Scholar Gerhard von Rad uses the term “community” in explaining TM at
Genesis 25: 27: “The adjective (‘tam’) means actually belonging to the
solidarity of community life with its moral regulations, a solidarity that the
hunter does not know because he is much more dependent on himself.” “Genesis”
(1972), at p. 266.
In my opinion, however, university scholars have been unable to understand
the characterization of Esau at Genesis 25: 27. For example, von Rad says
the following at pp. 265-266: “As they grew up, the boys lived completely
separated from each other, for they personified two ways of life typical for
Palestine, which at that time was more wooded: that of the hunter and that
of the shepherd.” But that is clearly not true, because (a) the boys grow up
together in the same household, and (b) even more importantly, after they
do indeed separate, Esau is a shepherd of sheep and goats! “6Then Esau took
his wives, his sons, his daughters, and all the members of his household,
his livestock [MQNH, which can mean “sheep and goats”, especially when viewed
from an economic perspective], all his beasts [BHMH, which can mean “
livestock”, and in context here cannot possibly mean “wild animals, beasts”],
and
all his property that he had acquired in the land of Canaan. He went into
a land away from his brother Jacob. 7For their possessions were too great
for them to dwell together.” Genesis 36: 6-7. Just as Abraham and Lot each
has a large flock of sheep and goats and they separate (Genesis 13: 5-6), so
also do both Esau and Jacob have large flocks of sheep and goats.
In a long chapter on Esau’s pluses and minuses, scholar R. Christopher
Heard incredibly only has the following single sentence regarding Genesis 25:
27: “Some readers may suppose that the (presumably Israelite) narrator is
already trying to slight Esau in the first sentence [Genesis 25: 27], with an
implicit valorization of Jacob’s settled, pastoral-agricultural lifestyle
over against an implicit denigration of Esau’s hunting lifestyle (so, e.g.,
Dillmann: 197; Gunkel: 291; Kunin: 107, 113-14; von Rad: 266; Skinner:
360-61; Speiser: 195), though readers who perceive an implicit criticism here
are by no means bound to agree with it.” “Dynamics of Diselection” (2001),
at p. 103.
But as noted above, Jacob and Esau will soon enough live the same
lifestyle. Scholars cannot figure out on what precise basis Esau is being
compared
unfavorably to Jacob here.
E.A. Speiser, “Genesis” (1962) at p. 195 is no better: “The over-all
contrast, then, is between the aggressive hunter and the reflective
semi-nomad.”
But who is “aggressive” in the very next lines of text? “31Jacob said, ‘
Sell me your birthright now.’ 32Esau said, ‘I am about to die; of what
use is a birthright to me?’ 33Jacob said, ‘Swear to me now.’” Genesis 25:
31-33. And do Jacob’s actions out at Naharim in eastern Syria lack
aggressiveness? “31He [Laban] said, ‘What shall I give you?’ Jacob said, ‘You
shall not give me anything. If you will do this for me, I will again pasture
your flock and keep it: 32let me pass through all your flock today, removing
from it every speckled and spotted sheep and every black lamb, and the
spotted and speckled among the goats, and they shall be my wages.’ … 42but
for the feebler of the flock he [Jacob] would not lay them there. So the
feebler would be Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s.” Genesis 30: 31-32, 42.
Jacob does not lack for aggressiveness! Scholars cannot figure out the
meaning of Genesis 25: 27.
Robert Alter, “Genesis” (1996) at p. 128 is similarly at a loss to explain
what is going on here: “The Hebrew adjective ‘tam’ suggests integrity or
even innocence. …There may well be a complicating irony in the use of this
epithet for Jacob, since his behavior is very far from simple or innocent in
the scene that is about to unfold.” Jacob ain’t no innocent, that’s for
sure! This unconvincing explanation immediately precedes the following
unbelievable attempt at explaining the next line of Biblical text: “It is
unclear whether the idiom suggests Esau as a kind of lion bringing home game in
its mouth or rather bringing home game to put in his father’s mouth.”
Finally, here’s Gordon Wenham, perhaps the #1 Genesis scholar in the world,
at p. 177. “Jacob, unlike his activist outgoing brother, is a
self-contained, detached personality complete in himself, hence ‘quiet’.” No,
Jacob is
not “quiet”. See above. “‘Who lived in tents’ contrasts him with his
wild hunting brother and may well suggest he would become a herdsman (cf.
4:20) like his father and grandfather (cf. 13.5).” But Esau as well becomes a
herdsman just like Jacob, per Genesis 36: 6-7 quoted above.
None of these various scholarly explanations works, in light of the
following two key facts:
(1) Jacob is every bit as aggressive as his older twin brother Esau.
(2) Esau ends up being a herdsman just like Jacob.
Isn’t it clear that the scholarly community is clueless as to what is going
on at Genesis 25: 27? What precise aspect of Esau’s behavior in hunting
with a bow is the Hebrew author castigating, and why? That’s the key issue
here. As I have been saying, if we can understand Genesis 25: 27, we can
understand the bulk of the Patriarchal narratives.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
