Ex 3:14a-State of the Question and a Possible Chinese Mystical Interpretation
Tak-Kwong Chan
June 1, 2011 DOI: 10.29448/fjirs.201106.0001 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key points | The paper argues that Exodus 3:14a sustains a dialectic between answer and refusal, and that the mystical thinking of Master Eckhart, Daoist texts, and the Buddhist Zen master Hui Neng similarly "unsay" the mystery of God or the Dao, illustrating a common goal and mechanism of mystical language. |
Abstract
Few verses in the Old Testament have evoked such heated controversy and such widely divergent opinions as Ex3:14a (”I am who I am”). As to the verse, can one speak of an answer to the question? Is it only a refusal to answer?Or does it even disclose a dialectic relation between the two possibilities? Our study can be divided into three parts. The first part attempts to deal with the exegetical or historical-critical analysis of Ex3:14a; the second part investigates its theological problem, whether God reveals Himself as Being or rather God conceals as beingless or non-being, and the mystical thinking of Master Eckhart (1260-1327/8) will be discussed. The third part compares the study with the text in Daoism and that of the Buddhist Zen master Hui Neng (638-713). The authors in the two traditions expose a kind of mystical thinking similar to that revealed in Ex3:14a.The paper, a contribution to the study of mystical languages, illustrates the common goal and mechanism of the languages that unsay the mystery of God or the Dao.