## Ibn Ezra on Genesis Chapter 27

###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:2:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:2:1)

**הנה נא.** כמו עתה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BEHOLD NOW. The word *na* means now.¹

footnotes:
¹ See I.E.’s comments on Gen. 12:11.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:3:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:3:1)

**כליך.** יתכן היותו שם כלל והפרט תליך וקשתך, ותליך האשפה התלויה ששם החצים, או תליך כמו חרב ויחסרו וי"ו מן תליך, "כאדם שת אנוש" (דה"א א א):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THY WEAPONS. *Khelekha* (thy weapons) is possibly a general term, the particulars being *thy quiver and thy bow*.² *Telyekha* (thy quiver) is a sheath hanging³ means to hang. from its bearer wherein arrows are placed. On the other hand, *khelekha* may refer to a sword.⁴. 38 text. The printed texts have *telyekha* referring to a sword. If this reading is accepted, why does I.E. say a *vav* should have been placed before *telyekha*? The first particular following a general term does not require a *vav*, as I.E. himself implies in his comment on Gen. 26:5. Furthermore, why should a *vav* be placed before *telyekha* if it means a sword and not if it means a quiver? For an attempt to explain the printed texts see Krinsky and Cherez. However, for the impossibility of the printed versions see Filwarg. The reading of *Vat. Ebr*. 38 seems correct. However, in this case a conjunctive *vav* should have been placed in front of *telyekha*.⁵ should be placed before quiver as it is before bow. The verse should read: take thy sword and thy quiver (*ve-telyekha*) and thy bow. Nevertheless, it does not refute the latter interpretation, for we find a similar instance in *Adam, Seth, Enosh* (I Chron. 1:1).⁶ before the final two. The text should have read: Adam and Seth and Enosh. We thus see that Scripture at times leaves out the conjunctive *vav*.

footnotes:
² The verse should be understood as follows: take, I pray thee, thy weapons, namely thy quiver and thy bow.
³ The root tav, lamed, heh
⁴ The translation follows the Vat. Ebr
⁵ Since Scripture is listing three separate items, sword, quiver and bow, a conjunctive vav
⁶ Here, too, we find three separate individuals listed without a vav


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:5:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:5:1)

**ורבקה שומעת.** היתה שומעת:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND REBEKAH HEARD. *Shoma’at* (heard) should be translated, “was listening.”⁷ is a participle. It literally means listening. Hence, the word “was” has to be added and the verse should be understood: Rebekah was listening when Isaac spoke to Esau his son.

footnotes:
⁷ Shoma’at


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:7:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:7:1)

**לפני מותי.** כמו בטרם אמות:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BEFORE MY DEATH. Before I die.⁸ (before) means in the presence of. It might conceivably be rendered immediately before (in the presence of) my death, hence I.E.’s comment. For the same reason Filwarg explains I.E.’s comment as meaning: while I yet live.

footnotes:
⁸ The word li-fene


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:11:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:11:1)

**שעיר.** בעל שער, וההפך חלק, ויתכן שנקרא כן בעבור היות החלק חלקיו שוים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
HAIRY. The word *sa’ir* means hairy. The opposite of *sa’ir* is *chalak* (smooth) (v. 11). Someone without hair on his body is possibly so called (*chalak*) because all parts of his body (*chalakav*) are the same.⁹ means a part, *chalak* one whose entire body appears to be one part. The idea is that a hairy person has some non-hairy parts on his body; hence his body is not all the same. The smooth man’s skin is the same all over his body (Filwarg).

footnotes:
⁹ Chelek


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:12:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:12:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:12:1)

**ימושני.** כמו יסובני מבעלי הכפל,:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
WILL FEEL ME. *Yemusheni* (will feel me) is similar to *yesubeni* (compasseth me about)¹⁰, too, has a root (*samech, bet, bet*) whose second and third letters are the same (Weiser). *Yemusheni* follows the paradigm of *yesubeni* (Cherez). (Ps. 49:6). It belongs to those roots whose second and third letters are the same.¹¹ root is *mem, shin, shin*.

footnotes:
¹⁰ Yesubeni
¹¹ The root of yemusheni


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:12:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:12:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:12:2)

כמתעתע. כפול מגזרת תועה כאיש שמתעה אחר:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AS A MOCKER. The root of *ki-metate*’a (as a mocker) is doubled.¹². The *heh* drops out and the *tav ayin* are doubled making for a quadriliteral (Weiser, Cherez). It comes from the same root as *to’eh* (err). The meaning of *ki-metate*’a is: as one who misleads his fellow man.

footnotes:
¹² Its root is tav, ayin, heh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:13:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:13:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:13:1)

**עלי קללתך.** אל תפחד שיקלל, ואם יקלל תהי קללתו עלי ולא עליך, וזה משפט דברי הנשים והגאון פי' עלי להסיר קללתך, וי"א חלילה לכזב הנביא רק הוא כן:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
UPON ME BE THY CURSE. Don’t be afraid that your father might curse you. If he does, the curse will be upon me, not on you. This is the way women talk.¹³ However, Saadiah Gaon explained *Upon me be thy curse* to mean: it is upon me to remove the curse.¹⁴

footnotes:
¹³ A mother is willing to have any trouble that is destined to fall upon her son fall upon her.
¹⁴ I will intercede with your father to annul any imprecation that he may curse you with (Weiser).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:19:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:19:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:19:1)

**אנכי.** מי שאנכי ועשו בכורך, ואחרים אמרו כי בנחת אמר אנכי, ונשא קול במלת עשו בכורך ואלה דברי רוח, כי הנביאים יתחלקו לב' חלקים, החלק הא' שליח במצות, והחלק השני נביאי העתיד ואם יצטרכו לאמר דבר שאיננו כהוגן לא יזיק רק השליח לא יתכן שיכזב כלל, גם הנה דוד נכתב עליו "איש האלהים" (דה"ב ח יד) ואמר "רוח ד' דבר בי" (ש"ב כג ב) בלבל דבריו עם אחימלך ואמר "ויהיו כלי הנערים קדש" (ש"א כא ו) לצורך שעה, גם אלישע שאמר לחזאל "לך אמור לו חיה תחיה" (מ"ב ח' י) אף על פי שפירושו היה תחיה מחולי זה, הראני השם כי יהרג, וכן מיכיהו אמר תפלת שוא "עלה והצלח" (מ"א כב טו) דרך מוסר וכן אמר דניאל "מרי חלמא לשנאך" (דניאל ד' טז), ולהיותו כנגד השם דרך דרש וכן אמר אברהם "וגם אמנה" (בראשית כ יב) "ונשתחוה ונשובה" (בראשית כב ה):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[I AM.] Some say, Heaven forbid that a prophet should lie. We must therefore interpret Jacob’s words to his father as follows: I am who I am and Esau is thy first born.¹⁵ Others say that Jacob quietly said, I am, and then loudly said, *Esau is thy first-born*.¹⁶ Now these interpretations are nonsence. Prophets are divided into two groups. One group consists of God’s messengers concerning commandments;¹⁷ (Heb.) Vol. 8, p. 678. An example of God’s messengers with regard to commandments are Moses and Aaron. the other, those who foretell the future. If the latter have to say something that is not quite so,¹⁸). According to Filwarg, what I.E. says is that prophets do not lie when they act as God’s messengers. At other times they may tell an untruth. there is no harm done.¹⁹ prophet. However, a prophet whose task is to reveal commandments never lies. We thus find that King David, whom Scripture calls *the man of God* (II Chron. 8:14) and who said, *The spirit of the Lord spoke by me* (II Sam. 23:2), perverted the truth out of need of the hour when he spoke to Abimelech and said, *Of a truth women have been kept from us about these three days, when I came out, the vessels of the young men were holy* (I Sam. 21:6).²⁰ Also, the prophet Elisha did not speak the truth when he said to Hazael, *Go, say unto him, thou shalt surely recover* (II Kings 8:10), even though what he meant was, go say unto him that thou shalt recover from this illness; however, God has shown me that he will be killed.²¹ spelled with an *alef*. Thus the verse may be read: thou shalt not recover. However, the *kere* spells the *lo* with a *vav* meaning: say unto him thou shalt recover. I.E. points out that the *kere* is the correct meaning of the verse. Thus Elisha misled the king of Aram. He told him that he would live although he knew that he would be killed (Netter). For a description of the incident see II Kings 8:7-15. Similarly the prophet Micaiah uttered a vain prayer out of deference to King Ahab when he told him, *Go up and prosper; and the Lord will deliver it into the hand of the king* (I Kings 22:15).²² Similarly Daniel said to King Nebuchadnezzar, *My lord, the dream be to them that hate thee* (Dan. 4:16).²³ Those who explain that *My lord* refers to God are indulging in Midrash.²⁴ 35b. Similarly Abraham said unto Abimelech, *And moreover she is indeed my sister* (Gen. 20:12);²⁵ and unto his young men, *and I and the lad will go yonder and we will worship and come back to you* (Gen. 22:5).²⁶.

footnotes:
¹⁵ Cf. Rashi. “I am he who brings to you and Esau is your first born.”
¹⁶ Hence he said two things; I am; Esau is thy first born.
¹⁷ According to Weiser and Biblical Encyclopedia
¹⁸ A messenger who reveals God’s laws never stretches the truth. Prophets who foretell the future occasionally do (Weiser and Biblical Encyclopedia
¹⁹ It is no blight on the prophet’s reputation qua
²⁰ When David asked for the holy bread, he had no young men with him. Cf. I Sam. 21 and Weiser.
²¹ II Kings 8:10 reads lo
²² King Ahab inquired of the prophet if he would succeed in his attempt to regain Ramoth-Gilead from Aram. Cf. I Kings 22.
²³ Nebuchadnezzar’s dream signified that he would live as a beast for seven years. Since Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the Temple the prophet could not really have meant that the events in the dream should fall on Nebuchadnezzar’s enemies.
²⁴ According to the Talmud what Daniel really meant was: O Lord, may this dream fall upon your enemies, that is, Nebuchadnezzar. Cf. Shavuot
²⁵ See I. E. on this verse.
²⁶ Since Abraham intended to offer Isaac as a burnt offering, he really was not telling the truth when he said, And I and the lad will…come back to you


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:19:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:19:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:19:2)

**ואכלה מצידי.** כמו "זכרה לי אלוהי לטובה" (נחמיה ה יט) והאל"ף שרש:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND EAT OF MY VENISON. *Okhlah* (eat)²⁷ (eat) is an elongated imperative. The usual form is *ekhol*. Thus *okhlah* is similar to *zokhrah* which is also an elongated imperative. is similar to *zokhrah* (remember)²⁸. in *Remember* (zokhrah) *unto me, O my God, for good, all that I have done for this people* (Neh. 5:19). The *alef* of *okhlah* is a root letter.²⁹ prefix of the first person imperfect. I.E. makes this point because in verse 25 the *alef* of *okhelah* is the *alef* prefix of the first person imperfect. See I.E.’s comment on verse 25 and the note to it.

footnotes:
²⁷ Okhlah
²⁸ The normal imperative for remember is zekhor
²⁹ It is not the alef


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:21:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:21:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:21:1)

**ואמשך.** קל השי"ן להקל על הלשון:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THAT I MAY FEEL THEE. There is no *dagesh* in the *shin* of *va-amushekha* (that I may feel thee) in order to simplify the enunciation of this word.³⁰ is *mem, shin, shin*. One of these *shins* is missing is *va-amushekha*. When a root letter is missing a *dagesh* is placed in one of the remaining root letters; thus we would expect a *dagesh* in the *shin* of *va-amushekha*. I.E. points out that since a *dagesh* doubles the letter in which it is placed, the verse would have to be pronounced *va-amushshekha*. The *dagesh* was left out to avoid this.

footnotes:
³⁰ The root of va-amushekha


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:25:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:25:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:25:1)

**ואכלה מציד בני.** האל"ף סימן המדבד, והנה הנעלם שהוא אחריו תחת אל"ף השרש, וכן "אומרה לאל כלעי" (תהלים מב י),

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND I WILL EAT OF MY SON’S VENISON. The *alef* of *ve-okhelah* (and I will eat) is a first person imperfect prefix. It is vocalized with a *cholam* to compensate for the missing *alef* of the root.³¹ (eat) is *alef, caf, lamed*. The *alef* prefixed to a verb in the first person imperfect is usually vocalized with a *segol*. I.E. points out that in *okhelah* the *alef* is a first person imperfect prefix and is vocalized with a *cholam* rather than a *segol* to make up for the missing root letter. We find the same in the word *omerah* in *I will say* (omerah) *unto God my Rock* (Ps. 42:10).³² (say) is *alef, mem, resh*. In *omerah* the *alef* is the *alef* of the first person imperfect prefix and it, too, is vocalized with a *cholam* to make up for the missing *alef* root letter.

footnotes:
³¹ The root of akhal
³² The root of amar


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:25:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:25:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:25:2)

דגשות נו"ן תברכני (בראשית כז יט) לחסרון נו"ן הנוסף כמו "יסובבנהו" (דבר' לב י) וכן "ישחרונני" (הושע ה טו):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
The *nun* of *tevarakhanni* (may bless me) (v. 19) receives a *dagesh* to make up for the missing *nun*³³ is added to the end of the root. Since *ni* is the sign of the first person pronominal suffix, *tevarakhanni* should have been spelled with two *nuns* (we have spelled it with two *nuns* because of the *dagesh*. In the Hebrew it has one *nun*). It should be noted that I.E.’s comment is misplaced as it pertains to verse 19. which should have been in our word, as we find in *yesovevenhu* (He compassed him about) (Deut. 32:10) and similarly in *yeshacharuneni* (they will seek Me) (Hos. 5:15).³⁴ we see that a *nun* is added to the root when a verb is combined with a pronominal suffix. In *yeshacharuneni* we see that when a verb is combined with a first person pronominal suffix, two *nuns* are added to the root.

footnotes:
³³ According to I.E. when a verb is combined with a pronominal suffix, a nun
³⁴ In yesovevenhu


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:27:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:27:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:27:1)

**נשיקה** עם למ"ד ביד או בכתף או בצואר ובלי למ"ד בפה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[AND KISSED HIM.] When the word kiss is followed by a *lamed* it means to kiss upon the hand, shoulder or neck; when it is not followed by a *lamed* it indicates a mouth to mouth kiss.³⁵

footnotes:
³⁵ I.E. offers no proof for this statement (Weiser).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:27:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:27:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:27:2)

**וַיָרַח.** בפתח הרי"ש בעבור אות הנרון וכן "וַיָנַע לבבו" (ישעי' ז ב) "וַיָנַח בכל גבול מצרים" (שמות יו"ד י) וכולם מהשניים הנראים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND HE SMELLED. The *resh* of *va-yarach* (and he smelled) is vocalized with a *pattach* because it precedes a gutteral.³⁶ is an *ayin vav* in the *hifil. Ayin vavs* in the *hifil* are usually vocalized with a *segol*. Compare, *va-yashev, va-yarem* (Cherez). *Va-yana* (was moved) and *va-yanach* (and rested), in *And his heart was moved* (va-yana) (Is. 7:2) and *and rested* (va-yanach) *in all the borders of Egypt* (Ex. 10:14),³⁷ and *va-yanach* are vocalized with *pattachs* because they end in gutturals, *va-yana* with an *ayin, va-yanach* with a *chet*. are similar. All of the above come from roots whose middle letter is a *vav*.³⁸ comes from the root *resh, vav, chet, va-yana* from *nun, vav, ayin* and *va-yanach* from *nun, vav, chet*.

footnotes:
³⁶ Va-yarach
³⁷ Va-yana
³⁸ They are ayin vavs. Va-yarach


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:27:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:27:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:27:3)

**ראה.** דבור עם הלב, והיה ריח טוב בבגדים כאשר חשב בלבו שהוא עשו והוא בא מהשדה, הריחו בגדיו כריח ציצי האילנים כי יתכן כי זה המעשה היה בחודש הראשון:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SEE. Isaac said this to himself.³⁹ The garments gave off a pleasant odor when Isaac thought in his heart that it was Esau before him and that Esau had just come in from the field.⁴⁰ The garments gave off the scent of trees in blossom since it is possible that this episode took place in the first month.⁴¹

footnotes:
³⁹ So Weiser. Krinsky suggests that “see” is to be understood as perceive, since it is impossible to see smell.
⁴⁰ Part of Isaac’s pleasant sensation was psychological.
⁴¹ The month of Nisan. Hence the trees were in bloom and the garments absorbed their scent and gave off the smell of the field.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:28:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:28:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:28:1)

**מ"ם מטל.** מושך עצמו ואחר עמו וכן "האתן בכורי פשעי" (מיכה, ו, ז):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[OF THE DEW.] The *mem* of *mi-tal* (of the dew) is also to be prefixed to *mishmane* (of the fat places).⁴². The particle *mem*, which means from, is thus missing. The word should have read *mi-mishmane*, hence I.E.’s comment (Cherez). *Shall I give my first-born for my transgression*? (Micah 6:7) is similar.⁴³ of *be-alfe* (with thousands) and *be-rivevot* (with ten thousands) are to be read as if prefixed to *pishi* (my transgression) and *chattat* (the sin of). Micah 6:7 reads, *Will the Lord be pleased with thousands* (be-alfe) *of rams, With ten thousands* (be-rivevot) *of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first born for my transgression* (pishi), *The fruit of my body for the sin* (chattat) *of my soul*. However, its literal reading is: Shall I give my first born my transgression, the fruit of my body, sin of my soul? This makes no sense. Hence I.E. points out that the *bet* of *be-alfe* is to be applied to *pishi* (my transgression) and that of *be-rivevot* to *chattat* (sin of). Thus *pishi* is to be translated, for my transgression (*be-fishi*) and *chattat*, for the sin of (*be-chattat*) (Weiser). Our verses are thus similar in that letters prefixed to one word also apply to other words.

footnotes:
⁴² According to I.E. the word for fat is mishman
⁴³ There, too, the bets


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:29:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:29:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:29:1)

**לאחיך.** בני הפילגשים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THY BRETHREN. The children of the concubines.⁴⁴

footnotes:
⁴⁴ Abraham’s concubines (Gen. 25:6). I.E. interprets brethren in the sense of relatives (Weiser). Or I.E. assumed that Isaac had concubines.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:29:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:29:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:29:2)

**בני אמך.** עשו ובניו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THY MOTHER’S SONS. Esau and his children.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:29:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:29:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:29:3)

אורריך ארור. כל אחד מאורריך וכן "וצדיקים ככפיר יבטח" (משלי כח א) ורבים ככה, וכן ומברכיך:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
CURSED BE EVERYONE THAT CURSETH THEE. Each one of those that will curse you.⁴⁵) is a plural, is cursed (*arur*) is a singular. Hence, I.E.’s explanation that a plural followed by a singular means each one of the plural (Weiser). *But the righteous are secure as a young lion* (Prov. 28:1)⁴⁶ is in the plural; *will be secure* is in the singular. The verse literally reads: And righteous people he will be secure as a young lion. I.E. interprets this: each one of the righteous will be as secure as a young lion. is similar. There are many other analogous expressions in Scripture. *And blessed be everyone that blesseth thee* is also similar.⁴⁷, a plural) is blessed (*barukh*, a singular). It means each one of those who blesses you will be blessed.

footnotes:
⁴⁵ The verse literally reads: Those who curse you is cursed. Those who curse you (orerekha
⁴⁶ The righteous
⁴⁷ Literally, and those who bless you (u-mevarakhekha


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:33:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:33:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:33:1)

**מי אפוא.** מי זה ואנה הוא שתי מלות

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
WHO THEN IS HE. *Mi efoh hu* (who then is he?) should be interpreted as follows: who is he and where is he?⁴⁸ (who is he) and *efo hu* (where is he). The *hu* following *efoh* also applies to *mi* (Krinsky, Cherez). *Mi efo hu* literally means who where is he. Hence I.E.’s comment. The word *efoh* (then) is made up of two words.⁴⁹ is made up of *ayeh* (where) and *poh* (here) (Weiser).

footnotes:
⁴⁸ The phrase should be read as follows: mi hu
⁴⁹ Efoh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:33:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:33:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:33:2)

וי"ו ואברכהו קמוץ בעבור היותו פועל עבר ואלו היה בפתח גדול היה לעתיד:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
The *vav* of *va-varakhehu* (and have blessed him) is vocalized with a *kamatz* because *va-avarakhehu* is a perfect. Had the *vav* been vocalized with a *pattach*, then *va-avarachehu* would be an imperfect.⁵⁰ means I will bless him. The *vav* vocalized with a *kamatz* is a *vav* conversive and changes *I will bless him* to *I blessed him*. If the *vav* were vocalized with a *pattach* it would be a connective *vav*, and *va-avarakhehu* would mean, and I will bless him.

footnotes:
⁵⁰ Avarakhehu


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:35:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:35:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:35:1)

**במרמה.** שלא דבר אמת:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
WITH GUILE. He did not speak the truth.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:36:1)

**הכי.** כמו אמת וכן "הכי אחי אתה" (בראשית כט טו):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
IS NOT HE RIGHTLY. *Ha-khi* is to be rendered as truly. *Ha-khi* in *Thou art truly* (ha-chi) *my brother* (Gen. 29:15) is similar.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:36:2)

**קרא.** הקורא שמו יעקב:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
NAMED. Someone named him Jacob.⁵¹ (named) is omitted. Hence *kara* should be rendered, someone named him. According to I.E. *ha-khi kara shemo ya’akov* (is he not rightly named Jacob) means, someone truly named him Jacob. Cf. Kimchi.

footnotes:
⁵¹ The subject of kara


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:36:3)

**ויעקבני.** כמו מרמה וכן "בעקבה" (מ"ב י יט), ויתכן היותו מגזרת "עקוב הלב" (ירמי' יז ט), והעקוב הפך המישור:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
FOR HE HATH SUPPLANTED ME. *Va-yakeveni* (for he hath supplanted me) is to be rendered: for he hath deceived me. *Ve-okbah* (in subtlety) in *But Jehu did it in subtlety* (ve-okbah) (II Kings 10:19) is similar.⁵² It is possible that it comes from the same root as *akov* (deceitful) in *The heart is deceitful* (akov) (Jer. 17:9). *Akov* is the opposite of *mishor* (straight).⁵³ (and the rugged shall be made level). We thus see that *akov* is the opposite of *mishor*.

footnotes:
⁵² According to I.E. it should be translated: But Jehu acted with deceit.
⁵³ Cf. Is. 40:4, ve-hayah he-akov le-mishor


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:4
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:36:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:36:4)

**אצלת לי.** עזבת לי אצלך, והוא מגזרת "ואצלתי מן הרוח" (במדבר יא יז):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
RESERVED A BLESSING FOR ME. Kept with yourself (*etzlekha*) a blessing for me. *Atzalta* (reserved) comes from the same root as *ve-atzalti* (and I will take) in *And I will take* (ve-atzalti) *of the spirit which is upon thee* (Num. 11:17).⁵⁴ means near. *Ve-atzalti* literally means: I will take from that which is near thee. *Atzalta* (reserved) means kept near you. Cf. I.E. on Num. 11:17.

footnotes:
⁵⁴ Etzel


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:37:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:37:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:37:1)

**הן גביר שמתיו לך.** בברכתי, גם כן נתתי לו בדבור, יש אומרים, כי אפוא עם אל"ף בסוף מלה אחת כמו עתה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BEHOLD, I HAVE MADE HIM THY LORD. Via my blessing. Similarly *have I given to him* (v. 33) also means I have verbally given. Some say that *efo* (then) spelled with an *alef* at the end is one word meaning now.⁵⁵

footnotes:
⁵⁵ This comment is in contradiction to I.E.’s note on verse 33.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:40:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:40:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:40:1)

**והיה כאשר תריד.** כמו תרדה והם ב' שרשים, וי"א כמו "אריד בשיחי" (תהלים נה ג), והטעם כאשר תריד לשם ירחמך:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS WHEN THOU SHALT BREAK LOOSE. *Tarid* (thou shalt break loose) has the same meaning as *tirdeh* (thou shalt rule) (Lev. 25:43). However, *tarid* and *tirdeh* have different roots.⁵⁶ is *resh, vav, dalet*. The root of *tirdeh* is *resh, dalet, heh*. According to this interpretation *tarid* means thou shalt rule, and the meaning of *And it shall come to pass when thou shalt rule* is, when the time that thou shalt rule shall come (Weiser). Others say that *tarid* is similar to *arid* (I cry out) in *I cry out* (arid) *in my complaint* (Ps. 55:3). According to this interpretation the meaning of our clause is: and it shall come to pass when thou shalt cry out, then God will pity you.⁵⁷ means thou shalt cry out.

footnotes:
⁵⁶ The root of tarid
⁵⁷ According to this interpretation tarid


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:40:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:40:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:40:2)

**ופרקת.** מגזרת מפרק הרים (מ"א יט יא), ומהם "מפרקתו" (ש"א ד' יח), ויש בברכות אלו כמה שאלות קשות, אם הברכה היתה נבואה, איך לא ידע את מי יברך, והשיבו נבוני הדור כי השם אמר לו כשבא יעקב, ברך את זה, ואילו היה כן היה אומר יצחק לעשו השם צוני, ועוד למה בירך לעשו בעבור שבכה, ואחרים אמרו כי לא היה יצחק נביא, וברכתו לא נתקיימה, גם אלה טעו כי הנה הכתוב אמר "וירא אליו ד'" (בראשית כו ב וכד), גם אמר דוד "ובנביאי אל תרעו" (דה"א טז כב), ואחרים אמרו מה תועלת יש בדברים אחרי שהיתה מחשבתו על עשו, והנה הדבר היה בספק אצלו, כי כן אמר "הקול קול יעקב" (בראשית כז כב) ובירך מי שיהיה מהם, כי בניו הי' שניהם, וי"א איך אמר השם "ורב יעבוד צעיר" (בראשית כה כג), ג"כ אמר יצחק "ואת אחיך תעבוד" והגאון דחה זו השאלה בקנה רצוץ, בעבור שמצא "וילך אל ארץ מפני יעקב אחיו" (בראשית לו ו) והנה שכח "וישתחו ארצה שבע פעמים" (בראשית לג ג), והנכון בעיני שברכת הנביא כעין תפלה היא, והשם שמע תפלתו, כי עיקר זאת הברכה על זרעם, וישנים שלא הקיצו משנת האולת יחשבו, כי אנחנו בגלות אדום, ולא כן הדבר רק אדום היה תחת יד יהודה, וכן כתוב "ויפשע אדום מתחת יד יהודה" (מ"ב ה כב) גם יואב הכרית כל זכר באדום (מ"א יא טז), ובעבור שהי' תחת יד יהודה שמחו ביום אידינו והי' אומרים לבבליים "ערו ערו עד היסוד בה" (תהלים קלז ז), ויותר היה קשה על ישראל החרפה שהיה אדום מחרף אותם מרעתם, וכן טעם שישי ושמחי בת אדום" (איכה ד כא), ג"כ "אל תשמח לבני יהודה" (עובדיה א, יב), גם בימי הורקנס הזקן שמם שומרי ירושלים, והכניסם בברית מילה, גם בימי אגריפס כאשר נלכדה ירושלים באו גדודי אדום לעזור ליהודה, ואומה שהגלתנו היא מזרע כתים וכן אמר המתרגם "וצים מיד כתים" (במדבר כד כד), והיא מלכות יון בעצמה כאשר פי' בס' דניאל והי' אנשים מתי מספר שהאמינו באמונה חדשה, וכאשר האמינו בימי קוסטנטין שחדש כל הדת ולא הי' בעולם שישמרו התורה החדשה חוץ מאדומיים, ג"כ יקראו היום אנשי מצרים ושבא וארץ עילם ישמעאלים, ואין בהם מי שהוא מזרע ישמאלים כי אם מתי מעט:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THAT THOU SHALT SHAKE HIS YOKE. *U-farakto* (that thou shalt shake) comes from the same root as *mefarek* (rent) in *rent* (mefarek) *the mountains*⁵⁸. It means to break apart, to rend. Hence *u-farakta* (that thou shake) means that thou shalt break. (I Kings 19:11). The word *mafrakto* (his neck) (I Sam. 4:18) is derived from the same stem.⁵⁹ is derived from the verb meaning to break, i.e., for it is easily broken (Rabbi Solomon Ha-Kohen). These blessings present a number of great difficulties. If the blessings were prophecies how is it possible for Isaac not to know whom he was blessing? The wise men of our generation respond to this problem by explaining that when Jacob entered the room, God told him, “Bless this one.”⁶⁰ However, if this was the case Isaac would have told Esau, “God commanded me to bless Jacob.”⁶¹ (v. 35). Furthermore, if God told Isaac to bless Jacob, why did Isaac bless Esau because he cried?⁶² Others say that Isaac was no prophet and his blessings did not come to pass.⁶³ However, they are also mistaken. Scripture explicitly tells us, *And the Lord appeared unto him (Isaac*) (Gen. 26:2, 24).⁶⁴ Moreover, King David in referring to the patriarchs says, *And do My prophets no harm* (I Chron. 16:22). Others ask, what efficacy could there be in Isaac’s blessings since he thought that he was blessing Esau? The truth of the matter is that Isaac was in doubt as to who was really before him. Indeed, he said, *The voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau* (v. 22). What Isaac did was bless the one in his presence without regard to whether it was Esau or Jacob, the reason being that both were his sons. Some ask, how could God say (Gen. 25:23) *And the elder shall serve the younger*? Similarly how could Isaac say, *and thou shalt serve thy brother* (v. 40)?⁶⁵ Saadiah Gaon superficially answers this question by pointing to Scripture’s statement, *And Esau took his wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all the souls of his house, and his cattle, and all his beasts…and went unto a land away from his brother Jacob* (Gen. 36:6).⁶⁶ However, the Gaon seems to have forgotten that the Bible relates, *and (Jacob) bowed himself to the ground seven times until he came near to his brother (Esau*) (Gen. 33:3).⁶⁷ It appears to me that the prophet’s⁶⁸ blessing was akin to a prayer, and God accepted his prayer,⁶⁹ for Isaac’s prayer was mainly concerned with the offspring of Jacob and Esau.⁷⁰ Those who have as yet not awakened from their foolish sleep think that we are in the exile of the Edomites (Esau).⁷¹ However, this is not so. Edom (Esau) was subject to Judah.⁷² Scripture thus states, *In his (Jehoram’s) days Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah* (II Kings 8:20).⁷³ We are also told that Joab⁷⁴ *cut off every male in Edom* (I Kings 11:16). It is because of their subjugation to Judah that they rejoiced on the day of Judah’s calamity⁷⁵ and told the Babylonians, *Raze it, raze it even to the foundations thereof* (Ps. 137:7). The taunts of the Edomites on the day of Jerusalem’s fall was harder for the Judeans to bear than the afflictions visited upon them by the Babylonians. This is also the meaning of *Rejoice and be glad, O daughter of Edom* (Lam. 4:21),⁷⁶. and *Neither shouldest thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction* (Obad. 1:12). Also, Hyrcanus the elder⁷⁷ made the Edomites (Esau’s descendants) guard Jerusalem and had them circumcised. Also, in the days of Agrippa⁷⁸ when Jerusalem was taken,⁷⁹ troops of Edomites⁸⁰ came to Judah’s aid.⁸¹ The Romans⁸². who exiled us are from the seed of Kittim. Onkelos similarly explains Kittim to mean Rome in *But ships shall come from the coast of Kittim* (Num. 24:24).⁸³ The Kittim are the very kingdom of the Greeks as I have explained in my commentary on the Book of Daniel.⁸⁴ [At first⁸⁵ there were only a few people who believed in the man that was made into a god. The Romans accepted the belief in this man in the days of Constantine who introduced this new religion to the Romans upon the advice of an Edomite priest and placed upon his flag an image of this man. At that time there was no one in the world aside from a small group of Edomites who followed the new religion.⁸⁶. 38. It was removed by the censor and does not appear in the *Mikra’ot Gedolot* edition. Some of the printed editions read; “At first there were only a few people who believed in the new religion. When the Romans accepted the new religion in the days of Constantine who adopted it as the state religion there was no one in the world who kept the new religion except for the Edomites.” ] Similarly the contemporary inhabitants of Egypt, Sheba⁸⁷ and the land of Elam⁸⁸ are called Ishmaelites even though only a tiny minority of the people living there are true decendants of the Ishmaelites.⁸⁹

footnotes:
⁵⁸ Its root is peh, resh, kof
⁵⁹ Mafrakto
⁶⁰ The revelation did not include any name.
⁶¹ Rather than telling him, Thy brother came with guile, and hath taken away thy blessing
⁶² The Bible implies that Isaac blessed Esau because he pitied him for having his blessing stolen by his brother.
⁶³ Isaac prophesied that Esau would be subservient to Jacob. We do not find it to be so.
⁶⁴ The verse refers to the patriarchs. See I Chron. 16:13-22.
⁶⁵ When in fact we do not find that Esau was subservient to Jacob.
⁶⁶ This shows that Esau was subservient to Jacob.
⁶⁷ Which clearly shows that Esau was not subservient to Jacob.
⁶⁸ Isaac.
⁶⁹ A blessing does not take effect immediately. See Rashbam’s commentary on Deut 7:12 (Krinsky). Thus Isaac’s blessing was a blessing and not a prophecy. If it had been a prophecy he would have been directed by God whom to bless.
⁷⁰ And the latter were subject to the former.
⁷¹ This opinion identifies the Romans (hence Christianity) with the Edomites. If this is so, then how could Scripture say that Jacob would rule over Esau when in fact Esau destroyed the Temple, exiled the Jews and ruled over them?
⁷² From the time of King David until the reign of King Jehoram.
⁷³ Which indicates that till that time Edom (Esau) was subject to Judah.
⁷⁴ King David’s general.
⁷⁵ The day that Jerusalem was taken.
⁷⁶ A sarcastic statement Rejoice while you still are able to, for your happiness will not long endure. Indeed, the verse concludes, The cup shall pass over unto thee also; Thou shalt be drunken and shalt make thyself naked
⁷⁷ John Hyrcanus the Hasmonean. He ruled Judea from 135 to 104 B.C.E. He conquered the Edomites and forced them to embrace Judaism.
⁷⁸ Agrippa II, last king of the House of Herod. When the Jews revolted against Rome in 66 C.E. he went to Jerusalem and tried to restore calm.
⁷⁹ That is, during the Roman-Jewish War.
⁸⁰ During the Roman-Jewish War the Edomites came to the aid of the Jews.
⁸¹ Thus it is clear that the Romans are not to be identified with the Edomites.
⁸² Some printed editions read, the nation
⁸³ Onkelos renders Kittim as Rome.
⁸⁴ See I.E.’s comments on Dan. 2:38 and 37:14.
⁸⁵ I.E. goes on to explain why the Romans are referred to as Edomites.
⁸⁶ This is the reading of Vat. Ebr
⁸⁷ An allusion to the Moslems living in the vicinity of the Red Sea (Weiser).
⁸⁸ An allusion to the Moslems in Mesopotamia (Weiser).
⁸⁹ The people of these places are called Ishmaelites because they accepted the religion of the Ishmaelites (Islam).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:41:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:41:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:41:1)

**וישטום.** נטר איבה וכן "וישטמוהו" (בראשית מט כג):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND ESAU HATED. *Va-yistom* (and he hated) is to be rendered: and he harbored hatred. *Va-yistemuhu* (and hated him) (Gen. 49:23) is similar.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:41:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:41:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:41:2)

**ויאמר עשו בלבו.** יתכן שגלה סודו לאחד מאוהביו וי"א על דרך נבואה היה והראשון קרוב:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND ESAU SAID IN HIS HEART. It is possible that Esau confided this thought to one of his friends.⁹⁰ Others say that Rebekah knew this through prophecy.⁹¹ The first interpretation appears correct.

footnotes:
⁹⁰ Otherwise how could Rebekah know that Esau plotted to kill Jacob?
⁹¹ Hence she knew that Esau planned to kill Jacob after Isaac’s death.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:42:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:42:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:42:1)

**מתנחם.** מגזרת נחמה והטעם זאת היא נחמתו שיוכל להרגך והגאון אמר מגזרת ווע"ד בלשון ערבי:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
DOTH COMFORT HIMSELF. *Mitnachem* (doth comfort himself) comes from the same root as *nechamah* (consolation).⁹² and thus means to comfort or console. The meaning of our clause is: Esau’s sole consolation is that he will be able to kill you. However, the Gaon says that *mitnachem* means to set a time and is similar in meaning to the Arabic *wa’ad*.⁹³

footnotes:
⁹² It comes from the root nun, chet, mem
⁹³ Which may mean to set a time. The phrase should thus be rendered: Esau doth set a time to kill you. This interpretation is problematic. For the problems inherent in it, see Weiser’s notes on I.E.’s comments on Gen. 6:6.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:44:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:44:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:44:1)

**ימים אחדים.** כמו "ימים תהיה גאולתו" (ויקרא כה כט) שנים מועטות והאחדים פחותים מעשר:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
A FEW DAYS. *Yamim achadim* (a few days) is to be translated as a few years. Compare *yamim* in *for a full year* (yamim) *shall he have the right of redemption* (Lev. 25:29). *Achadim* (a few) means less than ten.⁹⁴ means one, *achadim* is its plural. Thus *achadim* can refer to any number up to ten.

footnotes:
⁹⁴ Echad


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:45:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:45:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:45:1)

**למה אשכל.** פחדה שמא יהרוג זה את זה, או יהרגוהו, אם יהרוג אותך, ויש דרש שביום אחד מתו שניהם:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
WHY SHOULD I BE BEREAVED. Rebekah was anxious lest they kill each other,⁹⁵. or that Esau would be killed for murdering Jacob. There is a Midrashic opinion that both Jacob and Esau died in one day.⁹⁶

footnotes:
⁹⁵ Hence Rebekah’s statement, why should I be bereaved of you both in one day
⁹⁶ Thus her words came true.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:46:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 27:46:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/27:46:1)

**קצתי בחיי.** כמו הפוך וכן "נעלה ביהודה ונקיצנה" (ישעי' ז ו) וכן אמר הכתוב "אשר אתה קץ" (שם שם טז)

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
I AM WEARY OF MY LIFE. *Katzti* (I am weary) has the same meaning as *tzakti* (I am distressed).⁹⁷; that is, *katzti* is similar to *tzakti*, the *kof* and *tzadi* changing places. Thus the root *kof, vav, tzadi* has the same meaning as the root *tzadi, vav, kof*. Compare *U-nekitzennah* (and vex it) in *Let us go up against Judah and vex it* (u-nekitzennah) (Is. 7:6). Scripture similarly says, *the land whose two kings thou hast cast a horror of* (katz)⁹⁸ *shall be foresaken* (Is. 7:16).

footnotes:
⁹⁷ I.E. literally reads: katzti is similar to its opposite
⁹⁸ That is, the land which causes you distress (Weiser).