I Am that I Am

() is the first of three responses given to Moses when he asks for God's name in Exodus 3:13-15. The word () is the first person singular imperfective form of (), 'to be', and owing to the peculiarities of Hebrew grammar can mean both 'I am' and 'I will be'. The meaning of the longer phrase is debated, and might be seen as a promise ('I will be with you') or as statement of incomparability ('I am without equal'). Biblical Hebrew did not distinguish between grammatical tenses. It instead had an aspectual system in which the perfect denoted any actions that have been completed, and imperfect denoted any actions that are not yet completed. Additionally, if a verb form was prefixed by (), its aspect was inverted; a verb conjugated in the imperfect and prefixed by would read as the perfect, while a verb conjugated in the perfect and prefixed by would read as the imperfect. The word () is the first-person singular imperfect form of , 'to be', which in Modern Hebrew indicates the future tense 'I will be'; however, it lacks the prefix which would necessitate this reading in Biblical Hebrew. It therefore may be translated as 'I am', but also as a modal form such as 'I may be', 'I would be', 'I could be', etc. Accordingly, the whole phrase can be rendered in English not only as 'I am that I am' but also as 'I will be what I will be' or 'I will be who I will be', or 'I shall prove to be whatsoever I shall prove to be' or even 'I will be because I will be'. Other renderings include: 'I will be that I will be' in the Leeser Bible, 'I will become whatsoever I please' in the Emphasized Bible, and 'I am Being' ( () in the Septuagint. The word () is a relative pronoun whose meaning depends on the immediate context, therefore 'that', 'who', 'which', or 'where' are all possible translations of that word. == Interpretation ==

According to the Hebrew Bible, in the encounter of the burning bush (), Moses asks what he is to say to the Israelites when they ask what gods ('Elohiym) have sent him to them, and YHWH replies, "I am who I am", adding, "Say this to the people of Israel, 'I am has sent me to you. Despite this exchange, the Israelites are never written to have asked Moses for the name of God. Then there are a number of probably unanswerable questions, including who it is that does not know God's name, Moses or the Israelites (most commentators take it that it is Moses who does not know, meaning that the Israelites will ask him the name in order to prove his credentials), and just what the statement means. The last can be approached in three ways: • "I am who I am" – an evasion of Moses' question; • "I am I that am" or "I am he who is" – a statement of the nature of Israel's God, and thus his true name. Scholars believe it refers to God's eternal nature, which is common in ancient Near Eastern cultures and not restricted to Hellenistic philosophy. It might be a reaction to the motif of gods arbitrarily disappearing in Canaanite mythology; • I Am' is who I am", or "I am because I am" – this version has not played a major part in scholarly discussion of the phrase, but the first variant has been incorporated into the New English Bible. ==Roman Catholicism==

St. Augustine of Hippo and St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctors of the Church, identified the Being of Exodus 3:14 with the '''''', who is God Himself, and, in metaphysics, the Being in the strong or intensive sense in whom one has all the determinations of every being in their highest degree of perfection. Therefore, this Being is actuality of every actuality (or pure Act) and perfection of all perfections. In Him, solely essence and existence () are identified. While St. Augustine had a general intuition of Him, His philosophical formulation came only with St. Aquinas. ==Other views==

The South Indian sage Ramana Maharshi mentions that of all the definitions of God, "none is indeed so well put as the biblical statement 'I am that I am. He maintained that although Hindu scripture contains similar statements, the Mahavakyas, these are not as direct as given in Exodus. Further the "I am" is explained by Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj as an abstraction in the mind of the Stateless State, of the Absolute, or the Supreme Reality, called Parabrahman: it is pure awareness, prior to thoughts, free from perceptions, associations, memories. Parabrahman is often considered to be a cognate term for the Supreme Being in Hinduism. Victor P. Hamilton suggests "some legitimate translations ..: (1) 'I am who I am'; (2) 'I am who I was'; (3) 'I am who I shall be'; (4) 'I was who I am'; (5) 'I was who I was'; (6) 'I was who I shall be'; (7) 'I shall be who I am'; (8) 'I shall be who I was'; (9) 'I shall be who I shall be'." The Bahá'í Faith reference to "I Am" can be found on page 316 of The Dawn-Breakers: ==See also==