21st Century Bible Hebrew -- v'hayah/v'hayu

I said something last week that I don’t think I discussed before, which is a real shame because the grammar occurs a lot in Torah but is always mistranslated.

Genesis 2:24 ends with a phrase that I translated “from then on X”.

כד עַל־כֵּן֙ יַֽעֲזָב־אִ֔ישׁ אֶת־אָבִ֖יו וְאֶת־אִמּ֑וֹ וְדָבַ֣ק בְּאִשְׁתּ֔וֹ וְהָי֖וּ לְבָשָׂ֥ר אֶחָֽד:

As we all know, hayah is “be”. Hayu is “they were”, perfect aspect. So you would imagine that this is the man and his wife forever being one flesh, which can be true, except that the grammar is also correct for an oblique modality, the result of setting one’s parents aside.

Also, hayah l’ means “turn into”.

But look at this important set of verses, Deuteronomy 11:13-14.

יג וְהָיָ֗ה אִם־שָׁמֹ֤עַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ֙ אֶל־מִצְוֹתַ֔י אֲשֶׁ֧ר אָֽנֹכִ֛י מְצַוֶּ֥ה אֶתְכֶ֖ם הַיּ֑וֹם לְאַֽהֲבָ֞ה אֶת־יְהוָֹ֤ה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶם֙ וּלְעָבְד֔וֹ בְּכָל־לְבַבְכֶ֖ם וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁכֶֽם:

יד וְנָֽתַתִּ֧י מְטַֽר־אַרְצְכֶ֛ם בְּעִתּ֖וֹ יוֹרֶ֣ה וּמַלְק֑וֹשׁ וְאָֽסַפְתָּ֣ דְגָנֶ֔ךָ וְתִירֹֽשְׁךָ֖ וְיִצְהָרֶֽךָ:

From then on, if you duly listen to My commandments that I command you today; to love the Lord your Gd and serve Him [exclusively] with all your heart and with all your soul,

Then I shall set the rain of your land at its period, lighter or heavier, so that you collect your increase, your wine and oil.

We can’t call v’hayah at the start of verse 13 an oblique modality. The preceding three verses describe the Holy Land. There is no necessary connection between believing that the Holy Land is as stated in those verses, and v’hayah. V’hayah introduces a conditional “if”, im shamoa, etc.

This is sort of the converse of va-y’hi as an evidentiary epistemic about time. Not “it must have been at that time,” but “From that point on” and then whatever will happen.

I had to search on all the occurrences of possible forms and analyze the context to see what was going on. V’hayah and v’hayu can be translated as “then” but, as we all know, “then” can simply be one step into the future. The context is always about something that persists long-term. A case in point is Numbers 35:12:

יב וְהָי֨וּ לָכֶ֧ם הֶֽעָרִ֛ים לְמִקְלָ֖ט מִגֹּאֵ֑ל וְלֹ֤א יָמוּת֙ הָֽרֹצֵ֔חַ עַד־עָמְד֛וֹ לִפְנֵ֥י הָֽעֵדָ֖ה לַמִּשְׁפָּֽט:

From then on they are for you cities for [the purpose of] refuge from the [blood] redeemer so that the murderer does not die until his standing before the witness for judgment.

Now, while hayah l’ means “turn into”, you can’t say that these cities “turn into you”. So the other possibility is that this is like the verse in Deuteronomy and means that from the point when the cities of refuge are set aside, they have a purpose which the rest of the verse states. This is one more example of how you have to analyze the context before just assuming that the meaning you are most familiar with applies everywhere.

These words are sometimes translated “it shall come to pass”. For once, this is not the fault of the horrible Septuagint. It ignores v’hayah in the verse from Deuteronomy and goes straight to “if”. It uses a future tense in the verse from Numbers. Where the translators got “it shall come to pass” is a mystery to me. But since it doesn’t apply in every place where we find v’hayah/v’hayu, and “from then on” does, I’ll go with the more consistent concept.