The designation “Being” (bhūtāḥ, more literally “has-become”) is “because-of-the-coming-forth” (udbhūtatvāt) of the One who makes himself many (Maitri Upaniṣad V.2). This is the true sense of “I am” in Exod. 3:14, where ehyé = bhavāmi (cf. D. B. Macdonald, The Hebrew Philosophical Genius, Princeton, 1934, p. 18); similarly Egyptian khefr. However, Macdonald (like C.A.F. Rhys Davids in To Become or Not To Become, London, 1937) does not see that becoming is not a contradiction of being but the epiphany of being, or that what can “become” represents only a part of the possibility inherent in the Being that “becomes.” God becomes what he becomes “to mortal worshippers” (The Hymns of the Ṛgveda v.3.2), but in himself is “what?” (kaḥ), i.e., not any “what,” and “where?” i.e., not “anywhere.” (ACKMETA, p. 336)