The Linguistics of YHWH, the Ontology of 'The Existent', and the Integration of Universal Consciousness
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) February 28, 2026 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18808368 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Transcendental number Consciousness Fundamental ontology Philology Noun Absolute philosophy Argument complex analysis Presupposition Epistemology Quine Semantics computer science Linguistics Fatalism Absoluteness Realization probability Attributive Agency philosophy Materialism Transcendental idealism Horizon Certainty Denial Qur’anic interpretation studies |
| Key points | Argues that the Tetragrammaton YHWH is an ontological statement of continuous, self-sustaining Being, and that this structure independently appears across Western, Sufi, and Javanese traditions, converging on consciousness as the condition for ontological disclosure. |
Abstract
he Tetragrammaton YHWH is not a proper noun but an ontologi- cal statement. Rigorous philological analysis of its derivation from the He- brew root ḥ-y-h/h-w-h identifies an imperfect-tense verbal form encoding con- tinuous, self-sustaining, reflexively self-grounding Being—a Being whose existence is not a completed fact but an ongoing act. The argument then moves outward: this same formal structure—singular, self-subsisting, self- knowing Being—is independently arrived at by the Western ontological tra- dition (Parmenides, Aristotle, Aquinas’s Ipsum Esse Subsistens), the Sufi meta- physics of Ibn ʿArabī (Waḥdat al-Wujūd), and the Tantric Javanese philosophy of Mpu Tantular (Bhinneka Tunggal Ika, Kakawin Sutasoma, 14th c. CE). The convergence is neither historical accident nor interpretive projection: each tradition, when it pursues the question of Being with sufficient rigor, encoun- ters the same transcendental horizon—consciousness as the condition within which any ontological disclosure first becomes possible. This epistemologi- cal grounding is then subjected to internal challenge: Levinas’s critique that any ontology of the Absolute risks neutralizing the infinite ethical demand of the Other is answered by showing that non-dual consciousness radical- izes rather than dissolves ethical responsibility. Apparent counter-examples from Theravāda anattā, Kabbalistic Ein Sof, and traditions of genuine non- monistic resistance (Jainism, Sāṃkhya, Cārvāka) are examined: the first two are clarified as convergent; the last three sharpen the profile of the thesis by distinguishing its robust epistemological core from its more contestable on- tological extension. The result is a structural perennialism within the horizon of consciousness: not a synthesis that dissolves traditions, but a map of the ontological terrain that serious inquiry—in Hebrew grammar, Greek meta- physics, Sufi ontology, and Nusantaran wisdom—independently and neces- sarily traverses.