Genesis 16:13. The God who sees. רֳאִ֑י

[wilens]

16:13 בראשית
וַתִּקְרָ֤א שֵׁם־יְהוָה֙ הַדֹּבֵ֣ר אֵלֶ֔יהָ אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל רֳאִ֑י כִּ֣י אֽ͏ָמְרָ֗ה הֲגַ֥ם הֲלֹ֛ם רָאִ֖יתִי אַחֲרֵ֥י רֹאִֽי׃

In Genesis 16:13 where Hagar calls God by a new name, most English translations render אֵ֣ל רֳאִ֑י as “the God who sees ME.” Why is it not just “the God who sees.” Where does the ‘me’ come from? Just the previous context?

[Jason Hare]

16:13 בראשית
וַתִּקְרָ֤א שֵׁם־יְהוָה֙ הַדֹּבֵ֣ר אֵלֶ֔יהָ אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל רֳאִ֑י כִּ֣י אֽ͏ָמְרָ֗ה הֲגַ֥ם הֲלֹ֛ם רָאִ֖יתִי אַחֲרֵ֥י רֹאִֽי׃

In Genesis 16:13 where Hagar calls God by a new name, most English translations render אֵ֣ל רֳאִ֑י as “the God who sees ME.” Why is it not just “the God who sees.” Where does the ‘me’ come from? Just the previous context?

The suffix -î refers to the first-person pronoun. “God sees” is אֵל רֹאֶה ʾēl rōʾeh, but “God sees me” is אֵל רֹאִי ʾēl rōʾî or (as in the text) אֵל רֳאִי ʾēl rŏʾî. The idea of “me” is found in the suffix -î.

[Jason Hare]

—2. meaning uncertain: on אֵל רֳאִי Gn 16:13a, see especially White ZAW 87 (1975) 285⁵⁹ and Westermann BK 1/2:296: either —a. God of seeing, of perception; or —b. God who sees me (רֳאִי‎ = רֹאִי, see Westermann BK 1/2: 279); —c. further support for the first suggestion (a) is now given by H.P. Müller Monotheismus im Alten Israel und in seiner Umwelt 122¹⁰⁸: El of seeing, being seen; cf. the Ugaritic place name Ilštmʿ and Ilištamʿi (Fisher Parallels 2: p. 264 entry 14, and p. 352 entry 152) “El of hearing” (as well as e.g. White, and also Westermann, see above); in support of the second suggestion (b) see esp. Sept. ὁ θεὸς ὁ ἐπιδών με and Vulg. tu deus qui vidisti me, and see further Westermann BK 1/2:296.

Source: Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994–2000), 1163.

It is uncertain. Perhaps the -î isn’t so firm as a pronoun marker, but that is where it comes from. Notice from HALOT that both Greek and Latin translations included the “me” element.