The name Ephraim seems to commonly be given two etymologies, one referring to an "ash heap" and the other referring to "fruitfulness". Example I can understand the fruitfulness etymology linking אֶפְרַיִם back to פָּרָה, but where does the etymology of "ash heap" come from? Are these competing etymological theories, or are they somehow compatible?

  • I've added the genesis tag since Joseph gave the name to his second son in Genesis 41:52. The NET Bible explores the meaning of the name, but doesn't mention the "ash heap" definition. +1 for an interesting question. (I hope you'll activate your account here soon and that we'll see you around.)
    – Jon Ericson
    Nov 13 '12 at 18:37

I'm not sure this is a answer, certainly if it is, it is speculative. However, it isn't clear why "ash heap" is an option here, because the word clearly derives from the word for fruitfulness. But as we know, words are a lot more than their etymology. They are a network of associations tying together different ideas based on the context in which they are used. Just a a pineapple is neither a pine cone nor an apple, the word stands on its own meaning, and own usage.

However, a couple of points worth considering. First, it is more commonly used of the place name Bethlehem Ephrath. This is the place where Joseph's mother Rachel was buried, Jacob's beloved one. Perhaps the place was named "Fruitful" originally but then became associated with the mourning for Jacob's beloved Rachel -- especially at that time, so close the actual event. Hence the two meanings, originally the literal, later the associated meaning of sadness. Of course ash heap is strongly associated with mourning in the Abrahamic tradition.

The best parallel I can draw is our English word Columbine. The columbine is a beautiful flower found in the woodlands of high altitude states like Colorado. However, now in English when we hear the name we think not of the flower but the tragedy associated with the school of that name. Beauty and terror in one word. Were your name Columbine, what would you think? How would you feel?

Another point that I think is pretty interesting is the context of the verse. The name is given, and its meaning is ambiguous, with the two possible meanings being almost opposites. The name is first given in Gen 41:52, occurring right in the middle of the Egyptian crisis (see the following few verses), seven years of plenty (fruitful), seven years of famine (ash heap.) In the seven years of plenty, and seven years of famine, which did the LORD make Jacob, plentiful or mourning? The fruitful and ash heap ambiguity seems quite poignant in that light I think.

  • I was 3 miles from the Columbine school when the incident at the Aurora theatre occurred. Nov 14 '12 at 20:05

Pardon me for inserting my less than scholarly conjectures.

Due to the Hebrew words for

  1. Ash


  2. Fruit


In my own words

  1. Ash as an adjectival descriptor


    = Stuff that has been made to be, appear to be like, ash.

    Frequently, in languages including English and Hebrew, we use the adjectival or participle descriptor with an implied object. And then ascribe plural declension to that descriptor. Therefore


    = plurality of such ash-related stuffs.

    Hence, Ephraim



  2. Concoct a 1st person singular hiphil causative to fruit


    = I cause (target) to bear fruit.

    (Is that the way to hiphilize a word ending with yod? I'm not sure).

    And then similarly, ascribe dual or plurality - I doubly/multiply cause (targets) to bear fruit.

Conjecture #2 is less plausible because a pual form might be more appropriate - I am caused to bear fruit - I am fruitful -> I am doubly/multiply fruitful.

Therefore, I vote for conjecture #1 - Plurality of stuffs that have been made into or appear as ash. Which would collide with all the good things biblical/rabbinic scholars have said about the tribe of Ephraim.

Someone with good biblical hebrew could please critique my conjectures.

  • BTW, אפר in modern hebrew also mean to put on make-up. Does this come from an ancient source of painting one's face, as I think ancient Egyptians must have practiced. Therefore, the hiphil could imply a make-up artist. Nov 14 '12 at 21:09
  • Ashes for eye shadow? Only a guess.
    – Bob Jones
    Nov 27 '12 at 0:48

Both fruit and ash come from the two-letter sub-root פֶר .

Sub-roots are not words, though some are occasionally used as such. They are primarily metaphoric concepts which are narrowed by the intersecting ideas of the letters which are added to them.

פֶר means young bull. As such it is the metaphor of the young bull. It is viril (fruitful) and it is the sacrifice (ash heap).

The aleph (אֵ) represents separation (see the heavens and the earth separated by the firmament), so the separated bull is the ash heap. The yud (י) represents the initial spark of creation and when added to the bull becomes fruitfulness.

It is made plural with the suffix. The metaphoric meaning of doubling is that the thing happens in heaven and on earth.

*formation of words is called: Notarikon - Interpretation by dividing a word into two or more parts in the 32 rules of Rabbi Eliezer ben Jose de Galili

  • 1
    Google "Hebrew subroots" to find Jewish sources. Although it is all over the internet now, it was originally only taught to Jewish men over age 40. It is also suggested by rabbis that individual letters have hieroglyphic meanings and that an unknown Hebrew word can be discerned from the meaning of the letters.
    – Bob Jones
    Nov 18 '12 at 4:51
  • In the case of bull it is a two letter word as well as a subroot.
    – Bob Jones
    Nov 18 '12 at 4:51
  • Oh.. and English is not deeply rooted as is Hebrew, so I agree that your example is nonsense.
    – Bob Jones
    Nov 18 '12 at 4:56
  • 1
    Sub-roots is a very midrashaesque concept. Meaning they have expository and gematric value in scholarship but not much evidence linguistically. As you can see my similar attempts at hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/2062/… was voted down. Perhaps, whoever voted me down should consider voting this down too - to be fair to me. Nov 21 '12 at 2:23
  • Actually, if the Sefira Yetsira is read as a 'formation of language' rather than as an occult document, there is very early evidence for the sub-root as the 'gates' of which it speaks. I have since been collecting such evidence for a dictionary of subroots based on the same proposition.
    – Bob Jones
    Nov 19 '14 at 0:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.