § 256; Gesenius, Gram. § 91. 9.-What first struck the prophet as being prominent in the vision, was "the likeness of a man." (797 with the full tone.) Likeness to man, where God has made man like God, is just the fulness of the times, Gal. iv. 4; Phil. ii. 7, 8. The angels also assume the ways of man; for man is a microcosm. "All forms of the creature reach in his person a phenomenon of the highest beauty" (UMBREIT). At all events, man stands among the living creatures of the earthly world in the first, as in the highest place. In this way, first of all, the impression in general here without bending inwards of the knee, rising straight up (comp. ver. 23), or the dual is to be understood thus: as respects their 2 legs, it was (generically, without reference to the number, so KEIL) a leg standing erect. is, what is firm, "does not need to bend, to turn" (EWALD), back, smooth and symmetrical (PHILIPPSON): without joints (MAIMONIDES), without front and with which also the calf's foot agrees. Thus there is nothing of likeness to man in this connection, except the upright carriage in general, which results therefrom, but is not made prominent here. On the contrary, for the sole of the foot, even in special contrast to what is human, the comparison is taken from the beast, from the calf, i.e. the foot proper stood firmly, symmetrically rounded off (y), while the human foot is extended lengthwise. (Hitzig makes the circumstance that "they present in no direction a decided front," as also the "want of distinction" in the legs, parallel with the chajoth "facing towards the four quarters of heaven.' Similarly Hävernick before him: "These feet fulfil the object of being able to move in all directions, without turning round (ver. 9); they symbolize the idea of freedom of motion." is stated, as Ezekiel received it from the four chajoth. What special feature in them produced this impression in his case, will become clear in the further progress of his description. And just because it will be expressly stated, a limit is drawn against arbitrariness in the application of man's corporeal form as a rule. The Ver. 6. Just as, on the one hand, man, i.e. (inwardly considered) what is spiritual, what has spiritual life, characterizes the vision, so, on the other hand, in a more outward respect it is sig-human element of the vision, which in general is nificantly defined by its fourfold character. Not prominent, will be strengthened, next to the only are there "four chajoth" in all (ver. 5), but upright carriage, by the legs also being two in "four faces" (ver. 10) are found "in each, and number, which is not indeed stated, but is four wings" (vers. 8, 9, 11, 23; comp. ch. x. 8) certainly to be understood. This human element likewise in each of them." If the number 3, is represented, because of the bestial element as as the designation of the true, highest, most per- well as in spite of it, by the masc. suffix. As the fect being, is the number of God, then must the the lion also-which, according to Bähr, is to number 4 represent the conditional, dependent come into consideration because of his strength, being, which has proceeded from the true being, power, and fearful character-is not mentioned in and be the number of the world, as the sum of the detail, the substitution of the calf for the bull all created things. Time and space, the two (ver. 10) may possibly here set the latter also most general forms of the universe, bear the aside, so far as regards the power of generation, number 4 in themselves, etc. (According to just as Hengstenberg takes into consideration "only the representation of cattle, to ward off all Bähr, comp. Symb. i. p. 156 sqq.)— mascu- heterogeneous ideas." "Although each has a line form, which Hengstenberg here, as in what lion's face, yet none has a lion's feet or claws for follows, explains from the masculine name tearing in pieces, nor those of the eagle, not even cherubim standing in the background, which, the foot of a man."—Cocc.)— mase. is however, here lies as yet too far off. The more meant, according to Hitzig, also to refer to the probable supposition, as a Lapide has already cherubim, yet Hengstenberg (because of Rev. shown, is the collective masc., this being fact, is specially to the feet," and as Geseniur i. 15) admits that "the reference, in point of the impression in general of the chajoth. maintains that is masc., although “rarely,' happens so frequently in looking at the sense, the reference to the grammatical form is let go the explanation of Keil is at all events more probable and the legs sparkled, etc. HengstenD' and also the dual stand as plurals. berg's limitation to the "sole of the foot:" "they Some have incorrectly translated: form, were (there, on the sole of the foot) sparkling," guise, so that each had only one, and that a is not forced, although it would apply to the legs human face and head, but had besides a fourfold also. PHILIPPSON: shining like a brazen hoof. figure, or expression of countenance, or head- (Ewald takes Dy as "feathers," as already the ornament. No less incorrectly, some have assigned Sept., which omits what is said of the sole of the to every face 4 wings, and thus to each of the foot, but instead makes the feet "feathered.") 4 chajoth 16, which would give a sum total of-nen, brass, is also in Dan. x. 6 mase.; 64 wings. The Chaldee paraphrast understands just as many faces, and 256 wings in all. ་ז : ז As GESENIUS: xaλxós, copper., GESENIUS: Ver. 7. Now that we have passed from the shining; BOCHART: polished, burnished; HENGfaces to the wings, in going downwards their STENBERG (with a reference to Rev. i. 15), “prolegs (masc. suff.) come into consideration, not perly: light [in weight]; but because what is merely in the sense of the lower part only, the light [in colour] is represented as lighter [in foot proper, which is distinguished as weight] than what is dark, just as what is sharp is either conceived of distributively equivalent to: glowing, light brass." is represented as lighter than what is blunt, (HirzIG): and each of their legs was, grants the possibility of a derivation of "light" Hitzig ver. 9 the contrary is the case, but still more sc in ver. 10. Ver. 9. But the wings which come into con. sideration here (comp. ver. 11) reach still higher fore, which (as in ver. 6) likewise proceeds from than the faces; a more exact description, thereabove downwards, will have to begin with these wings. There is a going down (ver. 7), and a going up (ver. 8), and a going down again (ver. 11), just as the eye is accustomed to do in such an act of looking. The joining is (with Kliefoth, Keil) to be conceived of in this way that the right upper wing of the chajoth was joined to the left upper wing of its neighbour at the tip. HENGSTENBERG: This pair of wings is stretched upwards, so that the one wing stands over against the other, and is in so far (!) joined to it." One does not see how this can still be called a joining. The connection of the joining of the wings with the going straight forward, which Hitzig holds to be impossible, pointed out by Ewald in the words: "The wings of all so firmly interlaced with one another, that all moved straight forward with wonderful coherence." Comp. for the joining of the wings, vers. 11 and 23, also Exod. xxv. 20, 1 Kings vi. 27, for the expression [in colour] from "to be light" [in weight], but asserts that is manifestly a substantive in the genitive, possibly from (to burn), meaning the red-hot or smelting furnace, akin to y, a crucible. "The sending forth of sparks refers to the special mission in hand, which is one of wrath" (HENGSTENBERG). But the comparison with the effect of light brass attributes to them (HÄVERNICK), at the same time, something glorious, according to UMBREIT, "imperishable freshness.” (?)—If the faces in general serve to express the quality in view, then, from the fact of there being four of them, this quality is expressly shown to have its sphere in the world; and the four wings in general portray the prompt, rapid dexterity towards the respective sides. (UMBREIT: "The living motion and the unceasing vibration of creaturely existence.") In addition, there is the firmness, the steadiness of the carriage, the sure and certain tread (Bosi di). UMBREIT: "The forcibly-pressed sole of the ox." A mere symbol of fitness for service, viz. as regards God, although of "any kind of rendering of service (as messengers or ambassadors of God) for men nothing is said (Häv.). It is the creation gloris nus nınan, Exod. xxvi. 3.-0 fying the living God in its ever ready power and fulness of life. (Niph. of 2D) shows that it is meant to be a Heng-joining of all together, not a joining of the wings of each separate chajoth-form just for itself. That they needed not to turn ¡n (fem. suff.), when they went (vers. 12, 17), is of course at once intelligible from the joining of their wings, but is expressed still more strongly (and for this reason the face of each is spoken, of) by means of Ver. 8. For 17 the Qeri reads "". stenberg, on the other hand, upholds (comp. ch. x. 8) the singular 7, either: "his man's hand," or "his hand, that of a man," because of the ideal comprehension of the quaternity in the unity of the cherub. Hitzig likewise conjectures the singular; the suffix, according to him, presupposes (ch. x. 3, iii. 21) the genitive DN. Ewald accepts the Qeri: "and man's hands," as also Keil, who declares to be an old mistake of the went they always followed their face. Similarly transcriber for. Hav., Maurer, and before them with y in Exod. xxv. 37.-The change in the Kimchi, explain the concise form of the Kethibh gender of the suffixes in this way in one and the by understanding an ellipse, punctuating 17sity of the life of creation in this respect is to be same line, makes one almost think that the diver e. in whatever direction they. איש אל עבר פניו characterized in the chajoth. and taking the suffix distributively, thus: and his (each one of the four's) hands were hands of a Ver. 10. Now comes the detailed description of the four faces. First, the face of a man, man (D7). KEIL: "The wings sat accordwhich, as being turned toward the prophet, had ingly on the shoulders, from which the hands determined his impression of the vision as a proceeded." Hence four wings, and are there whole (ver. 5). Maimonides understood it even not also four hands? and this also because of the of the other three also, and distinguished in these four sides? The designation as man's hands only an expression corresponding to the animals determines nothing as to their number. Comp. named. Just as the man's face in front is put on ver. 9. UMBREIT: "By means of the man's without this definition, so similarly the eagle's hands the mention of the bestial appearance is face also is not defined more exactly as being the meant to be weakened." With the "hands" the one behind. The definition nya at the close description will ascend to the "faces;" for just as on occasion of the hands, the "wings," as we applies to the man's face also, and besides, this saw, were very suitably mentioned "on their four latter is immediately preceded by the general sides," so, because the "four sides" are formed. Hengst. claims for it the east side, as by means of the four faces on each of the chajoth, being the principal side, for the lion on the right mention may be made of the "faces" as well as the south, for the ox on the left the north. The of the "wings" and they four had their faces and their wings (yan, as is known, from ya, "four," signifies the fourth part, or here: one side of four (ver. 17). The emphasizing of the number four down to the minutest detail is to be noted). Hav. connects the last words with vers. 9 and 10: "and as regards their faces and their wings in the four, their wings were," etc. Similarly Ewald. It cannot be objected to this, that here the topic is no longer the faces; even in position of the eagle behind shows (as against Hengst.) a background pointing higher up. Comp. the introductory remarks to vers. 4-28. The right and left of the description may be fixed either with respect to the man's face, or to the quarter of the heavens (, south side, just as So, north), or to the prophet. As to the meaning of the faces,-the part of the body which, as may be understood, is capable of expressing more than any other what is characteristic, and that in the way that is most spirited, most in accordance with the idea in view,-see the introductory remarks to vers. 4-28. BÄHR: The ox (bull), the symbol of the generative, creative power of God; the lion, the symbol of the royal majesty of the Sovereign and Judge; the eagle, the symbol of the divine omnipresence and omniscience; man, the symbol of the absolute spirituality of God, of the divine wisdom. GROTIUS: Man denoting the goodness, the lion the wrath (punitive justice) of God, the eagle His swiftness to do good, the ox His slowness to wrath. BOCHART: The ox the emblem of constancy and firmness; man, of humanity, gentleness, and averia; the lion, of generosity and strength; the eagle, of vigour, and of the sublimity of a heavenly nature. DE WETTE: The strength, power, wisdom of God, and His nearness. UMBREIT: The reason, sovereignty, creative power, and omnipresence of God. (What becomes of the veto of the second commandment ! ?) Ver. 11. The description, which might now have done with the "faces," nevertheless repeats them (remaining, as they certainly do, the principal subject),—at ver. 8 in moving upwards, now in coming down to the lower parts-along with the wings: ' '), which Häv., Klief., Keil rightly refuse to translate: "and (these are) their faces; and their wings were (HENGST.), since the clause belongs rather to what follows, as already Ewald has taken it, inasmuch as the faces also were separated (the root-meaning of 77,-"spread out," because of the reference to the nearer □) “from above" (by, which likewise gives greater prominence to this reference), i.c. were not (à la Janus) on the same head, but on four heads, or rather necks. EWALD: "Both faces and wings not hanging down loosely, but stretched upwards." In this way an act of worship is depicted in the heads, just as a soaring is intended to be expressed by means of the wings.-With the reference to the wings, by means of which the description goes downwards, there is a return to what has already been said (ver. 9), but it is conceived of more definitely, and joined with new matter. Every one (not of the four chajoth, but of what is spoken of in ver. 10, viz. the four faces, inasmuch as the description gives what the prophet saw, who, standing before each of the four faces, always beheld two wings, alike on the right and on the left, joined to one another) had two joined, viz. wings, either belonging to or as Keil : ", an abbreviation for the , found in ver. 9. The meaning is clear, according to ver. 9. Since, then, the joining is expressed only as regards the four pairs of wings (in all) above, which together represent a square, the pairs of wings lower down are to be conceived of without such connection, each with its neighbour, which would also have no object. With these pairs of wings the chajoth covered their bodies. properly belly, denotes the body in this respect. As this is covered, the conjecture readily suggests itself, that it is conceived of neither as feathered nor as covered with hair, hence not like an animal, but likewise after the similitude of a man. BUNSEN: "which served for covering the body, and are to be conceived of as before and behind." UMBREIT: "in order to show their holy fear and reverence.' Comp. Isa. vi. 2, where, however, this [ne videant] seems to be expressed by the covering of their faces; while the covering of the feet there, corresponding to the covering of the bodies here [ne videantur], symbolizes the profound distance of the creature. Ver. 12. The lower part being now quite reached, taking up what has been said in ver. 9, their going, their movement is described, but along with the mention of the moving principle. Ver. 4 (comp. there) ¡y , here, which in any case does not denote the wind. HITZ. : the instinct, which does not suit the human element of the chajoth; but also not the will or the like (UMBREIT: "most unrestricted freedom"), since it is exactly such a movement that is meant to be set aside throughout the whole context. The spirit is conceived of manifestly according to its divine reference and power of influencing, although not as the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of Christ. Comp. vers. 20, 21. (HENGST.: "The life-breath of God, who dwells in the creature, and leads it according to the laws which He prescribes for it, to the ends which He sets for it.-Num. xvi. 22.") All quarters of the world are facing them, whether they go backward or forward, to the right or to the left. The facility of movement given in this way is-by means of the fastening of the wings outwardly, by means of "the spirit" (absolutely), i.e. "the spirit of the living creature (vers. 20, 21) inwardly-united to the whole. chajoth, going back to ver. 5, merely adds what Ver. 13. The completed description of the corresponds to the n of ver. 5: out of the midst of the fire, their appearance was first of all in themselves: like kindled coals (from S, to kindle) of fire, burning. Is it primarily as depicting the lightning of the kindled wrath of God (following Ps. xviii. 8)? or is it to be referred specially to the eyes of the chajoth? (GROT.: "after God's long patience, eager for vengeance."―y cannot easily be referred with Bunsen to n. The accumulation of synonymous expressions is still more unmistakable than the gradation of the same remarked by Häv.; it is rather like a movement from the beginning of the fire to its rising up like flames, and to its breaking forth in lightning (Gen. xv. 17). TES (λaμzádis, lampas, lamp) is that which sends up light in motion, that which sends forth flame ready resembles lightning. may, in accordquickly, flickeringly toward us; hence what alance with the fiery element of all these comparisons, and where the chajoth themselves come forth from the fire, be looked upon as that to which refers. So Keil, Ewald. It can neither refer to , by reason of the meaning, nor to (masc.), for a linguistic reason. Hengst. correctly remarks that the fire appears separated from the living creatures (ver. 4). forms the power that gives the keynote, just as the spirit is the moving principle. And along with this the brightness is emphasized, as in ver. 4 also. Comp. there.- and confirm the reference of It given above. Pra, from to break through, to break forth light-faces of the chajoth. Each being always between ning, denoting the threatening effect outwards. (Hofm. compares Gen. iii. 24.) two faces of the separate chajoth on the right and on the left, the four wheels formed an outer Ver. 14. Next we have the appearance of the square round the four chajoth. First of all movement of the chajoth. 11, infin. Ezekiel had to say, although in general merely, absol. for the finite verb, here with the noun- where, in what position as regards the chajoth he subject (GESEN. Heb. Gram. p. 215, BAGSTER'S saw the wheels; the relative position of wheel" edit.). A mere indication of what they did, not and chajoth took the precedence, not "the naa "short description" as well (Ew.). 7, from ture of an individual wheel," which would be NY, according to Häv.: an Aramaistic the case, according to Häv., Maurer, Klief., if form. Their, however, was no D, their were to be referred to DN: "according to its fourfold face," equivalent to: "with fourfold return (i.e. going back) no turning. Comp. on face,"-for then we should have here already the vers. 9, 12.-pia only here, in sound like pa wheel within a wheel specially mentioned, which in ver. 11, akin in meaning also, but not identical comes after in ver. 16. As to the meaning of the with it, Hav., Hengst. : wheels, comp. the introductory remarks to vers. "spark-fire;" Klief., 4-28. How little in this connection the basinKeil: denoting the zigzag of lightning. It is perhaps meant to be an individualizing of the lightning. Vers. 15-21.-The Wonderful Wheels upon the stands of 1 Kings vii. come into consideration, the Vers. 4-14, which contain the first vision which Ezekiel saw, hang directly suspended between heaven and earth; there is need of connection alike with what is above and with what is below. The fire-cloud, as regards the spirit of the storm which impels it, and out of its midst the fire-named. Hengst. indicates very correctly the picture of the chajoth, as regards the principle"impression as a whole" as being that of "a which moves them, are certainly governed from kind of vehicle, in which the Lord took the place a higher region, and are no less certainly destined of the charioteer, the living creature the place for the earth. It is, in the first place, this latter of the chariot, the wheels lowermost, as usual destination which is furnished by vers. 15-21. in a chariot. Züllig, in his pamphlet The Ver. 15 introduces the second vision in a way Cherubim - Chariot (Heidelb. 1832), fears that similar to that in which ver. 4 introduces the "these wheels, standing there detached, might first. perhaps also some day roll away by themselves, and leave the throne standing," and therefore adopts the supposition, referring to 1 Kings vii. (like Vitringa before him), of a connection with the wheels, in opposition to which Umbreit: "the prophet was in spirit for the spirit, but not for the eye." But the fact that it is said: and I saw the living creatures, and, behold, a wheel, brings into immediate prominence the connection, which what follows will have to bring out in detail and to give the reason for. The wheel shows itself , which is not to be thought of, with Kliefoth, in the case of the chajoth also, for these, forming as they certainly do the kernel of the Ver. 16. The general is followed by the special. cloud, are to be conceived of rather as being above-Make, not the material of which, but: the the earth. There is thus for the second vision, way in which they were made, added to the in its look towards the earth (and the historical appearance, because we are dealing here not with scene of events), a repetition of the idea, which what is living-ys, comp. on ver. 4.-, was symbolized at the close by the movement of "the chrysolite, which with the ancients unthe chajoth. The simplest, most natural sym-doubtedly had a yellow colour" (BAHR, 10. 9). bolism of this idea, i.e. in reference to earthly" Probably of clear fire' (HITZIG). Perhaps affairs, is the wheel, appearing as it does as mere from Tartessus, a Phoenician possession in Spain motion, which only waits for the moment (comp. (similarly, for gold of Ophir). But whether ch. x. 13, 2). This is, as regards the idea, the connection of the in no wise " disturbing is it so named because from thence, or on account of its solidity? The probable root, T: with ; and in accordance with this (not linking together of the second and primarily), means, according to the Arabic: to be earthly vision with the first, that connection is hard, solid (comp. ); the word formed also localized by means of, not="neighbourhood" (HITZIG), but beside.-As one wheel by doubling the third radical, as so frequently, is spoken of, so also the chajoth in the vision are means a fortified place, fortress. Spain is, howconceived of together as a unity; hence the sin-ever, rich in precious stones. It is said to be the gular suffix 15. So already the Syriac. Nor modern topaz (gold-topaz), which commonly has are sixteen wheels meant to be indicated, with reference to each of the four faces of each of the four chajoth, but four wheels (ver. 16, ch. x. 9), corresponding to the four front sides, the human Häv.: An intensification of the thought of the power and fulness of life by means of the wheels, where the form must give way entirely to the essence, to the idea. small four-sided columns, whose surfaces are again divided into two, and which also appears bluish and quite white; according to Hengst. the jasper, which, however, has mostly a beautiful red, and also a brown and green colour. The chrysolite is pistachio-green, beautifully transparent and shining. That they four had one likeness, i.e |