Conditional Presence: The Meaning of the Name YHWH in the Bible

Abstract

This chapter discusses the meaning of YHWH in the Bible, with specific attention devoted to the two theophanies which tie God’s revelation to a proclamation of His name: one in Exodus 3 and the other in Exodus 32–34. Combining philological, literary, and comparative tools, the chapter reads these theophanies as asserting that the Name encapsulates an essential tension of religious covenantal relationships—the yearning for proximate divine presence versus its intrinsic danger. In contrast to most readings which tend to highlight one specific side of this tension, I argue that God’s name in the Bible integrates both by promising an ongoing divine presence, while reflecting a concern regarding God’s indeterminate character as He who always becomes and changes.

Furthermore, the chapter underscores how the Bible interprets YHWH’s descriptive content as disclosing the possibility of using this very name as an indicative-designating means to address God. In so doing, the Bible functions as an origin of this unique combination of descriptive and indicative positions, which would later continue to develop within the Jewish tradition.

“Bible” relates here and in the following to what is commonly known as the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible. Biblical citations in the book are taken from the JPS 1917 edition, with alteration of divine names when necessary.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Possible Semitic Contexts for the Etymology of YHWH and Ehyeh

One of the fundamental questions about the meaning of the name YHWH in the Bible, particularly given its explicit link to the name Ehyeh, is its linguistic function. More precisely, the question of the name’s etymological meaning depends on whether it is a verb in some form. Let us use as our point of departure the assumption that YHWH does not derive from a verb. For instance, according to an Ugaritic text from Ras Shamra in which a god refers to his son as yw-ilt and immediately proceeds to call him ym, several scholars have identified YHWH with the Ugaritic sea god ym or yammu.⁷⁶ Yet as this reference to yw appears only once, and as the Ugaritic text contains no indication of ties between this name and a verb form such as YHWH, this proposal has been rejected by the leading body of scholarship.⁷⁷

Another nominal possibility is that YHWH is a form of ritual invocation. One option is to read the first syllable, YH, as a vocative such as the Arabic “ya” (يا). According to this thesis, YHWH is a portmanteau of the invocation “ya hu” (O He!).⁷⁸ Support can be found in the frequent interchangeability between the pronoun “he” (hu) and the shortened version of the deity’s name in theophoric names. For example, Avihu (אביהוא) is interchanged with Aviel, Avia, and Avihu (אביהו); Elihu is interchanged with Elia and Eliahu. In this context, the theophoric name Yehu is particularly interesting, as it can be read as Ya-hu or Yo-hu. Also, several biblical verses present God as “ani hu” (“I am He”), sometimes together with the expression “anochi YHWH” (“I am YHWH”). For example:

Ye are My witnesses, saith YHWH, and My servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He [my emphasis]; before Me there was no God formed, neither shall any be after Me. I, even I, am YHWH; and beside Me there is no saviour. I have declared, and I have saved, and I have announced, and there was no strange god among you; therefore ye are My witnesses, saith YHWH, and I am God. Yea, since the day was I am He [my emphasis], and there is none that can deliver out of My hand; I will work, and who can reverse it?⁷⁹

These examples, along with the pronoun (הואהא) that replaces the name YHWH in the paraphrase of Isa. 40:3 in the Dead Sea Scrolls, may indicate that the pronoun “he” (hu) was indeed an original component of the etymology that formed the name YHWH, and therefore is often used as a substitute for this part of the Name.⁸⁰ Yet a more cautious examination of the pronoun in these theophoric names shows that the theophoric element remains even when yehu or ya is replaced with hu. For instance, the name Elia means “Yah is my god”, while Elihu means “He is my god”. The same applies to Avia, Aviel, and Avihu. The pronoun hu (“he”) is certainly not divine in these names, nor a substitute for God’s name in the strictest sense. Here, it is a regular pronoun indicating a particular god, not through use of His proper name but rather as a determiner. The name Yehu makes this argument clear. It is hard to read hu here as a substitute for part of the name YHWH, as in this case, the theophoric name would consist of a double repetition of the name YHWH. It makes more sense to read “ani hu” not as a noun phrase but rather as a verb phrase that contains the verb HWH in present tense, singular.⁸¹

Many scholars have attempted to trace the origins of the name YHWH to Amorite theophoric names. The Mari tablets contain theophoric names such as yawi-il, yawi-addu, yahwi-nasi, yawi-dagan, and yahwi-il, which can be interpreted in several ways. They may be short sentences conveying a wish or an invocation, such as “may He be a god”. Or, they can be read as identity sentences meaning “God is yawi”. Such an identity sentence could translate as “God makes things live” or “God makes things exist”. Several scholars have read these names as indications that YHWH served to describe various gods, and especially a god in Amorite theology at the turn of the second millennium BCE⁸²—an argument that is hard to validate historically. Yet even if we do not accept the claim that the Israelite faith in YHWH originated in a verb form that came from the Amorites, these names may still contain a Semitic verbal form from which the Hebrew name YHWH was derived. What do yawi and yahwi mean, then?

These theophoric Amorite names exist in Akkadian transcription—a language that does not contain the letter “h” (he, in Hebrew). Therefore, yawi and yahwi may be the same name transcribed by different scribes. The Amorite “h” is often omitted in Akkadian transcriptions, and sometimes represented by the consonant h ̮a. It follows that yawi and yah ̮wi may derive either from the stem hwy/hwh, whose common meaning is to be or to become, or from the stem h ̮ wy/h ̮ wh, which means to live. In addition to exploring the stem root of both forms, identifying their derived stem (בניין) also requires reconstructing the Amorite grammar through the Akkadian filter that retained these forms. In the case at hand, the theophoric names may consist of the derived stem pa’al (בניין קל) in the Amorite language, yet may equally be forms of the derived stem hif’il (הפעיל). If the former is true, yawi and yah ̮wi would mean something like “will be” or “will live”. Yet if the latter is true, they belong to hif’il, which is a causative verb. The present-future forms of hif’il in the Amorite language are yaqtil and yaqtilu,⁸³ so that in stem roots that end in “h” (he) or “y” (yod), it is impossible to definitively distinguish pa’al from hif’il. Therefore, if yawi and yah ̮wi derive from hif’il, they mean “He causes to be/to become”, or “He will give life”. In this reading, these names relate to God as creator. The possibilities can be summed up as follows:

Table 2.1 Etymological possibilities in the Semitic context

It is also possible, however, that yawi and yah ̮wi do not share the same stem, or even the same derived root. De-Vaux and Friedman, for example, believe that while yah ̮wi is derived from the root h ̮wy in hif’il, meaning “one who gives life”, yawi is probably derived from the root hwy in pa’al, meaning “he will be”. If that is the case, yawi is the only name derived from hwy in this form in the Amorite language, but it may mirror other theophoric names in Akkadian, which mean “Ba’al exists” or “El exists”, derived from the stem bašu.⁸⁴

This range of possibilities also informs scholarly hypotheses about the link between the Amorite finding and the name YHWH. For example, Friedman believes that yaḫwi is the relevant form to interpreting YHWH. He holds that YHWH is a form of the root hwh in hif’il, meaning “the one who causes to become”. Accordingly, Ehyeh asher ehyeh should be read as ahyeh asher ahyeh, meaning “I am the one who causes or creates the becoming of what I cause to become”. The shortened form ahyeh is therefore: “I am the one who causes becoming, who makes things be”.⁸⁵

Cross’ reading does not rely on such a model of the Name as a nominal sentence,⁸⁶ but does view it as a name that relates to God as creator. Cross reads the Name as the root hwy in the derived stem hif’il. He argues that its origins lie in the nominal sentence ēl du yahwi, meaning “El that is the creator”, which permutated into yahwi du yahwi and finally Ehyeh asher ehyeh. Every one of these interpretations raises a set of problems, whether philological or historical. Yet, for our purposes, their drawback is their shared methodology, which is an attempt to reconstruct an understanding of the name YHWH in the Bible, based on extra-biblical Semitic findings.

Appendix 2: The Term “Name” (shem) in the Bible

The term “name” appears, in various forms, more than 800 times in the Bible. It is beyond the scope of this study to offer a comprehensive view of its varying meanings and contexts.⁸⁷ However, exploring the name YHWH requires an examination of the various meanings accorded to names in biblical literature, as many—or most, in Psalms and in the books of the prophets—relate directly to God and to His proper name, YHWH.

One basic sense in which the term “name”/shem appears in the Bible relates to a proper name of a particular individual. Many of the books in the Bible, and especially Genesis, indicate an individual’s proper name with the term “name” (shem), which at times relates to the proper name only,⁸⁸ and at others to the naming event. Names are often followed by an etiological explanation⁸⁹ that is connected to a person’s birth, a wish of the parents, or a prophetic message. Unlike the etiologies of names in Mesopotamian literature,⁹⁰ biblical etiological equivalents often blur the meaning of names as purveyors of the essence, or essential qualities, of the referent, either by grounding their etiology in an event that relates to the giver of the name rather than to its bearer (e.g. the names of Leah’s children), or by offering an etiology that does not match the form of the name itself.⁹¹ In contrast, changes of an individual’s name often include an etiological interpretation that is related to altering his calling or essence.⁹²

This intrinsic tie between proper names and their referents leads us to the second meaning of names—their role in declaring the very existence of their bearer, as indicated in Ps. 83:19: “That they may know that it is Thou alone whose name is YHWH, the Most High over all the earth”. The name can play an existential role even beyond the lifetime of its bearer and conveys his existence even after death, as shown in the laws of levirate marriage in Deut. 25:6: “And it shall be, that the first-born that she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother that is dead, that his name be not blotted out of Israel”.⁹³ The terms “name” and “memory” (זכר) are used interchangeably to describe the special way in which a proper name denotes the existence of its bearer, which attests to his concrete existence but can also go beyond it. This fact finds positive expression in Exod. 3:15: “this is My name for ever, and this is My memorial unto all generations”. However, it also has negative ramifications, such as the obligation not only to annihilate Amalek but also to erase his name and all memory of him: “for I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven” (Exod. 17:14).⁹⁴

Proper names, then, do more than distinguish between individuals and can often convey real content concerning their bearers, such as their beliefs and collective identity⁹⁵ The fact that a proper name can reveal meaningful information about its bearer is made clear in exchanges between biblical characters and angels.⁹⁶ Both Jacob and Manoah inquire after the angel’s name and receive a similar reply: “Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name?” (Gen. 32:30); “Wherefore askest thou after my name, seeing it is hidden?” (Judg. 13:18). The angels are reticent as they do not wish to divulge important information about their identity, and perhaps even do not want to give Manoah and Jacob access to the potential magical power of knowing their names. They do not aim to stay unnamed, but rather unknown. The description that Abigail gives David of Nabal is an extreme expression of this view: “for as his name is, so is he: Nabal is his name, and churlishness [nevela] is with him” (1 Sam. 25:25). A person’s name may disclose his essential feature, although not necessarily.

Yet proper names convey more than cognitive content concerning their referent. As a means of confirming the existence of a particular person, names are also an extension of their bearers, in several ways. First, we find that names appear in the Bible in the sense of reputation or glory. In the following verse, for example, Jeremiah prophesies the ruin of Moab, which will be all the more surprising given this nation’s powerful reputation: “Bemoan him, all ye that are round about him, and all ye that know his name; say: ‘How is the strong staff broken, the beautiful rod!’” (Jer. 48:17). However, most examples of this meaning of names relate to the name of God, for example: “I am YHWH, that is My name; and My glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images” (Isa. 42:8); “[b]ut in very deed for this cause have I made thee to stand, to show thee My power, and that My name may be declared throughout all the earth” (Exod. 9:16). Moreover, many of the Israelites’ supplications against punishment for their sins cite the potential blemish of God’s name-reputation as an argument against ruining or inflicting serious injury upon His people.⁹⁷

Names also serve as an extension of God in the sense that they imply the power of their bearer. The most prominent example occurs after the sin of the calf: God appoints an angel to accompany the Israelites on their sojourn through the desert, emphasizing the angel’s authority as His direct representative: “Take heed of him, and hearken unto his voice; be not rebellious against him; for he will not pardon your transgression; for My name is in him” (Exod. 23:21).⁹⁸ Another example appears in the exchange between David and Goliath, where David contrasts Goliath’s weapon with his own powerful tool—the name YHWH: “Then said David to the Philistine: ‘Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a javelin; but I come to thee in the name of YHWH of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast taunted’” (1 Sam. 17:45).⁹⁹

The four meanings of names we have examined thus far lead to another use: as a manifestation of the bearer’s presence, and specifically God’s presence.¹⁰⁰ The Deuteronomistic expression “cause His name to dwell there”¹⁰¹ implies the rationale of concentrating worship at a location of God’s choosing. Where God’s name dwells, God Himself is present, and therefore that is the only place to worship Him.¹⁰² Jeremiah informs us that YHWH’s presence, manifested in the presence of his name in the temple, was for many a guarantee and promise that the temple would remain eternal, regardless of their actions, as God is manifested among them through His name. Jeremiah—or, at the very least, in the Deuteronomistic parts of Jeremiah—contests the very notion that God’s name serves as a concrete testament to His presence.¹⁰³ The prophet has to remind his audience, who are convinced that God is present via His name, that He can remove His name and presence from the temple just as he did at Shiloh:

Behold, ye trust in lying words, that cannot profit. Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and offer unto Ba’al, and walk after other gods whom ye have not known, and come and stand before Me in this house, whereupon My name is called, and say: “We are delivered”, that ye may do all these abominations? Is this house, whereupon My name is called, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, I, even I, have seen it, saith YHWH. For go ye now unto My place which was in Shiloh, where I caused My name to dwell at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of My people Israel. And now, because ye have done all these works, saith YHWH, and I spoke unto you, speaking betimes and often, but ye heard not, and I called you, but ye answered not; therefore will I do unto the house, whereupon My name is called, wherein ye trust, and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh. (Jer. 7:8–14)

In Psalms, the name in the sense of divine presence appears time and again when God is praised as a result or expression of His believers’ close relationship with His presence. For example: “Glory ye in His holy name; let the heart of them rejoice that seek YHWH. Seek ye YHWH and His strength; seek His face continually” (Ps. 105:3–4). It also appears as God’s explicit presence in Isaiah (30:27): “Behold, the name of YHWH cometh from far, with His anger burning, and in thick uplifting of smoke”. In addition, in the story of the cleft in the rock (Exod. 33), several verses link God’s name to His panim/face, as interchangeable signs of His intimate presence.¹⁰⁴

That is not all. As God’s manifestation among His followers through His name plays such a central role in the biblical corpus, scholars have suggested that the term “name”, at least in the early texts that comprise the Bible and in those more closely influenced by the Canaanite perception of divinity, actually refers to concrete presence, even if it is local and limited, of God Himself. This view is based on what scholars of the ancient East call “nominal realism”, that is, the idea that there is an ontological connection between words and the things or actions they denote, which goes beyond mere representation. According to this approach, the name and its referent are identical in essence, so that the name can be a tangible, physical extension of the referent.¹⁰⁵ In keeping with this notion, B. Sommer recently argued that the issue of God’s corporeality does not really arise in the Bible, as the biblical terms “name”, “face”, and “angel” function much like in ancient Eastern literature, that is, to denote local, concrete appearances of divinity. Not only does the biblical God have a body, claims Sommer, He even has more than one. The difference between His body and that of humans is that God’s physicality is more fluid and can exist in more than one place at once, without being limited to a particular form. According to Sommer: “Yet shem or Name can also refer to a hypostasis, a quality or attribute of a particular being that becomes distinct from that being but never entirely independent of it”.¹⁰⁶

Some, therefore, read the term “name” not only as a vague symbol of God’s presence among His followers but as a concrete, physical manifestation of His presence in actual reality. Another reading of the word “name” challenges this view of it as a physical presence distinguished from the entirety of God. In this interpretation, textually, at least, the word “name” serves as a synonym for God, so there is no gap between talking about God—YHWH—and discussing His name. Examples abound, and suffice it to mention several of them: “And he shall stand, and shall feed his flock in the strength of YHWH, in the majesty of the name of YHWH his God” (Mic. 3:5); “YHWH answer thee in the day of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob set thee up on high” (Ps. 20:2); “And I will strengthen them in YHWH; and they shall walk up and down in His name” (Zech. 10:12); “for them that feared YHWH, and that thought upon His name” (Mal. 3:16); “There is none like unto Thee, O YHWH; Thou art great, and Thy name is great in might” (Jer. 10:6).¹⁰⁷