Weekly Torah Thoughts

[Work-for-ur-muny]

Chayei Sarah

[lubaby]

Chayei Sarah

Nice. Thanks 

[Work-for-ur-muny]

Update: The title of the weekly post is a link. I will try to do it that way in the future.

[good sam]

It hit me today that Yaakov paid for the bechora in cash, not in soup.

"And Eisav sold the bechora to Yaakov" and then "And Yaakov gave to Eisav bread and lentil soil."

I think the simple pshat is that the soup was unrelated to the transaction. It seems many meforshim agree (though Ramban and Ohr Hachaim do not).

[YitzyS]

It hit me today that Yaakov paid for the bechora in cash, not in soup.

"And Eisav sold the bechora to Yaakov" and then "And Yaakov gave to Eisav bread and lentil soil."

I think the simple pshat is that the soup was unrelated to the transaction. It seems many meforshim agree (though Ramban and Ohr Hachaim do not).

There is a beautiful pshat based around that, but it is based on the premise that he indeed sold it with the soup.

A group of bochurim in Europe got lost in a forest, and after wandering for days, they chanced upon the hut of an old Jewish lady. Famished, they begged the woman for food, but sensing an opportunity, she said that she'll only give them food if they promise her a tremendous sum of money. Having no choice, they reluctantly agreed, and she gave them some food.

After regaining some strength, the woman demanded that they pay up, but they objected. It was Pikuach nefesh, they said, and they should not have to pay the exorbitant sum. The woman took them to the godal at the time (IIRC, it was Rav Yitzchok Elechonon Spector), insisting that they pay her the money. The Godal ruled that they were not obligated to pay.

"Why does it say that Yaakov gave Eisav lechem u'nizid adashim? Eisav didn't ask for bread, only for soup? The reason is because had he just given him soup, Eisav could've gotten out of the agreement by asserting that he was dying, and that Yaakov was obligated to give him the soup to save him. Thus, Yaakov first gave him bread, and only after Eisav ate did he complete the transaction with the soup."

[AsherO]

It hit me today that Yaakov paid for the bechora in cash, not in soup.

"And Eisav sold the bechora to Yaakov" and then "And Yaakov gave to Eisav bread and lentil soil."

I think the simple pshat is that the soup was unrelated to the transaction. It seems many meforshim agree (though Ramban and Ohr Hachaim do not).

Do you see this explicitly in any Rishonim? Even according to the Seforno and Rashbam where there may have been other consideration (a monetary exchange) for the right to the firstborn, the lentil dish was a part of the transaction happenings.

To be the lentil dish being at least a part of the transaction (If not the consideration on Yaakov’s part) is integral to Pshat, because the Torah mentions the lentils and Esav being hungry, then they negotiate/transact and only afterwards did Esav “eat, and drink, and rise, and leave, and Esau scorned the right to the firstborn”, all in one possuk. If the lentils weren’t relevant to the transaction, and to Esav scorning the firstborn rights, then why mention them together at all?

[good sam]

Do you see this explicitly in any Rishonim? Even according to the Seforno and Rashbam where there may have been other consideration (a monetary exchange) for the right to the firstborn, the lentil dish was a part of the transaction happenings.

To be the lentil dish being at least a part of the transaction (If not the consideration on Yaakov’s part) is integral to Pshat, because the Torah mentions the lentils and Esav being hungry, then they negotiate/transact and only afterwards did Esav “eat, and drink, and rise, and leave, and Esau scorned the right to the firstborn”, all in one possuk. If the lentils weren’t relevant to the transaction, and to Esav scorning the firstborn rights, then why mention them together at all?

It wasn't the consideration, that's what I meant. Obviously it's relevant to the story.

[AsherO]

It wasn't the consideration, that's what I meant. Obviously it's relevant to the story.

You see that as pshat? I see the Rashbam and Sforno as outliers here.

[good sam]

You see that as pshat? I see the Rashbam and Sforno as outliers here.

To me it fits better with the flow of the psukim

[AsherO]

To me it fits better with the flow of the psukim

The flow of the pesukim takeh seems to make our issue questionable, but I think that’s because the Torah wanted to focus on the individuals and their positions vs. the transaction itself. Reading it in that context it does seem to flow and not necessarily imply there was other consideration.

[EliJelly]

There is a beautiful piece in Chasam sofer this week. That the lentil soup, being the סעודת הבראה for Yitzchak, was the only way to make this transaction possible for Yakov.  See attached.

[kayef]

Do you see this explicitly in any Rishonim?

The Ramban brings down such a Pshat (although he himself doesn’t agree with it).