כִּֽי־אַ֭תָּה קָנִ֣יתָ כִלְיֹתָ֑י תְּ֝סֻכֵּ֗נִי בְּבֶ֣טֶן אִמִּֽי׃
Car c’est toi qui as façonné mes reins, tu m’as pétri dans le sein de ma mère.
Or HaChaim
We may have to understand all this in accordance with the statement in Pessachim 116 that when one recites the Passover story one begins with aspects which reflect discredit and concludes with aspects which reflect credit on the Jewish people. The discredit consists of the fact that our ancestors were pagans, something one can hardly boast about. The Torah therefore hints at this procedure by writing והגדת, "you will relate matters which are as tough as tendons;" you will conclude with אמירה, i.e. לאמור, words which recall that you were meritorious. The words ביום ההוא are a hint of the future redemption when the night will be called "day" (compare Psalms 139,13). It is also a reminder that the night preceding the morning of the Exodus was illuminated for the Jews (see our comment on 12,30). The Torah adds the words בעבור זה so that we will not err and conduct these ceremonies during the hours which belong to the day but at the time when we have to consume Matzah, i.e. in the evening. Possibly the words והגדת and ביום ההוא have been placed next to one another in order that we will also include the miraculous way in which that night turned into bright daylight for the Jews.
Ramban
KONEI (POSSESSOR) OF HEAVEN AND EARTH. Rashi wrote: “Konei is similar to osei (maker);192In our text of Rashi, ‘Osei’ (Maker) of heaven and earth. Psalms 134:3. through His having made them He acquired them as His possession.”
But these are really two different interpretations.193From Rashi it would appear that osei and kinyan — making and acquiring — constitute but one interpretation when in fact they are two: konei is similar to osei, and konei is like kinyan (acquisition). Perhaps it is indeed the case that the word kinyan (acquisition) is also used in the case of asiyah (making). Thus you find, For Thou ‘kanita’ (hast made) my reins,194Pslams 139:13. repeating the thought [expressed in the second half of the verse], Thou hast knit me together in my mother’s womb.195Ramban’s point is that since the second half of the verse clearly speaks of the making of man, the first half of the verse which uses the word kanita must also refer to “making,” rather than “acquiring.” A similar case is the verse, Is He not ‘konecha’ thy father? Hath He not made thee, and established thee?196Deuteronomy 32:6. Here too the word konecha is used together with asiyah, indicating that they have a similar connotation. Thus the Sacred Language uses kinyan in the case of “making.” Conversely, And the souls which ‘asu’ [literally, they made] in Haran,197Above, 12:5. means “they acquired.” And of that which was our father’s ‘asah’ (hath he made)198Further, 31:1. — [here too it means “hath he acquired.”]
That which Rashi says further — “He acquired them as His possession,” is correct, for whatever belongs to a person is called kinyano (his acquisition). Sheep are called mikneh because they constitute the main wealth of a person. In the language of the Sages: “He who picks up a find for his friend, his friend kanah [has taken title to it];”199Baba Metziah 10a. Here the word konah does not mean that he acquired it from the other since he never picked it up for himself. Instead, it means taking title to it. “watching gives ‘keniya’ (the right of possession) in ownerless property;”200Ibid., 118a. Here too konah does not mean that he acquired it from another person but that he took title to it. “a man’s yard koneh (obtains title) for him without his knowledge.”201Ibid., 11a. This too is a similar case. Similarly, the Sages, in all places, use the expression of kinyan for taking possession, meaning that it is his. This was the intention of Onkelos when he translated konei (of heaven and earth) as d’kinyanei, [meaning “Whose possessions are heaven and earth”], and he did not say kanah (who acquired).
But these are really two different interpretations.193From Rashi it would appear that osei and kinyan — making and acquiring — constitute but one interpretation when in fact they are two: konei is similar to osei, and konei is like kinyan (acquisition). Perhaps it is indeed the case that the word kinyan (acquisition) is also used in the case of asiyah (making). Thus you find, For Thou ‘kanita’ (hast made) my reins,194Pslams 139:13. repeating the thought [expressed in the second half of the verse], Thou hast knit me together in my mother’s womb.195Ramban’s point is that since the second half of the verse clearly speaks of the making of man, the first half of the verse which uses the word kanita must also refer to “making,” rather than “acquiring.” A similar case is the verse, Is He not ‘konecha’ thy father? Hath He not made thee, and established thee?196Deuteronomy 32:6. Here too the word konecha is used together with asiyah, indicating that they have a similar connotation. Thus the Sacred Language uses kinyan in the case of “making.” Conversely, And the souls which ‘asu’ [literally, they made] in Haran,197Above, 12:5. means “they acquired.” And of that which was our father’s ‘asah’ (hath he made)198Further, 31:1. — [here too it means “hath he acquired.”]
That which Rashi says further — “He acquired them as His possession,” is correct, for whatever belongs to a person is called kinyano (his acquisition). Sheep are called mikneh because they constitute the main wealth of a person. In the language of the Sages: “He who picks up a find for his friend, his friend kanah [has taken title to it];”199Baba Metziah 10a. Here the word konah does not mean that he acquired it from the other since he never picked it up for himself. Instead, it means taking title to it. “watching gives ‘keniya’ (the right of possession) in ownerless property;”200Ibid., 118a. Here too konah does not mean that he acquired it from another person but that he took title to it. “a man’s yard koneh (obtains title) for him without his knowledge.”201Ibid., 11a. This too is a similar case. Similarly, the Sages, in all places, use the expression of kinyan for taking possession, meaning that it is his. This was the intention of Onkelos when he translated konei (of heaven and earth) as d’kinyanei, [meaning “Whose possessions are heaven and earth”], and he did not say kanah (who acquired).