Commentary for Genesis 23:28

ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה ועשרים שנה ושבע שנים AND THE LIFE OF SARAH WAS 127 YEARS (literally, 100 years, 20 years and 7 years) — The reason the word שנה is written at every term is to tell you that each term must be explained by itself as a complete number: at the age of one hundred she was as a woman of twenty as regards sin — for just as at the age of twenty one may regard her as having never sinned, since she had not then reached the age when she was subject to punishment, so, too, when she was one hundred years old she was sinless — and when she was twenty she was as beautiful as when she was seven (Genesis Rabbah 58:1).

A HUNDRED AND TWENTY YEARS Rashi comments: “The reason the word ‘years’ is written at every term is that it informs you that each term must be interpreted by itself. At the age of one hundred she was as a woman of twenty as regards sin [for at the age of twenty she had not sinned since she had not reached the age when she was subject to punishment],¹The Heavenly Court does not punish one for sin before the age of twenty. The verse thus indicates that at the age of a hundred, Sarah never sinned, just as at the age of twenty she had never sinned. and at the age of twenty she was as beautiful as when she was seven.” Rashi wrote similarly on the verse, the years of Abraham’s life.²Further, 25:7.
However, this exegesis of his³Ramban does not disagree with Rashi’s interpretation as this is based on the Rabbis’ comment in Bereshith Rabbah. However, Ramban does dispute which words in the Torah-text are the basis for their interpretation. Thus according to Ramban a similar interpretation would not follow in the verses concerning Abraham and Ishmael. is not correct. In the case of the verse, the years of the life of Ishmael,⁴Further, 25:17. it is stated exactly as in the verse, the years of Abraham’s life,²Further, 25:7. whereas these years of Ishmael were not all equally good since Ishmael was wicked in his early years, and only in the end did he repent of his evil ways.⁵See Ramban, ibid. Furthermore, the repetition of the word “year” at every term would seem to indicate an intent to distinguish between them and, thus, should not be interpreted to imply equality. Rather, the use of the word shanah (year) and shanim (years) in this instance is the customary usage of the Hebrew language, while that which the Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah,⁶Bereshith Rabbah 58:1. “At the age of one hundred she was as a woman of twenty as regards sin,” is an interpretation which they derived only from the redundant expression, the years of the life of Sarah, which includes them all and equates them. The Rabbis would not make a similar interpretation of the verse concerning Abraham [since in his case Scripture does not conclude with a similar comprehensive expression].

ויהיו חיי שרה, even though the Torah never revealed the ages of other women, in Sarah’s case it became necessary to inform us of this, as her death was directly related to the purchase of the cave of Machpelah. The Torah therefore told us for how many years Sarah lived after having become a mother at the advanced age of 90.

ויהיו חיי שרה, The life of Sarah was 127 years, etc. Why did the Torah use the term ויהיו to describe Sarah's life when everyone else's life is described by the word ויחי?

ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה ועשרים שנה ושבע שנים .The Torah repeats the word “year” or “years” three times, even though this verse could have been written using the word שנה only once. We encounter a similar “waste” of the word “year” and “years” in Genesis 6,9 in connection with Noach, as well as in connection with בני ישראל, “the Children of Israel” in Numbers 8,19 where that word occurs no fewer than five times We also find such a repetitive use of the word “year” when we are told about Avraham’s death in Genesis 25,7. Even when reporting the death of Ishmael in Genesis 25,17 the word שנה is repeated three times. Some commentators claim that this is a feature of the Holy Tongue, which endeavours to be clear and unambiguous. When a large number of years (unit) is mentioned the word שנה, “year” appears in the singular mode, whereas when less than ten years are mentioned the years appear in the plural mode, i.e. שנים. There is an aggadic approach to these seemingly superfluous words, especially in our verse here (mentioned by Rashi) which sees in the wording an allusion to the fact that Sarah at her death was as pure and beautiful as at 7 or at 20 years respectively. Seeing that the word שנה did not occur at the beginning of the verse, the verse concludes with the summary שני חיי שרה.

ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה ועשרים שנה ושבע שנים, “Sarah lived for 127 years.” Rashi explains that the reason why the word is repeated twice is to draw our attention to the fact that each period so designated represented a separate part of her life. She was as free from sin at 127 as she had been at the age of 7 and as beautiful at the time of her death as she had been at the age of 20. Nachmanides writes that Rashi does not derive this information from the repetition of the word שנה, seeing that there is nothing exceptional in this, and the sum total of the lives of lesser individuals has been described in similar terms, Ishmael’s death being reported in a similar fashion to that of Sarah’s, for instance. Rather, we derive this interpretation quoted by Rashi from the superfluous sounding introduction of the words חיי שרה-followed by the words שני חיי שרה. This formulation indicates that all these years had been lived under the aegis of purity and beauty. There are some books in which the version in the Bereshit Rabbah is as follows בת ק כבת עשרים ליופי ובת עשרים כבת שבע לחטא, “at 100 she was as beautiful as she had been at 20, and at 20 she was as free from sin as at 7. This is the correct version, seeing that girls are more beautiful at 20 than at 7 having learned in the intervening years how to use cosmetics to bring out their beauty.

The reason שנה is written with every set... I.e., and Scripture does not gather the ones and the tens in a set, and the hundreds in a separate set, as it did in Parshiyos Bereishis and Noach. Rashi’s is not asking why it says שנה for 100 years whereas it says שנים for seven years, for also in Parshiyos Bereishis and Noach it is always written שנה for hundreds, and שנים for smaller numbers. Rather, Rashi’s question is about the middle שנה, written after twenty, for שנה is never written three times. Perforce, it is meant to be expounded upon. Since one of them is to be expounded, so too are the rest to be expounded.

Es ist hier das einzige Mal, dass in תנ"ך von dem erreichten Lebensalter einer Frau erzählt wird. (Wohl wahrscheinlich darum, weil das Leben der Frauen der öffentlichen Geschichte ferner liegt und ihre Jahre nicht zur chronologischen Feststellung der Begebenheiten Bedürfnis sind). Außerdem ist noch hier die Eigentümlichkeit, dass es heißt ויהיו חיי שרה und nicht שני חיי שרה, und dies muss so eigentümlich sein, dass, was wieder eine Eigentümlichkeit bildet, der Text sich genötigt sieht, dies am Schlusse durch das wiederholte: שני חיי שרה gleichsam berichtigend nachzuholen. Dass die Weisen darauf hindeuten, wie sich hier das Lebensalter in drei Gruppen darstellt, ist bekannt. Nehmen wir es, wie es sich ohne weiteres darbietet, so ist uns gesagt: Sara lebte nicht hundertsiebenundzwanzig Jahre, sondern hundert Jahre, zwanzig Jahre und sieben Jahre. Diese drei Ziffern repräsentieren uns den Entwickelungsgang eines Menschenlebens: das Kindesalter, die reife Jugend, das vollendete Greisenalter. Ein geistig und sittlich vollkommenes Leben lässt sich nicht besser ausdrücken als: er war als Greis Greis, als Mann Mann, als Kind Kind. Ja, die Weisen bemerken: der wahrhaft Lebende nimmt aus jedem Alter die dieses Alter krönende Eigentümlichkeit mit hinein in das spätere Leben. Daher auch der Ausdruck בא בימים, er geht die Tage durch, er geht nicht auf und unter in die Tage, sondern er geht durch sie hin, nimmt alle geistigen und sittlichen Errungenschaften der vergangenen Tage in die kommenden mit hinüber und lässt sich nichts, was wahrhaft "sein" geworden, von den Tagen rauben. "Sara nahm die Schönheit des Kindes mit ins Frauenalter, und die Unschuld der zwanzigjährigen Frau mit ins Grab". Wie weit ab, und sicherlich nicht zu unserem Vorteil, kontrastiert diese Anschauung der Rabbinen mit der unsrigen! Sie suchen die Schönheit nicht in den Zwanzigern, sondern in dem Kinde, und die Unschuld nicht in der Kindheit, sondern in der reifen Jugend. Wir sind gewöhnt, von "kindlicher Unschuld" zu sprechen. Es wäre traurig, wenn das Kind beneidenswert wäre wegen seiner Unschuld. Unschuld setzt die Möglichkeit einer Schuld voraus, Unschuld heißt Kämpfe gehabt haben mit der Sinnlichkeit und Leidenschaft und Sieger geblieben sein, und nur die zur Frau reifende Jungfrau, sowie der zum Mann reifende Jüngling können sich den Kranz der Unschuld ins Haar winden.

'ויהיו חיי שרה וגו, “the lives of Sarah were, etc.” the description of Sarah having had more than one life must be understood as follows: during the first ninety years of her life she had been childless. Anyone who has no children is really considered as if dead. When you look at the numerical value of the letters in the word ויהיו the total is 37. This is the Torah’s way at showing us that the last thirty seven years of Sarah’s life were really the ones that counted.

And the life of Sarah It is not the [usual] way to record the deaths of women, even righteous ones, unless it is by means of a deed. For behold we find only Sarah, Rachel, and Devorah -- Rivka's wetnurse -- and Miriam on the withdrawal of the well. Sarah's death is mentioned since she makes known to us how the grave was acquired with riches (and this is one of the tests [of Avraham]). Devorah's death is mentioned to make known how the name of the place is called Alon-Bachut. Rachel's death is mentioned to teach why she is not buried in Ma'arat haMachpela. And why is it that their years are not numbered, except for Sarah? Since she is the most important of them all.

ויהיו חיי שרה, “The years of Sarah’s life amounted to etc.” People fond of dabbling in the allusions found through the numerical value of words or whole sentences, will note that the numerical value of the word ויהיו equals the “life of Sarah,” in other words, Sarah’s real life commenced with the birth of Yitzchok, at which time she was 90 years old, whereas she died on the day of the binding of Yitzchok 37 years later. This is the numerical value of the word: ויהיו. As long as a person has no child he or she is considered as dead. (Talmud Nedarim, 64)

שני חיי שרה THE YEARS OF SARAH’S LIFE — The word years is repeated and without a number to indicate that they were all equally good.

שני חיי שרה. When reporting the death of Avraham and Ishmael, seeing that the verses commenced with the words ימי שני, these words are not again repeated at the end of the respective verses. It is possible that in all of these instances the word שני at the end is a hint that the persons concerned lived until the completion of that particular year.

That every set is to be explained by itself. I.e., each set bears its own meaning and does not join with the other sets to form a single sum, as numbers composed of ones, tens and hundreds usually do. This is because the repetitive שנה divides them, placing the ones on their own, and so the tens and the hundreds. According to this [Midrashic interpretation], it is not twenty-seven plus one hundred. Rather, twenty-seven represents the first years within the one hundred.

Midrash Hagadol 23,2 claims that the reason Sarah died was that she was unable to make peace with the fact that Isaac was spared at the last moment. She thought he refused to be the sacrifice. The expression ויהי or ויהיו always alludes to some painful experience, whereas the expression ויחי does not. The Torah wanted to allude to the grief which caused Sarah's death.

Alle diese Jahre zusammen werden חיי שרה genannt, sie lebte in allen, ihr ganzes hundertsiebenundzwanzigjähriges Dasein war ein Leben, ein lebendiges, heiteres, bedeutsames, gutes Leben, kein Moment darin, den sie hätte wegwünschen müssen; und doch, schließt bedeutsam der Bericht, diese חיי שרה waren doch nur: w חיי שרה, Jahre aus dem Leben Saras, nur eine Periode, ein Bruchstück ihres Lebens; denn das Leben misst sich nicht nach der Spanne Zeit, die uns hier gegeben, צדיקים אפיי במיתתן קרויים חיים, gehen einer מחיל אל היל ewig fortschreitenden Entwickelung entgegen. "Gott", spricht ein Wort der Weisheit, "kennt die Tage der תמימים, der ganz Gott Lebenden, da ist kein Moment, kein Tag, der nicht in Gottes Buch stände, ein solches hundertundsiebenundzwanzigjähriges hieniediges Dasein enthält keinen Tag, der nicht bedeutsam wäre; aber נהלתם, ihr eigentliches Erbe, liegt in der ganzen unbegrenzten Zukunft, לעולם תהיה; denn, wie die Weisen einfach an diesen Vers anknüpfend bemerken, es heißt: .(שני חיי שרה (ב"ר

חיי שרה, “the lives of Sarah;” according to Rashi all the years that Sarah lived on this earth were equal in the sense that she was a good person during all these years. When we look at the way the Torah describes the years of Yishmael after his death, (Genesis 25,17) the Torah describes them in the same terms, i.e. ואלה שני חיי ישמעאל מאת שנה ושלושים שנה ושבע שנים; does Rashi imply that the Torah compliments Yishmael in the same manner as it complimented Sarah? When we accept that the word ואלה, “and these,” are a hint that he had become a penitent, as Rashi derives from the manner in which his burial is described in the Torah in same verse from the fact that he is described as having been gathered into his forefathers, and we know that a proselyte is considered as if newly born from the day of his conversion, i.e. free from sin, it follows that the years he had lived prior to this have now been converted as a prelude to his conversion, i.e. as part of that conversion process. Another way of explaining the Torah’s wording of the death and burial of Yishmael: the Torah did not preface his death with the unusual words: “and the lives of Sarah were,“ words which alert us that they must have more meaning than the plain text suggests. When Sarah’s death is reported the word חיי, “lives of,” is mentioned twice, not only once. This calls for closer examination. Rashi, therefore was quite correct in alerting his readers to this.

מאה שנה, “one hundred years;” Rashi comments on the reason why the word: שנה, “year,” is repeated here three times, when the Torah could have simply written: מאה עשרים ושבע שנה, “one hundred and twenty seven years.” He suggests that the Torah wished us to know that Sarah was as free from sin at a hundred as she had been at twenty, and that she was as beautiful at twenty as she had been at seven. This, of course, raises the question why the Torah, in reporting the death of Yishmael at 137 years (Genesis, 25,32) used exactly the same formulation? We can answer this by pointing out that when reporting Sarah’s age, each group of years is reported separately, as an individual unit, whereas when reporting Yishmael’s age at death, the groups of years are introduced in the construct mode, i.e. מאת, not מאה, i.e. all the years had the same common factor. Not only that, but the Torah sums up her years once more with the words: שני חיי שרה, “the years of Sarah’s life,” i.e. all her years were earmarked by a common denominator. If, when Avraham’s death is reported our sages have seen fit to read something into the way his years are reported, although there too just as at the death of Yishmael we find the word מאת in the construct form, this can be accounted for by the word: ימי, “days of,” which are superfluous and therefore available for interpretation. (Genesis 25,7) Rashi also adds that Sarah was free from sin at twenty as if this was something exceptional; this sounds strange as at that time everyone was free from sin, i.e. not held accountable until the age of twenty? We must understand Rashi as if he had written: ”just as she was free from sin at 20, she remained free from sin until the end of her life. Accountability for sins at the age of 12 or 13 for females and males respectively, commenced only after the Torah had been given. [Our midrashim describe Yishmael as “innocent” when expelled by Sarah, as he was below 20 years of age. Ed.] Sarah had not required cosmetics at twenty anymore than she had required it at the age of seven. We know from Rivkah, who accepted jewelry at the age of three in order to enhance her appearance, that girls in those days felt the need to enhance their natural charms at an early age. (Compare Genesis 24,22) There is a Midrash in pessikta zutrata according to which the reference to her being one hundred as meaning that she was as beautiful at a hundred as she had been at twenty, whereas she was as free from sin at twenty as she had been at seven.

At one hundred years old she was like a twenty year old, regarding sin. Rashi implies that from this comparison we learn that all Sarah’s days were good. But Rashi’s next comment — “‘The years of Sarah’s life,’ they were all equally good” — implies that “The years of Sarah’s life” comes to teach that all her days were good. If so, Rashi seems to be contradicting himself! But in fact, this is not a question. On the contrary, from the comparison of one hundred to twenty regarding sin, we would not know that at one hundred she was beautiful as at twenty, since we learn only one quality from each set by itself. Therefore, we still need “‘The years of Sarah’s life,’ they were all equally good.” A further answer: Since שנה is repeated in order to compare one hundred to twenty, which are the first twenty years counting from her birth [see previous entry], therefore, the “twenty-seven” years are within the one hundred and are not the additional years after the one hundred that the verse’s simple meaning infers. If so, we might think that during the twenty-seven years after the one hundred, she had sin and not beauty. This is why we need “The years of Sarah’s life,” to tell us that they were all equally good. And from “The years of Sarah’s life” alone, we would know just that her years were equally good in one quality. Thus it says שנה after each set, to compare them in both qualities: lack of sin and that she possessed beauty. And “The years of Sarah’s life” applies to both [qualities, telling us that in all her years she possessed beauty and she was without sin]. (R. Meir Stern)

Another reason why the Torah phrases Sarah's lifetime in this unusual manner may be based on Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer 32 where Sarah's death at that time is described as due to the fact that Satan informed her of Isaac's imminent death. The word ויהיו then reflects a "new existence, הויה, "i.e. although she had been allocated a certain number of years at birth, the trauma caused by Satan's information cut short her years. The reason the Torah speaks about חיי שרה, is to remind us that whereas the righteous give life to their days (such as Sarah), the reverse is the case with the wicked.

שני חיי שרה, “the years of the life of Sarah.” According to Rashi, the apparently superfluous words: “the years of,” mean that she retained all her virtues in equal measure throughout her life. The wording used by the Torah when reporting Yishmael’s life does not lend itself to such an interpretation, seeing that up until his death we had never heard anything about his age, as distinct from Sarah. It is clear therefore that the words underlined earlier were meant to relay an additional message to the reader.

Just as when she was twenty she was not considered as having sinned... Question: Here, Rashi implies that right after turning twenty she was subject to [Heavenly] punishment. But regarding “Noach produced Sheim...” (5:32), Rashi said that before the Torah was given, people were not subject to [Heavenly] punishment until the age of one hundred? The answer is: Sarah was subject to punishment right after turning twenty because they accepted the Torah upon themselves—and after the Torah was given, people were subject to punishment from the age of twenty. Thus, Scripture is telling us that even by post-Torah standards, she was without sin. (Re’m)

The Torah adds the word שני חיי שרה, the years of Sarah's life, to allude to the fact that she "completed" the years of the life allotted to her, but that the immediate cause of her death was the information brought her by Satan. As to my second explanation that she "lost" a number of years of the life that had been intended for her, you need to understand the kindness that G'd does with the righteous. When such a righteous person dies "prematurely," for reasons such as in Sarah's case, G'd does not deduct from the sum total of their achievements what such a person would have achieved had he not died before his allotted time. The Torah therefore tells us that Sarah received full credit for all she would have accomplished had she lived out her remaining years (Tanchuma פרשת כי תשא 3).

The Torah also alludes to the almost one hundred years that Sarah suffered either the anguish of childlessness or the animosity which developed between Ishmael and the son she finally bore at the age of ninety. We know from Rachel, (Genesis 30,1) that a woman's feeling of being unfulfilled when she has no children can cause her to consider her life as not worth living. The years in which Sarah "really lived," therefore, were only the last twenty seven years of her life during which she was able to enjoy Isaac's development in undisturbed tranquillity

Genesis 23:1: Rashi says all of Sarah’s years were good. The Midrash asks: why did Moshe merit to have his face shine? Because, for all of his life, he waited for the glory of Hashem and glory of the Jewish people and for there to be peace between the Jewish people and Hashem. It's known that Hashem created this world as a kindness to His creation; His only intention was to do kindness for the world. [Hence] we always need to draw kindness and mercy to the Jewish people, which is the glory of Hashem, and, concomitantly, the glory of the Jewish people, and it is good to them for all their days. When a person prays for Hashem's name to be sanctified in the world, he needs to attach, to that prayer, [the supplication] that there should be more kindness and mercy and more abundant goodness to the Jewish people since the glories of Hashem and the Jewish people are interdependent. This is the meaning of a Talmudic teaching: "if two people entered a synagogue to pray, and one of them finishes early and doesn’t wait for the other person: his prayers are taken away and he causes the Shechina to depart from the Jewish people.” The meaning [is that treatment of your fellow Jew impacts the glory of Hashem and that] you have to daven for two things-- glory of Hashem and glory of Jewish people and know that they’re interconnected. This is also the meaning of the Mishnaic teaching: whenever you ask about your friend’s welfare, you should mention Hashem's name. [In light of the theme, this means that] when you ask about your friend’s welfare, you should pray for the glory of Hashem [since that, in turn, draws blessing to the glory of the Jewish people and this will result in] your friend’s welfare and peace. Also, in the Torah, Boaz said "Hashem is with you.” [By doing so,] he was blessing the work of their hands. This is also explains the significance of saying the blessing of the Kohanim after the blessings of the Torah [since this draws blessing from Hashem’s glory directly to the Jewish people]. Also, the Talmud says "a Torah scholar is immediately accompanied by blessing.” Additionally, Avraham Avinu said “I will bless those you bless you”: blessing the Jewish people causes the glory of Hashem to be enhanced, as intended in creation. This also the meaning of baruch she’amor: [when it says] blessed is the One Who Spoke and it came to be [and] blessed is the One Who Makes Creation, [this is followed by] blessed is the One Who Has Mercy on His Creations. Hashem bestows goodness, and they sing and praise His name with appropriate blessing: “All powerful G-d, all merciful Father.” G-d is exalted when He has mercy. Moreover, when the Red Sea split, the Jewish people observed the dead Egyptians and saw His great hand, which caused them to sing to Hashem [once again, demonstrating the beneficial dynamic between the glory of Hashem and the glory of the Jewish people]. They sang at their best because of the visible victor; yet, if G-d forbid, it wasn’t that way, the Jewish people would still bless G-d since we bless Him for the good and for the band. However, how would that praise look? Doesn't Hashem's praise need joy? That's the meaning of the verse: satiate us in the morning with your kindness, and we will sing and rejoice all our days. [Thus] that’s the meaning of the verse: the entire life of Sarah was good for the Jewish people forever, amen

בקרית ארבע literally, the city of the Four, and it was so called because of the four giants who lived there: Ahiman, Sheshai, Talmai and their father (Numbers 13:22). Another explanation is that it was so called because of the four couples who were buried there, man and wife — Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Leah (Genesis Rabbah 58:4). ויבא אברהם AND ABRAHAM CAME from Beer-Sheba.

AND ABRAHAM CAME. Rashi comments: “From Beer-sheba.” Now this does not mean to imply that Abraham remained in Beer-sheba — as is indicated in the verse, And Abraham abode at Beer-sheba,⁷Above, 22:19. for how then would Sarah have been in Hebron? Rather, the intent is to state that Abraham had gone to Beer-sheba for the day for some purpose, and while there he heard of the death of Sarah and came from there to Hebron to mourn and weep for her. However, the expression of our Rabbis is,⁸Bereshith Rabbah 58:5. “And Abraham came — from Mount Moriah.” This is in accord with the Midrash which the Rabbi [Rashi] previously cited⁹In his commentary to Verse 2. which states that hearing of the Binding [in which her son had been made ready for sacrifice and had indeed almost been sacrificed] her soul flew from her and she died.
It would appear that the Divine command concerning the Binding was delivered to Abraham in Beer-sheba for there he dwelt and he returned thereto after the Binding, for so it is written at the outset: And Abraham planted a tamarisk-tree in Beer-sheba and called there on the name of the Eternal, the Everlasting G-d.¹⁰Above, 21:33. It further states, And Abraham sojourned in the land of the Philistines many days.¹¹Ibid., Verse 34. This refers to his dwelling in Beer-sheba, which is in the land of the Philistines, and it is there that he was commanded concerning the Binding. It is for this reason that he expended three days on the journey to Mount Moriah,¹²Ibid., 22:4. for the land of the Philistines is distant from Jerusalem. On the other hand, Hebron is in the mountains of Judah, as Scripture testifies,¹³Joshua 20:7; 21:11. and is therefore near to Jerusalem. Thus, when coming from the Binding, he returned to Beer-sheba, as it is said, So Abraham returned to his lads and they rose and went together to Beer-sheba.¹⁴Above, 22:19. This teaches us that he tarried there and dwelled in Beer-sheba for a period of years. Now if this was the case, Sarah did not die during that period immediately following the Binding for it would not be that Abraham lived in Beer-sheba while Sarah dwelt in Hebron. And so it also appears since Isaac was born in Beer-sheba for it is previously written, And Abraham journeyed from there towards the land of the south and abode between Kadesh and Shur and sojourned in Gerar,¹⁵Ibid., 20:1. and Abimelech said to him, Behold, my land is before thee; abide where it is good in thine eyes.¹⁶Ibid., Verse 15. There in that land Abraham settled in the city of Beer-sheba, for so it is written, And it came to pass at that time that Abimelech and Phicol the captain of his host spoke unto Abraham, saying.¹⁷Ibid., 21:22. Though it is not written there that they came to him from Gerar, [as it is written in the case of Isaac],¹⁸Further, 26:26. from which you might infer that Abraham lived in Gerar, this is not the case. Scripture clearly states that it was in Beer-sheba that they made the covenant.¹⁹Above, 21:32. Similarly, you will see that when Hagar was sent away from the house of Abraham on the day that Isaac was weaned,²⁰Ibid., Verse 8. she walked in the desert of Beer-sheba,²¹Ibid., Verse 14. for it was there that they lived. However, after many days, he [Abraham] journeyed from the land of the Philistines and came to Hebron, and there the righteous woman Sarah passed away.
However, according to the Midrash [which states that Sarah died at the time of the Binding], we must say that Abraham and Sarah lived in Hebron at the time of the Binding, and there Abraham was commanded concerning it. The verse which states that On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes,¹²Ibid., 22:4. poses this difficulty: Since Hebron is near Mount Moriah, which is in Jerusalem, why did he not arrive at the mountain until the third day? The answer is as follows: The mountain which G-d had desired for His abode²²Psalms 68:17. A reference to the fact that in the future the Temple of Jerusalem was to be built on that mountain. See Ramban, above, 22:2. was not revealed to him until the third day. Thus for two days he wandered in the environs of Jerusalem, and it was not yet the Divine Will to indicate the mountain to him. After the Binding, Abraham did not return to his place in Hebron. Rather, he went first to Beer-sheba, the place of his tamarisk-tree, to give thanks for the miracle that befell him. It was there that he heard of the death of Sarah, and he came to Hebron. The two apparently divergent opinions — namely, that Abraham came from Mount Moriah and that he came from Beer-sheba — are thus one [since, as explained, on his way from Mount Moriah he went to the tamarisk-tree which was in Beer-sheba, there to give thanks for the miracle]. Accordingly, the verse which states, And Abraham abode at Beer-sheba,⁷Above, 22:19. is intended to indicate that upon his return from the Binding he went to Beer-sheba, and from there he went to bury Sarah. After the internment he immediately returned to Beer-sheba and settled there for years. Scripture, however, concludes the subject of Beer-sheba all at once, and following that it tells of the burial, [which explains the lack of chronology in the verse, And Abraham dwelt in Beer-sheba]. It was there in Beer-sheba that Isaac married Rebekah, as it says, For he dwelt in the land of the South,²³Further, 24:62. the locus of Beer-sheba. It is thus the opinion of all the commentators that Abraham was in another place, and it was from there that he came to the burial.
In my opinion, Sarah had a tent for herself and her attendants. And so it is written elsewhere into Jacob’s tent, and into Leah’s tent, and into the tent of the two maid servants.²⁴Ibid., 31:33. Sarah thus died in her tent, and Abraham came into her tent with a group of his friends to bewail her. [This is a simple explanation of the expression, and Abraham came.] It may be that the word vayavo (and he came) indicates that Abraham was bestirred to make this eulogy, and he began to make it, for all who bestir themselves to begin doing a certain task are spoken of in Hebrew as “coming to it.” This usage is quite common in the language of Sages, as we learn in Tractate Tamid:²⁵Tamid, IV, 3. “He came to the neck and left with it two ribs on either side…. He came to the left flank…. He came to the rump.” And also (you have) their expression,²⁶Bechoroth 20a. “I have not come to this principle.” In Scripture, likewise, you find, he came for his hire,²⁷Exodus 22:14. meaning that he came for the purpose of this work and did it for his hire. However, it does not appear to me feasible that Abraham came from another city to Hebron. If that were the case, Scripture would have mentioned that place and would have expressly written: “and Abraham heard, and he came from such and such a place.”

בקרית ארבע, the name of the person who founded or owned this town was Arba. We know this from Joshua 15,13 where he is described as the father of a giant. The reference to a town by mentioning an outstanding citizen is familiar to us from Numbers 21,27-29 where the capital of the Emorites is described as קרית סיחון, the city of Sichon.

+++ To be proofread +++ Sarah died in Kiriath-arba—now Hebron. [Translator's note: heading should be bold] In the aggadic compilation Yalkut Shimoni (Remez 102:7) the author infers that this place had four names, namely, Eshkol, Mamre, Kiriath-arba, Chevron (Hebron) and I would pay attention [Translator's note: "אמרתי ליתן טוב טעם ודעת על" is a specific rabbinic idiom, trans. unclear] to those four names: in accordance with this place being allocated to graves it is called by four names that indicate four ways by which death is being found. 1) Because there is a manner of death, when someone dies for his own sin, as it is written (Numbers 27:3) "but [he] died for his own sin". 2) And there is a manner of death due to the transgression of other people, as with the children who are caught in the transgression of their fathers, and the righteous who is caught in the transgression of the generation. 3) And there are those who pass away in the absence of a transgression, by natural death and the divisiveness of the four elements [Translator's note: earth, water, air, and fire], since it is natural that the end of all that is composited is to be separated. 4) And there is the death by a kiss, and this is the manner of death for the righteous: they die by a [Translator's note: heavenly] kiss, which is an expression for joining [Translator's note: connection?], and the issue about this is, that when their thought and their soul ascends and sticks to the wit of the worker [Translator's note: i.e., the creator, "שכל הפועל" is a specific rabbinic idiom, trans. unclear], the one who ascended will not descend again, but his soul remains joined there.

The small "kaf" signifies that Abraham cried, but not too much because she was elderly, and also because she caused her own death when she passed judgment for her own deeds onto another (cf. TB Rosh Hashanah 16b) and therefore was punished first, and one does not eulogize someone who dies by suicide.

ותמת שרה בקרית ארבע. Sarah died at Kiryat Arba. We must not misunderstand that Kiryat Arba was the cause of her death. The reason the town was mentioned and was so named is to tell us that it was built on the four basic elements. Death normally implies a departure from, or disintegration of, the four basic elements that a body is composed of. When the Torah adds that "Kiryat Arba" is also known as חברון, this is an allusion to the word חבור, something that is joined together. The message is that when the righteous "die," this is not to be viewed as a process of disintegration. The righteous are still called "alive" even when they have ceased to function in regular bodies on this earth. The story in Shabbat 152 about how the grave of Rabbi Achai bar Yoshiah was disturbed by diggers on a property of Rav Nachman and how Rabbi Achai reacted illustrates this concept. What all this means is that while the righteous are alive in this world, the four basic material elements that every human being is composed of become transformed into something spiritual and attach themselves to their souls by means of the good deeds that such persons perform during their sojourn on earth. Maimonides illustrates this somewhat in the fourth chapter of Hilchot Yesodey Torah where he describes that one element is capable of becoming transformed into another element which was similar to it, i.e. earth can be transformed into water. When man cleaves to G'd all his elements become transformed into the element fire which forms the basis of the soul. Kabbalists are familiar with this.

ותמת שרה בקרית ארבע, this is where Avraham and Sarah resided after they had left Beer Sheva.

Sarah died. She did not die until a fitting successor was born and Avraham was apprised of the fact.

ויבא אברהם, “Avraham came, etc.” According to Rashi he came from Beer Sheva. Nachmanides adds that Rashi did not mean to imply that at that time Avraham resided in Beer Sheva on a permanent basis, whereas Sarah had resided in Kiryat Arba, (Chevron) as it is quite inconceivable that Avraham and Sarah lived in different locations from each. Avraham heard the news of Sarah’s death while he was in Beer Sheva on “business.” Some commentators think that Avraham at the time was in the process of establishing residence in Beer Sheva, and had wanted to prepare everything before bringing Sarah there also. According to the Bereshit Rabbah, Avraham arrived on his returned from Mount Moriah to find that Sarah had died from the distress that Yitzchok had been sacrificed. Nachmanides writes that according to the report in the Torah the commandment to offer up Yitzchok as a burnt offering was issued when Avraham was in Beer Sheva, where he resided at the time. This was the meaning of 22,34-35 “he planted an orchard in Beer Sheva and he resided there for many years.” This is why it took him three days to get to Chevron, seeing that the land of the Philistines was not that close to Chevron. If Avraham would have had to return from Mount Moriah to Chevron it would not have taken more than a single day at most, whereas the Toah reports that it took him three days to reach Mount Moriah on his way to binding Yitzchok on the altar there. If the Midrash were correct in saying that Sarah died [precisely during the time Avraham performed the binding of Yitzchok, we must assume that at the time of the Akeydah, Avraham and Sarah had both lived in Chevron, so that the meaning of 22,4 “it was on the third day (of Avraham and Yitzchok’s journey to Mount Moriah) must be that G’d for reasons best known to Him, did not want Avraham to locate the mountain until the third day of his journey. He had been walking in the neighbourhood until G’d indicated to him which of the mountains He had had in mind. The reason that he went to Beer Sheva after the binding of Yitzchok was to give thanks for the miracle he had been allowed to experience, and while there the news of Sarah’s death reached him. It is the consensus of all the commentators that Avraham was not at home at the time that Sarah died. My personal opinion is that Sarah had a tent which served as her home as well as the home for her maidservants. She died within her own tent, and the words ויבא אברהם simply mean that he came to her tent upon hearing what had happened It is also possible that the term described Avraham’s preparation to eulogize Sarah appropriately. Whenever a person prepares himself to carry out a certain assignment, the term used to describe the preparation for such an undertaking is ויבא, He came, i.e., “he became ready.” In my opinion, it is most unlikely that the word ויבא means that Avraham came from another city, as the Torah would have mentioned from which city Avraham had to come in order to make burial arrangements for Sarah.

To eulogize … and to weep. In general one weeps over the termination of the life of the deceased before eulogizing the loss to the living. For the righteous, however, death is not a tragedy because they are then able to attain greater heights. Thus it is only the loss to the living that is a cause for weeping.

So called because of the four giants that were there... Re’m writes: However, I do not know what brought Chazal to say that Kiryas Arba was named after the four giants [or the four couples], when the city’s ruler was himself named Arba! It is written: “And the name of Hebron previously was Kiryas Arba; he was the greatest man among the giants” (Yehoshua 14:15). Chazal should have said that Kiryas Arba means “the city of the man named Arba,” and then explain why he was named Arba, rather than why the city was named Arba. The Re’m answers: Perhaps it is because Chazal found a reason for the city to be called Arba, but not for its ruler to be called Arba. Therefore they explained that the city was so called because of [the four giants or] the four couples — and the city’s ruler was also called Arba, after his city’s name.

ויבא אברהם, gewöhnlich: da kam Abraham usw. also war er nicht gegenwärtig bei ihrem Tode. Es wird dahin erklärt: als er von der Akeda nach Hause kam, fand er sein Weib nicht mehr. So wenig misst sich der Lohn, die Verheißung, die den Vätern gegeben worden, nach der Freude und der Heiterkeit, die sie im Leben genießen. Zu dieser Erklärung muß jedoch dann auch noch suppliert werden, dass Sara von Abraham vor seinem Gange nach Moria von Beerscheba nach Chebron entfernt worden war, damit sie den Schmerz nicht plötzlich erhielte. Allein eine Erwägung der ursprünglichen Bedeutung des בוא dürfte diese ganze Voraussetzung unnötig machen. בוא heißt ursprünglich: sich aus dem Freien ins Haus, aus der Öffentlichkeit in einen Privatraum begeben. So bei Gideon (Richter 6, 19) וגדעון בא ויעש וגוי. — (Jes. 26, 20) לך עמי בא בחדריך. — (Jechesk. 3, 23) בא הסגר בתוך ביתך, ziehe dich zurück und schließe dich ein. So auch בוא השמש im Gegensatz zu צאת השמש. Also: Abraham zog sich zurück, schloss sich ein, um zu klagen um seine Sara und sie zu beweinen. Er trägt seinen Schmerz nicht zur Schau, macht kein Gepränge damit. Ob hier nicht darum auch ein kleines כ in לבכתה steht, stellen wir als möglich hin. Wir wissen, was die Sara dem Abraham gewesen, wie unendlich tief der Schmerz gewesen sein muss, wenn ein Abraham eine Sara verliert. Er klagt, er weint, aber er trägt den Schmerz in sich, zu Hause.

בקרית ארבע, “in the town or village known as the city of the “four.” The word ארבע is the name of the person after whom the town was named as is stated in Joshua 14,15: קרית ארבע האדם הגדול בענקים, “the town of Arba, the great man among the Anakites.”

ותמת שרה, “Sarah died;” it is most unusual for the Torah to report the fact that a woman died. (Miriam, Moses’ sister’s death are exceptions, Numbers 20,1 as are Rachel’s premature death in Genesis 35,18, and Deborah, Rivkah’s nursemaid in Genesis 35,8.) When such a death is reported it is not only a compliment to the virtuous lives these women had lived, but is always associated with a remarkable event. Sarah’s death is associated with the enormous amount of money paid by her husband for acquiring the land for burying her. Rachel’s premature death is reported so that we should know where she has been buried. Deborah’s death is reported so that we should know why the place where this occurred became known subsequently as אלון בכות, “oak of mourning.” [Also in order to draw our attention to the fact that her mistress, Rivkah’s death has not been reported. Ed.] Miriam’s death was the reason that the well that had accompanied the Israelites throughout their long march in the desert ceased flowing.

ויבא אברהם AND ABRAHAM CAME from Beer-Sheba

ויבא אברהם, even if he did not arrive from out of town it is perfectly in order to describe his arrival in order to mourn Sarah by the words ויבא אברהם. [Clearly, the author considers Avraham as having lived uninterruptedly in Beer Sheva ever since were told this in 22,19. Ed.]

בקרית ארבע, Arba was the name of a man whose was known by this “nickname” as he had three sons, and they, just as he himself were giants, so that there were four giants. Compare Joshua 21,11. His three sons were called ששי,חימן, תלמי.

To eulogize Sarah. Literally, “to eulogize for Sarah” — a eulogy is for the honor of the deceased.

לספוד לשרה ולבכותה, “to eulogize Sarah and to weep for her.” At this point the Torah does not add the words: “and to bury her,” as he had not yet secured a suitable site where to bury her.

Another explanation: So called because of the four couples that were buried there... Both explanations are needed, because each on its own raises the question: Why does the city’s name not reflect the reason for its origin? If after the four giants, it should be named Kiryas Anakim, and if after the four couples, it should be named Kiryas Zugos — but not Kiryas Arba. Since it makes no difference that there were exactly four giants, or couples, the city should not be called after a number which is not the reason for its name. That is why Rashi uses both explanations — to say that Kiryas Arba is called after the fact that it contains certain things which relate to the number four. E.g., it has four giants and four couples. But it was not called after one thing alone. Furthermore, we could even say it was called after the thing itself, but was called a number for the sake of brevity. The word “Arba,” alludes to two things the city has, both related to the number four. And since both are equally alluded to, both are included. (R. Meir Stern)

The Torah adds the (apparently superfluous words) "in the land of Canaan." This is an allusion to the fact that this present world is called ארץ כנען, a simile for the evil urge, Satan. This is so because the existence of Satan is the incentive for us to overcome him and to attain holiness and sanctity (Zohar 1,80).

ספר, vielleicht verwandt mit זבר: izuerteilen, jemandem das von ihm im Leben Errungene zuerteilen, seinen Wert aussprechen. Dem Begriffe nach wie: תנו לה מפרי ידיה וגו׳ (ProRaw Hirsch on Genesis 23: 31, 31). — בכה, verwandt mit בקע, ihervorbrechen, auch vom Quell aus der Tiefe בקעת מעין ונחל (Psalm 74, 15), weinen. In der Träne strömt das Gemüt aus.

בקרית ארבע, in Kiryat Arba; there is an opinion that the reason why the location where she died is mentioned, while the locations where the other matriarchs died were not mentioned is that Avraham had sent her there before taking Yitzchok with him to be offered as a sacrifice on Mount Moriah. He did not want her to have any knowledge of this. Avraham and Sarah at that time had been residents of B’er Sheva. Another commentator claims that Sarah had moved from B’er Sheva for health reasons as the climate in Chevron (mountainous instead of desert) was more likely to cure her. When she heard why Avraham had taken Yitzchok to Mount Moriah she died. This is why Avraham had to come all the way from B’er Sheva to mourn and bury her. Had she died in B’er Sheva, Avraham could have buried her there without problems as he was at home there.

לספוד לשרה ולבכותה TO BEWAIL SARAH AND TO WEEP FOR HER — The narrative of the death of Sarah follows immediately on that of the Binding of Isaac, because through the announcement of the Binding — that her son had been made ready for sacrifice and had almost been sacrificed — she received a great shock (literally, her soul flew from her) and she died (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 32).

To eulogize … and to weep. Usually weeping precedes eulogizing because the mourner’s sense of loss diminishes with time. In Sarah’s case, however, her absence was felt more each day.

ויבא אברהם, he came from outside the house as he had not been present when Sarah died.. Alternately, he had been out of town at the time when Sarah died.

From Beer Sheva. You might ask: How does Rashi know this? The answer is: Since the verse does not specify where he came from, it must be from where he dwelled before. And Beer Sheva, written in 22:19, is the only place mentioned by Scripture in which Avraham dwelled after the Akeidah.

לספוד לשרה ולבכותה, to mourn Sarah and to weep for her. To mourn her departure from the world, and to weep for her on account of the personal loss he had sustained. One can also understand it in the reverse sense, i.e. he mourned the absence of her righteous presence, and he wept because she had tasted death and her sun had set (her benign influence on the people surrounding her).

בקרית ארבע, this was a town that had been built already by Adam, as we know from Joshua 14,15: קרית ארבע שם חברון לפנים, האדם הגדול בענקים, “the name of Chevron in former times was Kiryat Arba, the greatest of all the giants.”A different version found in midrashim, is that the name of that town is due to it changing ownership four times one after another. First it belonged to the tribe of Yehudah; then it became the private property of Calev of that tribe; subsequently it became a city of priests, and eventually one of the cities of refuge. (Compare B’reshit Rabbah 58,4) This is why only its outskirts were given to Calev as is apparent from the wording in Joshua 21,12. Compare also in Baba Batra 122. ויבא אברהם, “Avraham arrived.” Some scholars claim that the term: ויבא, need not imply that the subject came from afar, even if he only came from the outside of the house this term is used as we know from Joseph’s entering Potiphar’s house where the Torah wrote: ויבא הביתה לעשות מלאכתו, “he entered the house in order to perform his tasks.” (Genesis 39,11)

לספד, to eulogise her with words and elegies.

Sarah’s death immediately follows the Akeidah of Yitzchok... Rashi does not mean that the sections are juxtaposed, because if so he should have said this at the beginning of the Parshah. Furthermore, how does he know that this is not the section’s proper place, [so that the juxtaposition is significant]? Rather, [Rashi means that the events] are juxtaposed in time, as Chazal had an oral tradition that Sarah died close to the Akeidah, and they found support for this in the phrase, “Avraham came.” [Although Avraham came from Beer Sheva, he was there for just a short while (see Rashi on 22:19), so it is as if he came straight from the Akeidah.] (Re’m)

לספוד לשרה ולבכותה, “to eulogize Sarah and to weep over her loss.” He had not secured a suitable plot where to bury her.

ולבכותה, and to weep for her. These two verbs are used on occasion without the prepositions אל and על as for instance in Psalms 69,11 ואבכה בצום נפשי, “when I wept and fasted;” the meaning of the prefix ב in front of צום is equivalent to the preposition על, “I fasted on account of the threat to my soul.” Compare also Genesis 36,35 ויבך אותו אביו, “his father wept for him.”

As a result of the news of the Akeidah, that her son had been prepared for slaughter... Otherwise, why does the Torah write, “Avraham came,” teaching that he came from Mount Moriah? [See end of previous entry.] Perforce it is to tell us, “As a result...”

And almost not been slaughtered, her soul departed from her and she died. You might ask: Should Rashi not have said, “Almost been slaughtered”? The answer is: An emissary came from Mount Moriah, told her about the Akeidah, and began to say how her son had been prepared for slaughter. He delayed the end of his account that Yitzchok was actually saved from slaughter. He “almost” told her that Yitzchok had “not been slaughtered,” but a moment before, she became so shocked by his words that her spirit and soul departed. (Mahara’i)

מעל פני מתו, From before his dead one. It is assumed that the "dead one" was aware of what went on around her as long as the lid had not been put on the casket or equivalent (compare Shabbat 152). This also teaches that the dead is to lie on his back (Baba Batra 74).

ויקם אברהם מעל פני מתו, in order to attend to the funeral arrangements for the body of Sarah. The reason why the Torah added the word מתו, “his dead,” seeing we all know that Sarah had been his wife, i.e. “his dead,” is that this is an apt description for the body of the deceased person, such as מתי, “my dead,” in verse 4, or מתך, “your dead,” in verse 6.

מעל פני מתו, וידבר אל בני חת. As long as he had not buried Sarah he was not yet a mourner in the technical meaning of the word. He was therefore able to leave his house and assemble the people of the town.

ויקם ויאמר, er trennt sich nur von seinem Toten, um in dessen Angelegenheit zu verhandeln; daher die Lehre der Weisen: das natürliche Verhältnis zu dem hin gestorbenen Toten bedingt, dass, so lange der Tote daliegt, der Verwandte an gar nichts denken soll, als dem Toten gerecht zu werden. Dieser soll ihm so lange immer gegenwärtig sein, wie es im folgenden Vers heißt: ואקברה מתי מלפני.

וידבר אל בני חת, the בני חת were the inhabitants of the town, whereas חת was a son of Canaan. (compare 10,15). Avraham assembled all of them to one location in order to address them.

וידבר אל בני חת לאמור. He spoke to the Hittites, to say. The word לאמור is to counteract the impression that Abraham asked for something gratis when he said: תנו לי, "give me permanent possession, etc!" Abraham would not be satisfied with just any gift the Hittites were willing to give him, but this was only an introduction to negotiations leading to the acquisition of the cave of Machpelah.

Furthermore, the Torah wanted to explain why Abraham needed to speak to the Hittites, when the land in question belonged to one man only, and the whole transaction should have been simple and uncomplicated. A cave, unlike a field, could not be worked like a field, was not useful to its owner to build on, etc.; therefore normal proof of ownership might be difficult to establish by his heirs in the future. This is why Abraham wanted everybody present as witnesses. The purchase would be fully valid and would not ever be contested after all these preconditions had been met.

Abraham also wanted to refute any suggestion that he wanted something for nothing. By saying לאמור, he indicated that he would negotiate (establish a price) for this acquisiton.

גר ותושב אנכי עמכם I AM A STRANGER AND A SETTLER WITH YOU — A stranger having come from another land, but I have settled down amongst you. A Midrashic explanation is: if you agree to sell me the land then I will regard myself as a stranger and will pay for it, but if not, I shall claim it as a settler and will take it as my legal right, because the Holy One, blessed be He, said to me, (12:7) “Unto thy seed I give this land" (Genesis Rabbah 58:6).

I AM A STRANGER AND SOJOURNER WITH YOU. It was customary for them to have separate burial grounds for each family and one burial ground for the internment of all strangers. Now Abraham said to the children of Heth: “I am a stranger from another land and have not inherited a burial ground in this land from my ancestors. Now I am a sojourner with you since I have desired to dwell in this land. Therefore give me a burying-place for an everlasting possession just as one of you.” However, since Abraham used the word “t’nu (give), [which has the same root as matanah,” (gift)], they suspected that he desired it from them as a gift. They therefore answered him: “You are not regarded by us as a stranger or sojourner. Rather, you are a king. G-d has made you king over us, and we and our land are subservient to you. Take any burial ground you desire, and bury your dead there. It shall be unto you a possession of a burial-place forever since no one of us shall withhold it from you.”

גר ותושב אנכי, I have come from a distant land to sojourn here, but in the meantime I have made myself at home amongst you. Since I did not have parents here, I also have no ancestral burial plots.

גר ותושב, because I used to be a stranger here, I do not possess an ancestral burial ground. The word is used in this sense by Isaiah 22,16 ומי לך פה כי חצבת לך פה קבר, “whom have you here that you have hewn out a tomb for yourself here?”

גר ותושב אנכי. "I am a stranger and resident. Abraham's description of his legal status is based on Maimonides Hilchot Zechiyah U-matanah 3,11: Whereas one must not give a gift to an idolator, one may either give a gift or sell to a resident stranger (גר תושב) because the Torah writes: "the resident stranger let live by your side" (Leviticus 25,35). We need to appreciate that our holy Torah applies reason, and especially so in our conduct on this earth. Just as we Jews are commanded to deal with resident strangers in a humane manner, so reason dictates that people all over the earth should conduct themselves with one another in a like manner. It is a universal obligation to enable resident strangers to live undisturbed and to be able to receive gifts. It is this principle Abraham alluded to when he said: גר ותושב אנכי תנו לי, "since I am a resident stranger, give me, etc." He made a point of using the word גר, alien, not just תושב, resident, in order to emphasise that though he was an alien, the fact that he resided amongst them entitled him to what he requested. There is a spiritual dimension to Abraham describing himself as an alien. He did not consider it seemly for a human being to describe himself as a "resident" on this earth, seeing that he looked forward to a permanent status in another, higher life.

גר ותושב, I describe myself first and foremost as a stranger, seeing that I have come from another country. Yet I also describe myself as a resident, seeing that I have lived among you for many years and I intend to continue to remain among you. This is why I am asking you to give me some place within your country as an inalienable place to be mine and my son’s after me. At the moment I ask for only enough to bury my dead.

גר ותושב אנכי עמכם, “I am both a stranger and a resident amongst you.” What he meant was that as far as not having been born in the land of Canaan he was a “stranger,” so that he did not have a piece of earth that would serve as his burial ground by right. If he were to bury Sarah on a piece of land belonging to someone else, that someone could raise valid objections and even dig up the soil forcing him to rebury Sarah elsewhere. Nachmanides understands the prevailing custom as each family owning burial plots for members of their respective families, whereas for strangers (not born locally) there was a mass grave where all such people would be interred. Avraham pointed out that as far as local custom was concerned he was indeed a stranger, though he had lived in this land for over 60 years. Still, he had not inherited a burial site from his father as he had not lived in the land of Canaan. He now requested that he be given the benefits of the status of a resident. He did not want to deprive anyone of part of their ancestral holdings, but he required to own in perpetuity, in a manner that could not be challenged, a piece of ground wherein to bury his wife. The local inhabitants were under the mistaken impression that he requested to be given such a piece of land for free, seeing Avraham had used the expression תנו לי, “give me.” This is why they responded that his standing was such that no one would refuse to give him even a site he had earmarked for his own burial in the future. Such a piece of burial ground would indeed be deeded to him in perpetuity. Other commentators hold that just as Avraham had used the term תנו לי, “give to me,” as a figure of speech, never intending to receive such as a present, so when the locals used the same expression they also did not mean literally to give him such a burial place. When they used the expression במבחר קברנו, they did not refer to the “choicest,” but to a random grave site belonging to some family without adding anything about the final status of such a piece of land. Avraham paid strict attention to the nuances in the Hittites’ offer and proceeded to offer generous payment.

תנו לי אחוזת קבר עמכם, “let me have possession of a burial ground amongst you, etc.” It was the custom for every family to have its own field as a burial ground for its members, whereas they had set aside a special plot of land on which to bury aliens. This is what prompted Avraham to use the preamble: גר ותושב אנכי עמכם, “on the one hand I am an alien, seeing that I have come here from a distant land, and this is why I do not own a burial plot of my own. On the other hand, I have been very willing to become a resident amongst you, etc.”
They answered him: “Listen to us, my lord etc.” On the one hand they addressed him as a group, saying: “listen to us.” On the other hand, they continued with the singular “my lord.” The reason for this was that a single individual was conducting this conversation though he spoke in the name of a multitude. When this individual, i.e. the spokesman, continued by saying: “you are a prince in our midst, choose from the choicest of our burial grounds, etc.,” adding the compliment: “you are a prince of G’d,” he spoke in the name of the people who had made him their spokesman.
The term גר, “stranger, alien,” is demeaning, whereas the expression נשיא אלוהים אתה בתוכנו, “you are a prince of G’d amongst us,” is a compliment, contrasting Avraham’s stature amongst them with that of a stranger. They suggested that they themselves as well as their land was at Avraham’s disposal. (compare Genesis 47,19 where loss of land is equated with the status of subservience). As a result of their considering Avraham as royalty, he had the right to choose whatever piece of land he desired as his burial ground. Nobody would deny him even land he had previously reserved for his own eventual interment. When Avraham heard this, he immediately responded with the words: “if indeed you wish me to bury my dead, etc.” He meant that he had no intention of burying his dead in any unknown field; rather, he had a particular spot in mind for which they needed to speak to Efron son of Tzochar, the owner of that particular piece of property. This is Nachmanides’ version of what transpired here.

I am a foreigner (or “sojourner”) and a resident. A sojourner does not usually purchase a family burial plot because he does not intend on remaining. Conversely, a resident does not need to buy one because he possesses his own land. Avraham, however, has been a sojourner until now but would like to become a resident. That is why he is seeking to purchase a plot.

For God has told me, “To your descendants I will give this land.” You might ask: Rashi explained in Parshas Lech Lecha, on “The Canaanites and the Perizzites were then living in the land” (13:7), that Avraham did not yet have possession of the land. Does this not imply that Avraham did not have a portion in it as yet? The answer is: In the above verse, Avraham did not yet have children, but now he did. This is why Rashi states here that Hashem said to him: “To your descendants I will give this land” — and now he had descendants. Accordingly, [Avraham said to them]: “At least grant me the possession of a grave site, although my descendants are not yet ready to inherit the land, as they are still few.”

גור ,גר: bodenlos sein, nicht auf eigenem Boden sein, davon מגורָה, (und vielleicht auch גרֶן wie גרזן von גרז), wo das dem Boden entnommene Getreide aufgenommen wird. גור מפני ,לא תגורו מפני איש, vor jemandem zurückweichen, seinen Stand und Halt vor jemandem verlieren. — גר ותושב: Ich habe kein Recht an eurem Lande, wohne aber bereits lange unter euch. — אְַחוזָה. Wenn man dies ge- wohnlich als Ausdruck sür Besitz erklärt, weil "der Gegenstand gefasst" wird, so ist dies schwerlich zutreffend. אחוזה kommt nur vom Bodenbesitz vor, der ja eben nicht gefasst werden kann, nie aber von beweglichem Eigentum. Ferner wird Besitz nehmen mit אחז immer im Niphal ausgedrückt, והֵאָחזו בה. B. M. 34,10) ויֵאָחזו בה (das. 46,27), ונאחזו תבוככם ‎(4. B.M. 32,30). Es wird also nicht der Gegenstand von dem Besitzer, sondern der Besitzer durch den Gegenstand gefasst und festgehalten, und das ist in der Tat beim Landbesitz der Fall. Der Boden trägt den Eigner, der Mensch wird durch ihn gefesselt, deshalb ist auch קרקע Bürgschaft für ihn, deshalb auch wohl z. B. אין נשבעין על הקרקעות. Im Schwur setzt der Mensch sich und alles Seine, alles in seine Persönlichkeit Aufgehende, der strafenden Vernichtung aus, wenn sein Wort nicht wahr ist, oder er sein Wort nicht wahr macht. Nur beweglicher Besitz geht aber in die Person auf, sie kann ihn selbst in jedem Augenblick vernichten. Der unbewegliche Besitz aber überdauert den Menschen, dieser geht in ihn auf, aber nicht umgekehrt. Er kann also nicht die Existenz des Bodens einsetzen für die Wahrheit seines Wortes.

גר ותושב אנכי עמכם, “I am a stranger as well as a resident amongst you.” A stranger because I came from a foreign land – and a resident because I intend to settle amongst you. Rashi suggests that Avraham also implied that if he were to be denied his request he would insist on his legal rights in the matter (by simply becoming a permanent resident). If you were to point out that according to what Rashi had explained on Genesis 13,7 where the Canaanites are described as the then residents of that land, that had been before he had become a father of children. (Such people cannot claim permanent resident status.) After all, G-d had not promised Avraham that he would inherit this land. He had only promised it to Avraham’s descendants. Now that Yitzchok had been born, he was entitled to inherit part of the Land.

אחזת קבר A POSSESSION OF A BURYING PLACE — means possession of land to serve as a burying place.

תנו לי אחוזת קבר, allocate to me a burial plot which will be mine in all future, deeded. He wanted to buy a plot of land for the express purpose of burying his dead. Such a piece of land deeded in perpetuity, i.e. אחוזה, required the approval of all the local populace. This matter becomes even clearer when Avraham tenders the money for the field and cave to Efron, the former owner, and the Torah goes on to laboriously describe the bureaucratic procedure that had to be followed until Avraham could lay Sarah to rest. (17-19)

תנו לי אחוזת קבר, “be agreeable to that I should possess a burial plot among you.”

ואקברה מתי מלפני, so that I can remove my wife’s body and bury it.

The possession of land to serve as a burial place. Rashi is answering the question: How can the word אחוזה apply to a grave, which is a cavity in the ground? The word אחוזה applies only to an object with substance! Therefore Rashi says an אחוזה of land to serve as a burial place. Accordingly, אחוזה refers to the land. But Re’m explains that [Rashi is answering the question:] The word אחוזה applies to land that is at a person’s disposal. How then can it apply to a grave, which is set aside for the dead? Therefore Rashi explains that [Avraham asked] them to give him land for an אחוזה, and he will make graves there.

ואקברה מתי מלפני, "so I may bury my dead one from before me." Abraham meant that he wanted to bury Sarah without delay. Furthermore, Abraham knew already that he would have to pay Efron a substantial price for a field not worth a fraction of the asking price, because it contained something he wanted. At the same time, he realised that once the local people would hear of the price he was prepared to pay they would conclude there must be a hidden treasure beneath that field that they did not know about. In order to forestall such speculations by the local population he emphasised already at this stage that he was only concerned with burying Sarah forthwith i.e. מלפני, and that because of the urgency of the matter he could not afford to haggle over the price. Under such circumstances, it did not matter how much he would have to pay, the locals would not mind and would not suspect him of ulterior motives.

אחוזה heißt also eigentlich: Niederlassung, der Akt des Seßhaftwerdens. Abraham bittet nicht um die Erlaubnis, sein Weib zu begraben. Sein Weib soll in ihrem bleibenden, ewigen Eigentum ruhen, darum erbittet er sich zuerst das Recht, zum behufe des Begräbnisses ein Stück Land zum bleibenden Eigentum zu erwerben. Er hat Jahre lang im Lande als Fremdling geweilt, hat bei aller seiner Begüterung nie einen Quadratschuh Boden zu erwerben gestrebt. Wanderschaft war ja seine Bestimmung. Das Bedürfnis, sein Weib zu begraben, bringt ihm die erste Notwendigkeit, Eigentum am Lande zu erwerben. Seines Weibes Grab soll die erste Fessel werden, die ihn an den Boden knüpft, die Stätte, die ihn an sich zieht und fesselt: אחוזה.

תנו לי אחוזת קבר, “give me a burial plot that will have the status of ancestral ownership.” Avraham meant that it would not be satisfactory to bury Sarah in a piece of land that was privately owned at that time, as the present owner or his heir could demand at any time in the future to plough over her remains and scatter her bones. However, if he would let me acquire a plot of land for a burial site I would not worry that he would plough it.

(3) MIL'FANAI [FROM BEFORE ME]. I will take it out from before me to bury it.

ויענו בני חת…<underline>לאמור לו</underline>. The Hittites answered, …<underline>to say to him.</underline> This means they appointed a single spokesman to speak on their behalf.

ויענו, they agreed by telling him so.

In the choicest of our grave sites. Because you are so respected you may have the best grave in the public cemetery, or else you may request the private plot of anyone in town. But it is against our custom to allow a sojourner to acquire a plot of his own.

(5-6) Die B׳ne Chet beraten und lassen Abraham ihre Antwort wissen: Obgleich Fremdling, habe er durch sein langjähriges, Gott zugewandtes und von Gott getragenes Wirken und Walten unter ihnen einen so "gehobenen" Charakter unter ihnen erworben, נשיא אלקי׳, dass er wahrlich kein Grab zu kaufen brauche, um ein bleibendes Grab für sein Weib zu finden. Er sollte sich das beste Grab aussuchen. Jeder wird es sich für eine solche זכיה anrechnen, eine Sara, das Weib Abrahams, in seinem Eigentum begraben zu wissen, dass er sich nicht nur nicht weigern wird, Sara dort begraben zu lassen, sondern dass dieses Grab auch für ewig unangetastet bleiben wird. Dieses scheint in dem לא יכלֶה zu liegen. לא יכְלָא würde heißen: er wird dir sein Grab nicht verschließen, sich nicht weigern, deinen Toten dort zu begraben. כלה aber heißt, sich nach etwas sehnen, und dürfte es daher wohl vielleicht heißen: Keiner von uns wird sich nach seinem Grabe von dir sehnen, dass du dort deinen Toten nicht begrabest, d. h. keiner von uns wird wünschen, dass du sein Grab nicht zum Begräbnis deines Weibes wählen mögest, vielmehr jeder wird wünschen, dass sein Grab das erwählte werden möge.

ויענו בני חת, “the members of the tribe of the Hittites, replied;” on these words Rabbi Elazar commented that untold numbers of pens have been broken and untold amounts of ink have been used up for the Torah to repeat the expression בני חת, “the members of the tribe of the Hittites, in this paragraph no fewer than ten times. Our sages say that we learn from here that anyone who assists a righteous person to receive his due share is viewed as if he had observed the commandments in all the Five Books of Moses. We find in Kings II 4,42, as similar –apparently unnecessary repetition- when told: ואיש בא מבעל שלשה ויבא לאיש האלוקים לחם, בכורים, עשרים לחם שעורים וכרמל בצקלו ויאמר: תן לעם ויאכלו. “A man came from Baal-shalisha and he brought the man of G–d some bread from the first reaping- twenty loaves of barley bread and some fresh grain, in his sack; and Elisha said: give it to the people to eat.” (The prophet in this paragraph was Elisha) Anyone reading this paragraph must wonder was Elisha then a priest that the bikkurim would be brought to him? The answer given is that when someone brings a Torah scholar a gift it is considered by our sages as if that person had personally erected the Temple and had offered the first fruit, bikkurim, therein (Talmud tractate Ketuvot folio 105). We find a third occasion when unnecessary repetition seems to occur in the Bible in the Book of Joshua (Joshua 7,10) in connection with Achan who had stolen from the loot of Jericho; in that report the word גם is repeated five times, though it could easily been avoided. On that occasion our sages interpret the constant repetition of the word גם by saying that it teaches that if someone steals property belonging to the Temple treasure it is considered as if he had transgressed all the commandments of the Five Books of Moses. Another way of looking at this particular example: If you take the respective first and last letters in the last letter of each of the five Books of Moses, i.e. the letters ב-ם from the last word in the Book of Genesis במצרים, plus the letters מ-ם in the word מסעיהם at the end of the Book of Exodus, plus the letters ס-י from the word סיני at the end of the Book of Leviticus, plus the two letters י-ר of the word יריחו at the end of the Book of Numbers, i.e. ס-י from the word סיני at the end of the Book of Numbers, plus the letters י-ל from the word ישראל at the end of the Book of Deuteronomy you will have the numerical value of the word חרם=248. The sin of Achan was stealing from חרם, from what belongs to G–d. (Attributed to Sefer Chassidim page 106, (in the edition with Rabbi Price’s commentary)

It also means that they were not unanimous in their approach to the matter of the sale. As a result they delegated someone to "speak to him" i.e. without making an immediate and final commitment. The eventual outcome already indicates that it was their original intention to exact a very substantial price.

לא יכלה means will not withhold, just as (Psalms 40:12) “Thou wilt not withhold (תכלא) Thy mercies”, and (Genesis 8:2) “And the rain was restrained (ויכלא).

נשיא אלוהים, “a prince of G’d,” neither stranger or resident stranger as Avraham had described himself.

במבחר קברנו קבור, “do not wait until the formalities of the purchase have been completed, but go ahead and bury Sarah.” This corresponds to a statement by our sages in Moed Katan 22 על כל המתים כולן מדחה מטתו, “it behooves us to bury all the dead with dispatch, without undue delay.”

שמענו אדוני, "listen to us my lord;" they meant: "please listen to our suggestion to select the best of our burial grounds and go ahead and bury your dead one. You do not have to ask permission from any individual to give you his plot without a fair equivalent." The reason for all this is that "not one of us would refuse you even the plot he had selected for his own burial." They said so in order to expedite Sarah's burial.

שמענו אדני, this was said by their spokesman speaking on behalf of all of them. This is why he addressed Avraham as adoni in the singular mode, whereas the words following are all in the plural mode.

Will not withhold as in, “You will not withhold (לא תכלא) ...” Although the word in our verse ends with a ה, and the word cited by Rashi ends with an א, they still mean the same: “will not withhold.” [Rashi is saying that] our verse does not mean “destruction” (כליון), as in “Destruction (כלה) shall come upon them” (18:21), or “For destruction (כלה) and annihilation” (Yeshayahu 10:23), although those words indeed end with a ה like the word in this verse (יכלה). This is because this verse would not be understandable if יכלה meant “destruction.”

נשיא אלוהים, “a prince of G-d;” they answered his first statement first when he had described his status as either that of a stranger or resident, by saying that he was much more than that. They considered him as if G-d Himself had sent him. As far as his second request was concerned that he needed to acquire ancestral rights to any burial plot so as to safeguard it to being ploughed over in the future by its previous owner, every one of them would be willing to deed to him the plot that he had already chosen for himself his own future burial plot. He should meanwhile proceed to bury his dead and they would it consider an honour to have Sarah buried in a plot that had once belonged to one of them. איש את קברו, even if Avraham, by chance would select a plot that one of them had already earmarked as his own future burial ground.

(2) IN THE CHOICEST OF OUR BURIAL PLACES. In the place where we bury the chiefs of the land, and here is a grave already prepared.

נשיא אלוהים, G’d has given you an elevated position, and we consider your status as such among us.

The expression אדני simply means "my lord," and does not represent a name of G'd.

במבחר קברנו, they possessed many caves within which to bury the dead, and each family had such a cave reserved for interring its dead. Every corpse was buried in an individual coffin, the overall description of such a place being the word קבר, tomb. This is why the spokesman spoke of

איש ממנו את קברו, he considered not the individual grave but the family’s burial grounds. They intended that Avraham should ask one of them to share their family plots with him.

The words לא יכלה in verse 6 mean that no one would withhold his burial plots from Avraham if the latter chose to use it. We come across this verb in a similar usage in Samuel I 25,33 אשר כליתני היום הזה מבא בדמים, ”for preventing me from seeking redress in blood.”

וישתחו לעם הארץ לבני חת. He bowed to the notables present, seeing they represented the whole population.

ויקם…וישתחו… He arose and bowed down. Abraham explained to them that the reality was the exact opposite of what the Hittites thought. He did not consider himself as a prince amongst them; on the contrary, he considered them as deserving more honour than himself.

ויקם אברהם וישתחו, he rose on his legs and folded them in a manner signifying gratitude for the positive response he had received from the בני חת, informing them next of precisely what it was that he was requesting.

HE PROSTRATED - according to Ibn Ezra prostration is bowing the head, and this is an expression of giving honor to another person, and so Yitro does it for Moshe. However, Rashi (parashat Miketz, Genesis 42:6; Genesis 43:26) sees prostrating as extending oneself on the earth, with hands and feet extended. And it seems that the difference between a simple prostration and the prostration on the earth is that if it is on the earth obviously implies the extending of hands and feet.

לעם הארץ steht hier wahrscheinlich in der Bedeutung wie ואם העלם יעלימו עם הארץ wo es nicht das Landvolk, sondern die Landgemeine ,(B. M. 20. 4 .3), die Vertretung des Volkes bedeutet, die Landesversammlung, die zur Bestrafung des Verbrechens verpflichtet und befugt ist, so hier: die Landesvertretung, die einem Fremden das Recht des Gütererwerbs zu erteilen ermächtigt ist. Dann heißt auch das לבני חת: für die Söhne Chet, die Versammlung, welche die Gesamtheit der Bevölkerung vertritt.

“Avraham stood up and prostrated himself;” Avraham was dependent on the goodwill of everyone in that town; even if Efron had been willing to sell his field or plot Avraham would have needed all the townspeople’s permission to convert it into a burial site. Avraham had to first arise in order to prostrate himself in the appropriate manner to all of them, even to the one sitting behind him. But for a single individual such as Efron he was not required to rise, he just prostrated himself before him.

נפשכם means YOUR WILL.

IF IT BE YOUR MIND TO BURY MY DEAD FROM BEFORE ME. The intent thereof is: “I will not bury my dead in another burial ground. However if it be your desire that I bury my dead, entreat for me to Ephron who has a cave at the end of his field, which is not used as his family burial-place but as a field.” The meaning of the word milphanai, (from before me), is that if you will not do so I will entomb her in a casket. It may be that it means “my dead wife who is before me, and as an obligation I must hurry to bury her.” The reason Abraham requested, and entreat for me, is that Ephron was a rich and distinguished person, as is indicated by his saying, What is that between me and thee?²⁸Verse 15: Land worth four hundred shekels of silver — what is that between me and thee? It would therefore not be to his honor to sell his ancestral inheritance, as was the case with Naboth of Jezreel.²⁹I Kings, Chapter 28. It was for this reason that Abraham did not go to Ephron to offer him an inflated price for the field, but instead he asked of the people of the city to entreat to him [Ephron] on his behalf in an honorable way.

אם יש את נפשכם לקבור, if you want that I shall bury the dead without delay, as you have indicated when you said: במבחר קברנו קבור!" (verse 6) i.e. that I would not need to wait.

וידבר… אם יש את נפשכם. He said: "If it be your desire, etc." This may be understood similarly to what we are taught in Baba Batra 36: Members of the exilarch's household were not permitted to keep land merely as a result of having occupied it although no protest had been registered as the true owners were afraid to do so. The latter were advised to retain their documents proving their title to those lands. On the other hand, landowners were not in the habit of immediately protesting when rich people squatted on their land as they hoped the improvements made by the illegal squatters would eventually benefit them when they reclaimed their property.

וידבר...את נפשכם, the word את נפשכם means ברצונכם “your pleasure, your goodwill.” We find the word נפש used also in this sense in Psalms 27,12 אל תתנני בנפש צרי, “do not deliver me to the pleasure of my oppressors.”

ופגעו לי בעפרון, “and entreat Efron on my behalf;” if you were to ask why all this was necessary after he had been offered the choice of many grave sites by the assembled people, the reason could be that Efron was himself not a member of the Hittites, as were the townspeople, so that they could not have spoken in his name also. He had come from afar and settled in Kiryat Arba and after having dwelled there they elected him as their president.

ופגעו לי — This phrase signifies entreaty, as (Ruth 1:16) “Do not entreat (תפגעי) me”.

שמעוני, agree with me that I shall receive an inalienable burial plot.

ופגעו לי, “plead on my behalf.”

When the Hittites addressed Abraham as "a prince of G'd," claiming that not one of them would deny Abraham his own burial plot, they could have alluded to either of two scenarios. 1) They described him as a great and powerful individual who was able to impose his will on the local population. They indicated that Abraham was aware that no one would dare protest what he set out to do. Just because he was a man of such calibre the usual practice of acquiring land by occupying it and no one protesting did not apply to him. As soon as they would feel powerful enough they would feel free to remove the body Abraham had buried on that land. What they conveyed was that their approval was only due to Abraham representing superior force. 2) A second way of interpreting the Hittites' response is as follows: Inasmuch as you are "a prince of G'd," you need not fear that we look upon you as a person who throws his weight around such as in the example quoted from the Talmud. Whereas the people in the household of the exilarch were suspected of robbery, no such motive would ever be attributed to Abraham. Abraham's righteousness was beyond question. Perhaps they used the word שמענו, "listen to us," in order to underline that they considered Abraham beyond reproof. Hearing this, Abraham responded: "if you truly wish me to bury my dead, etc." please act as brokers between me and Efron. Had it not been for the latter words of Abraham we would have been forced to conclude that the Hittites' offer was something based on duress.

ופגעו לי בעפרון, that he will sell me this cave even though it is not an agreeable thing for a highly placed person to sell any portion of his land-holdings. We know this from Navot (Kings I 21,3) who had been aghast at the suggestion of selling his vineyard to the king. His precise words were: חלילה לי מתתי את נחלת אבותי לך, “far be it from me to give you any part of my ancestral heritage.”

המכפלה MACHPELAH (the root, כפל, means double) — it had a lower and an upper cavern. Another explanation of why it was so called is, because it has the characteristic of being doubled on account of the couples who are buried there (see Rashi in verse 2) (Eruvin 53a).

THAT HE MAY GIVE ME. The intent of this is “that he may give it to me in such a way that I will consider it as a gift (even) if I will buy it from him for its full value.” It is for this reason that Abraham did not mention the word “selling.” A similar usage is found in the verse, Thou shalt sell me food for money, that I may eat; and give me water for money, that I may drink,³⁰Deuteronomy 2:28. meaning “for the water which is usually given as a gift I will give money.” It may be that such is the ordinary usage of the language to mention “giving” when describing sales transactions.

מערת המכפלה, any depression in the surface of the earth is called מכפלה, as the ככר הירדן, refers to the entire Jordan valley (13,10). This is substantiated by the Torah describing Efron’s field as being located in מכפלה in verse 18 of our chapter.

מערת המכפלה, a place known as machpela.

ויתן לי את מערת המכפלה, So that he may give me the cave of Machpelah. Abraham made a point of describing the transaction as a gift though perfectly aware that money would be changing hands, as indicated by the words "for full monetary value." Abraham was astute enough to purchase the cave in such a way that any future complaint was out of the question. He was also careful to add the words: "in your midst." The Zohar 1,128 points out that Efron never saw anything in that cave except darkness and calamity. This being so, Efron could have claimed later that in view of his having been unaware of the true value of the cave, his consent to sell it was based on a false premise, and he could have reversed the sale. This in spite of the rule that there is no validity to a claim of land having been over or underpriced at the time of sale. Abraham still worried about an idea expressed in the Jerusalem Talmud (compare Tossaphot Kidushin 42) that if the undercharge was 50% or more the sale is reversible although it is not reversible when the amount of the undercharge was between 15% and 50%.

ויתן לי את מערת, he did not ask anything from Efron other than the cave, not the field in which it was situated.

ויתן לי את מערת המכפלה, “so that he may give me the cave Machpelah which adjoins his field.” The reason it was called מכפלה is related to the expression כפל, “double.” Apparently G’d had “doubled” the height of the cave in order to bury Adam’s remains inside it. The local residents had been unaware of this. Efron himself was also unaware of any special significance of the cave in spite of its name. He had had no reason to suspect who, if anybody, had previously been buried inside that cave. [Seeing that this had occurred before the deluge, how could anybody have been aware, unless Noach had found the land of Israel intact after the deluge. Ed.]
When Avraham repeatedly spoke about Efron “giving” him the cave, he did not mean that he was unwilling to pay for it. He meant that he would consider transfer of the title to that cave to him as a gift, regardless of any commercial transaction they would conclude concerning it. In order not to be misunderstood, Avraham added the words (verse nine) בכסף מלא יתננה לי, “in return for full monetary compensation he shall give it to me.” Avraham neither asked for a gift, nor even for the field (which would have meant a loss to Efron, [seeing he could no longer till it. Ed.] All he asked for was the cave at the edge of Efron’s field.
Efron’s answer was couched in ethical/moral terms. “I have donated the field to you as well as the cave which is situated on it; it would not be fitting for someone of your stature to own merely the cave and not the field of which it is part.” He continued: “this is why I have given you the whole package as a gift, field as well as cave.” When Efron used the expression “I have given,” he meant “it is equivalent to a gift.” Avraham took him up on this expression and that is why he said: “I have given the money for the field, take it from me,” although Efron had not even named his price yet (verse thirteen). The entire transaction was intended to create the impression that Avraham had received a tremendous bargain by being allowed to pay an outrageous price.

Let him give me. That is, as a present. At the end of his field. Although it is not customary to sell one’s inheritance, the cave is not in the main part of the field but at an extremity. Let him give it to me for its full value. Publicly let it be a gift, but privately he will receive full value.

Another explanation: It is doubled with couples. [You might ask: Why did Rashi need to bring two explanations? The answer is:] These two explanations reflect two opinions in Eiruvin 53a. They are telling us not to mistakenly think that the cave itself was double—one cave within the other, or one cave on top of the other—for then it should have said מערה הכפולה, “the double cave.” Since מערה lacks the ת of the construct state, כפולה [would consequently be an adjective and] its feminine ה would refer back to [the feminine] מערה. But with מערת in the construct state, המכפלה is a noun meaning “doubleness.” Thus, מערת המכפלה denotes “a cave of some other doubleness.” One opinion is that it was so named for the doubleness of the building (a house with an upper level above it) and the other opinion is that it was so named for the doubleness of the couples. And since Rashi does not decide which is closer to the plain meaning of Scripture, he cites both; they are equally good. A further answer: Rashi held that each explanation on its own raises the question: Why was the cave called מכפלה, after its doubleness, thereby omitting the main reason for its name? It should have been called after the main reason: according to one opinion, “Cave of House and Upper Level” or “Cave of Double Building”. And according to the other opinion, “Cave of Couples” or “Cave of Doubled Couples.” This is why Rashi brings both explanations—to say that it was called after the fact that it has certain things which relate to doubleness. These are: building and couples. But it was not called so for relating to only one matter. Alternatively, it was [so called] for the sake of brevity, to include two things in the word מכפלה. [Since both are equally hinted to,] both are included. We explained the name “Kiryas Arba” along similar lines.

בקצה שדהו. Die Höhle liegt ganz am Ende seines Feldes, die Abtretung der Höhle beeinträchtigt eigentlich die fernere Benutzung des Feldes nicht. — בכסף מלא usw. Es scheint, dass Abraham sich erboten, gleichwohl, da doch irgend - wie der Gebrauch, den er von der Höhle machen will den Wert des Feldes schmälern könnte, für die Höhle den ganzen Wert des Feldes zu zahlen. Um den Erwerb des Feldes wagte er als Fremder nicht zu bitten.

ויתן לי, “so that he will give me, etc.” Avraham never suggested that he wanted the cave of Machpelah as a gift; on the contrary, he considered that even after having paid a substantial amount of money for it, he would still view this as a gift bestowed upon him by Efron.

בכסף מלא FOR ITS FULL VALUE IN SILVER — מלא means שלם so that the phrase means all that it is worth. Thus, too, did David say to Ornan, (1 Chronicles 21:22) “for full money”.

Compare verse 17 ויקם שדה עפרון אשר במכפלה אשר בקצה שדהו, “Efron’s field which is situated in machpela at the edge of his field, stood, etc.” The details provided by the Torah are intended to prove to us, the reader, that by selling the cave to Avraham Efron did not suffer any loss of face, he had no reason to feel embarrassed about what he had done.

המכפלה, the word is a noun describing a subordinate function. If it were an adjective the word מערת should have had the prefix ה. Our sages disagree concerning the meaning of the word מכפלה. Some think that it describes a cave above another cave, (root כפל, double) others claim it means a cave within another cave. Alternately, the word describes this particular location, i.e. that the whole cave was known as the “cave machpelah” on account of the dual cave contained in that field; this is also why the field itself was considered as almost subordinate to the cave in question.

את מערת המכפלה,”the cave Machpelah;” Rashi explains the word מכפלה as related to כפול, double, and that it was named so because couples were buried side by side, starting with Adam and his wife Chavah. Nachmanides disagrees seeing that the Torah described it as שדה עפרון אשר במכפלה, “the field of Efron situated at Machpelah.” The phrasing makes it clear that “Machpelah” is the name of a location that contained the cave. There is no need to investigate why certain locations had been named in a certain manner by the locals of the time In Bereshit Rabbah, 23,8 we are told that G’d miraculously reduced the size of Adam’s body when he died so, that the cave could accommodate his earthly remains. If so, the name Machpelah dates back to the time of Adam’s burial in that cave. Clearly, this had not been known to Efron as he would have multiplied the amount he asked for that cave from Avraham had he known that the first human being had been buried in that cave.

There was also the concern that landowners of the adjoining property could claim that the land should have been sold to them in preference to an outsider, something known in Jewish law as דין המצר. Another consideration of Abraham was that after the transfer of the cave someone might present a lien dated prior to the transaction which would require him to give up his claim. For all these reasons Abraham used both the expression of "gift" and "sale" when referring to the way he wanted to acquire the cave. This would protect his claim also under the heading of what is known in Jewish law as דין חליפין, i.e. acquisition by means of a symbolic transfer. Under this heading there is no such law as אונאה, reversal of the sale due to unfair pricing. This דין חליפין applies to transactions involving either real estate or chattels whereas such acquisition by a symbol representing the ultimate object does not apply to money, i.e. coins. Hence Abraham's reference to receiving the land as a gift. Our sages in Bechorot 50 phrased it thus: Rabbi Chaninah stated that every time the word "כסף" i.e. silver or money appears in the Torah, the meaning is "סלעים", 25 silver coins of a standard denomination; the exception is the use of the word "shekel" in connection with the transaction involving Abraham and Efron. In that instance the meaning is קנטרין, a coin weighing four times the usual weight of the "shekel." This is the meaning of the Torah (Genesis 23,15) defining the "shekel" as being "four hundred shekel acceptable at any merchant." The fact that Efron arbitrarily changed the usual definition of the value of the "shekel," made the transaction unassailable in the future seeing he himself had set the terms of the sale. Concerning Abraham's fear that the דין מצר might be invoked by a neighbour in the future, Abraham ensured the presence and consent of all the local populace who would jointly act as his broker in the transaction. This would preclude any claim at a later date. It also demonstrated that there was no outstanding lien against the property as any such lienholder should have spoken up at that time, seeing he was present.

THE CAVE OF MACHPELAH. Rashi comments: “It had a lower and an upper cave. Another explanation [of why it was called Machpelah — the root of which is keiphel (double)] — is that it was ‘doubled’ on account of the four couples who were buried there: Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah”. But this is incorrect since Scripture states, the field of Ephron which was in Machpelah.³¹Verse 17 here. Thus we see that it is the name of the place in which the field was located, and there is no need to search for a reason for the names of places.
In Bereshith Rabbah, the Sages have said:³²55:10. “The Holy One, blessed be He, bent double the stature of the first man and He buried him there.” In their opinion, this entire place was always called Machpelah though the people did not know the reason for it for Ephron sold him everything for the price of the field unaware that there was a grave in it. Abraham, on the other hand, desired only that he should sell him the cave which was in the end of the field, and the field might be retained by Ephron. But Ephron by way of good conduct or trickery, [possibly hoping to receive a higher price for the larger transaction], said that he would give him the field and the cave which was in it since it would be unbecoming for such an honorable person to own the cave as a possession for a burial-place while the field belonged to another. Abraham rejoiced at this suggestion, and he purchased it in its entirety for the price that Ephron mentioned.

בקצה שדהו, “at the edge of his field;” in other words, using of that corner as a burial ground will not interfere with his having continued full use of his field for agricultural purposes.

בכסף מלא, I do not want that he grant me a reduction from its real worth as a gesture to you.

כסף מלא, each coin would be of full weight, like a brand new coin which had not lost some of its original weight through being in circulation. The Torah makes this clear by adding the words עובר לסוחר, acceptable by any merchant.

אשר בקצה שדהו, “which is at the edge of his field.” Avraham mentioned this, implying that his burying Sarah there would not in the least interfere with Efron’s activities on the field itself. Avraham would not even need to walk across the field as it was situated at the edge, allowing access from another direction. Avraham requested to purchase only the cave from Efron, leaving him in possession of the adjoining field. Efron, ingeniously, implying that it would be unseemly for a distinguished personage such as Avraham to bury his dead in a cave without having title to the adjoining land, suggested that he would deed to him both cave and field. Avraham replied that he had already set aside the money required to purchase the entire field. [He had realised that the price was likely to be sky high. Ed.]

Abraham used the term אחוזת קבר, "a burial plot held in perpetuity," leaving Efron the option to use the remainder of the field if he so chose. Had Abraham not used the term אחוזה, Efron could have denied him access to Sarah's grave once he had buried her there.

בתוככם, in the presence of all of you. I do not ask for time to come up with the payment but am willing to pay cash at once. Compare verse 16 where Avraham does in fact pay cash immediately.

לאחוזת קבר, Avraham wanted complete freedom to do what he wanted to in the property once he had acquired it. This is the privilege granted to anyone owning an ancestral heritage. Avraham wanted it understood that as a result of the sale Efron would not be able to dictate to him how close to his own property Sarah or other members of his family could be buried.

ועפרון ישב The verb is written without a ו so that it may be read ישב he sat, thus indicating that on that very day they had appointed him (Ephron) to be an officer over them. Because of the high standing of Abraham who needed to negotiate with him, he was elevated to a dignified position (so that Abraham whom they esteemed as a great prince might have to negotiate with an equal and not with an inferior person (Genesis Rabbah 58:7).

ועפרון..באזני בני חת, in a loud voice, making sure they could all hear him. In this verse the Torah emphasises the aural aspect of the negotiations, whereas in verse 18, at the conclusion of the transaction the visible aspect, לעיני בני חת is stressed, as at that point eye-witnesses were more important. We find such a sequence of aural perception and visual perception also in Job 29,11 כי אזן שמעה ותאשרני ועין ראתה ותעידני, “for the ear that heard acclaimed me, and the eyes that saw were my witness.”

לכל באי שער עירו, “in the presence of all the assembled citizens of the his town.´ In connection with the dealings of Chamor and Shechem with their subjects, the Torah uses the expression לכל יוצאי שער עירו, “in the presence of all the inhabitants of his town who had come out (to the square)”. Avraham wanted to publicise his request for a burial ground even to people who were not residents of the region. The relatives of Efron, or anyone who would witness the transaction were disqualified as witnesses, whereas total strangers were fit to testify to the transaction legally.

On that day they appointed him an officer over them... If it were written יושב it would be in the present tense, denoting that he once lived as an equal in the midst of the sons of Cheis, and he still does. But it is written ישב, in the past tense, denoting that he once lived in their midst as an equal but no longer. [Therefore, Rashi deduces] that on that day they appointed him to be an officer.

ועפרון יושב בתוך בני חת, “Efron was sitting among the Hittites (as if he were also a Hittite), like the Shunammite in II Kings 4.13.”

לכל באי שער עירו OF ALL THAT CAME IN AT THE GATE OF HIS CITY — for they all left their work and came to pay their last respect to Sarah (Genesis Rabbah 58:7).

לכל באי שער עירו, including all the people of his city, prominent or plain people.

For they all left their work and came... It seems that Rashi deduced this from the fact that here it is written, “Who came to the city gate,” whereas in the story of Shechem it is written, “Who left the city gate” (34:24). Each verse makes a different point: Here, it teaches that even if someone had to do work, he left it to come pay respects to Sarah. There, it teaches that even if someone urgently needed to leave, he did not, but first circumcised himself—in order to cleave to the offspring of Yaakov. (Nachalas Yaakov)

באי שער, people who enter or leave through the gate. In other words, everybody. Sometimes the Torah refers to באי שער, people entering through the gate, other times יןצאי עירו, people leaving via the gate. (compare Genesis 34,24) It all amounts to the same thing. For the sake of brevity the Torah mentions only either באי or יוצאי. Sometimes it mentions both, as in Jeremiah 17,19.

לא אדני NAY, MY LORD — You are not to buy it with money.

IN THE PRESENCE OF THE SONS OF MY PEOPLE. The intent thereof is to state: “Behold, all the people are present, and they are knowledgeable witnesses to the sale. Therefore do not fear denial or retraction, and so bury thy dead from now on, for it is yours and I cannot retract.” But Abraham did not do so for even after he paid its full value in silver he first took symbolic legal possession of the field and the cave. He established them as his possession in the presence of the people of the city, and all those who came in at the gate of the city,³³Verse 18 here. the merchants and the residents who happened to be there, and after that he buried her.

לא אדוני, "No my lord." The word "no" means that Abraham could not merely acquire the cave but had to buy the field it was situated on. Efron indicated that the reason he had decided to give the whole field to Abraham was that once it served as a cemetry it could not longer serve its original purpose. He implied all this by using the word שמעני, "listen to me carefully."

לא אדוני שמעני, not like you say that you want to pay the full value of the property. Take it for free, as a gift, and not only the cave, but I am also donating the field to you.

No, my master, hear me. There is no need for the leaders of the community to intercede with me.

לעיני בני עמי, “in full view of all my people.” He called upon everyone present to be a witness to the transaction. He implied that everyone knew that he, Avraham, would not renege on an offer made by himself. In fact, as soon as he had handed over the money he took possession of both the field and the cave adjoining it. This act of taking possession was performed in full view of the people assembled be they rich, poor, tourists passing through, or local residents.

Efron hat den Abraham nicht verstanden, oder will ihn nicht verstehen, um Abraham zum deutlichen Ausspruch zu vermögen. Es ist die Feinheit nicht zu übersehen, mit welcher man schon damals und dort sein Interesse unter den ausgesuchtesten Höflichkeitsformen wahrzunehmen gewohnt gewesen war. Der Sinn dieser Äußerung ist wohl: Ich habe dir das Feld zugedacht, die Höhle aber ist bereits dein, sie habe ich dir hiermit öffentlich geschenkt, begrabe darum nur sofort erst deinen Toten, wir werden uns schon wegen des Übrigen verständigen. Abraham hatte nur um die Höhle angesucht. Efron aber deutet ihm an, dass er die Höhle nur mit dem Felde zusammen veräußern würde.

השדה נתתי לך, “I have given you the field;” Efron pointed out that unless he gave Avraham not only the cave of Machpelah but also his adjoining field, Avraham would have no access to the cave. (without asking permission to visit there each time).

נתתי לך I HAVE GIVEN IT TO THEE (a perfect tense) — See, it is as though I have already given it to you.

(2) AND THE CAVE THAT IS IN IT. You are asking only for the cave that is at the end of the field, and by sale; I am giving you as a gift the whole field and the cave.

Listen to me;

נתתי, I have already given it to you as a gift,

והמערה אשר בו, "as well as the cave situated on it." He meant that already at the very beginning of the discussions when the local people had indicated their willingness to relinquish their own burial plots in favour of Abraham, he, Efron had decided that the cave and the field were a single unit. The reason he repeated the fact that the transaction took place in full view of all the people was to make plain that no דין מצר could be invoked by anyone in the future.

I have given you the field. In my mind I gave it to you the moment you spoke.

לעיני בני עמי, in front of the members of my people who are all witnesses to this transaction between me and you.

והמערה אשר בו, “and the cave which is in it, since it is not proper that you should have to cross someone else’s property in order to get to the grave of your wife. Therefore,

לעיני בני עמי נתתיה לך קבור מתך, I am telling you in the presence of all my people that I have given it to you in order that you may bury your dead there, just as you asked when you referred to אחוזת קבר.”

וישתחו אברהם, to Efron before the assembled people.

Avraham bowed. He bowed to them to acknowledge that it was in their honor that Ephron consented.

וישתחו, Avraham bowed to Efron in everybody’s presence.

Abraham erwidert ihm, er habe ja bereits angedeutet, dass er den Wert des ganzen Feldes zu leisten bereit sei, er habe das Geld dafür bereits bestimmt, gleichsam geweiht, es sei schon nicht mehr sein, Efron möge es doch annehmen.

אך אם אתה לו שמעני BUT IF THOU WOULDST ONLY HEAR ME — You tell me to listen to you (verse 11) and to accept it without payment.

‘LU’ (IF) THOU WILT HEAR ME. This is equivalent to saying, “If you, if you will hear me,” and the purport thereof is like, “if you, if you would hear me,” the redundancy being for the purpose of emphasizing the matter. Similar cases are found in these verses: Turn in, my lord, turn in to me;³⁴Judges 4:18. Art thou any better, better than Balak?³⁵Ibid., 11:25. And to speak against him, saying;³⁶II Chronicles 32:17. And as for me, whither shall I go?;³⁷Further, 37:30. And I turned myself;³⁸Ecclesiastes 2:12. And I saw myself;³⁹Ibid., Verse 13. Seeing all the congregation are all holy.⁴⁰Numbers 16:3. All these are examples of expressions of synonimity. In my opinion, this is also the case in the verse, If from a thread even to a sandal tie, if I take (anything that is thine),⁴¹Above, 14:23. Here too, there is a redundant “if.” which is equivalent to saying, “If, from a thread even to a sandal tie, I take anything that is yours.” It may be that [in the verse here before us the meaning is], “If you are as you have said.” that is, if you are speaking what is in your heart concerning the matter, and if you will listen to me and consummate the sale. A similar usage of a missing word is found in the verse, And their brethren said unto them, What are ye?⁴²Judges 18:8. [which means, “What are you saying?”] In my opinion, a similar case of such usage is the verse, Wherefore am I?⁴³Further, 25:2. See also Ramban there. [meaning, “Wherefore am I in the world?”] Perhaps this is the opinion of Onkelos who translated here, “if you will do me a favor,” meaning, “if you will do my will as you have said.”

אך אם ...נתתי בסף השדה, I will comply with what you said, namely to bury my dead there only if I can hand over the money for the field. I will not bury Sarah there as a result of any other kind of arrangement.

וידבר אל עפרון, "He said to Efron, etc." The use of the word אך indicated Abraham's desire to proceed with a minimum of further discussion.

וידבר...אך אם אתה לו שמעני, I wish you would have listened to what I said that

נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני, “I have as good as given the money for the field, all that is needed is that you accept it from me.” He meant, not as Efron had indicated that “you” have given me the field, I have already given the money for this purpose; you only have to accept it, pick it up.

I do not wish this... Rashi needed [to add] this phrase, due to the word אך which always comes to exclude something stated previously. Here it excludes [Ephron’s previous offer, by saying]: “I do not wish this...”

נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני, “I have already set aside the money for the field, just accept it from me.” The word: נתתי, really belongs to an earlier part of the dialogue which the Torah did not quote in full. Avraham responded to the “generous” offer with the question: “did I hear you right that you are also willing to “give” me the field?” There is no need for this as I have already have set aside the money for the field, i.e. that money is already legally yours if you fulfill the bargain. He made it clear that he would not accept a gift. The sages who were the authors of the cantillation marks already drew our attention to this nuance by placing the tonesign gershayim, a disjunctive tone sign, on the word: נתתי, to indicate that Avraham considered this part of the transaction as having been completed.

I do not desire this: BUT IF THOU WOULDST ONLY HEAR ME!—i.e. I only wish that you would listen to me and do as I ask.

אך אם אתה לו שמעני, “if only you would be good enough to listen to me! Please accept the money from me so that I can proceed with the burial.”

נתתי כסף השדה, I have already prepared the money for the field, if you’ll accept it you will be doing me a favour,

And I wish that I had already given it to you. [Rashi makes this comment] because here it is speaking of money, which must be actually handed over [to validate the transaction]. However [in v. 11 it speaks of] land, which is at one’s disposal [one can say] “as though I have already given it to you.” This is because land [is readily available and] doe need to be collected. (Maharshal) But R. Meir Stern writes: Here it says נתתי כסף, past tense, although it should have used future tense and said: “I will give you the money.” And Rashi explains it as: “I wish that I had already given it to you.” And also in v. 11 it said השדה נתתיה, past tense, although it should have used future tense. Yet, Rashi explained it as: “As though I have already given it to you.” Why does Rashi explain it differently? [The answer is:] Here, Avraham said afterward: “Take it from me.” If נתתי כסף meant, “As though I have already given it to you,” he would not then say, “Take it from me.” If he already “gave” Ephron the money, then Ephron already “received” it, since by definition, giving entails receiving. That is why Rashi explains it as: “I wish that I had already given.” Then it understandable for Avraham to say: “Therefore, now, take it from me.” But on v. 11, Rashi could not explain as he does here, because here it is written לו שמעני נתתי, and לו means “if only.” Here, לו can refer both to שמעני, “If only you would listen to me,” and to נתתי, “If only I had already given.” But in v. 11 it does not [say לו]. However, if it were not written here, “Take it from me,” we would not be forced to say that לו refers also to נתתי; we would say it refers only to שמעני. And we would rather have explained נתתי as in v. 11: [“As though I have already given it to you.”].

נתתי כסף השדה, "I have given the money for the field." Even if Efron had decided to give him the field as a gift, Abraham begged Efron to accept the money from him. If so, Abraham would accept the field as a gift.

נתתי I GIVE (perfect with present sense) old French donne; English I give. I have the money ready and I only wish that I had already given it to you.

ואקברה, and I will proceed to bury, as the matter does not permit further delay.

Es scheint, dass der Preis von vierhundert Schekel ein so enormer gewesen, dass Efron diese Forderung geradezu zu machen sich gescheut, und sie Abraham lieber durch einen Dritten sagen ließ.

ביני ובינך BETWEEN ME AND THEE — Between two such friends as we are, of what importance is that? Nothing at all! Leave business alone and bury your dead!

LAND OF FOUR HUNDRED SHEKELS OF SILVER. According to Onkelos’ opinion, the intent of this is that the land was so worth, [since he translated, “land worth four hundred shekels of silver.”]
Perhaps it was Ephron’s intent to say that the price of the land was so fixed in that place for it was customary in most lands that the price of a field be fixed in accordance with its dimensions. In the words of our Rabbis,⁴⁴Bereshith Rabbah 58:9. however, Ephron set an exorbitant arbitrary price, and Abraham, out of the willingness of his heart, listened and did according to his will, and magnified himself.⁴⁵Daniel 8:4. A reference to the Midrash (ibid.) which says that Abraham gave Ephron shekels of large size. If we follow the simple interpretation of Scripture, land of four hundred shekels of silver means that either Ephron bought it for that price, or it was so purchased by his forefathers.

ארץ..ארבע מאות שקל, “a land which is not worth more than 400 shekel silver, what is this worth talking about?

?מה היא, “after all it is a very minor transaction! It is so insignificant a matter that the acquisition can be made by a mere declaration without being recorded in a document. As soon as you have handed over the money you may consider yourself as burying Sarah in your property.”

אדוני...ביני ובינך מה היא?, what difference does such a paltry sum make, whether you want to pay it or do not want to pay it, go ahead and bury your dead.

ארבע מאות שקל כסף, “400 silver shekel.” According to Onkelos this was the objective value of the field. Our sages understood Efron as having greatly overcharged Avraham, and they describe Efron as an individual who says a lot, but falls far short in his performance of what he promised. According to Rabbi Meir, (Maha’ram from Rotenburg) Efron had never meant to give Avraham more than the cave for free, a promise he kept. He only charged Avraham for the field, seeing that it did not appear as proper to acquire only the cave. Nachmanides, following the plain text, writes that the words ארבע מאות שקל כסף,” 400 silver shekel,” refer to the price either Efron himself or his forebears had paid when they had bought the field originally.”

Between two friends such as we are, what significance does it have... Rashi is answering the question: Why did Ephron say, “Between me and you”? How was Avraham different from anyone else? Rashi answers: “Between two friends such as we are.” Rashi then answers another question: Why did Ephron say: ואת מתך קבור (“And bury your dead”? Rashi answers: Ephron was saying: “Disregard the sale, and bury your dead.” ואת relates to, “Disregard the sale.”

Take it and bury your dead for free if you so desire.”

וישקל אברהם לעפרן AND ABRAHAM WEIGHED TO EPHRON [THE SILVER] — The name Ephron is written defectively (without the ו) to indicate that there was something missing in Ephron viz, sincerity — because he promised much but did not do even the very least (Bava Metzia 87a): He took from him big Shekels, viz., centenaria (worth a full 100 smaller units) as it is said, “money current with the merchant” which means, such coins as were everywhere accepted as worth a full Shekel — for there are places where their Shekels are of large size, centenaria; old French Centenars (cf. Ruth R. 7).

וישמע אברהם, he understood what Efron was hinting at and did not want to spell out.

וישקל אברהם לעפרן: The name עפרן is missing a 'ו'. The Ba'al Haturim explains that he had an evil eye, and the name of עפרן without a 'ו' adds in gematria to ר״ע עי״ן (evil eye). The reason for this comes from a statement in Bava Batra (9B) which states that whoever gives a coin to a poor person is blessed with 6 blessings, and whoever is stingy with the poor is not blessed with these 6 blessings. It is for this reason that Efron lost his 'ו' (which has the numerical value of 6) - as he was stingy he lost 6 blessings. Our sages also tell us (Sotah 36B) that we give the glass of blessing to a generous spirit, as the verse states טוב עין הוא יבורך (with a 'ו') - Don't read 'he is blessed', but rather 'he will bless'. Both the literal reading and the way it is read are true - someone who blesses others generously will be blessed with the six blessings (as depicted by the 'ו' in יבורך).

וישמע...עובר לסוחר. Silver coins acceptable by the most discriminating merchants who weighed each coin to assure themselves that they were not being short-changed.

Without a vav because he said much... [You might ask:] Are not יעקב and אהרן also spelled without a vav? [The answer is:] עפרון is spelled with a vav throughout the parshah, and only here is written missing a vav. Therefore, it is to be expounded. But יעקב and אהרן are always without a vav. Where they have a vav, it is to be expounded.

וישמע אברהם אל עפרון, “Avraham listened to Efron (accepted his conditions), i.e. he accepted Efron’s evaluation of the value of the field, i.e. that to him it was worth 400 shekel of pure silver;

עובר לסוחר, silver minted into coins, refined silver acceptable without question anywhere. The expression עובר in that sense occurs also in Kings II 12,5 in connection with Yehoyakim, i.e. כסף עובר, as well as in Song of Songs 5,5 ואצבעותי מור עובר, “ a reference to the best quality of myrrh.

Furthermore, know that the numerical value of רע עין = 400. We find 400 in 4 different places specifically with regards to stingy people. The first is Efron who was stingy and therefore took 400 Silver shekels. The second place relates to the brothers of Joseph had a bad view of Josef the righteous and they were jealous of him because of the coat of many colours. The result of this was that the Jewish people were exiled for 400 years as strangers, affliction and servitude. The third place relates to Esau who had a bad view of his brothers, and he was jealous of him because of the blessings which Isaac blessed Jacob. It is for this reason that Jacob placed a space between each flock to fill the eyes of that evil man (that was to be given to Esau), because he came with 400 men. The fourth place relates to Naval, because he was a stingy man. It was for this reason that David approached him with 400 men.

וישקול אברהם לעפרן, “Avraham weighed the amount of silver;” you will note that in this verse the name “Efron” is spelled without the letter ו. The reason the sages spelled it thus is so that the numerical value of the letters in his name should add up to 400, i.e. the amount of silver pieces he had charged Avraham for burying Sarah in that cave.(Compare Baal Haturim)

כסף עובר לסוחר, “silver,” i.e. pure silver acceptable by any merchant. The word: עובר means “passable;”

ויקם שדה עפרון AND THE FIELD OF EPHRON WAS MADE SURE (literally, it rose) — It received a rise in importance because it passed from the possession of a commoner (הדיוט an ordinary person) into the possession of a king (Genesis Rabbah 58:8). But the real meaning of the verse is: The field and the cave that was therein and all the trees … became secured to Abraham as a possession etc. (i. e. verse 17 is an incomplete sentence and must be read together with verse 18, thus: ויקם השדה וגו… לאברהם למקנה —The field etc. became secured to Abraham as a possession).

ויקם השדה לאברהם למקנה, the word ויקם teaches that the purchase was confirmed by a sealed document

ויקם, it “arose” for Avraham as a purchase, and acquisition. The unusual sounding word קם here also occurs in this sense in Leviticus 27,19 וקם לו, where it describes the legal procedure of redeeming property from the Temple treasurer by paying a premium. The term is chosen to describe a transaction of a permanent, enduring nature.

ויקם שדה עפרון, “Efron’s field ‘arose.” The Torah means that the handover of the money was not yet the conclusion of this transaction. The site had not become a recognized cemetery by Avraham handing over the purchase price, but the Torah means that after it had become his property Avraham designated the site as a burial site and then proceeded to bury his wife there. It was not admissible in those days to convert a piece of earth into a cemetery until such a change had been approved by the local community.

It was elevated for it left the possession of a commoner to the possession of a king. [Accordingly,] ויקם does not mean acquisition, as in (Vayikra 25:30): “The house in the walled city shall be established (וקם), to the one who bought it,” where Rashi explains that possession is transferred from the seller to the buyer’s control. This is because there, the verse mentions the buyer after וקם, unlike here. [You might object: Here too, the next verse says]: “This became Avraham’s through a purchase” — [thus mentioning the buyer after ויקם. The answer is:] That is not a continuation of the previous verse, since the ta’amei hamikra divide [it into a separate verse].

ויקם, literally: “it stood up;” the subject is the field, and the Torah means that by becoming the property of Avraham this field now had “risen” in spiritual value. שדה עפרון, one side of that field extended along the whole length of that town. Here it is described in precise detail, i.e. ממרא היא חברון, whereas previously it had been described as קרית ארבע, “the city of the four;” later on during the lifetime of Yaakov it has been described as ממרא קרית הארבע היא חברון, (Genesis 35,27) a location where both Avraham and Yitzchok had been residents at one time or another. Earlier. in connection with Avraham, (12,18) he had been described as having settled in Kiryat Arba which is described there as “part of Chevron.” This was meant to tell us that Mamre was the original founder who had built himself a town adjacent to Chevron which had previously been inhabited by Hittites. He called that new town “Mamre,” thus memorializing himself. The “groves” of Mamre, i.e. אלוני ממרא, were situated at the entrance to that town. The cave of Machpelah, in another direction, at that time had belonged to the Hittites. After Mamre’s death, a giant by the name of Arba became very powerful and claimed the entire area, naming it Arba after himself. Several centuries later, when the Israelites had defeated most of Canaanite tribes they called that town Chevron.

אשר לפני ממרא, השדה והמערה, both were outside the actual town limits of Kiryat Arba, the present day Chevron then having been known as Mamre. (compare also verse 19). [The Torah makes certain that all the names by which this location had ever been known is mentioned so that no one in the future could challenge this cave as belonging to the Jewish people. Ed.]

The simple meaning of the verse is: The field came into... It seems we could ask either way: If the simple meaning works well, [why do we need the first explanation?] Rashi does not usually bring a Midrash without reason! And if the simple meaning does not work well, why bring it? This question should be asked whenever Rashi brings both. The answer is: The simple meaning, on its own, raises a question. It is redundant to say, “The field of Ephron... became Avraham’s through a purchase.” Why say, “Of Ephron”? Do we not already know it was his field? Perforce, an elevation took place specifically for the field of Ephron—it previously belonged to a commoner, Ephron. However, the exposition by the Midrash of “elevation,” when on its own, also raises a question. The verse already said, “The field of Ephron was established.” Why say again, “The field and the cave...”? A further problem with the Midrash, [when on its own, is that] the next verse לאברהם למקנה. becomes somewhat disjointed Thus Rashi brings also the simple meaning: the field, etc, came into Avraham’s possession. It says, “The field of Ephron,” and then repeats, “The field and the cave...” in order to indicate both explanations. Accordingly, ויקם applies to both. It applies to “The field of Ephron” to indicate “elevation.” And it applies to “The field and the cave” to indicate that it came into Avraham’s possession. In the simple meaning, ויקם denotes that possession of the field was transferred from the seller’s control and was established to the buyer, as Rashi exsimpleed on (Vayikra 25:30), “The house in the walled city shall be established (וקם)...” The questions of Re’m, and of the Minchas Yehudah who came after him, are thus resolved. There is no need for their forced explanations, as ויקם שדה and וקם הבית both mean the same. In the simple meaning, ויקם השדה means that possession of the field was established in the buyer’s control, the same as Rashi exsimpleed for וקם הבית. Rashi understands the word וקם to mean “shall be established,” and only says “in the control of the buyer” to exsimple that verse’s following phrase: “To the one who bought it.” The same applies here: ויקם means the field was established to Avraham. Whereas Re’m and Minchas Yehudah understood that according to Rashi there, וקם means “acquisition” [and thus conflicts with its meaning here]. But this is not so, and it is difficult to understand why they said this. (R. Meir Stern)

בכל באי שער עירו BEFORE ALL THAT CAME IN AT THE GATE OF HIS CITY — In the midst of all them, and with all of them standing by he gave him legal possession of it.

לאברהם למקנה, “it arose” after Avraham had paid the money, a normal procedure which we are familiar with from the (misquote) in Erchin 33 ונתן הבסף וקם לו. The purchase was concluded in verse 18, i.e. the field became a מקנה for Avraham. It became an ancestral piece of property only after Sarah had actually been buried there, i.e. after the purpose of the transaction had been carried out (verse 20)

לעיני בני חת. He weighed the money for Efron in the presence of all the assembled people, so that Efron sold the cave and the field to Avraham also in the presence of all his townspeople. He also handed Avraham a document confirming the sale.

And in the presence of all, he gave him possession. [The prefix] ב usually denotes “within.” But since “within” or “inside” does not fit here, Rashi says: “In the presence of all.” Rashi did not wish to explain here as in v. 10, that everyone left their work, because then Scripture should have written לכל, as it does there. Why is it written בכל, implying he was amongst them? Perforce, it is to be interpreted as “in the presence of all.”

בכל באי שער עירו. While all the people of his town were present. The expressions בכל, לכל (compare verse 10) mean basically the same. We find similar formulations in Exodus 27,19 where the two expressions occur in the same verse, i.e. לכל כלי המשכן בכל עבודתו.

AND AFTER THIS, ABRAHAM BURIED SARAH HIS WIFE IN THE CAVE OF THE FIELD OF MACHPELAH BEFORE MAMRE — THE SAME IS HEBRON — IN THE LAND OF CANAAN. The reason why Scripture reverts to clarify the field, the place and the land is that the whole section mentioned the sons of Heth and Ephron the Hittite. Therefore Scripture mentions at the conclusion that the field was in the land of Canaan which is the land of Israel. And so it said at the beginning of the section: in Kiryath arba — the same is Hebron — in the land of Canaan.⁴⁶Above, Verse 2. All this is to explain that the righteous woman died in the land of Israel, and there she was interred, as the Hittites were of the families of Canaan.⁴⁷Ibid., 10:15.
In my opinion, the reason for the verses is only to mention that this was the land of Canaan, not the land of the Philistines. Having said, And Abraham sojourned in the land of the Philistines many days,⁴⁸Ibid., 21:34. and since all his habitats were in that land — in Gerar,⁴⁹Ibid., 20:1. and the valley of Gerar,⁵⁰Further, 26:17-18. and Beer-sheba,⁵¹Above, 22:19. and from there to Hebron and back — Scripture therefore mentioned that Hebron is in the land of the Canaanite who dwelt in that hill country,⁵²Numbers 14:45. not in the land of the Philistines, which is mentioned in connection with Abraham. And in the end Scripture added a phrase to inform us that the cave was in the field of Machpelah before Mamre, for this was the name by which it was known.
This section was written to inform us of G-d’s kindnesses to Abraham, i.e., that in the land in which he came to live he was regarded as a prince of G-d,⁵³Above, Verse 6. and each individual as well as all the people called him “my lord” although he did not tell them that he was a prince and a great man. Also, in his lifetime G-d fulfilled His promise to him: And I will make thy name great, and thou shalt be a blessing.⁵⁴Ibid., 12:2. Moreover, his wife died and was buried in the inheritance of the Eternal.⁵⁵I Samuel 26:19. A reference to the land of Israel. Further, Scripture wanted to inform us of the place of the burial of the patriarchs since we are obligated to honor the burial place of our holy ancestors. Our Rabbis said⁵⁶Sanhedrin 111a. that this also was one of the trials of Abraham: he desired a place to bury Sarah but did not find it until he purchased it, [despite G-d’s promise that the entire land would be given to him].
I do not know a reason for the words of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who says that the purpose of this section is to let us know the superiority of the land of Israel as regards the living and the dead, and also to fulfill the word of G-d which promised him that the land would be an inheritance of his. But what superiority of the land was thus demonstrated? Abraham would not have carried her to another land to bury her, and the word of G-d to Abraham applied to the whole land, and that was fulfilled only with his seed.

ואחרי כן…ויקם השדה. Afterwards the field stood as burial plot, etc. We need to understand why the Torah had to write the words: "afterwards," something that is obvious. What could be more natural than Abraham burying Sarah at the end of these negotiations? Besides, why did the Torah repeat the words: ויקם השדה, something we read already in verse 17?

ואחרי כן...אל מערת, the preposition אל means the same as the prefix ב, i.e. במערת שדה המכפלה. Compare Exodus 25,21 ואל הארון תתן את העדות instead of בארון.

ואחרי כן קבר, “after (all) this he proceeded to bury, etc.” Rabbi Meir points out that throughout the entire chapter thus far, Avraham had always spoken of burying מתי, “my (singular) dead,” whereas Efron and his townspeople had spoken about Avraham being allowed to bury מתיך, “your dead (plural).” According to this Rabbi the words ואת מתך קבור (verse 15) of Efron, (after the price had been agreed upon), also have to be understood as including other dead family members in the future.

אל מערת המכפלה, nicht ,במערת וגו׳, diese Konstruktion kommt nur noch einmal vor: קברו אותי אל אבתי. Es liegt darin der Gedanke, dass der Ort, welcher für das Begräbnis gewünscht wird, einen besonderen Wert für den zu Begrabenden oder dessen Angehörige habe. Er soll nicht nur begraben, sondern gerade dort begraben werden. Da tritt denn nun die Überlieferung hinzu, dass Saras Leiche nicht die erste dort zu begrabende gewesen. Schon ruhten dort Adam und Eva. Das Elternpaar der Menschheit waren die ersten, die dort begraben, zu ihnen sollte sich das Elternpaar des jüdischen Volkes, dieses geistige Elternpaar der Menschheit, gesellen; darum hatte sich Abraham gerade diese Höhle ersehen.

אל מערת המכפלה, “literally: “to” the cave of Machpelah; actually the word: אל here appears in lieu of the prefix ב. We find similar instances of the word אל being used in lieu of the prefix ב, in Exodus 25,16, and Numbers 19,6, as well as in Numbers 19,17.

ואחרי כן קבר אברהם את שרה אשתו אל מערת המכפלה...היא חברון בארץ כנען. “After this, Avraham buried his wife Sarah in the cave of Machpelah. which is in Chevron in the land of Canaan.” The Torah goes to great lengths to describe the location of this field and its adjacent cave in great detail. The reason is that throughout the inhabitants of that land had been described as members of the tribe known as Hittites, a major tribe of the Canaanite nation, Whenever “the land of Canaan” is mentioned, the Torah, by implication, reminds us of the loving Providence of G’d Who gave this ancestral land to the Jewish nation. Although Avraham had only come to that land as a stranger with no claim on any part of that land, he had risen to be a highly respected member of that society, so much so that the people ceded a little of their ancestral land to have him use it as his in perpetuity. An additional reason for describing this location in such detail was so that we should be aware of where our patriarchs have been buried, in order to honour their memory on the occasions when we are obligated to honour the dead of our people who had led sainted lives .by visiting their graves.

The Torah wanted to confirm that the transaction complied with all and every legal form of acquisition. The words "afterwards" mean that once Abraham had weighed the money for Efron the latter had foregone all claim to that property in perpetuity. Maimonides explains it thus in chapter one of Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah: "A Gentile loses his right to formerly owned property the moment he accepts the money as compensation for it. A Jew, on the other hand, does not acquire title to his new property until he has a written document. Once this has occurred the property in question is like land in the desert which anyone can stake a claim to." In other words, once the Gentile has accepted the money he loses all former claims. Had Abraham buried Sarah before giving the money to Efron, the fact that he gave the money to Efron afterwards would not have made a full acquisition, seeing that the act of possession expressed by his burying Sarah would not have been performed on land owned by him at the time.

Die Örtlichkeit, von welcher die Höhle den Namen trägt, hieß: מכפלה, und weist dieser Name von כפל, doppelt, auf eine gepaarte räumliche Gestaltung hin. Es scheint, dass die Örtlichkeit aus paarweise geschichteten Höhlen bestand, die sich also von selbst der Bestattung von im Tode wie im Leben vereinten Gattenpaaren darbot, wie ja denn dort Adam und Eva, Abraham und Sara, Jizchak und Rebekka, Jakob und Lea ruhen. Der erste Besitz, den der jüdische Stamm an seinem Lande erhielt, waren Gräberpaare, die der erste Jude für sich und demnächst auch für sich und seine Kinder und Enkel mit ihren Frauen erkaufte. Der Gedanke an den Wert der Familien- bande, die dem Manne sein Weib und den Kindern ihre Eltern ans Herz knüpfen, war fortan unzertrennlich mit dem jüdischen Boden verknüpft, bildete fortan den Grundzug in dem Charakter des Juden, und befähigte ihn, das zu werden, was er geworden. Vielleicht stammt hiervon auch der Name Chebron, der fortan dem Orte beigelegt wurde. חברון heißt ja: der innige Aneinanderschluss, der bezeichnendste Name für die Innigkeit, welche den jüdischen Mann und das jüdische Weib als Gatte und Gattin, als Vater und Mutter im Leben und durchs Leben gleichsam in eins zusammenwachsen lässt. Noch in der nationalen Blüte der späteren Jahrhunderte stieg kein Tagesopfer auf der Moriahöhe in Jeruschalaim empor, bevor nicht der Priesterherold von des Tempels Zinne den Morgenstrahl über die Gräber der Väter und Mütter zu Chebron leuchten gesehen — כבוד אב ואם ist dem Juden die Vorbedingung und Wurzel für כבוד המקום. —

We need to examine if the act of חזקה, i.e. using the land for one's own purpose, is actually legally valid when the act of such חזקה is performed on land previously owned by a Gentile. In chapter two of the above-mentioned tractate of Maimonides, he writes as follows: "In the case of formerly ownerless property, or property formerly owned by a proselyte, the fact that the squatter (Jewish) has eaten the proceeds of such land for a number of years does not constitute an act of acquisition of either tree or the land itself until such time as the squatter has performed an act on the body of the land itself. What kind of activity would qualify in such an event? In the case of a Jew having taken over the house of a proselyte or an abandoned house, if he whitewashed it or added a moulding about 60 centimeters high this would constitute a valid act of acquisition. If he took earth from high ground and transferred it to fill lower ground in the same piece of land this would be considered as an improvement of the earth and would qualify as an act of acquisition." It is clear therefore that if the squatter merely shifted some earth without specific intent to effect an improvement on that soil- even though he thereby levelled the ground,- this would not be enough to qualify under the heading of קנין, acquisition. Maggid Mishneh (a commentator on Maimonides) writes that if the squatter spread mats on the ground in order to be able to sit on it in comfort and to enjoy this, this would count as a valid act of קנין, acquisition. An alternative cited by the above commentator suggests that even spreading the mats merely in order to improve the appearance of the ground in question suffices. Rabbi lbn Migosh concurs with the latter example. Thus far the quotation from Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah. Granted that according to the first example cited by the Maggid Mishneh anyone who benefits from an act performed on the land he squats on performs a valid act of חזקה, Abraham benefited by having buried Sarah on that land and thereby performed an act of acquisition; however, according to the opinion of Rabbi lbn Migosh that an actual improvement of the land has to take place, Sarah's burial would not have constituted such an improvement. How then did Abraham acquire that land (even though Efron had forfeited it)?

ואחרי כן erst nachdem der Ort mit der ganzen Umgebung sein bleibendes Eigentum geworden, begrub Abraham seine Sara. Der Jude treibt kein Götzentum und keinen Prunk mit seinen Gefühlen. Er baut keine Kirchen und Mausoleen an seine Gräber, noch schmückt er sie zu Gärten um. Dagegen kennt er auch keine "Ruhejahre". Die Stätte, wo seine Toten ruhen, bleibt ihm für immer heilig. Ihm ist eine Anschauung fremd, die die Kinder der Eltern Grab mit Marmor und Immortellen verherrlichen und die Enkel es aufwühlen und die Gebeine zu namenlosen Haufen gedanken- und gefühllos hinauswerfen lässt. —

Perhaps the superstructure erected around the grave, and especially the sepulchral chambers dug within the earth which was customary at the time, constituted such an improvement in the field under discussion. These sepulchral chambers were probably white-washed with lime to prevent the earth around them from crumbling. Now we can understand the reason the Torah repeated the words ויקם השדה. It means that after Abraham had buried Sarah the acquisition of that field by Abraham became complete.

Zwei Bemerkungen mögen hier noch eine Stätte finden. Dem jüdischen Volke wird nichts so sehr vorgeworfen, als der Hang zu Kauf und Verkauf, zum Handel, zum Geschäft. Da ists denn eigentümlich: wenn unsere Gesetzeswissenschaft sich nach einem Beispiel im heiligen Worte umsieht, um daran die Form eines Kaufs und Verkaufs zu veranschaulichen, findet sie nur den Kauf eines Grabes hier — שדה עפרון — und den Kauf eines Feldes, das der Prophet — Jirmija — zur Bekräftigung der Zukunftszuversicht kaufen musste, als bereits die babylonische Macht den Untergang des Staates vor Jerusalems Toren vorbereitete, also vor dem Anfang und dem Ende unseres volkstümlichen Daseins.

Die Form jüdischer Eheschließungen knüpft ebenfalls an den Erwerbakt des Feldes Efrons an. "Der Jude kauft sein Weib!" spricht eine gedankenlose Zeit vorwerfend. Ja wohl kauft er sein Weib, aber dafür bleibt sie denn auch die Seine, und verehrt er in ihr sein höchstes irdisches Gut. Und wohl uns, wenn alle unsere Ehen durch diese Erinnerung gleichsam an Saras Grabstätte eingegangen werden und von dem Geiste einer Ehe durchweht bleiben, wie sie die Erinnerung an Abraham und Sara vergegenwärtigt, und die ihren letzten und bleibenden Ausdruck in dem "Kauf der Höhle zu Machpela" fand. —

ויקם...מאת בני חת, All the townspeople had agreed to the sale of Efron’s fields to Avraham. They were quite keen for Avraham to own an ancestral plot in their midst.

מאת בני חת ויקם השדה, these people all agreed to the transaction.

ויקם השדה, “this formulation uses the verb קום in the sense of being stable, remaining firmly established. Examples are Numbers 30,10 where it refers to the validity until honoured, of a vow made by a woman of age and not married. In this instance, the Torah records that the transfer of the cave and field adjoining Machpelah from Efron to Avraham remains valid forever. Avraham himself, of course, also acquired the legal right to be buried alongside his beloved wife Sarah.

מאת בני חת “from the Hittites.” Avraham had taken the town seal and attached it to the document registering this sale. He did so in order to prevent the townspeople claiming in the future that Efron had not had the legal right to sell the property to be used as a burial site. [It occurs to this editor that if Yaakov, Avraham’s grandson, had not relied on Lavan’s word when he agreed to work seven years for the hand of Rachel in marriage, but had insisted on a written document, he might have saved himself an untold amount of grief.]