Komentarz do Rodzaju 25:31

SELL ME YOUR BIRTHRIGHT TODAY – (Our sages) have already inquired how it is proper (for Jacob) to entice his brother to sell the birthright, in particular, for lentils. It is certainly not the case that he intended to gain the right to the (firstborn’s double share of) the estate; also, who even knows whether prior to the giving of the Torah it was customary that the firstborn received a double share of the inheritance. The benefit of the birthright at that time was apparently a sign of virtue and the right to carry on the family name (literally, “to rise to his father’s name”.) The scripture already stated, “through Isaac your heirs will be named” (with regards to Abraham, Bereishit 21:12) and our sages learned “in Isaac” and not “all of Isaac,” meaning that the one who holds on to Isaac’s (righteous) ways has the pedigree to carry on the family name. After (the sale) Esau went out to a bad culture that very day, and therefore to Esau there was no difference whether he had the birthright or not, since how could he rightly be called “firstborn” if he couldn’t be called (Isaac’s) “son” (as a result of his decision to engage in bad behavior.) The only benefit to Esau in having the birthright was to deprive Jacob of it so that he did not have the birthright; Esau so no positive benefit for himself in it. That is the reason Jacob asked Esau to sell it, since Esau did not lose anything in the sale and Jacob had benefit from the sale. This is also why Esau said, “why do I need the birthright” – he stated that it made no difference at all to him whether he had the birthright, since he had no desire at all to be (Isaac’s) son (i.e., to live up to the family name.) This is the reason the scripture states among the attributes of Israel, “Israel, my son, my firstborn.” (Shemot 4:22) Apparently, the word “firstborn” already implies “son” (so why the redundant language?) This language is coming only to repudiate Esau – that Israel has two positive attributes, “son” and also “firstborn,” whereas Esau was not content to spurn the birthright, he also spurned being Isaac’s son.

מכרה כיום SELL ME THIS DAY (literally, like the day) — Explain it as the Targum renders it “as this day”: just as this day is certain, so make me a sure sale.

SELL ME THIS DAY (‘KAYOM’) THY BIRTHRIGHT. “I.e., as this day.⁴⁰“As this day.” Our text of Rashi reads: “Ketargumo (Explain it as the Targum rendered it), ‘as this day.’” Rashi now proceeds to interpret the Targum to mean, “just as this day is certain, etc.” Just as this day is certain, so make me a binding sale.” This is Rashi’s language.
The literal meaning of the word kayom is “at this time,” just as: But stand thou still at this time (‘kayom’), that I may cause thee to hear the word of G-d;⁴¹I Samuel 9:27. At this time (‘kayom’) you shall find him;⁴²Ibid., Verse 13. Let the fat be made to smoke at this time (‘kayom’);⁴³Ibid., 2:16. But unto us belongeth confusion of face, as at this day (‘kayom’).⁴⁴Daniel 9:7.
It would appear from the opinion of Onkelos⁴⁵Since Onkelos, the author of the Targum, added the word dilhein, it would appear from this, etc. that because the sale of the birthright was to take effect after the death of his father Isaac, he [Jacob] said, “Sell me the birthright, with the sale to take effect on whatever day [our father’s death] may occur.”⁴⁶Ramban’s intent is as follows: Since Esau would not possess the birthright until after Isaac’s death —(see Ramban further, Verse 34, that the birthright carried with it no distinction except after the passing of the father)— if he were to attempt to sell it effective immediately, the sale would not be valid. But in this way, having stipulated “whenever that may be,” even though the death of Isaac and the subsequent acquisition of the birthright by Esau have not yet occurred, the sale by Esau is nevertheless valid since Jacob stipulated “whenever that may be.” See my Hebrew commentary, p. 145. This is a typical usage of lahein in the Aramaic language: “Wherever (lahein) are you going?”⁴⁷Yerushalmi Berachoth II, 8: lahein yeizil lei. This means, “To what place are you going?” This is derived from the expression, “Whatever (hein) you let me know.”⁴⁸Yalkut Shimoni Ezra 10:3. Similarly in Bereshith Rabbah, Parshath Vayishlach,⁴⁹Bereshith Rabbah 78:1. “Wherever (velahein) are they going?”⁵⁰Our Bereshith Rabbah reads: ule’an atun azlin. See, however, Theodore’s edition of this Midrash, p. 906, where he quotes from manuscript, velahein, as Ramban has it. is derived from the expression, “Whatever (hein) is broken.”⁴⁹Bereshith Rabbah 78:1. This is their⁵¹Those conversing or writing in the Aramaic language. customary usage of language in many places. And in the book of Daniel this form appears with a patach⁵²That is our kametz. under the letter lamed, similar in meaning to the word ilahin (which): Which ‘lohin’ the angels whose dwelling is not with flesh;⁵³Daniel 2:11. whatever⁵⁴“Whatever, you do, O king….” (‘lohin’), O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee.⁵⁵Ibid., 4:24. Now Onkelos translated the Hebrew word zulathi as ilahin⁵⁶Deuteronomy 1:36. Zulathi Caleb (excepting Caleb) is translated by Onkelos as elahin Caleb. To the Aramaic root lahin which appears in the book of Daniel — (see my Hebrew text, p. 145 line 2 from bottom, covering Notes 53 and 55 here) — Onkelos added the letters aleph and yod, thus making it elahin. The intent of Ramban is to indicate that it should not surprise us that Onkelos added a dalet in the text before us, thus making it dilhein, for just as the original word hen was augmented to become lahein so he further expanded it to read dilhein. (Aboab.) its meaning being as the two words, ila hin.
Now in carefully edited texts of Onkelos I found the reading, kayom dilhei. This conforms with my interpretation, for hei in their language⁵⁷Aramaic. means “which,” as it is said in the Talmud: “Which (hei) Rabbi Meir?”⁵⁸Baba Kamma 99b. “Which (hei) Rabbi Yehudah?”⁵⁹Baba Bathra 141a. and others.
It is possible that Onkelos understood the word kayom (as the day) as if it were bayom (on the day). The verse would then be stating, “Sell the birthright to me on the day it will come into your possession.” We find such usage of the letter kaf elsewhere: As (‘Ka’asher’) they go, I will spread My net upon them,⁶⁰Hosea 7:12. meaning ba’asher (wherever they go) rather than “whenever they go.” Similarly, And for the blood (‘kidmei’) of thy children that thou didst give unto them;⁶¹Ezekiel 16:36. Ve’kidmei is to be interpreted as ubidmei (and in the blood). For I have spread you abroad as the four (‘ke’arba’) winds of the heavens.⁶²Zechariah 2:10. Ke’arba is here to be interpreted as be’arba (in the four).
And some scholars say⁶³Quoted by R’dak in his commentary in the name of his father. It is mentioned in Pesikta Zutrata, and a reference to it is also found in Bamidbar Rabbah 6:2. that the price for the birthright was not the pottage at all. Rather, Scripture tells that when Esau, being faint, desired to eat, Jacob said to him, “Sell me your birthright for money and then eat,” and Esau, in his haste for food, answered him, “What is this birthright to me? It is sold to you.” He then swore to him upon it, and they sat down to eat and drink. Scripture however did not reveal the price. I do not agree with this interpretation.