<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Micha Berger <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I was asked to ask the chevrah the following:<br>
: (Aside from Sefer Otzer HaTefilos' derash) what is the source for the<br>
: Yotzer of parashas Zachor to say that Esav sold his birthright for a<br>
: cup of wine alone (stanza starting "Zachor HaDichui") rather than the<br>
: standard explanation of lentils ?<br>
<br>
Tir'u baTov!<br>
-Micha<br>
</blockquote></div><br>The plain text never mentions a quid pro quo of Bechora for lentils. It merely juxtaposes the 2. This is like saying:<br>Let's sit down to eat an dtalk business.<br><br>The meal is not necesarily a quid pro quo for the business. Perhaps it is merelya venue for negotiation, much like a lot of busines is done today on golf courses. Now wouldn't it be silly to say if 2 CEO's made a merger at a golf course that the golf-ball was the consideration for the merge?! <br>
<br>And so the plain text states that Esav gave away the Bechora for free. His gluttony was focused upon satisfying his appetite and the Bechora was merfely discarded, not swapped. Maybe the lentils or the golf ball would form a kinyan ch'lippin but certainly not a true quid pro quo.<br>
<br>I have been promoting this view for years and finally my LOR said this at Shalosh Sheudos in the name of the Sipporno. But as a ba'al q'ria, it is jsut the plain read of the tex w/o any embelishment <br clear="all">
<br>-- <br>Kol Tuv - Best Regards,<br>RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com<br>see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a><br><br>