And he said, Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing. And he said, Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?
36. rightly named Jacob ] See note on Gen 25:26.
supplanted ] i.e. “outwitted,” “overreached by guile.” The word in the original is of the same root as the word “Jacob.” It is as if Esau had said “he hath ‘Jacob-ed’ me these two times”; “he hath twice overreached me.” See Jer 9:4. LXX , Lat. supplantavit. Our word “supplant” is probably derived from this context.
he took away my birthright ] See Gen 25:29-34. Esau now applies the words “took away” to the transaction in which he was foolish enough, not only to sell his birthright for a “mess of pottage,” but also to ratify his action with an oath. He tries to hide his own folly by denouncing his brother’s part in the affair.
my blessing ] The word “my blessing” is spelt in the Heb. with the same consonants as “my birthright,” but with two letters transposed. The difference between the birthright or primogenita, and the blessing or benedictio, is that between a title of privilege and the patent which confers it.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 36. Is not he rightly named Jacob?] See Clarke on Ge 25:26.
He took away my birthright] So he might say with considerable propriety; for though he sold it to Jacob, yet as Jacob had taken advantage of his perishing situation, he considered the act as a species of robbery.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
He puts a perverse construction upon Jacobs name, as if it belonged not to him so properly, because of the manner of his birth, as because of his falseness and deceitfulness, and his tripping up his brothers heels.
He took away my birthright; a false accusation; Jacob did not take it deceitfully, but Esau sold it profanely.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And he said, is not he rightly named Jacob?…. As he was by his parents, and those that were at his birth, because he took his brother by the heel as he came out of his mother’s womb; for Jacob signifies “heeler”, a supplanter, and was given him to keep up the memory of what he had done, to which Esau here refers:
for he hath supplanted me these two times; to supplant another is to put his foot under the heel of another, in order to trip him up, to which Esau alludes; but uses the word in a figurative sense, for circumventing him, and dealing fraudulently and deceitfully with him, though he is not able to support his charge; for if he dealt fraudulently with any, it was with his father, and not with him, and the two times he refers to prove it not:
he took away my birthright; which is not true, he did not take it away from him either by force or fraud, Esau sold it to him for a mess of pottage, Ge 25:29; he had despised and made light of it himself, and had parted with it at so mean a price, and now falsely charges his brother with taking it away from him, and wrongly accuses him of being a supplanter on that account:
and behold, now he hath taken away my blessing; this also is not true, he had not taken it away; it was given him by his father; and though he had used some artful methods with him to get it, Ge 27:15, he had neither supplanted Esau, but if anyone, his father; nor had he done any injustice to Esau, since as he had bought of him the birthright, the blessing annexed to it went along with it, and of right belonged to Jacob:
and he said, hast thou not reserved a blessing for me? is the whole fund of blessings exhausted? are all bestowed upon Jacob? is there not one left for me? he hoped there was, and that as good a one as he had bestowed on his brother, and entreats he might have it.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
36. Is he not rightly named Jacob? That the mind of Esau was affected with no sense of penitence appears hence; he accused his brother and took no blame to himself. But the very beginning of repentance is grief felt on account of sin, together with self-condemnation. Esau ought to have descended into himself, and to have become his own judge. Having sold his birthright, he had darted, like a famished dog, upon the meat and the pottage; and now, as if he had done no wrong, he vents all his anger on his brother. Further, if the blessing is deemed of any value, why does he not consider that he had been repelled from it, not simply by the fraud of man, but by the providence of God? We see, therefore, that like a blind man feeling in the dark, he cannot find his way.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(36) Is not he rightly named Jacob?In thus playing upon his brothers name, Esau has had a lasting revenge; for the bad sense which he for the first time put upon the word Jacob has adhered to it, no doubt, because Jacobs own conduct made it only too appropriate. Its right meaning is one who follows close upon anothers heels. (See Note on Gen. 25:26.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
36. Rightly named Jacob Literally, Is it that his name is called Jacob? and he has jacobed me these two times . Thus Esau points to the significancy of Jacob’s name . Comp . Gen 25:26.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And he said, “Is he not rightly called Jacob? For he has supplanted me these two times. He took away my birthright, and see, now he has taken away my blessing.”
Esau makes a bitter play on words. The root idea behind the word ‘Jacob’ is protection. Jacob-el (the el is assumed) means ‘may God protect’. But a secondary root which indicates supplanting can also be read into the consonants (see on Gen 25:26).
Esau claims to see birthright and blessing as two separate things, but had he thought it through he would have recognised that he was wrong. For as the wording of Isaac’s blessing made abundantly clear, in the firstborn’s case they are really two parts of the one privilege. While it is true that the birthright centred more on property and official position over the tribe, and the blessing concentrated more on the giving of something personal, in the case of the firstborn both were interconnected.
The blessing was specially directed in the light of the birthright. Had Esau received the blessing and yet yielded to Jacob the birthright both would have been in an impossible position. And Esau would probably have won, because the blessing would have been seen as empowering him in a way the birthright did not. If Esau did not see the implications behind the situation there can be no doubt that Jacob and Rebekah did.
There is therefore poetic justice in the fact that Esau, who was seeking to supplant his brother in spite of his oath, finds himself supplanted. Later he would in fact recognise the justice of it and be reconciled with his brother.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Gen 27:36. Is not he rightly named Jacob i.e.. A supplanter. There is something very affecting in this scene between Esau (who was now, as Le Clerc computes, past his seventieth year) and his blind and aged parent. But his instant accusation of Jacob for taking away his birth-right, when he parted with it so freely and so profanely, gives one no high idea of his character, unless perhaps the petulance of sorrow may be allowed to plead a little for him. See Heb 12:17 where you read, that though Esau sought the blessing with tears, he could not gain it, for he found no means to change his father’s mind, to induce him to repent of bestowing it on Jacob. This, and not what is read in our version, is the true sense of the passage.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Jacob means a supplanter.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 27:36 And he said, Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing. And he said, Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?
Ver. 36. Is he not rightly named Jacob? ] He cavils and quarrels at his brother’s guile; at his father’s store, Hast thou but one blessing? &c.; but not a word we hear of his own profaneness. How apt are men to mistake the cause of their sufferings, and to blame anything sooner than their own untowardness!
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Jacob: i.e. a supplanter, Gen 25:26, Gen 25:31-34, Gen 32:28, Joh 1:47
he took: Gen 25:26, Gen 25:33, Gen 25:34
Reciprocal: Gen 27:12 – a deceiver Gen 27:38 – General Gen 29:25 – wherefore Exo 21:2 – an Hebrew Jos 9:22 – Wherefore Jer 9:4 – every brother Act 3:25 – the children Heb 12:16 – as Esau
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
27:36 And he said, Is not he rightly named {g} Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing. And he said, Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?
(g) In Gen 25:26 he was so called because he held his brother by the heel, as though he would overthrow him: and therefore he is here called an overthrower, or deceiver.