Preface
The name YHWH is unique among divine names in Jewish tradition. The most commonly used divine name in the Bible, YHWH was acknowledged already in rabbinic literature as the single proper name for God, a status granted neither to biblical terms such as Elohim, El, Shaddai, or Sabaoth1 nor to later ones such as the Holy One, Blessed be He, Makom, and Master of the Universe. Prohibitions and taboos that pertain to writing and articulating this name bear witness to its special status, as does its liturgical supremacy. Moreover, the connection between God and Godās name has been intensified by persistent efforts of thinkers in various periods to interpret the Name, to uncover its meanings, and to utilize these meanings to construct a theoretical discourse on the divine. In this book I examine several chapters in the history of these efforts from biblical to medieval times. In so doing, I attempt to provide a single conceptual key for unlocking all interpretations of YHWH in Jewish tradition through many historical periods and across diverse genres. This conceptual key draws on the treatment of proper names in the modern philosophy of language, which center on the distinction between description, which means speaking about God through His proper name, and designation, which involves speaking to God through His name.
The Question of Divine Names
Investigating the meaning of the divine name YHWH, which is the focus of this study, must be preceded by a fundamental question: why does a single God even need a name? In a polytheistic world populated by many gods, the names of various deities function (among other things) as definite expressions, like any proper name. Thus, any pantheon must include not only numerous gods but also their numerous proper names (and even family names). Such a polytheistic setting may account for the fact that the single God of Abrahamic religions has a proper name. Monotheism, in its various forms, developed in idolatrous environments. Judaism grew against the backdrop of polytheistic Egypt, Canaan, Midian, and Mesopotamia. Christianity, although rooted in Judaism, evolvedāboth politically and theologicallyāthrough continuous, close contact with pagan societies, both Roman and Hellenistic Mediterranean. Islam, which emerged centuries later, also had to carve out its own space against Jahili surroundings, as attested to by both historical documents and the Quran. In such a context, divine names could serve to tell the one true god apart from other contemporary deities, false as they may be. Yet these functional considerations do not exhaust the full meaning of divine names in monotheistic religions, even in their initial stages, when fighting idolatry was paramount.
For monotheists, the name of the single God not only identifies Him uniquely among a plurality of deities but also represents Him in a variety of ways. In fact, the significance of the divine name actually grew after the polytheistic setting ceased to be relevant. As a word representing God, His name became a locus of revelation in language. The name became a site in which the sublime is revealed in the earthly, the transcendent in the immanent. Nonetheless, the significance of divine names varies among the three monotheistic religions. In Christianity, earthly representations of the divine largely focus on Jesus the Son, and especially on the religious role and significance of the icon. The name of the Father has remained, as a rule, an issue for scholastic theology. In Islam, while divine names are central to religious life and thought, religious practice revolves mainly around Allahās 99 names, all of which are attributes rather than proper names. The name Allah itself is the subject of lively debate among traditional Muslim thinkers and modern scholars, who are divided over whether it is a proper name or a descriptive expression (much like Elohim in Hebrew). Although Islam and Christianity attach great importance to divine names, this work centers on the distinctive significance attributed to the issue in Judaism.
In Judaism, Godās proper name lies at the very heart of religious language. The divine name serves as the closest representation of God in language; as a written object, it is also the most important graphic and physical representation of Him. Thus, attitudes toward the Name become attitudes to God Himself; sanctification, sacrilege, fear, and love are transposed from God to His name. The divine name YHWH is so central to Jewish tradition that He is routinely referred to as ha-shem, literally āThe Nameā. Indeed, after Judaism was relieved of direct confrontation with concrete paganism, the obvious reasons for God having a proper name disappeared. Yet, despite this disappearance, or perhaps precisely because of it, the divine name became the central object of religious contemplation, speculation, fear, and desire.
The Many Interpretations of the Name YHWH
An investigation into the meaning of words, and especially proper names, usually begins with their etymology and morphology. Unlike other appellations assigned to God in Jewish tradition, YHWH has neither a simple etymology nor a clear-cut morphology. Moreover, although the correct articulation of YHWH became a form of esoteric knowledge by the end of the Second Temple period, the Name retained its dominance in text. In writing, YHWH appears tied to the verb hyh or āto beā in Hebrew, a connection already noted in intra-biblical exegesis. At the burning bush, Moses receives this name when God introduces Himself with what is likely a permutation of YHWH: āEhyeh asher ehyehā, often translated as āI AM THAT I AMā. Later, this link was officially acknowledged when shem havayah, āthe Name of Beingā, became the term denoting YHWH.
The combination of morphological oddity, no exoteric tradition of correct pronunciation, and possible etymological proximity to the Hebrew verb āto beā may have contributed to the prolific hermeneutics of YHWH throughout Jewish history. Yet, while some commentaries address morphology and etymology, almost all treat YHWH with much richer conceptual, semiotic, historical, and hermeneutic tools.
It is possible, therefore, to understand from polytheistic backgrounds why a singular God has a proper name, although He seemingly does not need to be distinguished, and that the peculiar etymology of YHWH may have situated the name as an object of unusual speculation. However, this does not account for the abundance and variety of interpretations offered for the Name, nor for the exceptional volume of this interpretive project. After all, names do not need to have meaning beyond their referent in order to function properly; arguably, getting from reference to referent merely requires agreement among interlocutors.
The argument that informs this work is an attempt to solve this conundrum. Precisely because investigating the meaning of a proper name seems superfluous, I suggest the following: that charting the various interpretations of YHWH is charting the project of exploration into the very possibility that a lingual object can refer to God, and the theological horizons that emanate from this possibility. These investigations divide into two types of questions: what can one learn about God from His name, and what possibilities can this name offer for speaking to God. From this perspective, there is not only an inner logic to the project of investigating the possibilities in naming God and the special connections between God and His name but also philosophical and theological value. Philosophers have been grappling with the referential relationship between names and named entities since Plato. They have tried to decipher the enigmatic process by which words in general, and specifically names or nouns, become attached to things in the world. How a word can distinguish what we commonly refer to as āGodā is especially mysterious. The relationship between language and things is one issue; the relationship between language and God is another altogether and, in fact, may not even exist.
This book traces the meaning of the name YHWH throughout three major stages of Jewish thought: the Hebrew Bible, rabbinic literature, and medieval philosophy and mysticism. It provides the first part of a panoramic picture of the divine name YHWH in Jewish tradition. This picture is more than an amalgam of loosely related discussions; it is a means of unfolding Jewish theology and its history in full, in light of YHWHās central role in all strands of Jewish tradition, in both text and practice. Analyzed through the lens of the philosophical debate over naming, the repeated attempts to interpret the name YHWH express an ongoing effort to trace the relationship between God and language. Pondering the name of God becomes a way of demarcating the boundaries of the relationship between man and God, marking the latterās presence among the former, and investigating the possibility of promoting such presence through language.
Proper Names: A Philosophical Outline of the Problem
To explore the meaning of Godās name, let us first define proper names. Proper names denote individual and discrete things in reality. On a functional level, we use proper names to pick out a specific object from the multiplicity of things, just as we can refer to a unique object by using a common noun coupled with a demonstrative. For example, we can refer to a particular building in a particular city if we point at it and say āthis buildingā. We could, however, achieve the same specificity and identify that building by using a proper name, such as āthe Empire State buildingā. Proper names are a means of referring to individual things even when those things are not available for direct (or deictic) designation. They are linguistic entities that are used for distinction and can function regardless of the speakerās specific context. Unlike āthis xā, they denote the individual thing in any time and place. This quality is what makes a proper name the clearest representatives of the named object in language. The relation of a proper name to the object it names is so strong, indeed almost indivisible, that, at least in language, the two become identical. It is this identity that evokes the essential question regarding the nature of proper names: how, exactly, do...