Esav

This week in class, we analyzed a bunch of commentaries who talk about what actually happened when Yaakov bought the birthright from Esav for a bowl of soup. Seforno brings a very interesting approach to analyzing this situation.

Seforno's general methodology is that he is very concise. Unlike other commentaries, who might add stories or extra scenarios to support their ideas, Seforno leaves all of the extra things out. In this particular situation, he believes that Esav was always "in the moment" and never really thought about his future. In addition, Yaakov was completely justified in his actions.

And now for the interpretations: Seforno explains the "red stuff" in passuk 30 simply as Esav mocking the soup, instead of acknowledging it as food. He explains "Kayom" as Yaakov's attempt to get Esav to think about his future. Because Esav was so caught up in the present, Yaakov was trying to remind him that doing the right think requires premeditation and careful thought. In passuk 32, Seforno says that Esav was being overly dramatic about dying. He meant that he was so exhausted, which is just like saying "he was dead on his feet." This, again, highlights the fact that Esav only lived in the present. In passuk 32, Seforno explains that the birthright was all spiritual and not tangible. Esav had to swear that it would belong to Yaakov because it is so easy to just take back an intangible object. The trade of the soup was the physical representation of the sale of the birthright. This further justifies Yaakov's actions; he blatantly sold the birthright. That way, there is no question about what really happened. (In passuk 34, Seforno restates that the pot of soup was the physical representation of the sale.)

I do have some problems with this explanation. According to the first article we read, the hardships of the rest of Yaakov's life were the direct punishment for his deception of Esav. This doesn't seem to fit with Seforno's explanation. He says that the sale was very straightforward and that there was not any deception on Yaakov's part. Esav's lack of attentiveness is the factor that tipped the scale. Basically, I don't believe Esav was evil and Yaakov was saint-like. I just think that they were two brothers who each wanted the best for themselves. How can we fit all of the pieces of interpretation together to make a story that both makes sense to us and fits in to the basic understanding of the text?