In the Lord's Prayer, what is the "Name" of God to be hallowed

[Miss Hepburn]

While there are many scholars who believe that it was pronounced in a certain way in Hebrew,
that pronunciation remains only an educated guess.

Since the Holy Name of God is unspeakable, any attempt to imitate the sound ...and there have been many imitations...
is similar to trying to pronounce the sound of waves crashing.
You have Aaaaah----rooosh.....Whooooshhhhh- aaaaaaah....
Is that the sound of waves crashing? No...it is an attempt with our breath
and lips and voicebox...sure.

That is why it is also attempted in Hindi as Soooo-huuumm...then,
Ham-sah and Ham so.... also Soooo-hung. (Similar to Yaaaahhhh-weeeeh...as good an imitation as there is..
but is that It, No...it is a sincere attempt.)
Why, there are Yogis in America that send out letters ending with 'So-hung,'...instead of' Sincerely,'.
That is their homage to the unspeakable Sat Nam...the True Name of God.
(And as you know...also, Om and Aum, Hu, and Amen...all from ancient rumors and tales passed down...imitations)
None from actual direct experience.

PS The Name of God is in you right, at this moment....and can be experienced...and when It is...It will knock your socks off.

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Hi, Still Waters,
I wonder if some research would be of interest to you on
the words Sat Nam...sometimes Sat Naam...and still again sometimes
Naam...see what you come up with.
Keeping in mind...the Creator's Name would have been before humans...before
the thought of a tongue or a voice box...it is not
exactly what you would call pronounceable ...in fact, It is
often phrased as 'the unspeakable Name of God'.
You will find your research fun...it will be different than the
western or biblical approach...but then again with more study
the parallels will become obvious.

Also, of interest to this topic...why would it be so important to include in the 10 Commandments:
Do not take thy Lord God's name in vain...
or
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain....
or
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
Ex 20:7-KJV

So, what is that Name? Are we in danger of taking the Name YWHW or Jehovah in vain...I think not...so then, what is this Holy Name or
Sat Nam, the True Name...that is to be so hallowed?
Indeed, it is unspeakable with the human tongue and way before a pen and paper and letters!
And while you are at it...what exactly is the Word?...that was in the beginning....Tom is a word...it is also a name...it is
also a sound...just to give you something to consider that most do not.

Let us know what you come up with.

What is 'I Am' in French, in Yiddish...
wouldn't God's Name be One Name...the Universal Name of our Creator God? The same in any language, on any planet,
any dimension...to a fish, to a bird, to a human, to an alien from another world? One Name...the One that was in the beginning
and always was...always will be?
THIS is why It is to be hallowed.
Another thought for your quest.

I've spent time with Sikh Masters both in India and right here in NYC. As a matter of fact, I love playing the Sat Nam chant and have done it for years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjx3zUktgG0


I am fully aware that the words sat means "true/everlasting" and nam means "name". In this instance, this would mean, "whose name is truth". Satnam is referred to God as the Name of God is True and Everlasting. (Wikipedia actually defines it quite well.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satnam

Sat often is interpreted as "That which is", which is how I interpret it as well. Your point is well taken.

Since this thread was on Christianity, I addressed it in Christian terms.

However, from a functional as well as a scriptural basis, those in the East often use the word "OM" as the "name" of God. It is considered to be the most natural sound as it emerges simply by opening the mouth, letting the sound come forth, and then closing the mouth.

The OM symbol itself describes the process of creation and the Totality. If one must indeed pick a sound as "the name of God", I personally gravitate towards "OM".

Of course, "OM" too is a gateway to the Great Stillness from which all emerges and to which all returns. "That which is" does not even say "I AM" or "OM" or "Sat Nam". The Reality is best expressed and communicated with in Silence. When one enters the Silence continuously, one attunes to the subtler vibrations (the Nada, Inner Sound) against which words like "I AM" and "OM" and "Sat Nam" seem gross by comparison. One must go beyond even those. Indeed, as you pointed out, the "name of God" is "unspeakable". On that, we agree completely.

That, however, is my sense. Feel free to continue this dialogue as I value your comments and insights.

[sky]

In Biblical times the name of each person usually said something about their character or mybe destiny. The different names of God comes from the idea that the writer had that described God to him personally, his own idea of what God meant to him.

El Elyon....The most high.
El Olam.... Everlasting.
Jehovah Rapha..... the lord who heals.
Etc etc.....

Gods name is personal to you, that is why we have so many different names in the Bible, whoever named him at that time chose a name that described his/her idea of their God.

Just my little opinion...

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

Indeed, as you pointed out, the "Name of God" is "unspeakable".
On that, we agree completely.
Feel free to continue this dialogue as I value your comments and insights.

Finally! Someone gets it.
The one in 10,000.

It has nothing to do with intellect or scholarly research...when you feeeeeel the Name of God,
the Word vibrating in your gut...then talk to me.
(That was rhetorical, not to you Still Waters!!! ha)

[markings]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Finally! Someone gets it.
The one in 10,000.

Lao Tzu, born 604 BC, BC!, got it.
How come only so few get it today? Talking about that would be much more profitable than talking about God's name.

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by markings

Lao Tzu, born 604 BC, BC!, got it.
How come only so few get it today? Talking about that would be much more profitable than talking about God's name.

One of my favorite quotes attributed to Lao Tzu is: "In utter emptiness and complete SILENCE, simply watch The Return."

Lao Tzu does indeed seem to have "got it".

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Finally! Someone gets it.
The one in 10,000.

It has nothing to do with intellect or scholarly research...when you feeeeeel the Name of God,
the Word vibrating in your gut...then talk to me.
(That was rhetorical, not to you Still Waters!!! ha)

First of all, thanks for the kind words. I appreciate them especially from you.

Having been a Phi Beta Kappa in college and an intellectual, the intellectual or scholarly research approach was a major obstacle for me. Fortunately, while everything has at least some value,that is behind me now as there is a point where one understands that such an approach eventually holds one back. I understand the intellectual, scholarly approach quite well......and its obvious limitations.

Originally Posted by markings

There isn't much point to talk with you about the process and value of labeling and naming, is there?

Since the creator made his Sons name above every other name--that did not include his name. His name is above his sons name. And since reality shows there is but one true living God, and hundreds being worshipped--that name carries great value and importance.
In the NT where it says--any who call on the name of the Lord, will be saved. Is error--The name-YHWH(Jehovah) belongs in that passage. 2 billion will be calling on the name of Jesus because of that mistranslation.
At Matt 7:21-23-- These are those who think they are Christian, told they are Christian, and will call on the name of Jesus to be saved--but Jesus tells them this-- Get away from me, you workers of iniquity, I must confess I never even knew you.---- So every one of these will be calling on the name of Jesus to be saved---they will be calling on the wrong name. They were mislead, so that Jesus did not even know them.
Jesus warned all--on account of his name--they wouldn't know the one who sent him=Father=YHWH(Jehovah)=== His name carries major importance.

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by RabbiO

If you want a translation - not a transliteration - basically the tetragrammaton, Yod, Hey, Vav, Hey - which is an archaic third person singular form of the verb "to be" - translates as "He will be."

It's interesting that your translation is in the FUTURE tense, "He will be".

Can you elaborate on the use of the future tense in your translation?

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

First of all, thanks for the kind words. I appreciate them especially from you.

Having been a Phi Beta Kappa in college and an intellectual, the intellectual or scholarly research approach was a major obstacle for me. Fortunately, while everything has at least some value,that is behind me now as there is a point where one understands that such an approach eventually holds one back. I understand the intellectual, scholarly approach quite well......and its obvious limitations.

the limitations aren't at all obvious to the learned... They'll defend their turf like football players defending the line.