hmm, never noticed that before

[cellio]

The torah uses different names for God in different places, with the most common being Elo[k]im and the tetragramaton (yud - hey - vav - hey). When I've been paying attention they've been distinct -- the first creation story is the E-name, the revelation at Sinai is the Y-name, and so on.

In preparing this week's portion (specifically the binding of Yitzchak) I've noticed something odd. The God who commands Avraham to sacrifice his son is the E-name, and Avraham uses that name when he tells Yitzchak that God will provide the sacrificial animal (there's some nice ambiguity here, but that's a tangent). Then, when the angel intervenes, it's suddenly an angel of the Y-name, and Avraham names the place "awe of Y-name".

Is the mingling of these two names in a single passage common and I haven't been paying enough attention? Is it uncommon but random/not meaningful? Uncommon but meaningful in some way?

Comments

[ralphmelton.livejournal.com]

I have a book called "Who Wrote the Bible?" that talks about the documentary hypothesis. The basic idea is that there were multiple texts that were woven together.

[cellio]

I know about the theory (though I haven't read that book); I had just expected the chunk size to be a little larger. Not always, I guess. (Mind, the hypothesis also isn't universally accepted.)

[ralphmelton.livejournal.com]

I'd happily loan it to you; I found it a quick and engaging read.

The chunk size does get down to a single verse or less (according to that book). For example, in Genesis 7, Friedman assignes verses 1-5, 7, 10, 12, 17-20, 22, 23 to the J text, and 6, 8, 9, 11, 13-16, 21, 24 to the P text.

Also, I found a bit in the book specifically relevant to this passage:

"The story of the near-sacrifice of Isaac is traced to E. It refers to the deity as Elohim in vv. 1,3,8, and 9. But, just as Abraham's hand is raised with the knife to sacrifice Isaac, the text says that the angel of Yahweh stops him (v. 11). The verses in which Isaac is spared refer to the deity as Yahweh (vv. 11-14). These verses are followed by a report that the angel speaks a second time and says, "... because you did not withhold your son from me...." Thus the four verses which report that Isaac was not sacrificed involve both a contradiction and a change of the name of the deity. As extraordinary as it may seem, it has been suggested that in the original version of this story Isaac was actually sacrificed, and that the intervening four verses were added subsequently, when the notion of human sacrifice was rejected (perhaps by the person who combined J and E). Of course, the words "you did not withhold your son" might mean only that Abraham had been willing to sacrifice his son. But still it must be noted that the text concludes (v. 19), "And Abraham returned to his servants." Isaac is not mentioned. Moreover, Isaac never again appears as a character in E. Interestingly, a later midrashic tradition developed this notion, that Isaac actually had been sacrificed. This tradition is discussed in S. Spiegel's The Last Trial (New York: Schocken, 1969; Hebrew edition 1950)."

I can't stand behind any of this, of course. I'm just excited by being able to participate in one of your theological questions.

[cellio]

Thanks for passing that on. It sounds like an interesting book, so I'll take you up on that offer when it's convenient for you.

I understand the "did not withhold" bit as meaning he was ready to do the deed. I've heard that there are midrashim where the angel isn't in time to prevent it; presumably there's resurrection involved, since Yitzchak continues to have a role.

"And Abraham returned to his servants." Isaac is not mentioned.

I was about to quibble over a plural verb, but on more careful reading that one refers to Avraham and the two boys he brought along. I previously had the impression that Avraham and Yitzchak came down from the mountain -- and then Yitzchak got out of there as expediently as possible. But maybe not!

I'm just excited by being able to participate in one of your theological questions.

I'm glad you can too! (It's funny -- when you write on many topics as I do, you never know until people speak up who's interested in which topics. So I know I have a lot of readers whose reaction is "blah blah blah torah blah blah... ooh, music!", but I can't say which ones. :-) )