B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

Panym at Genesis 32: 3

A form of panym / PNYM / פנים appears at Genesis 32: 3. What is the precise meaning of panym in that particular context?

Although panym is often said to have a literal meaning of “face”, Gesenius asserts that the ultra-literal meaning of panym is: “the part turned towards anyone”.

Here is Genesis 32: 3, where I have placed, consecutively, the translations of panym used by KJV, Darby and NIV:

“And Jacob sent messengers panym / before him / before his face / ahead of him to Esau his brother unto the land of Seir, the country of Edom.”

Those three different English translations collectively indicate that Genesis 32: 3 appears to be saying that Jacob sent messengers “ahead of him”, “before his face”, “before him” to “Seir” / Udumu / “Edom”. The Hebrew meaning of panym would seem to require that the messengers were sent in the same direction as Jacob himself was slowly going anyway (“before his face”), but with the messengers to move much faster than Jacob, who was greatly slowed down by his exhausted flock.

At this time, Jacob is moving (albeit very slowly) straight west along the northern bank of the Jabbok River (which is the southern border of the northern Transjordan). Jacob is heading toward the Jordan River, and then on to his beloved homeland of Canaan.

In Hebrew, the word panym seems to imply that the messengers went that same direction -- straight west -- to or near to an area that Jacob himself would soon be coming to a few days hence. That’s why NIV and Darby, combined, say that Jacob sent the messengers “ahead of him”, “before his face” to see Esau in “Seir” / Udumu / “Edom”.

Importantly, this reading of Genesis 32: 3, based on the above-noted apparent meaning of panym, makes sense if and only if, contra the ordinary view, “Seir” is given its one and only historical meaning outside of the Bible: the Late Bronze Age Hurrian-dominated northern Transjordan, north of the Jabbok River, east of the Jordan River, south of Bashan. (“Seir” is well-known as being the attested name of one of the Hurrians’ two divine bulls: Ḫurri and Še-e-ir-ri.)

On that historical interpretation (contra the non-historical locale of “Seir” asserted at Deuteronomy 2: 8), in traveling west along the northern bank of the Jabbok River, Jacob is on the verge of entering “Seir” / Udumu / “Edom”, where his older twin brother Esau lives. Jacob sends messengers “ahead of him”, “before his face” to see Esau there. That is to say, Esau’s “Seir” / Udumu / “Edom” is located west and/or northwest of where Jacob is temporarily encamped, with Esau’s “Seir” / Udumu / “Edom” being north of the Jabbok River, and just east of the Jordan River. Esau’s “Seir” / Udumu / “Edom” is therefore located “ahead of” Jacob, “before his face”, as Jacob travels straight west along the northern bank of the Jabbok River toward the Jordan River and Canaan.

By sharp contrast, the Hebrew nomenclature panym / “ahead of him” / “before his face” does not work if “Seir” is given its meaning in Deuteronomy of a locale south of the Dead Sea. The Dead Sea is n-o-t “ahead of” Jacob or “before his face”, when Jacob is moving straight west along the northern bank of the Jabbok River toward the Jordan River and Canaan. Jacob in fact never goes anywhere near the Dead Sea.
The conventional view of the geography underlying the meeting between Esau and Jacob, though virtually unanimous among all commentators, seems to me to be erroneous. Rather, in the Patriarchal narratives, “Seir” always has its Late Bronze Age historical meaning of the Hurrian-dominated northern Transjordan, north of the Jabbok River, east of the Jordan River, south of Bashan.

Esau’s Seir / Udumu / “Edom” was located “ahead of” Jacob, “before his face”, when Jacob was traveling straight west along the northern bank of the Jabbok River toward the Jordan River in the northern Transjordan. In my considered opinion, Esau is portrayed by the early Hebrew author of the truly ancient Patriarchal narratives as living near the later city of Jerash, in a part of the Transjordan which, though not being part of Canaan, would nevertheless end up becoming an integral part of Israel in the 1st millennium BCE. [Directly contra my views on the subject, most of today’s university scholars insist that the Patriarchal narratives are pure fiction ginned up by multiple Jewish authors in Iron Age Jerusalem, who knew nothing of which they wrote, who hated Israel because it had failed to protect Canaan from the Assyrian onslaught in the Iron Age, and who as such would never ever consider placing a close relative of the beloved Hebrew Patriarchs such as Esau in land that, earlier in the Iron Age, had been part of, ugh!, Israel. I myself disagree completely with all aspects of that ubiquitous “scholarly” view.]

Am I misunderstanding the intended meaning of panym at Genesis 32: 3?

Jim Stinehart

For the sake of conversation, it is best to quote the text in Hebrew.

[right]וְיַֽעֲקֹ֖ב הָלַ֣ךְ לְדַרְכּ֑וֹ וַיִּפְגְּעוּ־ב֖וֹ מַלְאֲכֵ֥י אֱלֹהִֽים׃ וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יַֽעֲקֹב֙ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֣ר רָאָ֔ם מַֽחֲנֵ֥ה אֱלֹהִ֖ים זֶ֑ה וַיִּקְרָ֛א שֵֽׁם־הַמָּק֥וֹם הַה֖וּא מַֽחֲנָֽיִם׃ וַיִּשְׁלַ֨ח יַֽעֲקֹ֤ב מַלְאָכִים֙ לְפָנָ֔יו אֶל־עֵשָׂ֖ו אָחִ֑יו אַ֥רְצָה שֵׂעִ֖יר שְׂדֵ֥ה אֱדֽוֹם׃[/right]
2 And Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him. 3 And Jacob said when he saw them: "This is the camp of God." And he called the name of that place Maḥanayim. 4 And Jacob sent messengers before him to his brother Esau, to the land of Seir (in) the plane of Edom.

The word in question is לְפָנָיו ləp̄ānāv. It's clear that the preposition לִפְנֵי lip̄nê (with its various personal endings) is not the same as the free state noun פָּנִים pānîm. The former, being constructed from the latter but not maintaining its literal sense, is a preposition meaning "before" in either spatial or temporal relation; and the latter simply means "face" or "surface."

The word pānîm does not mean "before his face." It only means "face." The "before" meaning comes with the addition of the lamed prefix, and the "his" meaning comes from the vav suffix. Ləp̄ānāv is the expression that means "before his face" or simply "before him."

This expression can be used to say, for example, that someone stands "before" the king or that one event took place "before" another (hence, both spatial and temporal).

The discussion of the direction of Jacob's travel and where he was headed may be up for debate, but we should be clear about our handling of the words of the Hebrew Bible. It may be the case that מִשְׁכָּן miškān "tabernacle" is built on the root שָׁכַן šāḵan "he dwelt," but miškān does not mean "he dwelt."

Miškān does not mean šāḵan, and ləp̄ānāv does not mean pānîm. In each case, the latter is the basis of the former, but we shouldn't refer to the one as if it were the other. They are different words.

It may be that the meaning of the Hebrew language can influence how we read the texts, but I hope that we can be more careful about the treatment of the language itself over against the interpretation of the meaning behind it.

Jason, I found your explanation helpful.

Jason Hare:

Your analysis of ləp̄ānāv is very helpful (being much better than my analysis of panym):

“The word pānîm does not mean ‘before his face’. It only means ‘face’. The ‘before’ meaning comes with the addition of the lamed prefix, and the ‘his’ meaning comes from the vav suffix. Ləp̄ānāv is the expression that means ‘before his face’ or simply ‘before him’.”

Thank you so much for that helpful clarification. But that then raises the issues I highlighted in my post.

1. Given your helpful explanation of ləp̄ānāv, shouldn’t Genesis 32: 3 then be translated as follows?

“And Jacob sent messengers ləp̄ānāv / before his face / before him to Esau his brother unto the land of Seir, the country of Edom.”

2. If so, then since we know that at that time Jacob is traveling west -- toward the Jordan River and his beloved homeland of Canaan -- along the northern bank of the Jabbok River, doesn’t that in turn strongly imply that Esau’s homeland of “Seir” / Udumu / “Edom” is located west of where Jacob is at that time -- north of the Jabbok River and immediately east of the Jordan River?

If that proposed analysis of ləp̄ānāv at Genesis 32: 3 is correct, then that would mean that “Seir” in the Patriarchal narratives has its Late Bronze Age historical meaning of the Hurrian-dominated northern Transjordan, near the later city of Jerash (further west along the westerly direction Jacob was travelling).

Jason Hare, that is a super-controversial assertion, because most all university scholars today say that the Patriarchal narratives were composed by multiple Jewish authors in 1st millennium BCE Jerusalem (as fiction) who (i) wouldn’t have known what “Seir” meant in the Late Bronze Age, (ii) hated Israel for having failed to prevent Assyria from overrunning Canaan, and (iii) accordingly would never ever consider portraying a close relative of the Hebrew Patriarchs -- such as Jacob’s older twin brother Esau -- as sojourning near Jerash, since during part of the Iron Age Jerash had been an integral part of, ugh!, Israel. I myself think that every single aspect of that ubiquitous scholarly view is false, but I am a lonely outsider as to these matters.

Given your great knowledge of, and respect for, the Biblical Hebrew language, do you agree or disagree with the near-universal scholarly view that when “Jacob sent messengers ləp̄ānāv / before his face / before him to Esau his brother unto the land of Seir, the country of Edom”, that means that the messengers were sent in an entirely different direction than the westerly direction that Jacob was going at the time (or for that matter would ever go in his entire life), namely, far south to the southern end of the Dead Sea?

It is my considered opinion that university scholars are improperly “forcing” the text here, trying to give ləp̄ānāv a meaning at Genesis 32: 3 that simply is not possible. Your post suggests that ləp̄ānāv means before his face / before him. In order to encapsulate that meaning, I myself would, on reflection, suggest a slightly less literal translation: “on ahead”. Since Jacob is moving west toward Canaan, then if Genesis 32: 3 is truly saying that “Jacob sent messengers ləp̄ānāv / before his face / before him / on ahead to Esau his brother unto the land of Seir, the country of Edom”, there is no way that university scholars are right in claiming that Esau’s Seir was located south of the Dead Sea. Rather, “Seir” in the truly ancient Patriarchal narratives then has (in my opinion) its historical Late Bronze Age meaning of the northern Transjordan near the later city of Jerash.

Am I misunderstanding what ləp̄ānāv means at Genesis 32: 3? Whether the Patriarchal narratives accurately reflect the non-Biblical history and nomenclature of the Late Bronze Age (my view), as opposed to being non-historical 1st millennium BCE fiction ginned up by multiple Jewish authors in Jerusalem who hated Israel (the “scholarly” view), is riding on this very question.

Jim Stinehart

As long as Jacob was traveling in a given direction toward his brother, it doesn't matter where he sent his messengers. They would be going in the same direction he was headed. The directional understanding doesn't change whether Jacob sent messengers or not. I don't see that ləp̄ānāv is important for the interpretation of the passage.

Jason Hare:

You wrote: “As long as Jacob was traveling in a given direction toward his brother, it doesn't matter where he sent his messengers. They would be going in the same direction he was headed. The directional understanding doesn't change whether Jacob sent messengers or not. I don't see that ləp̄ānāv is important for the interpretation of the passage.”

1. Everyone agrees that at the time when Jacob sent messengers to his brother Esau, Jacob was travelling straight west along the northern bank of the Jabbok River, in returning to his beloved homeland of Canaan (to the west). That is confirmed when Jacob, after going farther west, stops at Succoth for a while (just north of the Jabbok River and just east of the Jordan River), and then Jacob crosses over into Canaan and soon ends up sojourning near Shechem (where his sons will be reported as killing all the men of Shechem).

2. What is up for discussion on this thread is where Esau was living at this time. University scholars insist that Esau was living 100 miles south of where Jacob was when the messengers were sent. University scholars cite Deuteronomy for the proposition that in the time of Moses, “Seir” was supposedly located south of the Dead Sea.
University scholars say that the authors of the Patriarchal narratives are Jews in 1st millennium BCE Jerusalem, who as such (i) would not know that “Seir” was the name of one of the Hurrians’ divine bulls, (ii) would not have known that in non-Biblical history, the one and only meaning of “Seir” as a geographical place name was the Late Bronze Age northern Transjordan dominated by Hurrian princelings: north of the Jabbok River, east of the Jordan River, south of Bashan, and (iii) in any event, since Israel was by then hated for having failed to stop the Assyrians from overrunning Canaan, in allegedly making up a fictional history of their ancestors, Jewish authors in Jerusalem would not place a close relative of the Hebrew Patriarchs, such as Jacob’s older twin brother Esau, on land that had been part of, ugh!, Israel.

So university scholars claim that whereas Jacob is travelling w-e-s-t toward Canaan, Jacob at Genesis 32: 3 sends messengers 100 miles straight s-o-u-t-h to the southern end of the Dead Sea, being the alleged locale of Esau’s Seir.

It is my contention, contra the “scholarly” view, that the word ləp̄ānāv at Genesis 32: 3 necessarily implies that Jacob, who was slowly travelling west at the time, sent those messengers on ahead of him, farther (and much more quickly) to the w-e-s-t . Jacob is returning home to his beloved homeland of Canaan, to the west, and Jacob never changes his westerly direction, ending up first at Succoth and then later at Shechem, always to the west of where Jacob is -- near Penuel and Mahanaim, well east of Succoth -- when he sends the messengers to Esau. Jacob definitely was not planning to go 100 miles south to the Dead Sea, because Jacob wants to return home to Canaan, which was straight west.

You seem to agree with me as to the implication of the word ləp̄ānāv at Genesis 32: 3 when you write: “As long as Jacob was traveling in a given direction toward his brother, it doesn't matter where he sent his messengers. They would be going in the same direction he was headed.”

If that analysis of ləp̄ānāv at Genesis 32: 3 is correct, then “Seir”, where Esau lives, must have its Late Bronze Age historical meaning of the Hurrian-dominated northern Transjordan -- north of the Jabbok River, east of the Jordan River, south of Bashan -- being w-e-s-t of where Jacob is when Jacob sends messengers to Esau.

3. If the foregoing geographical analysis is correct, then the “scholarly” theory of the Patriarchal narratives is destroyed, and the Patriarchal narratives are much older, and more historically accurate, than today’s university scholars realize. Based on what the text says, Esau is portrayed as living near Jerash, which though not part of Canaan (being in the northern Transjordan) was nevertheless an integral part of Israel. Scholars err in thinking that Israel is hated in the Patriarchal narratives. Moreover, the Patriarchal narratives were composed by an early Hebrew author who himself lived during the Patriarchal Age, which was the mid-14th century BCE. He was very well acquainted with the short-lived prominence of Hurrian princelings in Canaan and the northern Transjordan at that time, he knew that “Seir” was the name of one of the two Hurrian divine bulls, and he knew that “Seir” as a geographical place name means the Hurrian-dominated northern Transjordan: north of the Jabbok River, east of the Jordan River, south of Bashan.

4. Jason Hare, you and others on the b-Hebrew list could do the world a great favor if you would point out that what the text of the Patriarchal narratives actually says, such as at Genesis 32: 3, is utterly incompatible with the “scholarly” view that the Patriarchal narratives are pure fiction ginned up by multiple Jewish authors in 1st millennium BCE Jerusalem who hated Israel. Every aspect of that “scholarly” theory of the case is false (in my opinion). The first step to recognizing that is the analysis on this thread of Genesis 32: 3.

Jim Stinehart

לְפָנָיו may also refer to time, as in 2Kings 18:5
בַּיהוה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּטָח וְאַחֲרָיו לֹא הָיָה כָמֹהוּ בְּכֹל מַלְכֵי יְהוּדָה וַאֲשֶׁר הָיוּ לְפָנָיו
NIV: "Hezekiah trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him"

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Isaac Fried wrote:לְפָנָיו may also refer to time, as in 2Kings 18:5
בַּיהוה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּטָח וְאַחֲרָיו לֹא הָיָה כָמֹהוּ בְּכֹל מַלְכֵי יְהוּדָה וַאֲשֶׁר הָיוּ לְפָנָיו
NIV: "Hezekiah trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him"

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Hence my twice mentioned statement that it was either temporal (time) or spatial (location).

Isaac Fried wrote:לְפָנָיו may also refer to time, as in 2Kings 18:5
בַּיהוה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּטָח וְאַחֲרָיו לֹא הָיָה כָמֹהוּ בְּכֹל מַלְכֵי יְהוּדָה וַאֲשֶׁר הָיוּ לְפָנָיו
NIV: "Hezekiah trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him"

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Hence my twice mentioned statement that it was either temporal (time) or spatial (location).

Essentially, you're arguing for a re-identification of Mt. Seir in the Patriarchal Narratives? That's what this whole thing is about?