YHWH and Elohim: One God, Different Attributes

The word אֵל (ʾel) means God, and אֱלֹהִים (ʾelohim) is in the plural form. Nevertheless, the Torah generally uses Elohim as a singular name, referring to the one God.^[1] In fact, the opening of the Torah describes Elohim creating the world:

^{בראשית א:א}בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.‏

^{Gen 1:1} When God began to create heaven and earth…^[2]

Elohim is clearly a singular here since the following verb, בָּרָא (baraʾ), is singular, rather than בָּרְאוּ (barʾu) in the plural.

In his gloss on the verse, Nahum Sarna argues that the choice of this divine name was purposeful, meant to emphasize the universal character of the Creator:

The term for God used here and throughout the present account of Creation is ʾelohim. This is not a personal name but the general Hebrew word for deity. It can even refer to pagan gods…^[3] The preference for the use of ʾelohim in this chapter, rather than the sacred divine name YHVH, may well be conditioned by theological considerations; the term ʾelohim, connoting universalism and abstraction, is most appropriate for the transcendent God of Creation.^[4]

Modern scholars look to historical developments or composition models to explain the choice of divine name,^[5] but however one understands it, it does stand out that the opening creation story uses the generic Elohim over the more specifically Israelite YHWH.

The Beneficent and the Punitive: Philo

The earliest commentator to try to make sense of when and why a given name of God is chosen in context was Philo of Alexandria (ca. 25 B.C.E.–ca. 50 C.E.). He makes this point concerning a verse which uses both divine names:

^{דברים י:יז} כִּי יְ־הֹוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם הוּא אֱלֹהֵי הָאֱלֹהִים וַאֲדֹנֵי הָאֲדֹנִים הָאֵל הַגָּדֹל הַגִּבֹּר וְהַנּוֹרָא...

^{Deut 10:17} For YHWH your God is God supreme and Sovereign supreme, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God.

Philo explains the significance of each name:

^{Philo, Special Laws I.307} Cannot you see that the primal and chief powers belonging to the Existent are the beneficent and the punitive? And the beneficent is called God [=Elohim] because by this He set out and ordered the world; the other is called Lord [=YHWH], being that by which He is invested with the sovereignty of all that is.[6]

Philo’s interpretation of YHWH is likely based on the Septuagint’s rendering of YHWH as Kyrios (“Lord” in Greek), which is similar to how Hebrew prayerbooks use Adonai (in some form), and how Torah readers treat the Tetragrammaton as having a perpetual qeri (out loud reading) as Adonai.

But Isn’t YHWH “Being”?

Notably, the Torah itself explains the name YHWH differently, when God speaks to Moses for the first time by the burning bush:

^{שמות ג:יד} וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל מֹשֶׁה אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה וַיֹּאמֶר כֹּה תֹאמַר לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶהְיֶה שְׁלָחַנִי אֲלֵיכֶם.‏ ^ג:טו וַיֹּאמֶר עוֹד אֱלֹהִים אֶל מֹשֶׁה כֹּה תֹאמַר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל יְ־הֹוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲבֹתֵיכֶם אֱלֹהֵי אַבְרָהָם אֱלֹהֵי יִצְחָק וֵאלֹהֵי יַעֲקֹב שְׁלָחַנִי אֲלֵיכֶם זֶה שְּׁמִי לְעֹלָם וְזֶה זִכְרִי לְדֹר דֹּר.‏

^{Exod 3:14} And God said to Moses, “I am what I am.” And [God] said: “Thus shall you say to the Israelites, ‘Ehyeh (=I am) sent me to you.’” ^3:15 And God said further to Moses, “Thus shall you speak to the Israelites: ‘YHWH, the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you.’ This shall be My name forever, this My appellation for all eternity.”^[7]

Nevertheless, Philo understands “I am” as a third name of the deity, and explains that it is about God’s essential being. This is clear from his gloss on the passage in which Abraham, sitting outside his tent at the oaks of Mamre, looks up and sees three men.

The “Trinity” According to Philo

Philo understands the three visitors as three aspects of God.^[8] In the middle is “the One Who Is” (ho ōn), while the two flanking figures are God’s powers: on the right the beneficent and creative power, theos, “God,” and on the left the royal and governing power, kyrios, “Lord” (YHWH).^[9] In sum, for Philo, the ultimate God is an abstract being; God’s manifestation as theos/Elohim creates and benefits; God’s manifestation as kyrios/YHWH rules and punishes.^[10] Later, the Sages also interpret God’s two names as reflecting attributes, but they interpret their nature in the inverse direction.

Elohim Is Justice, YHWH Is Mercy

In Deuteronomy, Moses begins his plea for God to allow him to cross over into the Promised Land by noting the power God has already shown in the conquest of the Transjordan:

^{דברים ג:כד}אֲדֹנָי יְ־הֹוָה אַתָּה הַחִלּוֹתָ לְהַרְאוֹת אֶת עַבְדְּךָ אֶת גׇּדְלְךָ וְאֶת יָדְךָ הַחֲזָקָה אֲשֶׁר מִי אֵל בַּשָּׁמַיִם וּבָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה כְמַעֲשֶׂיךָ וְכִגְבוּרֹתֶךָ.‏

^{Deut 3:24} O Lord YHWH, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your mighty hand—for what god is there in heaven or on earth who can do as You do?

Based on how the Hebrew word Elohim may sometimes mean a (secular) judge—at least this is how the rabbis understand it—the midrash Sifrei Devarim (ca. 3^rd cent. C.E.) comments on Moses’ plea:

^{ספרי דברים פרשת ואתחנן כו} כל מקום שנאמר ה' זו מדת רחמים שנאמר (שמות לד:ו) "ה' ה' אל רחום וחנון." כל מקום שנאמר "אלהים" זו מדת הדין שנאמר (שמות כב:ח) "עד האלהים יבוא דבר שניהם", ואומר (שמות כב:כז): "אלהים לא תקלל."

^{Sifrei Devarim Vaetḥanan §26} Everywhere it says YHWH, this refers to the trait of mercy, as it says (Exod 34:6): “YHWH, YHWH, a merciful and compassionate God.” Everywhere it says Elohim, this refers to the trait of justice, as it says (Exod 22:8): “To the judges (ʾelohim) you shall bring the words of the two litigants.” And it says (Exod 22:27): “Do not curse a judge (ʾelohim).”

YHWH as beneficent and Elohim as disciplinary is the opposite of how Philo divides the names.^[11] The Sages’ interpretation is more etymologically justified, since Hebrew ʾelohim carries both senses in a single word while Greek splits them between two. Where the meaning is God, the Septuagint has theos (θεός); where the sense is judicial, the translator supplies a second word—at Exodus 21:6, “to the tribunal (kritērion) of God (theos).” Reading the Greek—he held the Septuagint itself to be inspired—Philo had nothing in front of him to connect the two words “tribunal” and “God,” which both translate Hebrew ʾelohim.^[12] Moreover, Philo interprets YHWH based on the Greek translation Kyrios/LORD, not on any Hebrew root for the name YHWH.

The World Was Created with Justice, then Mercy

By the medieval period, the distinction between the divine attributes and the association of each with one of the main names of God in the Bible was standard rabbinic thinking. Thus, returning to creation, Rashi (R. Shlomo Yitzḥaki, 1040–1105), in his gloss on the opening verse of the Torah, notes how, in the next story about the Garden of Eden (Gen 2:4bff), the Torah switches to YHWH Elohim—almost^[13] the only place in the Torah where this occurs:

^{רש"י בראשית א:א} "ברא אלהים" – ולא נאמר: י"י, שבתחלה עלה במחשבה לבראתו במדת הדין, ראה שאין מתקיים, הקדים מדת רחמים ושיתפה למדת הדין. היינו דכתיב (בראשית ב:ד): "ביום עשות י"י אלהים ארץ ושמים."

^{Rashi Gen 1:1} “God created”—and it doesn’t say the LORD, for at first God thought to create it with the attribute of justice, but then saw that it could not abide, so [God] brought forward the attribute of mercy, and then joined it to the attribute of justice, as it says (Gen 2:4) “on the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven…” ^[14]

God starts creating with justice, realizes that such a world could not last, and continues the creation by adding mercy (in the next story).^[15] Thus, for Rashi, justice and mercy are never fully in opposition; each is always tempered by the other.

The Tension between Monotheism and Dual Divine Characteristics

This concept appears to advocate for a kind of dualism, which would be problematic in a monotheistic religion. The Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael (a tannaitic midrash on Exodus, ca. 3rd cent. C.E.) responds to this in a midrash on the opening line of the Decalogue:

^{מכילתא דרבי ישמעאל בחדש ה} "אָנֹכִי י״י אֱלֹהֶיךָ" (שמות כ:ב)—לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר? לְפִי שֶׁנִּגְלָה עַל הַיָּם כְּגִבּוֹר עוֹשֶׂה מִלְחָמוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות טו:ג): ‏"י״י אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה", נִגְלָה עַל הַר סִינַי כְּזָקֵן מָלֵא רַחֲמִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כד:י): "וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל". וּכְשֶׁנִּגְאֲלוּ, מַה הוּא אוֹמֵר? "וּכְעֶצֶם הַשָּׁמַיִם לָטֹהַר", וְאוֹמֵר: (דניאל ז:ט-י) "חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי כָרְסָוָן רְמִיו [וְעַתִּיק יוֹמִין יְתִב...]

^{Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Baḥodesh 5} “I am the LORD your God” (Exod 20:2)—Why is this stated? Because He appeared at the sea as a warrior waging wars, as it is said: “The LORD is a man of war” (Exod 15:3). He appeared at Mount Sinai as an elder full of mercy, as it is said: “And they saw the God of Israel” (Exod 24:10), And when they were redeemed, what does it say? “and like the very sky for purity.” And it says (Dan 7:9–10): “I beheld till thrones were placed, and an Ancient of Days did sit...”

שֶׁלֹּא לִתֵּן פִּתְחוֹן פֶּה לְאֻמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם לוֹמַר: "שְׁתֵּי רָשֻׁיּוֹת הֵן!" אֶלָּא "אָנֹכִי י״י אֱלֹהֶיךָ". אֲנִי בְּמִצְרַיִם, אֲנִי עַל הַיָּם, אֲנִי בְּסִינַי, אֲנִי לְשֶׁעָבַר, אֲנִי לֶעָתִיד לָבֹא, אֲנִי לָעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, אֲנִי לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים לב:לט): "רְאוּ עַתָּה כִּי אֲנִי אֲנִי הוּא!"

So as not to give an opening for the nations to say “there are two powers here,” rather, “I am the LORD your God”: It was I in Egypt, and it was I on the sea; it was I on [Mount] Sinai. It was I in the past, and it will be I in the future; it is I in this world, and it will be I in the world to come, as it says (Deut 32:39): “See, then, that I, I am the One.”

The midrash argues that even if God appears with multiple names in multiple forms, it is always a reference to the same being.

Praising Both Divine Traits

The Jerusalem Talmud (ca. 400 C.E.) builds the concept that God has two basic contradictory characteristics on a verse in Psalms, which repeats the same phrase, each time with a different divine name:

^{ירושלמי ברכות ט:ה} אָמַר רִבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא בֶּן יְהוּדָה: "'בֵּאלֹהִים אֲהַלֵּל דָּבָר בַּי״י אֲהַלֵּל דָּבָר' (תהלים נו:יא) – בֵּין עַל מִדַּת הַדִּין בֵּין עַל מִדַּת רַחֲמִים אֲהַלֵּל דָּבָר."

^{j. Berakhot 9:5} Rabbi Tanḥuma ben Yehuda said: “‘In God, whose word I praise; in the LORD, whose word I praise’ (Ps 56:11)—whether for the trait of justice or the trait of mercy, I praise the word.”

But Isn’t YHWH Sometimes Cruel?

The Jerusalem Talmud then tries to explain how it is that Job states that it is YHWH who gives and YHWH who takes, implying that YHWH is not always the merciful trait. The first answer is that even taking his children was done with compassion:

^{ירושלמי ברכות ט:ה} אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן בֶּן פִּילָה: "הוּא שֶׁאִיּוֹב אָמַר (איוב א:כא): 'י״י נָתַן וַי״י לָקַח יְהִי שֵׁם י״י מְבוֹרָךְ' – כְּשֶׁנָּתַן בְּרַחֲמִים נָתַן, וּכְשֶׁלָּקַח בְּרַחֲמִים לָקַח.

^{j. Berakhot 9:5} Rabbi Yudan ben Pila said: “This is what Job said (Job 1:21): ‘The LORD gave and the LORD took; may the name of the LORD be blessed.’ When He gave, He gave with compassion, and when He took, He took with compassion.”

A second answer mitigates the tension between divine mercy and punishment by blaming the latter on the involvement of the divine court:

וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא כְשֶׁנָּתַן לֹא נִמְלַךְ בְּבִרְייָה, וּכְשֶׁלָּקַח נִמְלַךְ בְּבֵית דִּינוֹ.

“Not only this, when He gave, He didn’t consult with anyone, but when He took, He consulted with His court.”

Rabbi Elazar builds on this and says that every time the Bible says “and the LORD” it refers to YHWH and the divine court:

אָמַר רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: "כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר 'וַי״י' – הוּא וּבֵית דִּינוֹ. בִּנְיַין אָב שֶׁבְּכוּלָּם: 'וַי״י דִּיבֶּר עָלֶיךָ רָעָה.'"

Rabbi Elazar said: “Anywhere it says ‘and the LORD’ it means in consultation with His court. The paradigmatic verse for this is (1 Kgs 22:23 [a chapter that features God’s heavenly council]): ‘And the LORD has decreed evil against you.’”[16]

God in Conflict with Himself

In response to the question of what prayers God offers, the Babylonian Talmud supplies the following:

^{בבלי ברכות ז.} אָמַר רַב זוּטְרָא בַּר טוֹבִיָּה, אָמַר רַב: ״יְהִי רָצוֹן מִלְּפָנַי שֶׁיִּכְבְּשׁוּ רַחֲמַי אֶת כַּעֲסִי,^[17] וְיִגּוֹלּוּ רַחֲמַי עַל מִדּוֹתַי, וְאֶתְנַהֵג עִם בָּנַי בְּמִדַּת רַחֲמִים, וְאֶכָּנֵס לָהֶם לִפְנִים מִשּׁוּרַת הַדִּין״.

^{b. Berakhot 7a} Rav Zutra bar Tovia said that Rav said: “[God says:] ‘May it be My will that My mercy will overcome My anger, and may My mercy prevail over My other attributes, and may I conduct myself toward My children with the attribute of mercy, and may I enter before them beyond the letter of the law.’”

The Talmud then continues with a story in which God asks Rabbi Ishmael, the High Priest, to bless Him, and R. Ishmael responds by offering this prayer:

^{בבלי ברכות ז.}תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן אֱלִישָׁע: פַּעַם אַחַת, נִכְנַסְתִּי לְהַקְטִיר קְטוֹרֶת לִפְנַי וְלִפְנִים, וְרָאִיתִי אַכְתְּרִיאֵל יָהּ ה׳ צְבָאוֹת, שֶׁהוּא יוֹשֵׁב עַל כִּסֵּא רָם וְנִשָּׂא, וְאָמַר לִי: ״יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנִי, בָּרְכֵנִי!״ אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: ״יְהִי רָצוֹן מִלְּפָנֶיךָ, שֶׁיִּכְבְּשׁוּ רַחֲמֶיךָ אֶת כַּעַסְךָ, וְיִגּוֹלּוּ רַחֲמֶיךָ עַל מִדּוֹתֶיךָ, וְתִתְנַהֵג עִם בָּנֶיךָ בְּמִדַּת הָרַחֲמִים, וְתִכָּנֵס לָהֶם לִפְנִים מִשּׁוּרַת הַדִּין״. וְנִעְנַע לִי בְּרֹאשׁוֹ.

^{Berakhot 7a} Rabbi Ishmael ben Elisha said: “Once I entered the Holy of Holies to offer incense [on Yom Kippur], and I saw Akatriel Yah, the LORD of Hosts, who was sitting on a high throne, and He said to me: ‘Ishmael, my son, bless me!’ So I said to Him: ‘May it be Your will that Your mercy will overcome Your anger, and may Your mercy prevail over Your other attributes, and may You conduct Yourself toward Your children with the attribute of mercy, and may You enter before them beyond the letter of the law.’ And He nodded to me.”

Kabbalah: Din versus Chesed

While the classical rabbinic texts see these two divine traits as being in competition, the sefirot system in kabbalah, according to which divinity is manifest in ten stages of vessels,^[18] sees the interplay between these traits—Din (Judgment) and Chesed (Lovingkindness)—as inherent to creation itself. Indeed, the dichotomy of Judgment and Lovingkindness is the basis of all kabbalistic systems, and assumes divine interaction with humans who have some freedom of choice in their actions and interactions with the world and God.

From Zoharic kabbalah, the two cryptic works, Idra Rabba and Idra Zuta (“Great Assembly” and “Small Assembly,” mini-works found in the Zohar’s commentary on the parashiyot of Naso and Haazinu respectively), take this further, asserting that the unification and disjunction of strict justice and boundless mercy at the world’s inception transcends human comprehension, being a mystery within the Godhead.^[19] In these texts, God is envisioned as manifest in two separate forms or faces (פרצופין):

Arikh Anpin (אריך אנפין, “Long Face”)—The higher divine manifestation, also called Atika Yomin (עתיק יומין, “Ancient of Days”). Its ever-watchful eye(s) has no eyelid and never closes, symbolizing unceasing divine mercy. Its hair and beard are white, and its beard has thirteen tikkunim (תיקונים, “configurations”)—distinct arrangements of facial hair associated with the thirteen attributes of divine mercy (Exod 34:6–7).

Zeir Anpin (זעיר אנפין, “Short Face”)—The lower divine manifestation, associated with both mercy and judgment (din, דין). Unlike Arikh Anpin, it has two eyes with eyelids that can close, and two nostrils from which smoke emerges when it is angry. Its right and left arms represent chesed (חסד, “lovingkindness”) and gevurah (גבורה, “might,” associated with judgment), respectively. Its black beard has nine tikkunim (תיקונים, “configurations”), distinct arrangements of facial hair through which divine influence flows. This is the manifestation through which divine punishment can be administered.

Idra Rabba describes the dew that passes from one to the other:

^{זוהר במדבר, האדרא רבא} בְּהַאי גּוּלְגַּלְתָּא, נָטִיף טַלָּא מֵרֵישָׁא חִיוָּורָא, דְּאִתְמְלֵּי מִנֵיהּ תָּדִיר... וְהוּא טַלָּא דְּאִתְכְּלִיל בִּתְרֵי גְּוָונֵי, מִסִּטְרָא דְּרֵישָׁא חִיוָּרָא, חִיוָּור בְּגַוֵּויהּ. דְּכָלִיל כֻּלְּהוּ חִיוָּורֵי אֲבָל כַּד אִתְיַישְּׁבָן בְּהַאי רֵישָׁא דִּזְעֵיר אַפִּין, אִתְחֲזֵי בֵּיהּ סוּמָקָא. כְּהַאי בְּדוֹלְחָא דְּאִיהוּ חִיוָּור, וְאִתְחַזְיָיא גַּוְונָא סוּמָקָא בְּגַוְונָא חִיוָּורָא.

^{Zohar Numbers, Idra Rabba} Upon this skull, dew drips from the white head, from which it is constantly filled… And it is a dew comprised of two colors. From the side of the white head it is white within—a white that comprises all whites. But when they settle in this head of Zeir Anpin, red appears in it. Like this crystal (bedolaḥ), which is white, and a red hue appears within the white hue.

This mystical doctrine brings unity to the disparity between the divine characteristics of justice and lovingkindness.^[20] At its source, the dew is white (=lovingkindness/chesed), with no red (=judgment/din) in it whatever. The red becomes visible only once that same dew has settled into the configuration that deals with the world. Judgment therefore has no existence of its own—it is merely what mercy looks like from where we stand. The Idra uses the crystal—a pure, radiant gemstone whose shimmering light gleams with all colors at once—as a physical analogy: nobody considers a white stone in which red appears to be two substances.

The Crystal Dew: Ramchal

Rabbi Moshe Hayyim Luzzatto (Ramchal, 1707–1746) uses the Idra’s analogy of a bedolaḥ crystal^[21] to illustrate how the strict laws of consequence and abundant mercy together preserve the universe:

^{רמח"ל קל"ח פתחי חכמה, פתח פט} כִּי טַלָּא דִּבְדוֹלְחָא מַרְאָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ כָּל הַגְּוָונִין בְּיַחַד… כְּמוֹ שֶׁמְּפֹרָשׁ בַּזֹּהַר, שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ הַחֶסֶד וְהַדִּין. וְכֵן רוֹאִים בִּבְדֹלַח כָּל הַגְּוָונִין, שֶׁאֵין אֶחָד מַכְחִישׁ חֲבֵרוֹ.^[22]

^{Ramchal, Qelaḥ Pitḥei Ḥokhmah, petaḥ 89} For the crystal dew shows that all the colors are in it together… as the Zohar explains, it contains both chesed and din. So too we see all the colors in a crystal, with none of them contradicting another.^[23]

The colors are the divine attributes, and Ramchal’s claim is about where they sit. Mercy and judgment are both in the stone, and the presence of one does nothing to drive out the other, and thus, they are never really in opposition. A viewer who sees one shade dominate is describing the angle of the light rather than the gem. What the rabbis had treated as two ways God acts toward the world—exacting in one moment, relenting in the next—Ramchal locates within God’s own structure, where the two hold together.

This is where the kabbalists bring the concept of the two names and their characteristics. The midrash kept mercy and judgment apart and then worked to keep them from becoming two powers: subduing one with the other, assigning the harsh decrees to a heavenly court, insisting that the same “I” stood behind every appearance. Ramchal needs none of those moves, because on his account the opposition was never a threat to God’s unity in the first place. It is simply what a single light looks like when it is refracted.

YHWH Is God: Elijah and Yom Kippur

At the close of Yom Kippur, in the last minutes before the gates shut, the congregation says the Shema once, Barukh shem (“Blessed is the name”)—the line that usually follows the Shema—three times, and then, seven times, the ending of the people’s cry upon Elijah’s success at Mount Carmel over the 450 prophets of Baʿal:

^{מלכים א יח:לט} ...יְ־הֹוָה הוּא הָאֱלֹהִים יְ־הֹוָה הוּא הָאֱלֹהִים.‏

^{1 Kgs 18:39} …YHWH is the (one) God, YHWH is the (one) God!

The two names that have represented polar opposite divine characteristics since Philo and the Sages are set in a single equation and repeated until they merge into one image.