How Do You Say "I Am That I Am" in Ancient Egyptian?
An inconclusive rabbithole
The exact meaning of the enigmatic title of God אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה (usually translated “I Am That I Am”) has heavy theological implications. This phrase only appears in Exodus 3:14 as the name by which the enslaved Israelites would know God - quite perplexing, given that the forefathers knew God by other names! The medieval philosopher Thomas Aquinas interpreted this to mean that the “essence of God” to be being itself. That interpretation should be rejected, as it implies panentheism, but it is true that אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה promises an esoteric insight, which has not to my knowledge been satisfactorily resolved.
One of my favorite YouTube channels is that of the Egyptologist Dr. David A. Falk, student of the famed chronologist Dr. Kenneth Kitchen. On his channel Ancient Egypt & The Bible, Dr. Falk consistently presents high quality information from Egyptology and Biblical Studies to his lay audience. Although I wouldn’t describe the channel as scholarly per se (his videos are light in citations, which makes a challenge of sourcing his claims), it is well worth watching for laymen or scholars who are interested in the Egyptian context of the Bible (if you have the patience to sit through Christian apologetics before getting to the scholarship).
In one video or another, Dr. Falk mentioned in passing that אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה has a parallel in Ancient Egyptian. This caught my interest, as loanwords (or a calqued-phrase, in this case) are a hobby-horse of mine. I have been quite busy, so I was not able to look into the Egyptian parallel at the time, but the lead stuck with me for whatever reason. Finally researching the topic, I discovered a paper from 1978 by Isbell1 which discusses the Egyptian divine epithet pꜣ nty wn.w.f ‘The One Who Is Who He Is’, freely available on JSTOR.
Isbell’s paper focused on the long-standing problem of why the Hebrew phrase אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה uses a first-person future form of the copula (more accurately translated as “I Will Be”) instead of a first-person present form (“I Am”), which the context would require. I confess, I am in no place to evaluate the strength of Isbell’s arguments; grammar is my Achilles heel. Context is key to determining what pꜣ nty wn.w.f/אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה means, and I don’t just mean present vs. future. Isbell does not mention where pꜣ nty wn.w.f occurs in Egyptian texts, only citing an article from the late Cyrus H. Gordon2.
Unfortunately, this article is paywalled in an obscure festschrift, which cannot be found online or in an American library. In 1974, Yeshiva University published Joshua Finkel Festschrift, which is exactly what it sounds like. Today, it is an exceptionally obscure volume. As I wanted to know where pꜣ nty wn.w.f occurs, it became imperative to obtain Gordon’s article, which necessitated buying the festschrift. For less than $20, a copy deaccessioned from the Touro University library (where I did my undergrad) was mine. If you’re interested in reading Gordon’s article yourself, I scanned it here:
It appears that pꜣ nty wn.w.f occurs in the Late New Kingdom Story of Wenamun, which eludes precise dating. However, Wenamun would seem to post-date the 19th dynasty, which Dr. Falk persuasively argues is the context for Exodus. I have never read Wenamun, which will be required reading to determine the context of pꜣ nty wn.w.f. No answer to the question yet, but I hope to have more to say on the question in the future.
Isbell, C. D. (1978). Initial ʾalef-Yod Interchange and Selected Biblical Passages. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 37(3), 227-236.
Gordon, C. H. (1975). “He is who He is.” In: Joshua Finkel Festschrift. 61-62.
"Isbell’s paper focused on the long-standing problem of why the Hebrew phrase אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה uses a first-person future form of the copula (more accurately translated as “I Will Be”) instead of a first-person present form (“I Am”), which the context would require."
This does not seem to be any more true than to say אז ישיר משה is more accurately translated as 'and then Moses will sing'. Actually less so, since the form וישיר משה is possible, but the form אני אשר אני seems very unlikely. You inspired me to finally read a very boring recent article on the future tense problem in Hebrew https://books.openbookpublishers.com/10.11647/obp.0250.13.pdf. I almost did it, but had to give up 2/3rds of the way through. But to sum up, no-one really has a clue.