YBY's article/s on YHWH's Name pronunciation

[Zvi]

Shalom `alaikha Ya`aqov,

How about reposting your article/s on this topic which you posted
@Torath_Emeth?
I further suggest you make a YouTube clip which presents your claims
in this regard, including the rebuttals to NG's contentions.

YHWH `Imekha,
Zvi

[Zvi]

Shalom Yaaqov.

I have read most of the attached file, which you have inexplicably deleted in the meantime, and I wonder who this Jacob Metz is. From what I recall -- if you do not mind a personal observation -- your English name is not Jacob, yet it appears that this author used your own arguments.

Blessings in YHWH,

Zvi

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

My given name is Jacob Metz. Yaaqov ben Yisrael is a pseudonym I use for most of my on-line articles for various reasons. The article was one I wrote for my college English course. I deleted the file because after reading it I wasn't satisfied with it. I will make a few additions to it and repost it. I hope to have that one finished by yom rishon.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Chaverim,

 

 I must apologize for not having the PDF revised and uploaded. There was a few personal issues that had to be dealt with which left me very little time to work on it. I will try, emphasis on try, to have it done before this shabbath.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Chaverim,

 

 At present, I am not going to be able to complete the PDF. I will, however, complete the PDF and post it for everyone. Until that time, I would have no problems discussing the theories behind the pronunciation of the Divine Name. I will suggest that the discussion remain within the known parameters of Hebrew grammar. I would accept any theory which suggest YHWH is from any other Semitic language only upon proof positive that YHWH existed in those Semitic languages; this includes of course the known grammar of those languages. Cognates may be used suggestively, or as points of explanation. Any other rules of the discourse is welcome from those who wish to participate.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael  

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Chaverim,

 

 The first item, which I suggest, to be discussed is concerning the root of the Divine Name. Shemoth 3, 14-15 demonstrates the earliest explanation of the Name. In verse 14 it used the expression אהיה אשר אהיה as well as the short form אהיה which suggests a root from היה , while verse 15 uses the common form יהוה which suggests the root is from הוה .

 

Any comments or discussion is welcome.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Chaverim,

 

 The next issue which I suggest be discussed is if the Divine Name represents a noun or a verb form. This is very important as the pronunciation may change depending on if it is a noun or verb.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael 

[Zvi]

Shalom Yaaqov,

I do not understand the motivation for your proposal at all. You deliberated on this issue on several occasions, we have gone over it several times, and each time you settled on the resolution that Elohim's Name represents a verb form. What you are doing now seems pointless. What are you attempting to gain in this?

Zvi

[Zvi]

Shalom Yaaqov, 

I anticipated that certain things would get in the way. 

Since we have some time until the PDF's publication, how do you account for the facts that

a) the Samaritans pronounce the Name as Yahawa as stated by Montgomry in his work from over a century ago

and

b) it has been claimed that "pro-Namers", so to speak, among the Yemenite Jews pronounce His Name as "ahawa" which appears like a contortion of "Yahawa"

?

Do you find any merit for the "Yahawa" version? Beyond being noteworthy, I find these facts worthy of a serious discussion at least, including to ascertain they cannot successfully assail the version you have chosen and mine.

All glory to YHWH!

Zvi 

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Zvi,

 

 If I remember correctly, Montgomery based his opinion upon Theodoret's statement that the Samaritan's pronounced the name as IABE, and he also stated it was written in a Colophon, I think. If that is the case, and I have to admit I am going from memory here, then the IABE was not the pronunciation of the Samaritans concerning the Name, but how they pronounced the Letters in the Name: Yoot Eh Ba Eh. Even so, the Greek letters at the time of Theodoret were not the same which were understood by Josephus, because in Josephus' day, the Waw was written as Digamma and the He written as Epsilon, so the Name would have been written IEFE. So, if the Samaritans were pronouncing the Name proper and not simply the letters of the names, then the second Epsilon would have been pronounced as the Greek always represented the Yah sound as IA and not IE. The second Epsilon then would naturally take the hateph seghol as it was a guttural. The final Epsilon, in reality, would have represented the seghol He as a vowel letter, as is common in Hebrew grammar. Hence, the IABE of Theodoret would actually have been YeHeWeH and not Yahweh as Gesenius and some others have proposed.

 

The pronunciation of the 3rd imperfect of the HWH stative verb in Samaritan Hebrew is YHYH. The Waw is not used in this conjugation as it is in the Aramaic. Therefore, the HWH of the Samaritans is not the HWH in the Tenakh which makes the Name. This means that the Samaritan pronunciation of the HWH in the 3rd imperfect would be YaYeH or YaHYaH: which is similar to the Arabic YaHYa. This is different than the Name in Tenakh, orthographically as well as pronunciation. 

 

My opinion about the Name in Tenakh is based upon the orthography of Tenakh and the pointing of the Masoretes. The Name YHWH, as found in the Hebrew portions, is the Aramaic form of the Hebrew HYH. As such, it was used in the Hebrew portions specifically to differentiate between the Name and the 3rd imperfect Hebrew verb YHYH: remember the Name was originally EHYeH. This is why the YHWH is never used for the Name in any Aramaic portion of Tenach and, also, why the HYH is never used in the same Aramaic portions. So, the actual Hebrew Name of YHWH is YHYH=YiHYeH while the Aramaic, as proven by the pointing in Daniel, is consistently LeHeWeA/H. The Lamed prefix is exclusive to this verb and only in the Aramaic.

 

 

 The Yemini could be influenced by the Arabic pronunciation, which is not uncommon nor condescending. The Arabic HYY would be pronounced in the 1st person as AHYa and in the 3rd as YaHYa. As a side note, the Semitic HYH/HWH is not found in the Cana'anite languages outside Hebrew, there is no evidence it is used at the time of the Phoenician inscriptions. This verb is present in the Syriac and Babylonian and even in the Akkadian. The form EA, in Sumerian is DinGir, and was represented by an 8 pointed Star which was pronounced as En and An. It represented both Lord (En) and Sky (An). In the Akkadian, it represented EA and El. The Hittites used the same sign and pronounced it as Anu. The form EA is said to be Semitic in origin, coming from the Akkadian Semites and introduced by them into the Sumerian. It is interesting that the deity EA is the Lord of life giving water and that the Semitic word for flowing water was HYY. This is seen in the Hebrew phrase Mayim Hayyim. Even the Qur'an mentions that All living beings come from water (21:30). The form EA, if indeed it does represent the Semitic HYY, would have been inflected in the Akkadian 3rd imperfect as IHaYEh, which sounds very similar to the Hebrew EhYeH. The point is not to draw a connection between the Akkadian EA and YHWH, but to demonstrate that the Semitic HYY has been used to represent the Semitic deity who was the possessor of the Heavens and the Life Giver represented by Water. The Sumerian/Akkadian/Hittite sign for deity, sky, water, and Life is also found among the Egyptians in the form of 'ankh, a four pointed star which is often falsely described as a cross. The first of the Monotheistic reforms of Egypt was in the worship of Amun who was represented by the 'Ankh as the Existing One. Surely, this had an impact upon the Hebrews who lived in Egypt for four hundred years. I believe this is how they would have understood their own deity as the Existing One, EHYeH/YHWH, the Possessor of the Heavens and Earth, and the One Who Delivered them Through the Sea. Ok, enough digressing.

 

This is all simple supposition and deduction on my part. However, I stand by the pronunciation of the YHWH in the Hebrew text as is pointed by the Aramaic LHWH in Daniel.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Zvi]

Shalom again Yaaqov,

Sorry that I'm confused by your assertion that the actual Hebrew Name of YHWH is YHYH="YiHYeH" .

Does this mean that "YeHeWeH" is the second Aramaic name alongside "LeHeWei"?

Zvi

On Monday, July 1, 2013 10:38:52 AM UTC+3, Yaaqov Ben Yisrael wrote:

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Zvi,

 

 I believe that the Name in Hebrew would have been YHYH, the exact replication in Hebrew of the Aramaic YHWH and also the 3rd imperfect counterpart of EHYeH. The Name, as it appear only in the Hebrew Texts, is YHWH which is, I believe, Aramaic. It was given in the Aramaic for a purpose, that is to distinguish between the Name and the 3rd imperfect Hebrew form YiHYeH. This is precisely the reason that YHWH never appears in the Aramaic portions, HYH is not an Aramaic verb, but Hebrew. In the Aramaic, HWH is never used for the Name, but is utilized strictly as a stative verb.

 

 The Lamed prefix is exclusively for the HWH verb in the Aramaic, for the 3rd imperfect. It would not be so suspicious if the Lamed prefix appeared on other verbs as it does in the later Rabbinic Hebrew texts, but it does not appear on any other verb in the Tenakh. The conjugations of the verb HWH in Aramaic follows Hebrew conjugation except in the final syllable: tsere-He in Aramaic v/s seghol-He in Hebrew. The vowel-final Aleph and He are interchangeable in Aramaic. By returning the 3rd imperfect prefix (Yodh) to the conjugation of HWH it becomes YeHeWeA/H instead of LeHeWeA/H. It is the same word only the proper spelling is with the Yodh, not Lamed.

 

The message which was deleted, due to me losing internet connection, had the Elephantine and Hegira inscriptions which show the lamed prefix was not utilized for the HWH verb in Aramaic in everyday writing, rather this verb is spelled fully as YHWH in the imperfect. I will upload them again with this post.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Zvi,

 

 It is also interesting to note that in the Elephantine texts, the verb consistently ends with the vowel-final He as opposed to the El Hejra inscriptions which consistently use the vowel-final Aleph. The Elephantine texts are very interesting as they are from a complex in which the seemingly legitimate priests were exiled and reconstructed an illegitimate temple. They would have certainly been aware of how the HWH is used and how the form of the Name would have been. Although there are names which have the supposed Theophoric stems, YHWH is never used for the Name in those Aramaic texts except in a shortened form YH/W (not that I have found anyway), rather the Aramaic Elaha is used consistently, and not only in Egypt, but Arabia, Petra, Palmyre, and elsewhere. 

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Chaverim,

 

 One of the greatest hurdles that I have had to confront is whether or not the Name is a verb or a noun. This is not so easy to solve. On the one hand, the Name derives from a pa'al 1st and 3rd imperfect conjugation. On the other hand, the name is used in construct forms and appears with inseparable prepositions and etc. There are places where YHWH is preceded by the intensive 1st personal pronoun, Anoki, which seems a bit strange, because if the Name were a verb it would mean "I am He Is/Shall Be". However, this usage is found even in the early Semitic languages such as Ugarit for a monarch. Looking at some of the constructions, such as Akoki YHWH eloheikha I am He Is/Shall Be Your Deity (Shemoth 20, 2), the Name seems easily understandable as I am He Who Shall Be Your Deity.  However, there are places where the intensive personal pronoun Anoki is used with verbs, mainly participles, for instance in Shemoth 34, 10, Anoki Kareith berith I am cutting a covenant; this pronoun is never used with a 3rd imperfect form, but with participles and 1st perfect forms.

 

 In my research, I have found the proper inflection for the 3rd imperfect conjugation of HWH in the book of Daniel; YeHeWeA/H is naturally how this 3rd imperfect would be conjugated. I have also found that when a name is built upon a 3rd imperfect verb conjugation, the only change (from verb to noun) is in the final syllable. The final syllable, especially in the Lamed-He verbs, receives a qamets as opposed to the seghol-He which is common for the final syllable in Lamed-He verbs for example, the verb Yishweh is changed to Yishwah in Dev. H. Yam. Aleph 7, 30 and the verb Yishpeh is changed to Yishpah in Dev. H. Yam Alep 8, 16. Even in the Lamed-Guttural verbs, the normal patach is changed to a qamets when forming a noun from the 3rd imperfect as is the case for the verb yiftach (with patach) in Dev. 28, 12 is changed to Yiftach (with qamets) when it is used as a noun in Shofetim  11, 3. This demonstrates that if the Name were a noun as opposed to a verb, then the final syllable would of necessity have a qamets as is the norm for every other noun form built upon the 3rd imperfect in the Masoretic Text. Now the question arises, "What about the other vowels in the Name if it were a noun built upon the 3rd imperfect?"

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Chaverim,

 

 If it is assumed that the Name is a noun built upon the 3rd imperfect form, then the next question, naturally, is, "How are the preceding syllables inflected?" As I explained in the last post, if the Name is a noun, then the only changes would be in the final syllable as is demonstrated by other nouns derived from an imperfect 3rd. The syllabification of Hebrew words which is used by the Masoretic Tradition is as follows:

 

A. Short vowels prefer an open accented or a closed unaccented syllable;
B. Long vowels, changeable or unchangeable, prefer closed accented, or open pre-tonic syllables;
C. Hateph vowel prefer the pro-pre-tonic syllables containing the gutturals;
D. Vocal Shewa prefers the pro-pre-tonic syllables containing consonants other than gutturals.

 

 There is, however, another matter to consider; the presence of gutturals, Alef (א), He (ה), Chet (ח), Ayin (ע), and Resh (ר), as one of the stem radicals (the letters of the root) forces a change in the inflection that a syllable will take and also the vowels which will be used. An over-simplification of these rules are:

 

1) Gutturals prefer an "a" class vowel before and after;

2) Pa'al Imperfect Dynamic verbs prefer an "a" class vowel in the imperfect preformative prefix instead of the normal hireq of the imperfect preformative prefix (yi);

3) Pa'al Imperfect Stative verbs prefer a seghol in the imperfect preformative prefix instead of the normal hireq of the imperfect preformative prefix (yi);

4) The Hebrew verbs HYH (היה) and CHYH (חיה) are exceptions to these rules where the (yi) prefix is retained in the imperfect and the Peh-Guttural initial stem radical retains the silent Shewa.

 

 Based, then, on these rules, the 3rd imperfect stative verb HWH (הוה) becomes YeHeWeH (יֶהֱוֶה) when conjugated. This is demonstrated to be so based upon the Aramaic conjugation of the 3rd imperfect of HWH (הוה) found in Daniel and Ezra. If, as explained above, the only difference between the 3rd imperfect verb and nouns which are built upon them is the change in the final syllable, then the explanation for how the Name would be inflected as a noun built upon the 3rd imperfect of HWH (הוה) would be YeHeWaH (יֶהֱוָה).

 

 The conjugation of the Hebrew HWH (הוה), then, in the 3rd imperfect is YeHeWeH (יֶהֱוֶה) and the inflection of this as a noun would be YeHeWaH (יֶהֱוָה). It has been suggested by some etymologists, that the Name may have the vowels which are found in names such as Yeroham (יְרֹחָם) Shem. Aleph 1,1. Yeroham is built upon the noun form of a pu'al conjugation: yeruham (יְרֻחַם). The evident changes in the pu'al derived noun is the holem and Qamets as opposed to the qibbuts patach in the verb. This infelction would seem very strange for the Name because this conjugation is passive and would give the meaning of YeHoWaH as (He Was Made to Be); this would demand that the deity of Yisrael had a beginning.

 

 The vowels of YHWH, which are utilized in the Tenkah, are specifically used to represent the Name as to be pronounced as either Adonai or Elohim. When YHWH stands alone, the vowels of Adonai are transposed upon the Name. When, however, the Name precedes or follows Adonai, the vowels of Elohim are transposed upon the Name. This is proved by the different vowels which are found upon the Name as well as the use of these vowels in relation to how near YHWH is to Adonai. In the Tenakh, the following vowels are used in connection with YHWH:

 

יְהֹוָה (Y'howah) Used a total of 29 times

יֱהוִה (Yehwih) Used a total of 304 times

יֱהֹוִה (Yehowih) Used only once in Judges 16:28

יְהֹוִה (Y'howih) Used a total of 23 times

יְהוִה (Y'hwih) Used a total of 207 times

יְהוָה (Y'hwah) Used a total of 6, 268 times

 

 I performed a search of the Tenakh for words which had a He Waw Hireq combination. I found that, in the entire Tenakh, the only word which used the He Waw Hireq (הוִ) was the Name YHWH. In every instance, the Name was either preceded by, or followed by Adonai. There was one instance in which I found extremely interesting; in Tehillah 68, 21, the Name has not only a conjunction, but an inseparable preposition and is written weleiHWiH (וְלֵיוִה). This is interesting because in this instance the Name precedes Adonai. Naturally, this would mean that YHWH would carry the vowels of Elohim. The presence of the inseprarable preposition L' with the Tsere demonstrates that this indeed was the case. In Hebrew grammar, there is a special rule for prefixing inseparable prepositions to Elohim; instead of the normal vocal shewa, which the prepositions normally take, when they are prefixed to Elohim, the preposition takes a tsere and the aleph is quiescent. The similar is the case when prefixing a preposition to Adonai only, in that case, the preposition takes a patach as opposed to the normal vocal shewa. This is seen in every case that a preposition is prefixed to YHWH when the Name stands alone; the preposition always takes a patach. Another rule for inseparable prepositions, as well as the conjunction waw, concerns the prefixing of these prepositions to a word which has a vocal shewa as the first radical, for instance Yehudah. When, in these cases, an inseparable preposition is prefixed to these words, the prefix takes a hireq and the yodh is assimilated to the hireq. This means that the vocal shewa is never pronounced. When a preposition is prefixed to Yehudah, for instance L', it becomes LiHudah and not LiYehudah. This is never the case with YHWH; in every instance, the preposition takes a patach. This provides proof positive that the vowels used by the MT on YHWH were the vowels of Adonai and Elohim transposed upon the YHWH and that these vowels do not, in any way, represent any possible pronunciation of the Name as it appears in the MT. The Masoretes were simply abiding by the Rabbinical ordinance to prevent the pronunciation of the Name by anyone reading the Tenkah.

 

 What this means is that the vowels of YHWH, as is presently found in the MT, cannot represent the Name as a noun which would conform with the rules as a noun. The reason that the Name appears in construct forms and with preposition, etc. is because the Name represents the words Adonai and Elohim. In those places where YHWH is used in the construct, for instance YHWH Tsevaoth, YHWH always takes a qamets in the final syllable; this represented, to the reader, that YHWH was to be pronounced as Adonai and so the reader would read Adonei Tseva'oth (אֲדֹנֵי צְבָאֹות). A great example of this is found in Shem. Aleph 1,3 where the phrase is prefixed with a preposition; true to the MT tradition of the use of inseparable prefixes with YHWH, there is a patach on the preposition which identifies the YHWH is indeed to be read as Adonai. The result is that, in this place, the phrase is to be read as Ladonei Tsevaoth (לַאדֹנֵי צְבָאֹות); the patach naturally causes the aleph to become quiescent. Based upon this information, it is entirely plausible that the phrase originally could have been YeHeWeH Elohei Tsevaoth (יֶהֱוֶה אֱלֹהֵי צְבָאֹות) as it is found in places such as Tehillah  89, 9.

 

Ya'aqov ben Yisrael

[Zvi]

Shalom Yaaqov.

I do not know what others feel. As to me, I am now emitting a thunderous round of applause for your research and scholarship.

Zvi

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Zvi,

 

 Todah Rabbah, that means a lot because have worked very hard to solve this question of the pronunciation of the Name and I strive hard to become a knowledgeable in Biblical Hebrew. I need to work on my modern conversation Hebrew now and hopefully become fully conversant in it.

 

Again, Todah

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Zvi,

 

 I hope you now understand that as I research and learn, my opinions may change: this is inevitable. On the topic of the Name, I have been very careful to leave aside my personal opinions to real research and accepting the outcome, even if it contradicts my original opinions of the matter. When I first began this study, my opinion was the Name should have been YiHWeH or YiHWaH. Once I began to delve into this grammatically, for which I have been enriched without measure, I soon realized that this was impossible. This also led to my suspicion that YeHoWaH may not be accurate.

 

 For many years, I looked, researched, and studiously examined every Hebrew, Aramaic, and other Semitic grammar concerning conjugations of weak verbs, etc. I read a ton of research papers on the Name sub
mitted by many well known Semitic scholars. For a time, I could not decide if the Name was a noun or a verb; perhaps it was either. I then considered the possibility that it was indeed a noun because of the construct, prepositional prefixes, etc. In this case, I had to find out how the Name would be pronounced if it were a noun. For a period of time, I considered Nehemia's guess to have been correct, that YeHoWaH was right. As I pondered this, I decided to study how names are developed from verbs in Tenakh as well as the usages of YHWH in those construct places and why the prepositions carried those strange vowels. This is when I began, again, to question Nehemia's proposal. I arrived, finally, at my current opinions which I have posted. I intend to include all this research material in the PDF and republish it. On top of thais, I am going to submit it for peer review in the academic field.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael

[Zvi]

Again, shalom Yaaqov.

This is brilliant!

I would only add, for now, that the phrase "יהוה צבאות" was also derived from the fuller phrase YeHeWeH Elohai Ha-Seva'ot (יֶהֱוֶה אֱלֹהֵי הצְבָאֹות), as in Hoshe`a 12:6 -- וַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵי הַצְּבָאוֹת יְהוָה זִכְרוֹ.

Zvi

[Yaaqov Ben Yisrael]

Shalom Zvi,

 

 Thanks for the encouragement.

 

 Did you notice the vowel under the conjunction? There it is patach and not the hireq which is expected of the presence of vocal shewa (which proves there isn't one). Even the next verse has the Beiloheim . . . Thanks for the helps.

 

Yaaqov ben Yisrael