The Divine Names (3)

The Power Of Language:

Until this point we have spoken of prophecy as a method of encountering the Divine Presence; however, there is another way of arriving at the knowledge of God.  This is through the prophetic bequest, the acceptance of a prophet's testimony.  This indirect encounter with prophecy can indeed grant man certainty in his knowledge of God.  This experience is most apparent in the "secondary" phenomena which accompany prophecy.  If we think of prophecy as a fire, then these phenomena are the smoke which informs us of its presence.  These phenomena are known to us by various names: Kavod, Shekhina, Malkhut, Esh, and so on.  These were supernatural phenomena which appeared when the Divine Presence descended upon a person.

     As we have already seen, the theory of Kavod is an approach which explains that the prophetic vision takes place on a different level of reality.  Prophetic visions can be described as holograms which exist in a parallel stratosphere.  Man sees them; yet, they are not real in the physical sense of the word.  An audio tape or a video camera could not record the vision.  At the same time, these phenomena do exist and bear witness to the existence of prophecy.  Prophecy itself is entirely spiritual; however, it leaves a trail that we can perceive.

     This perceivable trail accompanies us in language as well.  Let me point out an important semantic phenomenon.  Many times, when the Scripture refers to the Tetragrammaton, the subject is often absent from the sentence.  When we say, "when the Ark was carried" we absent the subject in this manner.  The phrases "arise Lord" and "Return Lord" must be understood as: "arise, Ark of the Lord" and "Return, Ark of the Lord."  It is forbidden, indeed impossible, to relate phrases such as these to God; God does not sit or stand.  These phrases refer to the Ark, and the verses are merely written in shorthand, with the subject absented from the sentence.  In other examples the words "nation," "covenant," "Torah" and others are missing.  The reason for this style of writing is because the text is referring to phenomena which are specific to God.  Thus, when we say,"the nation of God" we refer to the Jewish nation which is consecrated to God, a nation which is different from the rest of the world.  We describe this connection grammatically through the connection to God's name.

I Will Be What I Will Be

Now we will move on to a name which God uses to "present" Himself to the nation in compliance with  Moses' request.  The divine name "Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh" (I will be what I will be) is clearly related to the Tetragrammaton.  However, the meaning of this name must be understood in its context.  Moses asks God for the divine name which he ought to use to present His message to the Jewish people.  Of course, Moses was not asking merely for a name.  He was asking for a definition of God's essence.  God answers with one word: "Eheyeh" (literally: I will be).  Man cannot attain an understanding of God's true essence.  The investigation of God's essence is completely beyond him.  Despite this, it is possible to fall into the illusion that man is capable of comprehending God's essence.  This is a dangerous illusion.  The true meaning of this name lies not in philosophy, but in history.  God accompanies the Jewish people throughout its history.  This is the meaning of the name "I will be what I will be:" I will be with the Jewish nation whenever they turn to me.

     It is on the stage of history that we feel the presence of God.

A-donai

We now reach the last divine name, the name depicting God's lordship: A-donai.  Rihal's interpretation is innovative and interesting.  The person experiencing a prophetic vision sees a being or a sight.  However, we do not address the vision but God who is hidden behind these phenomena.  To understand this, we must point out a common, but significant semantic phenomenon of using one word when we mean another (known as synecdoche).  For example, we speak of a person "without a roof over his head" when we mean a homeless person.  Although the two words do not have the same meaning, through the use of one word we refer to something else, while the word we use is merely related to the word we mean, or is a part of the concept we intend to convey.

     Rihal illustrates this by using the phrases which are connected to the Hebrew word "lev" [heart].  Thus when we say "va-yit'atzev el libo" [and He was saddened in His heart] or "amarti be-libi" [I said in my heart, i.e., to myself], we do not mean to refer to a specific organ called the heart.  We use this term in order to create an image of the "world" inside us, as though in this organ our souls, minds or feelings are reflected; therefore, when we say "heart" we mean our souls, minds or feelings.  Of course, we cannot really suggest the intellect through an organ, since it is not located in a specific place.  However, our feelings are expressed through the heart, and we can say that the heart feels.  The soul exists or acts in the entire body; yet, we attribute its location to the heart.

     Consequently, we must divide our experiences into two groups.  According to Rihal, the distinguishing element between the two  must be the level of immediacy and directness of the encounter with God.  God affects many things indirectly.  Thus, on a deep level, God is the one who made the car which I see before me; however, I can create an illusion that the car was man-made.  Man is a link in an immense chain of causes, which brought this car into being.  However, regarding other things, the heavens for example, the chain is much shorter.  The cosmic phenomena are not in our hands; they are in the hands of God.  Because of the immediacy and directness of the relationship between God and the heavens, we use the term "God in heaven," or to use the Rihal's excellent example, "Fear of heaven."  Here is another example of the way language expresses one idea through another related word.  We appeal to the heavens, but of course we are actually appealing to God.  We do not fear the heavens, we fear the One who rules over them.

(This lecture was translated by Gila Weinberg.)