Cultural unit white – prototype terms

2.1 Macro-light, mega-verbal light and cultural unit

Mega-light means that all lexemes that are perceived as white are taken into account. These are the four verbal channels – basic color terms, prototype terms, prototype rival terms, and terms for basic feature of prototype outside of color. In the terminology of Berlin and Kay tradition, the macro-light includes only the basic terms for white, red and yellow. Accordingly, macro-dark includes only the basic terms for black, green and blue.

It was noted above that of all verbal channels, only the basic color terms are context-independent, while the others are context-dependent. Context-dependent means that they signify color depending not only on the verbal context, but also on the culture, such as religious doctrine. Thus, the four verbal channels should be considered a cultural unit (Eco 1996 [1985]).

Here macro-light is used, but this is not the term of the Berlin and Kay tradition, because here the object is the prototypes of white, and in the Berlin and Kay tradition these is the basic color terms. In Berlin and Kay tradition, the macro-light and macro-dark have a pronounced cognitive and psychological character, while here the macro-light is in the territory of color as a cultural unit. As a cultural unit, red can be both macro-light and macro-dark, where red denotes the evil, the wrong: “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the Lord, “Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool.” (Isa 1:18 NAS). The verse is an example of how Bible created a cultural matrix involving color through Basic Color Terms (red, crimson), Prototype Terms (snow), and Rival Terms for prototypes (wool), as well as the need to encompass the four classes of lexemes, not just the basic color terms.

3.1 Prototype for white and prototype for red produced from one root and the proper names

What impresses from the point of view of the theory of prototypes and macro-light is the presence of אוּר [ur] meaning fire? Among the twenty of roots of fire, flame, blazing, temperature, fever, intense heat there is one that is written in the same way as light but the vocalization is different: light אוֹר [or] – fire אוּר [ur].

The lexeme אוּר [ur] is the proper name of the hometown of the patriarch Abraham Ur of the Chaldeans (Gen 11:28; 11:31; 15:7; Neh 9:7). Ur of the Chaldeans was important Sumerian city on the banks of the Euphrates river during the time of Abraham at the territory of modern Tell el-Muqayyar in current south Iraq. “Archaeological excavations have found the remains of a temple tower (Ziggurat), built by Ur Namu about 2150 to 2050 BC.” (Оуен 1995 [1992]: 579). TWOT points to the link of this name with the nouns light, fire, lights (the sun and the moon), herb, as well as its Semitic paradigm. “Corresponds to Ugaritic ‘r ‘to be bright; to illumine’, and Akkadian urru ‘day’. It occurs infrequently in the Qal (Paal) and Niphal but some forty-five times in the Hiphil. It refers to the shining of the sun, but its metaphorical usages are more common.” (TWOT in BW).

In the Old Testament, Talmud and Kabbalistic commentaries, Chaldea is a symbol of astrology. Usually, the Old Testament is highly critical of the prediction through the stars, respectively, Chaldea, Chaldean is a wicked example to the Israelites. In the Kabbalistic literature, which is very varied in directions and currents, the Chaldean element is interpreted as “finding a path based on astrology”. On behalf of Abraham’s birthplace, Ur of the Chaldeans, must be understood as Abraham’s path in overcoming the astrological divination through the covenant with the One God.

Archangels are divided into two groups according to their names. One is compound words containing the word “god” [el] plus another noun. These are Michael, Gabriel, Raphael and Uriel. The other group is common nouns – cherub (херувим Bul. “cherubim”), seraphim, ophanim. The suffix -im in Hebrew marks plural, masculine but with this form they are adopted meaning singular, masculine in the Indo-European languages. The Hebrew Bible used as a proper name only Uriel. The name Uriel אוּרִאֵל [urièl] is mentioned only in the books of Ezra (3Ezra 4:1; 5:20; 10:28) The angel sent by God to Ezra to instruct him and explain to him the innermost ways of God: “Then the angel that had been sent to me, whose name was Uriel, answered” (4Esra 4:1 RSV); “So I fasted seven days, mourning and weeping, as Uriel the angel had commanded me.” (3Ezra 5:20 RSV); “Where is the angel Uriel, who came to me at first? For it was he who brought me into this overpowering bewilderment; my end has become corruption, and my prayer a reproach.” (3Ezra 10:28 RSV)

Some sources pretend that the name means Lord is my light, but the proper name means but is more likely that the name means “my God is fire”. JE gives a well-motivated treatment of the name of Uriel [urièl] as “the fire of God” + [ur + el] and as “light of God”, “glory of God” [or + el] (JE: Uriel). Such decoding of the name corresponds to my hypothesis of the possibility that the name of a special stone Urim shines in both white and red. The places and activities of the archangel Uriel have been reflected differently in the various Judaic commentaries – the Talmud, Kabbalah, Apocrypha, and their texts dedicated to angelology. Rich information can be found in the Dictionary of Angels (Davidson 1971), the Internet Encyclopedia of Religions, the Jewish Encyclopedia, the Catholic Encyclopedia, and The Oxford Concise Dictionary of World Religions (Bowker 2000). For a detailed analysis and sources see Алмалех (2013), and DA.

Urim אוּרִים [urìm] is a special stone, and it is a plural form of אוֹר [or] (Exo 28:30). The questioning of fortune-tellers is forbidden and persecuted in Judaism. Only the High Priest can ask God and receives the answer with the help of the special stones – Urim and Thummim. “And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the Thummim; and they shall be upon Aaron’s heart, when he goeth in before Jehovah: and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before Jehovah continually.” (Exo 28:30 ASV).

The [urìm] is white and [tumìm] is black. Questions can be asked in prayer, and then the two stones begin to glow to make a “yes” or “no” decision. This is the only divination possible for the Jews, and everything else is forbidden. King Saul consulted a fortune-teller in the presence of Urim and Thummim. He was punished with death, his family was destroyed, and David anointed a king of the Jews.

Septuagint did not resort to transliteration but introduced terms that are comment, interpretation, and the opinion of the seventy translators is δήλωσι [dìlosi] ‘pointing out’, ‘manifestation’, ‘explaining’, ‘showing’ for Urim and ἀλήθεια [alìthia] ‘truth’, ‘truthfulness’, (‘reality’) for Thummim. The terms reveal the function of Urim and Thummim according to Alexandrian Judaism and represent the Hellenic semiosphere of what these stones are.

The breastplate becomes a judge’s breastplate when the High Priest acts as a judge, including asking God for the right decision. Hypothetically, the two stones could emit three colors. Perhaps for very special occasions, the Urim stone could shine in red if it assumed that not only the light (white) but also the fire (red from [ur]) was laid in its name.

There are many extensive, complex analyzes and reflections of a large number of writers with an ever-increasing interest in Urim and Thummim. Van Dam (1997) is a profound repository for all Urim and Thummim-related research. There is no sure answers for two questions. Why the names of the single stones are in a plural form? What is the etymology of the Thummim?

Regardless of how we take Urim and Thummim as two separate stones or the twelve stones of the breastplate, priests of the Second Temple had no ability to use Urim and Thummim. It is generally accepted that the High Priest may handle with the Urim and Thummim if he is ritually pure, spiritually elevated, possessing a set of necessary qualities, including a judge and a prophet. Nehemiah (7:65) postulated that after the return from Babylonian exile there were no priests capable to minister with the Urim and Thummim: “The governor, therefore, ordered them not to eat any of the most sacred food until there should be a priest ministering with the Urim and Thummim.” (NIV). The same information is found in Ezra 2:63: “The governor, therefore, ordered them not to eat any of the most sacred food until there should be a priest ministering with the Urim and Thummim.” (NIV). According to Babylonian Talmud (BT), Yoma 21b Urim and Thummim are among the five missing important elements in the Second Temple: “These five things [distinguish] between the first and second temple: the ark, the ark cover, the cherubim (which all count as one), the fire [from heaven], the Shekinnah, the spirit of holiness (i.e., of prophecy), and the Urim and Thummim.” (Yoma 21b).

Fried (2007) detailed the documented lack of presence of Urim and Thummim in the Bible, the Talmud, Josephus Flavius, Qumran, and other documents. His conclusion includes few “if” and question marks:

If the Urim and Thummim did exist for a period of time during the life of the second temple, they evidently went out of existence (or stopped working) at the time of John Hyrcanus’ death. When were they installed? According to Ezra 2:61-63 (Neh 7:63-65), they were missing from the second temple in the early decades of the return. May we conclude then that a priest arose in the interim with Urim and Thummim, a priest who was able to restore the family of Haqqoz to the priesthood (cf. 1Chr. 24:10)? (Fried 2007: 24–25)

Quite interesting are the observations and conclusions of Horowitz and Hurowitz (1992). The authors compare and analyze an Akkadian document for psephomancy ritual from Assur to the properties and functions of Urim and Thummim. They attest that in the Akkadian document the stones are white (alabaster) and black (hematite) stones, they are “also called stone of desire” and “stone of no desire”.

The association of hematite with truth, trustworthiness, and honesty, both on the material-cultural and textual planes may provide the link with the biblical tummîm. We propose that the Hebrew word tummîm is the functional equivalent of the Sumerian and Akkadian depictions of hematite as a stone that speaks truth and represents piety or honesty. This is, in fact, how the LXX and Vulgate understood the word with their renditions ἀλήθεια [alethia] and Veritas, respectively […]. (Horowitz and Hurowitz 1992: 112–113)

The authors conclude: “Adoption of psephomancy by Israelite practice is therefore to be seen as sanctioning the least elaborate form of secular decision-making as the sole instrument of divination. In Mesopotamia, psephomancy was assimilated to prevailing religious practices, ‘Shamashizing’ it, while in Israelite religion it was ‘Yahwehized’.” (Horowitz and Hurowitz 1992: 115). The data and the analysis of Horowitz and Hurowitz outline the Israeli-like practice throughout the Middle East region.

As for the colors – it also remains unclear whether the white stone can be converted in a mystical way into a red stone in special occasions, since the name of the stone implies a connection with both light and fire. And if it is possible, what will be the lexical meaning of the redness – ‘Yes’ or ‘“absolutely Yes”?’

3.2 Two canonized extreme Aleph-Vav-Reish derivatives

The single use of the word אוֹרָה [orà] as herbs, vegetation is in 2Kings 4:39 in the context of the life and activities of Prophet Elisha: “And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered thereof wild gourds his lap full, and came and shred them into the pot of pottage; for they knew them not.” (ASV). Septuagint reacts to this unusual word with transliteration αριωθ [ariòt], plural of [orà]. English translation use herbs for these words, may be following Vulgate, herbas agrestes ‘wild herbs’. Spanish, French and German translations follow the Vulgate path.

Isaiah used a completely non-standard word for den/nest: “And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den [meurà].” (Isa 11:8 ASV). The word מְאוּרָה [meurà] means the hole/den in the verse. It is context-dependent semantics, not lexical, because Isaiah describes the characteristics and acts of the Messiah in chapter 11.

There are extraordinary situations at the time of Messiah: “the wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the young goat, and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together”. “The sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp”, and “the young child put his hand into the viper’s den”. Isaiah presented the time of Messiah’s coming with a non-standard word for den/nest which includes light in a den.

From my point of view, Isaiah’s prophetic knowledge inserts a paradise play with the letters Aleph א and ע Ayn, which often are homophones, despite their normative denotative phonetic differences. Isaiah had something in mind to write about viper’s den with Aleph. What Isaiah meant is the description of the extraordinary features of time of the coming of the Messiah. Isaiah used the Jewish cultural tradition of treating the letters as living ideas underlying the Creation and demonstrates the use of light as a den of a poisonous snake in the Old Testament. To the supernatural changes accompanying the presence of the Messiah, two more can be added, entangled in the change of a cave, den מְעָרָה [mearà] with light מְוּרָה [meurà]: 1. The den’s darkness becomes light; 2. Poisonous snakes are no longer a danger to humans.

3.3 The Nun-Yud-Reish root

The words lamp, candle [ner], [nur], furnace [tanùr], and seven-lampstand [menoràh] are from the root of Nun-Yud-Reish. The words [nìr]/[ner] are used 49 times in the Old Testament, according to TWOT. The standard translation of these words is a lamp, and in conjunction with the lighting proposition. Quite often, they are combined with the expression pure oil for light/pure olive oil for light source or light [òr], lighten [tanìr], e.g. Exo 27:20. The words [nìr]/[ner] usually are epithets or metaphor for God, for the commandments, for prophetic teachings: “For these commands are a lamp [ner], this teaching is a light [or], and the corrections of discipline are the way to life” (Prov 6:23 NIB).

There is a special Hebrew noun phrase lit. lamps/candles of YHWH נֵרִי יהוָה [nerèi iehòva]. The phrase is translated as ‘you are (my) lamp, O Lord’ in many languages: “For You are my lamp, O LORD; And the LORD illumines my darkness.” (2Sam 22:29 NAU). The translation “my lamp, O LORD” is according to the English worldview, while the Hebrew noun phrase has a much more general meaning – the individual spiritual life, the social area, and the Creation as a whole, at least because [nirèi] (plural of [ner]) is in compound with the quadriliteral name of God יהוה, the Tetragrammaton YHWH, the ancient Israelitish name for God.

The translation of Psa 18:28 is also incomplete compared to Hebrew: “For You light my lamp; The LORD my God illumines my darkness.” (NAU). The literal translation is “Because You will lighten lamp of Lord, my Elohim, You will lighten my darkness” [ki ata tair nirei YHWH elohai iagiah hashki]. The verse contains the two most frequently used names of God in the OT, Tetragrammaton and Elohim, as well as the following words for light: you will light [tair] Aleph-Vav-Reish root, candles [nirei] Root Nun-Yud-Reish, and will lighten [iagìah] root Nun-Gimel-double He. Psa 18:29 is a good illustration of the accumulation of various transformations of light united against personal spiritual and behavioral darkness. Candles of YHWH disperse the darkness in the soul. The inclusion of the Nun-Yud-Reish root in the nominal phrase with the name of God brings this root closer to the status of the first-created light, named by the Aleph-Vav-Reish root.

The seven-lampstand מְנוֹרָה [menorà] is an important symbol in a vision of the Prophet Zechariah (4:11) for the two messiahs, considered to be realized by St. John the Baptist and Jesus Christ in the New Testament. In Zech 4, the prophet speaks of a seven-lampstand surrounded by two olive trees. The Hebrew original names the olive trees with a non-standard term – they are עֺלָה [olàh]. This is the word for burnt offerings in Hebrew! The word is a derivative of the basic meaning of עֺלָה [olàh] climb up, walk, rise up. The inner form of the term includes climbing up, rising up in spiritual aspect but not just climb up physically or burnt offerings to God.

Zechariah’s vision hints that the two messiahs will be given as burnt offerings to God, i.e. they will lose their earth lives as burnt offerings [olàh], when they climb up and rise to God’s service. The Hebrew original of Zech 4:2-14 describes “a lampstand [menorà] all of gold, with a bowl on the top of it, and seven lamps נֵרוֹת [neròt] on it, with seven lips on each lamp [ner] which are on the top of it.” The seven-lampstand is surrounded by “two olive trees on the right and the left”, defined by the angel as “the two who are anointed to serve the Lord of all the earth.” TWOT in BibleWorks98 improperly identifies the two olive trees with the Holy Spirit. More precisely, the two olive trees are decoded as symbols of the two Messiahs.

Zechariah 4:11-14

Then I said to him, ‘What are these two olive trees on the right of the lampstand and on its left?’ And I answered the second time and said to him, ‘What are the two olive branches which are beside the two golden pipes, which empty the golden oil from themselves?’ So he answered me, saying, ‘Do you not know what these are?’ And I said, ‘No, my lord.’ Then he said, ‘These are the two anointed ones who are standing by the Lord of the whole earth.’

The Hebrew term for anointed is special. The word anointed צָהַר [tzahàr] is a derivate of the root Tzadi-He-Reish meaning noon, midday, fresh oil, press oil, and window of the Noah’s Ark in Gen 6:16 (window KJV, NAS light ASV, DBY roof RSV, NRS).

In addition, from the “two olive branches beside” there are “two gold pipes that pour out golden oil”, the seven-lampstand made of pure gold; gold flows out of the olives-messiahs, understood as golden paths. At the same time, the roads of gold can be that of the grain (the word [shibòlet] means both flow and grain). Zech 4 speaks the language of the cleanliness. Zech 4 is an example of the transformation of the idea of light in its wealth, depth, and vastness.

The term menorah מְנֺרָה confirms the status of the root. The menorah was made according to God’s instructions to Moses, it was located in the Holy of Holies and should be pure gold (Exo 25:31-40). This sacred object has been the subject of various interpretations in Judaism, which can be found in various encyclopedias, especially in the Jewish Encyclopedia (JE) and Encyclopedia Judaica (EJ).

3.4 Summary

From the context-dependent semantics of light [or] to all lexical forms: the birthplace of Abraham Ur of the Chaldeans, the fire of God [ur], the stone of Urim [urìm], the archangel Uriel [urièl], the lamp, candle [ner], the seven-lampstand [menoràh], God’s furnace תׇנוּר [tanùr] is Jerusalem and Zion – they clarify the massive biblical semanticize. The semanticize overcame both the usual universals and the meanings of light listed in the biblical dictionaries and encyclopedias, and the secondary lexical meanings in the average-statistical assessment of the term “secondary meaning”. The light and the fire are reflected in the spelling and the reader is taught macro-light colors (white and red) through metaphors based on cognitive universals of the prototypes for color.

The overlapping of the usual universal semantics of light consists of all the messages of the Bible being almost unambiguously preserved and remaining after translation because they rely on the cognitive universality of the prototypes of white color. This is how an educative process of civilization is realized for both the knowledgeable and the ignorant of Semitic languages. Meanwhile, Hebrew internal associations and “reminders” are based on the specifics of the worldview of this language. The word light and its derivatives can be seen as a cohesive assurance for fluent Hebrew. It flows through the text to signify set phenomenon: the history of the tribe and the family, the historical clashes with other peoples and their religions, the confidence in the victory of monotheism and the moral behavior of the individual, the moral and legal dimensions of monotheism as a way of behaving, and the social standards of behavior and attitudes. And this is only the crossing of the mega-white semantics with the mega-red as mega-light, based on one root Aleph-Vav-Reish and Nun-Yud-Reish.

Among the vast multitude of semantic transformations of light in the Old Testament, the structure white + red as a mega-light, based on the roots Aleph-Vav-Reish and Nun-Yud-Reish, interweave in the translations almost partial symmetry with the Hebrew original, i.e. almost complete preservation of the original message of white + red as macro-light: “And God made the two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.” (ASV)

The Jewish writing culture has fixed the macro-whites and macro-reds as joint sets in a peculiar biblical and semantic way. Both macro-whites and macro-reds have some synonymous semantics.

5.1 The proper name Hillel

In Isa 14:12, the text narrates the fall of the king of Babylon called Hillel, a derivate of He-Lamed-Lamed. Some translations use the name Lucifer to transmit the proper Hebrew name Hillel הֵילֵל [hilèl], while others prefer Day Star or morning star:

Isaiah 14:12

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! (KJV)

How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! (NRS)

How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! (NIV)

πϖς ἐξέπεσεν ἐκ του οὐρανου ο’ ε’ωσφόρος ο’ πρωὶ ἀνατέλλων συνερίβη εἰς τὴς

γῆν ο’ ἀποστέλλων πρὸς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη (LXX)

quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes (VUL)

Jakże to spadłeś z niebios, Jaśniejący, Synu Jutrzenki? Jakże runąłeś na ziemię, ty, który podbijałeś narody? (BTP)

The symbolism of the name Hillel is indispensable. Isaiah gave such a name according to the logic widespread in antiquity: “As the man is ‒ the name also” and vice versa: “The name creates a person as the name is.” The idea of the “fallen angel Lucifer” can be added as an incarnation of this ancient logic. The degree of the mega-white presence is increased by the further definition of Lucifer as the “son of the dawn”. The prophet chose for dawn the word שׇׁחַר [shàhar] derived from the root Shin-Het-Reish of the BCT black שׇׁחוֹר [shahòr] and none of the other roots meaning dawn available to Hebrew.

5.2 Summary

The review of the He-Lamed-Lamed root indicates that there are more than 300 cognitive mega-light presentations in the Hebrew text, although most of the words do not directly mean “bright light” or “emit light” and these are all those cases when we say/read in Indo-European languages praise, praise God, hallelujah, and psalm. Lucifer is a calque from the name Hillel, meaning brilliant, luminous.

The root He-Lamed-Lamed engraved the ideational function (in terms of M.K Halliday) on lexical and word-forming levels by linking the emission of light and the praise of God in the Hebrew worldview. After translation, there are languages in which the original ideational function is missing, leaving only part of the Hebrew ideational function. Hebrew psalm and praise of God bear the semantic trace of shining/radiating light, while Indo-European languages do not. Indo-European languages transliterate the Greek word psalm ψαλμός [psalmòs], without linking the term to the local language. The Greek word derives its internal form from the external characteristics of the psalm in Greek language – dancing and playing musical instruments – rather than reflecting the content of the Psalm, which is the intimate contact of the individual with God.

The root Не-Lamed-Lamed evaluates the direction ‘from man to God,’ ‘bottom to top.’ The concept of the psalm, praise, is a duty and a gift to the faithful. Bible Works98 pointed out that the psalm, as an activity and state, is a joyful, ecstatic emotion and vividly marked intellectual action.

6.1 Summary

Secondary meanings of this type of light are: ‘radiating horn-shaped light rays’; ‘the radiance that radiates Moses’ face after his encounter with God’; ‘the spreading of the Divine Power from the face of Moses’; ‘the radiance that emanates Moses’ face causes fear within the people’; ‘the person of Moses has attained an element of heavenly/paradise contact with God’; ‘the presence of the power of the Lord’; ‘sign of God’s love’; ‘physical and spiritual power’; ‘dignity’; ‘visualization of mighty’; ‘salvation’; ‘deliverance’; ‘victory’; ‘paramount’; ‘loftiness’; ‘power’; ‘authority’; ‘arrogance’; ‘God’s power’; ‘sign of material prosperity’; ‘a sign of the direct connection between God and the chosen people through the presence of horn-shaped light’.

It can be assumed that the meanings of the Kuf-Reish-Nun root are a sector in Biblical and modern Hebrew, in which language does not define culture, but the culture of the region defines the language. For the OT, monotheism determines the semantic parameters of the meanings of that root.

8.1 Summary

Nogàh is a full-size sunrise. The yellow–white sun rises over the hills of Jerusalem or over the mountains of Jordan, and the sunset, in its reddish-fiery colors, takes place in the Promised Land.

Zaràh sunset is associated with the rising of the sun above the horizon, but also with the meaning of I explode. It is more of a psychological assessment of the sunrise, perceived as rising, felt as a fast lightning appearance, as an explosion.

Shàhar is the name of the first signs of the approaching dawn when it is still dark, but they mark the end of darkness. Besides the explanation that Shahar is the end of darkness, one should consider another meaningful reason. The beginning of the day in the Bible is perceived in monotheistic thinking as a mini-repetition of the Creation, where light is the first creation of God that overcomes darkness (“The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.” Gen 1:2-3).

Nashèf is a name for the rising sun when sàhar has passed and is still “morning twilight.” The derivative stem of נשׁף Nun-Shin-Fe consists of blow [nashàf], twilight [nashèf], a bird [inshùf]: When I lie down I say, ‘When shall I rise?’ but the night is long, and I am full of tossing until dawn [nashèf]. (Job 7:4 NRS); I rise before dawn [nashèf] and cry for help; I wait for Your words. (Psa 119:147 NAU).

9.1 The window of Noah’s Ark

The word צֹהׇר [tzòhar] is interesting in that because it imparts light and purity, although the direct meanings may be different. According to TWOT in BibleWorks98, the word originates from an obsolete root not developed in the language. The existing meanings are light, amaze, shine, blinded by strong light.

English and other translations follow different logic in translation of [tzòhar] in Genesis 6:16 giving window, light or roof. The inner motivation of translation with window is related to the meaning of noon. Semantic ‘window’ is a secondary and bound to the light of the noon, the sunny zenith.

Genesis 6:16

A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it. (KJV)

A light shalt thou make to the ark, and to a cubit shalt thou finish it upward; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it. (ASV)

Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. (NIV)

Septuagint skips the word – there is no window or light of the ark in the Greek text. Vulgate keeps to translation with window, fenestra. TWOT in BibleWorks98 notes a single use of the verb pressing olives, press out oil [tzahàr] in Job 24:11. Job 24 is devoted to the transience of life and the wrongs that are being done by the monotheists. The use of the Tzadi-He-Reish root is indicative of the window designation for the Noah’s Ark because semantics is a way of expressing the idea of ‘ritual purity’ and ‘light of the plain’ present in the righteous Noah.

Not long after the construction of Noah’s ark, Genesis 7:11 introduces another word for a window [arubà] meaning sluice. It is part of the term “heavenly windows” [arubòt ha-shamàim]. The preferred decision is windows of heaven in many languages but also different choices are made as floodgates of the sky (NIB, NIV), floodgates of the heavens (NAS). It is interesting that after the flood Noah opens the window, and the Bible returns to the standard name for window [halòn]: “Then it came about at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made” (Gen 8:6 NAU). This is another example that in the Hebrew spelling norm and language there is a theological and educational value.

9.2 The color of messiah’s donkey

The Tzadi-He-Reish צהר root is associated with the special meaning of the window of Noah’s Ark. The Tzadi-Het-Reish צחר root is also an undeveloped root in the language associated with another important biblical symbol – the Messiah’s donkey. The prophesy of Zechariah (9:9) and the appearance of the root (Jdg 5:10 “white donkeys”) are woven into oral tradition and caused the recognition of Jesus Christ as the Messiah entering Jerusalem on a donkey (Mark 11:1-10; Mat 21:1-9, Luke 19:29-36, John 12:12-16). There are three reasons why the Jewish crowd accepted Christ as king of the Jews and Messiah.

The first reason is the text of the Old Testament. The prophet Zechariah foresees that the Messiah is a Jewish king who arrives, riding a donkey: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh to thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon a donkey, and upon a colt the foal of a donkey” (Zech 9:9 RVB). The verse contains three different Hebrew terms for donkey: “riding upon a donkey [חֲמוֹר hamòr], and upon a colt [עַיִר aìr] the foal of a donkey [בֶּן־אֲתֺנוֹת ben atonòt]”. In translations appears a fourth term – foal. In Hebrew text, it is “son” [ben] of female donkey.

In Jdg 5:9-10, the female Judge Deborah calls on the princes of Israel to ride white female donkeys: “My heart is with Israel’s princes, with the willing volunteers among the people. Praise the LORD! You who ride on white donkeys, sitting on your saddle blankets, and you who walk along the road, consider.” (NIB) For Hebrew word translated with “consider” TWOT in BibleWorks pointed out “[…] the basic meaning of this verb seems to be ‘rehearse,’ ‘repent,’ or ‘go over a matter in one’s mind’,” while Storng’s abridged BDB specifies “This meditation or contemplation may be done either inwardly or outwardly. Since English differentiates these two notions, the word is usually rendered ‘meditate,’ or ‘talk’.”

The term she-white donkeys is אֲתֹנוֹת צְחֹרוֹת [atonòt tzehoròt]. All translations use the basic color term, white, for צְחֹרוֹת [tzehoròt]. Biblical author did not use the most frequent term for white, לְבַנוֹת [levanòt], female, plural from לָבַן [lavàn]. The origin of צׇחֹר [tzahòr] is from an unextended root in the language meaning bedazzle, knock, shine, blinded by bright light (Gesenius 1996). The term [tzahòr] is used only once again in the Old Testament for white wool in Eze 27:18. The whiteness of the female donkeys and the wool signifies the shining, almost blinding whiteness. Judge Deborah calls upon the princes of Israel to take a spiritual path through this white, which is not the white color available to visual perception but is spiritual. The second reason is the Hebrew worldview, in which there are two directions. One direction is the suppletive terms for donkey in Hebrew, and the second is the inner form of the terms, which binds them by various logical connections to the derivatives of their root.

The Hebrew terms for male, female, and colt donkeys are suppletive: male donkey [חֲמוֹר hamor], female donkey אתֺן [atòn], colt/foal עַיִר [aìr], male mule/he-wild ass פֶּרֶד [pèred] (fem. פִּרְדׇה pirdà]), wild donkey עׇרוֹד [aròd], mule [פֶּרֶה pere]/[פֶּרֶא pere]. Each of the terms is a derivate from a different root and has different inner form and logical relationships with the symbolism. A detailed analysis of the biblical symbolism of the donkey and prophetic lexical strategies was conducted at Almalech 2012a. Of the whole network of relations, it is important to remember here that male donkey [hamòr] is a word from a root with derivatives be red [hamàr]; smear with asphalt; ferment, boil, foam [hamàr]; roebuck [iahmùr]; bitumen, asphalt [hemàr]; cement, mortar, clay [hòmer]; wine [hèmer]. This means that the male donkey is the bearer of black and red in the Hebrew language consciousness. Because of the values of ferment, boil, foam [hamàr], roebuck [iahmùr], bitumen, asphalt [hemàr], cement, mortar, clay [hòmer], wine [hèmer], the male ass is associated with the material, the carnal, the transitory.

As far as, male donkey is related to the material domain it cannot be the donkey of messiah because fermented food and drinks are symbol of impurity. Five types of grain, wheat, barley, oats, einkorn and rye left to leaven is forbidden to eat during the feast of Passover (Exo 12:15-20). This holiday is associated with slavery in Egypt and the exodus to freedom. Milk and dairy products are also prohibited for consumption on Passover days. According to the biblical text (Zech 9:9), there is no way that the person defined as “just”, “having salvation”, “lowly saving”, can ride a male donkey, bound by the inner form of the term [hamòr] with an unclean process of leavening, ferment, boil, foam, clay. In the color aspect, the King cannot be associated with black and red colors. Words that Zechariah used in 9:9 cannot be considered as coincidences: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh to thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon a donkey, and upon a colt the foal of a donkey” (Zech 9:9 RWB). This applies to the accumulation of three terms for male donkey [hamòr], female donkey [atòn], colt [aìr] and to the roots Tzadi-Dalet-Kuf just, righteous [tzadìk], Yud-Shin-Ayn having salvation, endowed with salvation [noshèa], and Ayn-Nun-He lowly, humble, gently [anì].

The word she-donkeys אׇתֹנוֹת [atonòt] is in the feminine plural from אׇתֹן [aton]. Gesenius (1996: 95) and the Easton Bible Dictionary indicate that the she-donkey is called [atòn] due to its slow step. “The she-ass so named from its slowness (Gen 12:16; 45:23; Num 22:23; 1Sam 9:3)” (EBD “Ass”). The word colt/foal עַיר [aìr] is an element of the root Ayn-Yud-Reish, which according to Gesenius is homonymous, and there are four different paradigms of this root. The cognitive, sub-consciously flowing relation of the word colt [aìr] has five aspects, resulting from the colt’s qualities as well as of the extended semantics of the root. The first aspect is that the colt lacks the association with strong sexuality, typical of mature donkeys, i.e. here the ‘lack of strong sexuality’ is at hand. The second aspect is complete onomatopoeia. The third aspect relates the colt to ‘flaming’, ‘ardent’, since they form the meanings ‘speed’ + ‘peace’. The word colt, wild ass עַיר [aìr] is an element of the paradigm of macro-red which is macro-light. According to Gesenius (1996), to be hot, ardent, rouse oneself, awake, incite עוּר [ur]; to make hot, to heat הְעִיר [heyìr]; excitement [yìr]. A wild ass, so-called from its rapid unrestrained running. The fifth aspect is the relation with the verbs rouse oneself, awake [ur] (Gesenius 1996). This last aspect transmits linguistic consciousness and sub-consciousness of a ‘journey to exaltation’.

The third reason that Christ is recognized and accepted in Jerusalem as king of the Jews and Messiah is in the territory of cultural heritage and intercultural influences. In the tenth century BC, the warrior King David founded the tradition that the ritual animal for the king of the Jews was a donkey, not a horse, camel, or other animal symbol of military power. David has a “mule” and Solomon is anointed as king on a “mule” (1Ki 1:38-39).

The word פִּרְדַה [pirdà] is used for David and Solomon’s king’s mule פִּרְדַת־הַמֶלֶך [pirdàt mèleh]. The phrase [pirdàt mèlech] is feminine, case form. It is either wisdom or stupidity for a king to appear in official rituals riding an animal symbolizing ‘the love of peace’ and ‘sexuality’? The appearance of Christ on a donkey at his entrance into Jerusalem, described in the New Testament, was interpreted by the Jewish crowd precisely as the appearance of the Messiah and the king of the Jews. This means that the tradition founded by King David has survived for centuries. At the same time, the Roman-installed Herodiades dynasty as kings of the province of Judea had the cultural influence of Rome. We may expect that the vassal kings of this dynasty, who were of Edomian origin, preferred the Roman way – to appear in public on horseback. The four evangelists testify that what Jesus is ultimately condemned for is that he is the king of the Jews (Messiah in Hebrew terms, King of the Jews in Roman terms). The Romans practiced placing a tablet with the sentence of the crucified on the cross. It is not surprising that this was the crime that some members of the Sanhedrin insisted on, even though the Romans saw no crime.

9.3 The prophetic status of Solomon

Solomon is described in the Bible as a king and the wisest judge. Mythological additions overgrew his personality over the centuries: he spoke the language of animals (Qur’an, Sura 27 Ants), Solomon had power over all demons. Solomon’s prophetic status is not mythology due to his authorship of the two books, The Song of Songs and The Proverbs, in the Old Testament. We can find textual instructions that Solomon is a prophet in 1Ki 7:4-5, which describes the windows of the palace of Solomon, visible only in Hebrew due to the Hebrew worldview.

1Ki 7:4 [3Царства 6:4]

[ve-shkufim shloshà turìm ve-mehezà el-mehezà shalòsh paamìm]

1Ki 7:4 And there were windows [shkufìm] in three rows, and light [mehezà] was against light [mehezà] in three ranks. (KJV)

1Ki 7:4 And there were windows [shkufìm] in three rows, and light [mehezà] was against light [mehezà] in three rows. (RWB)

1Ki 7:4 [3Царе 7:4] И имаше решетки [‘bars’ shkufìm] в трите етажа, така че светене [‘lights’ mehezà]беше поставено срещу светене [‘lights’ mehezà] в трите етажа. (BUL1)

1Ki 7:4 There were artistic window frames [shkufìm] in three rows, and window [mehezà] was opposite window [mehezà] in three ranks. (NAU)

1Ki 7:4 Wnęki okienne [‘the window recesses’ shkufìm] także były w trzy rzędy: okno [‘window’ mehezà] nad oknem [‘window’ mehezà], o trzy krok (BTP)

1Ki 7:4 [3Царе 7:4] И имаше решетки [‘bars’ shkufìm] на прозорците [‘windows’ mehezà] в три реда – прозорец [‘window’ mehezà] срещу прозорец [‘window’ mehezà] в три реда. (BUL3)

1Ki 7:4 [3Царе 7:4] Прозоречни стълбове [‘window posts’ shkufìm] имаше три реда; имаше и три реда прозорци [‘windows’ mehezà], прозорец [‘window’ mehezà] срещу прозорец [‘window’ mehezà]. (BUL2)

1Ki 7:4 [3Царства 7:4] Оконных косяков [‘window frames’ shkufim] [было] три ряда [окон], окно [‘window’ mehezà] против окна [‘window’ mehezà] (RST)

1Ki 7:4 et il y avait trois rangées de fenêtres [‘windows’ shkufìm] à linteaux saillants, un jour [‘day’ mehezà] vis-à-vis d’un jour [‘day’ mehezà], trois fois. (DRB)

The biblical author used a very special term, ambiguously translated as both window and light – מֶחֱזָה [mehezà]. The root of [mehezà] is Het-Zain-He חזה. According to TWOT and Gesenius, the derivates of the root have the following meanings: look, see, behold, prophesy, provide; vision. The noun seer חֹזֶה [hozè] is one of the normative terms for a prophet. The nouns חָווּת [hazùt], חָזוֹן [hazòn], and מַחֲוֶה [mahazè] mean vision. All sources point out that the meaning window, occurs only at 1Ki 7:4-5, at the description of the palace of Solomon, but there are translations with light.

The words that cause the problems of understanding at 1Ki 7:4 are מֶחֲזָה [mehezà] and שְׁקֻפִם [shkufìm]. The Hebrew terms remain unclear and this causes not only fluctuations but also increasing uncertainties in the Indo-European translations. A small number of translations prefer to use light for מֶחֱזָה [mehezà] instead of the window.

German LUT, ELB, and LUO use only fenster (“window”) for מֶחֱזָה [mehezà].

Except for RWB and KJV, most of the English translations avoid the word light, and simplify the confusing Hebrew text, and use window. In such a simplification, they follow Septuagint and Vulgate. The same did German LUO, LUT, ELB, French LSG, TOB, BFC.

French DRB inserts the word jour ‘day’ instead of window/light “un jour répondant à un jour, trois fois” which sounds strange but day presents the idea for light which corresponding entirely to the Hebrew word מֶחֱזָה [mehezà]. Spanish LBA, RVA, SRV, R60, R95 use ventana ‘windows’. Russian and Ukrainian Synodal (UKR) versions adhere to windows (окна, вікна) as do the Cze. BKR. Italian LND, NRV use finestre ‘windows’ but IEP skips the windows at all. Portuguese ARA and ACF are at the area of windows (janela). Bulgarian translations vary: BUL1 (a protestant version) used ‘light against lights’ and ‘gratings’ (решетки). All other Bulgarian translations replace the light with windows. Some of the translations miss the problematic word [shkufìm], e.g. “There were window frames in the three rows, Ø facing each other in the three rows”. (NRS); “Its windows were placed high in sets of three, Ø facing each other.” (NIV)

The Septuagint offers a different order of verses from the Masoretic text. We find “beam” for verse 4 and “doors” for 1Ki 7:41 καὶ μέλαθρα τρία καὶ χώρα ἐπὶ χώραν τρισσῶς (LXT). The Vulgate carries out cultural adaptation and for obscure Hebrew words introduces “square beams” and “pillars”: 1Ki 7:4 [.] contra se invicem positas, 1Ki 7:5 et e regione se respicientes aequali spatio inter columnas et super (VUL).

What did the biblical author do with [mehezà] and [shkufìm]? Why do these words in this verse describe the architecture and not the most frequent (14 times) word for a window in the Old Testament חַלוֹן [halòn]? 1Ki 6 starts the description of the palace, and only there is the word [halòn], which allows the non-standard words of Chapter 7 to be translated as windows. The Hebrew worldview provides the biblical author’s view Solomon was a prophet because the root of [mehezà] produces the words look, see, behold, prophesy, provide; vision; seer. Whatever translation we prefer – window or light – the semantics is different in the Hebrew worldview because of root meanings.

If we accept the translation with windows, we should agree if it comes just to the exterior of a building. If we agree with the other solution, light, then this is a strange solution, because the windows would only emit light at night, and during the day do not emit light. The decision to choose a light for translating [mehezà] is the metaphor of spirituality emanating from a prophet. The author of the Hebrew text encoded the information that Solomon owned all normative meanings of the root: look, see, behold, prophesy, provide; vision; seer, e.g. He is a prophet who can see through time and space. The word [mehezà], according to the root paradigm, is specialized to inform that prophecy is done through a mechanism of connections between the worlds through the light in something like windows. Jewish mysticism confirms this hypothesis because mystics claim that the prophets write under the dictation of the Holy Spirit what they see in the dark mirrors of the last, tenth sephirah Malkut, ‘Kingdom’. Only Moses was able to rise to the sixth sephirah – Tiferet, ‘Beauty’, ‘Love’.

Between the mystical thesis and the grammatical-semantic information, there is a relationship based on semantics ‘see’, ‘prophesy’, ‘window’, ‘light’. These are very special semantic features because they do not represent the usual semantics of the lexemes but instead point to the place of the prophet in the world, and to the specification of the communication ‘prophet-sephirot’ or ‘pure man – divine level’. This is how the understanding of the Jewish view of the “dictation” from above can be derived. Hence, the semantic features are not semantic signs in lexical level but have meanings that unfold the communicative paradigm in the ‘God-prophet’. This communication is done through light and in the form of some sort of “windows” between the different worlds – the human world and Divine, the ideal level outside the material body, that is, in the realm of light. Differences in translation create ambiguity and mystery.

The root of the [shkufìm] is Shin-Kuf-Fe שׁקף. TWOT and Gesenius pointed out two anonym derivative sets of meanings. The first one is PAAL, not used, to bend, to incline. The second one is according to conjugation Niphal of the root, as Gesenius (1996) pointed out:

[…] to lie out over anything, to project; hence to bend forward especially in order to see, and thus i.q. to look forth or abroad; from a window (Jdg 5:28; 2Sam 6:16; from heaven Psa 85:12). Also of a mountain, to overhang, to look towards Num 21:20; 23:28. Metaphorically Jer 6:1 euil impendelh (approacheth) from the north. […] to make inclination; hence to look forth, to look out, to look, 2Sam 24:20; to look towards, Gen 18:10; 19; 28. Of God as looking down from heaven, Psa 14:2; 102:20; Exo 14:24. (: 1107–1008)

It appears that the bars at the windows of the palace of Solomon do not interfere and they do not guard the inhabitants of the palace against danger. The word שְׁקֻפִים [shkufìm] is one more linguo-semiotic Hebrew instrument to characterize Solomon’s abilities to look forth or abroad, to look forth, to look out, looking down from his position. The use of the Shin-Reish-Fe root in Jeremiah 6:1 indicates that the name contains semantic features of ‘coming’, ‘looking’, ‘looking forward’.

Jeremiah 6:1

O ye children of Benjamin, gather yourselves to flee out of the midst of Jerusalem, and blow the trumpet in Tekoa, and set up a sign of fire in Bethhaccerem: for evil appeareth [niskefà] out of the north, and great destruction. (KJV)

Flee for safety, ye children of Benjamin, out of the midst of Jerusalem, and blow the trumpet in Tekoa, and raise up a signal on Beth-haccherem; for evil looketh forth [niskefà] from the north, and a great destruction. (ASV)

The word שְׁקֻפִים [shkufìm] at Solomon’s palace are part of the prophetic abilities and arrangement of his home in the direct and figurative sense. At this description of the building, the standard term for windows [halòn] does not appear at all. Actually, in verse 3 is the verb [shakàf] translated as beams, frames, cross-beams, window frames, beveled frames even only with windows (KJV, NIV, NIB, WEB, RWB), is a term that marks both the royal and the prophetic abilities.

Probably the reason we usually do not mention Solomon among the prophets is his punishment for the rise of pagan symbols in the yard of the temple, but that does not change his abilities. The etymological data [Skeat 1993] reaffirms that in the antiquity, in the different traditions and languages, the window is seen as something very special. Examples of a window in other languages in the etymological dictionaries – English ‘window’ and Old Icelandic ‘vindauga’, both ‘wind-eye, an eye or hole for the admission of air or light’, coming from Scandinavian (Skeat 1993: 564). The word window is an element of the article of the word “Wind” in Skeat. Old-Indian gavaksa, literally ‘eye of the bull’, are confirmations of the thesis of the curious cognitive behavior in the linguistic thinking of the object window. Undoubtedly, the different Hebrew window names serve the semantic transformations of the idea of light in the Old Testament.

Psalms and windows are transformations of light being different things. If a psalm implies that it requires spiritual cleansing and elevation, a window is an artefact through which light does not only invades our homes, temples, and workshops. In Judaism, the idea that the window should be also a point for spreading light is quite developed. Not only Solomon’s home can radiate light (spiritual and artificial) but also the candles for Sabbath and Hanukah should be placed at the window to present this Jewish ideas and habits.

In addition to the ordinary emission at night, the word [mehezà] linguistically marked information to Hebrew readers that Solomon possesses prophetic instruments of contact with the Lord. This fact once again illustrates the well-known thesis that the prophets’ intent does not allow any accidental use of the words in the Old Testament. The sacred text relies on the whole spectrum of multiplicity and depth in the semantics of the Hebrew roots. The disclosure of light games in this spectrum could bring intellectual pleasure from the Hebrew worldview.

Psalms and windows, as part of the types of light and its transformations, bring a better understanding of the genuine parameters of the Old Testament. If the windows of Solomon’s palace have such a special sign function, it is interesting whether other window terms in Biblical Hebrew have something similar to such a linguo-semiotic specialization.

The window is an artefact that provides the light inside the buildings, which also have the ability to observe outside as the etymology proves a connection with wind and a hole in the walls.

In the Old Testament, there are circa 40 uses of the word window. However, there are four different words for a window in Hebrew. What is the reason for using four different terms for naming the same object? For Windows of heaven [arubòt ha-shamàim] and window [halòn] see details at Almalech (2012b).

9.4 Summary

The exceptional uses of light with secondary meanings represent both the freedom of biblical authors to handle biblical Hebrew and the original ideas embedded in secondary meanings. Judaism is a distinctly written culture in which two roots undeveloped in language can participate in the creation of impressive symbols such as the Messiah’s donkey, Noah’s Ark.

For Noah’s Ark, the root Tzadi-He-Reish צהר (light, amaze, shine, blinded by strong light, noon) was used to signify the window of the Ark.

For the Messiah’s donkey, there is a cultural tradition based on the “white donkeys” (Jdg 5:10) the root Tzadi-Het-Reish צחר meaning bedazzle, knock, shine, blinded by bright light, and Zecharia’s prophesy (9:9).

For Solomon’s Palace, the Het-Zain-He root (look, see, behold, prophesy, provide; vision) was used to signify windows registering the spiritual light and prophetic qualities of Solomon’s person. Translators made different decisions, with some choosing light as the most appropriate interpretation. What all three characters have in common is that they possess purity, righteousness, and the prophetic ability to predict the future and the present, they are just, and endowed with salvation. All three cases are in logical and symbolic connection with the light that makes things visible and gives life.

10.1 Light like a flowing river, stream

In Biblical Hebrew, seven roots used to designate a river. However, only the Nun-He-Reish root נהר has another group of derivatives meaning light, to shine (as a lamp), to be radiant (with joy) (TDOT vol. 9: 262). The first meaning of נהר is flow, stream (Isa 2:2, Jer 51:4) used 120 times in OT, according TWOT in BW. The second is be radiant (Isa 60:5; Jer 31:12; Psa 34:6[5]; Job 3:4) to be light, to shine (as a lamp), to burn (as a lamp), used much less often.

The verb נׇהַר [nahàr] meaning be radiant is used five times (TWOT in BW). For Isa 60:5 the English translations are: flow together (KJV, WEB), and with the highest incidence of be radiant (ASV, NIV, NAB, NAS, NAU, RSV, etc.). For Jer 31:12: shall flow (ASV, DBY, KJV, RWB, WEB), shall be radiant (RSV, NAU, NAS), will rejoice (NIV, NIB). For Psa 34:5[6]: were radiant (ASV, NIV, NIB, NAU, RSV, NRS, NKJ), were lightened (KJV, WEB), were shining (RWB). For Job 3:4: light shine and daylight are the most common choice. We can specify this kind of light as ‘the shine of the moving waters of a river’. A water reflection of the sunlight is the other explanation of the cognitive basis of the inner form of the paradigm of the root Nun-He-Reish. As TDOT formulated it: “the connection between [nàhar], ‘river’ and ‘be radiant’, if one were to think of the glittering surface of a great river’’ (TDOT, vol. 9: 263).

10.2 Blossom-shaped gleam [iatzitz]

The Tzadi-Yud-Tzadi ציץ root has brought this kind of light into the Old Testament. The main meaning of this root is blossom, flower. According to Gesenius (1996: 892), the meaning of brightness is the leading one in relation to the meaning flower. Gesenius motivated it with‏ “a brightness, i.e. a burnished plate of gold on the forehead of the high priest, Ex 28:36”: “You shall also make a plate [צִיץ tzìtz] of pure gold and shall engrave on it, like the engravings of a seal, Holy to the LORD.” (NAU).‏ ‏The words plate and turban are often used as a translation of the Hebrew word צִיץ [tzìtz], but it is actually a golden flower-shaped diadem engraved with the phrase “Holy to the Lord” for the High Priest vestments.

Psa 132:18 recalls the sacred uses of the root at High Priest’s vestments (the flower-shaped diadem צִיץ [tzìtz] and tassels צִיצִית [tzitzit] worn at the corners of Israelites’ garments, see Num 15:38), binding it to the commandments and presence of God: “His enemies I will clothe with shame, But upon himself his crown shall shine [iatzitz]” (NAU). The verb appears 8 times. In Eze 7:10 it is possible that injustice can be qualified as blooming in parallelism with the other most frequent root for flower [pèrah] and flourishing [paràh]: “Behold, the day! Behold, it comes! Your doom has come, injustice has blossomed צׇץ [tzatz], pride has budded [paràh].” (RSV); “Behold, the day! Behold, it is coming! Your doom has gone forth; the rod has budded‏ ‏[tzatz], arrogance has blossomed‏ ‏[paràh].” (NAU).

There is another root meaning shine, to be bright mentioned by Gesenius with traces to Tzadi-Yud-Tzadi ציץ. This is the root of Nun-Zadi-He נצה‏ ‏. The difference is that this root is homonymous and has four different meanings but flower is not among them (: 686–688). One of these four is shine, to be bright נׇצַץ [natzàtz],‏ נֵץ ‏[netz], while at page 868 the word [netz] is attached to the root Nun-Tzadi-Tzadi נצץ. The prophet Ezekiel (1:7) used the Nun-Tzadi-Tzadi נצץ root, although no authoritative author has a separate article on this root. The word is plural נֺצְצִים [notzetzìm]: “Their legs were straight and their feet were like a calf’s hoof, and they gleamed [notzetzìm] like burnished bronze.” (NAU); “Their legs were straight, and the soles of their feet were like the sole of a calf’s foot; and they sparkled [notzetzìm] like burnished bronze.” (RSV). TWOT in BibleWorks confirms that this is the only use in the OT by adding the following derivatives of this root: spark [nitzòtz] (Isa 1:31, only), blossom [netz] (Gen 40:10, only), blossom [nìtza] (Isa 18:5; Job 15:33; Gen 40:10), blossom [nitzàn] (Song 2:12, only), bloom, blossom [natzàtz] denominative verb occurs only in the Hiphil (Song 6:11; 7:13; Eccl 12:5). As can be seen from the examples, the use of the three different roots with close or equal meanings attests that this sector of spoken language has entered the biblical sacred text, but leaves some hesitation in the systematization of biblical Hebrew. The use of Tzadi-Yud-Tzadi is minimized, and the homonymy of Nun-Tzadi-He is almost confusing. Steins (1997: 366–372) pointed out that the etymology remains unclear.

In conclusion, the roots are used by the holiest elements (the golden tiara of the High Priest and the clothing of the Jews), through the most mystical part of OT in the description of the Throne of the Lord (Eze 1:7), through the blossoming of injustice to love in a Song of Songs. The Jewish mentality encodes in language this kind of light in a flower-designed form, used both literary and metaphorical.

10.3 The light of the splendor

The root Yud-Fe-Ayn יפע derivational stem includes shine forth, cause to shine, and the nouns brightness and splendor. The meanings usually are attributed to the monotheistic God:

He said, The LORD came from Sinai, And dawned [zaràh] on them from Seir; He shone forth from Mount Paran, And He came from the midst of ten thousand holy ones; At His right hand there was flashing lightning [hofìa] for them. (Deut 33:2 NAU)

Therefore, behold, I will bring strangers upon you, the most ruthless of the nations. And they will draw their swords against the beauty of your wisdom and defile your splendor [iafatèha]. (Eze 28:7 NAU)

Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; You corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor [iofateha]. I cast you to the ground; I put you before kings, That they may see you. (Eze 28:17 NAU)

For the choir director; set to El Shoshannim; Eduth. A Psalm of Asaph. Oh, give ear, Shepherd of Israel, You who lead Joseph like a flock; You who are enthroned above the cherubim, shine forth [hofìa]! (Psa 80:1[H2] NAU)

The ability of the monotheistic God to shine forth, to cause to shine,‏ ‏to be splendor, is revealed to the elect of the Jews – Moses, Ezekiel, and the righteous Job – in their theophany experience. At the same time, the righteous Job, in the darkness of his misfortunes, came to the idea that the meanings of the derivative stem of the root reach the wicked: “Is it right for You indeed to oppress, To reject the labor of Your hands, And to look favorably [hofia] on the schemes of the wicked?” (Job 10:3 NAU).

10.4 The light for mystical use

The noun brightness זֺהַר [zòhar] and the verb shine, shine brightly, send out light, radiate; teach, warn, admonish זׇהַר [zahàr] are used three times in the Old Testament. The Zayn-He-Reish root is a loan from Aramaic. The first use is in Ezekiel 8:2 (VI BC). The noun is an element of the description of the Throne of the Lord, being the most mystical segment of the Old Testament. Ezekiel is known for his description of the Throne of the Lord, but also for his mathematically precise instructions on the architectural plan of the Second Temple. The fifty-year exile of the Jewish tribes to Babylon had an impact on Jewish culture with the introduction of Aramaic words into biblical Hebrew, as well as the so-called round script, which is still written today.

The second and third use are in Daniel 12:3 (VI BC or II BC). The verb is in the Aramaic apocalyptic text. The Aramaic word זֺהַר [zòhar] is phonetically close to the Hebrew צֺהַר [tzòhar]. In contrast, the word [zòhar] is prominent in the title of the principal book in Jewish mysticism, Zohar, written by Moses de Leon at the end of the 13th century.

Then I looked, and behold, a likeness as the appearance of a man; from His loins and downward there was the appearance of fire, and from His loins and upward the appearance of brightness [zòhar], like the appearance of glowing metal. (Eze 8:2 NAS)

Those who have insight will shine brightly [iahzirù] like the brightness [zòhar] of the expanse of heaven, and those who lead the many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever. (Dan 12:3 NAU)

The fate of the word zohar is interesting in that it left Judaism and the Semitic languages and, as a transliterated form, became famous in Europe among the admirers of Jewish and Christian Kabbalah as the basic book called The Zohar (13th century).