בְּרֵאשִׁית‎

BeReshit

Genesis

CHAPTER 23

With Commentaries

And it was: the life of Sara, Sarah lived one hundred and twenty-seven years.

Listen to this chapter in Hebrew

Torah Home

Tanakh Home

◄ Ch. 22

Ch. 24 ►

And it was the life of Sarah one hundred and twenty-seven years. (The) years of life of Sarah.
or
And it was the life of Sarah one hundred year, and twenty year, and seven years. (The) Two Lives of Sarah.

1 וַיִּהְיוּ חַיֵּי שָׂרָה מֵאָה שָׁנָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וְשֶׁבַע שָׁנִים שְׁנֵי חַיֵּי שָׂרָה׃

א

This verse in most Bible translations looks pretty straightforward, but it seems to be more complex than it appears in Hebrew. In Hebrew, there are two possible translations, and both seem correct. One offers the basic meaning, while the other provides more detail. Now, I'm at a loss with this one. I've been thinking about this verse for over three or four days, and after all that thinking, I am still not satisfied with my conclusions. However, I will write down everything I’ve considered, even if it doesn't make sense. Who knows? Maybe one of you will read this, and as you do, it might spark something in you that leads to the true meaning of this verse.

To start with, how her age at death was recorded is unusual. However, this is not the first time it has been said this way, nor will it be the last. Still, with only a few people, you'll find it phrased similarly but not the same.

BeReshit/Genesis 9:28-29

And Noakh, he lived after the flood three hundred year and fifty year. And all the days of Noakh nine hundred year and fifty year and he died.

BeReshit/Genesis 25:7

And these are the days of years of life of Avraham which he lived, hundred year, and seventy year, and five years.

BeReshit/Genesis 25:17

And these are the years of life of Yishmael (or And these are the two lives of Yishmael), hundred year, and thirty year, and seven years and he died. And he died and was gathered to his people.

For Sarah, the years are 100, then 20, and finally 7. Do these numbers mean anything?

In the Hebrew Bible, the number 100 often symbolizes completeness, fullness, and a large, rounded quantity. It appears in contexts such as significant ages, like Avraham's age at Yitzkhak’s birth, and in royal decrees and religious offerings, representing a sense of totality and perfection. It also appears in the Hebrew alphabet, where the letter kuf (ק) has a numerical value of 100, linking it to concepts of perfection, holiness, and control.
In the Hebrew Bible, the number 20 often symbolizes completion, waiting, and redemption. It is the age at which men were counted for military service and the half-shekel tax, representing a threshold of maturity and responsibility. Examples include Jacob waiting 20 years for his family and property, and the Israelites waiting 20 years to be freed from oppression.
In Hebrew biblical tradition, the number 7 is most strongly associated with completion, perfection, and holiness, rooted in the creation story where God rested on the seventh day. The Hebrew word for seven, sheva, is related to the root word shelem, meaning "to be complete" or "to be full". Examples of its significance include the 7-day creation week, the sabbatical year, and the 7-year cycles for Hebrew slaves.

I'm not sure if this is related to the verse, but when you don't see a definitive answer, you consider all possibilities. The number of years might also symbolize her life, as mentioned in the second part of the verse. What do we know about the first hundred years of Sarah? She was barren and couldn't conceive for ninety years. Then, at ninety, YHVH performs a miracle, and she gives birth to Yitzkhak. In the remaining ten years of that first century, her son is weaned and reaches the age of ten. During the following twenty years, we have no details about her, except that somewhere around the middle or end of those twenty years, the binding of her son Yitzkhak happens. The last seven years mark the end of her life.

Next, I calculated Yitzkhak's age at different points in Sarah's life, as described in this verse. Why? I wasn't sure. I found out that when Sarah was one hundred, Yitzkhak was ten years old; when Sarah was one hundred twenty, Yitzkhak was thirty; and finally, when Sarah was one hundred twenty-seven, Yitzkhak was thirty-seven. What did I do with this information? I didn't know what to do with it. In the end, I opened BeReshit/Genesis to those chapters.

BeReshit/Genesis 10:1

These are the generations of the sons of Noakh, Shem, Kham, and Yafet. Sons were born to them after the flood.

In this chapter, the genealogy of Noakh is listed, showing how Noakh’s descendants populated the entire land or world at that time. Shem, Noakh’s son, is the one through whom Avraham is descended.

BeReshit/Genesis 30:1

When Rakhel saw that she bore Yaakov no children, she envied her sister. She said to Yaakov, “Give me children, or I shall die!”

In this chapter, Yaakov has all his children; Yaakov is Sarah’s grandson. Also, you see that one of his wives could not get pregnant, while her sister, who was also Yaakov’s wife, could, and also his two concubines could get pregnant with him, resulting in multiple children, but she could not. Most of the chapter focuses on this; the rest covers how Yaakov gained his wealth.

BeReshit/Genesis 37:1

Yaakove lived in the land of his father’s sojournings, in the land of Khanaan.

This chapter narrates how Yosef ends up in Egypt to save the region from a severe famine and to rescue the Israelites. However, they later fall into slavery as YHVH predicted, and it is at this point that YHVH embraces the Israelites, making this family the bearers of the Hebrew Bible.

So, chapter ten discusses the spread of life around the world, while chapter thirty focuses on Yaakov's descendants and his wife's struggle with infertility. Ultimately, after much hardship, she becomes pregnant. In this chapter, Yaakov also gains wealth. Finally, chapter thirty-seven tells a tragic story of family envy and how YHVH, despite these struggles, brings salvation to the world through one family.

Can anything be seen here? Is there a pattern that aligns with YHVH’s plan for the world?

Life on Earth flourishes through one family.
One woman, who struggles to conceive and does so with much anguish, and her husband, a man of God, attain wealth.
YHVH’s plan involves one family to save nations and the people He has chosen to be His priest from a worldwide famine, fulfilling the prophecies He Himself has spoken. Who else but a true POWER/God could do that?

This is what I learned from it, and it is very informative about the world and YHVH’s plan, all through one family: Sarah’s family.

The second part of the verse also suggests that Scripture aims to convey more than what is explicitly written.

And it was the life of Sarah; one hundred year, and twenty year, and seven years. (The) years of life of Sarah.
or
And it was the life of Sarah one hundred year, and twenty year, and seven years. (The) Two Lives of Sarah.

The way it is phrased suggests communicating more than it actually does. The exact nature of this remains debated among the greatest minds. The division of years into hundreds, then into the twenties, and finally into the single digits is confusing. For the hundred, it says “year,” and for the twenty, it says “year” again, both singular. However, for the seven, it ends with “years” in the plural. I might say this is because 100 can be seen as a single unit, unlike numbers from 101 to 199, and similarly, the tens for the 20 years. The seven-year period isn't a multiple of a single number; it's seven ones, which makes it a plural of a single unit. But when you add the last part of the verse.

(The) years of life of Sarah.
or
(The) Two Lives of Sarah.

Everything changes depending on which translation you choose. The phrase that makes the second half of the verse different is “שְׁנֵי חַיֵּי/SheNey Khayey." It appears in Scripture ten times. I should also mention that the word “שְׁנֵי/SheNey" means “years of” and could also be the word for the number two, but with a twist. This word is the written form of the number two, reconstructed from the original feminine to the masculine form, which adds to the confusion about what Scripture is trying to tell us. The written number transforms. I could simply say that the first translation is correct and leave it at that, but that is not in me. If something does not seem right, I keep on looking. However, the only conclusion I can reach is this.

The first part of the verse might suggest that Sarah’s life is divided. However, her life was actually split into two distinct phases, as the second part of the verse indicates. What are her two lives? Sarah, in her life of being barren, and Sarah, after YHVH restored her menstrual cycles and youth. But that’s not all YHVH did for her; He also made it possible for her to conceive, meaning she was no longer barren. This feels like a complete rebirth: two lives, a transformation from who she was into a new woman. I could accept either of these possibilities, but I do not. So, this will be one of those verses that will haunt me until Elohim grants me understanding of it, as well as the similar ones that follow. And they all have some twist, different from this one. For example, there is a similar verse, but instead of counting by hundreds, tens, and units of a single unit, it goes backward — single units, tens, then hundreds. At this point in my life, Elohim seems to think I am not smart enough or not ready to understand.

These are the ten Scripture verses where these two words are found together, used in the same way, and with the same spelling.

BeReshit/Genesis 23:1

BeReshit/Genesis 25:17

These were (the) years of (the) life of Yishmael, one hundred year, and thirty year, and seven years and he died. And he died, and he was gethered to his people.
or
These were (the) two lives of Yishmael, one hundred year, and thirty year, and seven years and he died. And he died, and he was gethered to his people.

Two lives, before he was saved by the Elohim from dying in the desert, when Avraham desown him and his life after that. To become nations of his own.

BeReshit/Genesis 47:8

And Pharoh, he asked Yaakov, “How were they? The days of the years of your life?”
or
And Pharoh, he asked Yaakov, “How was it? The days of your two lives?”

Two lives, the life before Egypt and the life after, when he lived in Egypt. Or you can say the life before he thought Joseph, his son, was dead, and after, when Yaakov reunited with his son, because he found out he was not dead. Which basically are the same times.

BeReshit/Genesis 47:9

And Yaakov, he said to Pharoh, “The days of years of my sojournings, thirty and hundred years. Few and evil/bad were the days of years of life. And they don’t reach the days of years of life of my fathers, in the days of their sojournings.”
or
And Yaakov, he said to Pharoh, “The days of my two sojournings, thirty and hundred years. Few and evil/bad they were, the days of two lives. And they don’t reach the days of years of life of my fathers, in the days of their sojournings.”

Two lives, again, the days before Egypt and the day after, when he lived in Egypt.

BeReshit/Genesis 47:28

And Yaakov, he lived in the land of Mitzraim/Egypt, seven ten years. And it was the days of Yaakov, the years of his life, seven years, and fourty and hundred years.
or
And Yaakov, he lived in the land of Mitzraim/Egypt, seven ten years. And it was the days of Yaakov, his two lives, seven years, and fourty and hundred years.

Again, and now Scripture spells it out. Yaakov lived in Egypt for 17 years, and his total lifespan was 140 years; so, he lived 123 years outside of Egypt— from birth to when he moved to Egypt because of the famine—and 17 years in Egypt before he passed away.

Shemot/Exodus 6:16

And these were the names of the sons of Levi, to their generations, Gershon, and KeHat, and Merari. And the years of life of Levi, seven and thirty and hundred years.
or
And these were the names of the sons of Levi, to their generations, Gershon, and KeHat, and Merari. And the two lives of Levi, seven and thirty and hundred years.

From Levi, it could also be said that he had two lives: before he was a priest of YHVH, and after he became a priest.

Shemot/Exodus 6:18

And the sons of KeHat: Amram, and Yitzhar, and Hevron, and Uziel. And the years of life of KeHat, three and thirty, and hundred years.
or
And the sons of KeHat: Amram, and Yitzhar, and Hevron, and Usiel. And the two lives of KeHat, three and thirty, and hundred years.

This one is interesting. There was very little said about KeHat, aside from his genealogy, and Moses was the second generation born of KeHat.

Shemot/Exodus 6:20

And Amram, he took/married Yokheved, his aunt, for him, for his woman/wife, and begat for him, Aaron and Mosheh. And the years of life of Amram, seven and thirty and hundred years.
or
And Amram, he took/married Yokheved, his aunt, for him, for his woman/wife, and begat for him, Aaron and Mosheh. And the two lives of Amram, seven and thirty and hundred years.

Amram was Levi’s grandson, and he had two children, Aaron and Mosheh. One, Aaron is to be YHVH’s High Priest, and Mosheh is to become YHVH’s Prophet.

2 Samuel 19:35

And Barzilay, he asked the king, “How would they be? The days of years of life? To rise with the king of Yerusalaim.”
or
And Barzilay, he asked the king, “How would they be? The days of my two lives? To rise with the king of Yerusalaim.”

King David affords Barzilay a second life. The offer was to go with him up to Jerusalem and attend to him, but Barzilay refused because he is too old now to do the job properly. In exchange, Barzilay offers someone else who could do a better job than he can.

As I said before, these two words have been used before, but not together or with the same spelling. The word “years” has been used 883 times, and the word “life” has been used 145 times, and in only ten do they appear in this manner. I usually can see or at least struggle and think, and can conclude verses. However, not here, not yet. I could be overthinking it, but something in me says that’s not the case.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה ועשרים שנה ושבע שנים AND THE LIFE OF SARAH WAS 127 YEARS (literally, 100 years, 20 years and 7 years) - The reason the word שנה is written at every term is to tell you that each term must be explained by itself as a complete number: at the age of one hundred she was as a woman of twenty as regards sin — for just as at the age of twenty one may regard her as having never sinned, since she had not then reached the age when she was subject to punishment, so, too, when she was one hundred years old she was sinless — and when she was twenty she was as beautiful as when she was seven (Genesis Rabbah 58:1).

שני חיי שרה THE YEARS OF SARAH’S LIFE — The word years is repeated and without a number to indicate that they were all equally good.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

THE LIFE OF. The word life (chayyim) is always encountered in the plural. We never find it in the singular. [A HUNDRED AND SEVEN AND TWENTY YEARS.] Hebrew usually first lists the larger numbers and then the smaller ones. But we also find the opposite, an example being Scripture’s enumeration of Yaakov’s years (Gen. 47:28).

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

A HUNDRED AND TWENTY YEARS Rashi comments: “The reason the word ‘years’ is written at every term is that it informs you that each term must be interpreted by itself. At the age of one hundred, she was as a woman of twenty as regards sin [for at the age of twenty, she had not sinned since she had not reached the age when she was subject to punishment], and at the age of twenty, she was as beautiful as when she was seven.” Rashi wrote similarly on the verse, the years of Abraham’s life.
However, this exegesis of his is not correct. In the case of the verse, the years of the life of Ishmael, it is stated exactly as in the verse, the years of Abraham’s life, whereas these years of Ishmael were not all equally good since Ishmael was wicked in his early years, and only in the end did he repent of his evil ways. Furthermore, the repetition of the word “year” at every term would seem to indicate an intent to distinguish between them and, thus, should not be interpreted to imply equality. Rather, the use of the word shanah (year) and shanim (years) in this instance is the customary usage of the Hebrew language, while that which the Rabbis have said in Bereshith Rabbah, *Bereshith Rabbah 58:1. “At the age of one hundred she was as a woman of twenty as regards sin,” is an interpretation which they derived only from the redundant expression, the years of the life of Sarah, which includes them all and equates them. The Rabbis would not make a similar interpretation of the verse concerning Abraham [since in his case Scripture does not conclude with a similar comprehensive expression].

Bekhor Shor (12th century) commentary:

And the life of Sarah. It is not the [usual] way to record the deaths of women, even righteous ones, unless it is by means of a deed. For behold, we find only Sarah, Rachel, and Devorah -- Rivka's wetnurse -- and Miriam on the withdrawal of the well. Sarah's death is mentioned because she reveals to us how the grave was acquired with riches (and this is one of the tests [of Avraham]). Devorah's death is mentioned to make clear that the place is called Alon-Bachut. Rachel's death is mentioned to teach why she is not buried in Ma'arat haMachpela. And why is it that their years are not numbered, except for Sarah? Since she is the most important of them all.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

ויהיו חיי שרה, “The years of Sarah’s life amounted to etc.” People fond of dabbling in the allusions found in the numerical value of words or whole sentences will note that the numerical value of the word ויהיו equals the “life of Sarah”; in other words, Sarah’s real life commenced with the birth of Yitzchok. At that time, she was 90 years old, whereas she died on the day of the binding of Yitzchok 37 years later. This is the numerical value of the word: ויהיו. As long as a person has no children, he or she is considered dead. (Talmud Nedarim, 64)

שני חיי שרה, “the years of the life of Sarah.” According to Rashi, the apparently superfluous words “the years of” mean that she retained all her virtues in equal measure throughout her life. The wording of the Torah when reporting Yishmael’s life does not lend itself to such an interpretation, since, up until his death, we had never heard anything about his age, unlike Sarah. It is clear, therefore, that the words underlined earlier were meant to relay an additional message to the reader.

Tosafot: Da'at Zekenim on Genesis: Da'at Zekenim is a Torah commentary compiled from the writings of French and German tosafists in the 12th and 13th centuries. Composed: Middle-Age France / Germany / Italy / England, c.1100 – c.1300 CE: Commentary:

'ויהיו חיי שרה וגו, “the lives of Sarah were, etc.” The description of Sarah having had more than one life must be understood as follows: during the first ninety years of her life, she had been childless. Anyone who has no children is really considered as if dead. When you look at the numerical value of the letters in the word ויהיו, the total is 37. This is the Torah’s way of showing us that the last thirty-seven years of Sarah’s life were really the ones that counted.

חיי שרה, “the lives of Sarah,” according to Rashi, all the years that Sarah lived on this earth were equal, in the sense that she was a good person throughout them. When we look at the way the Torah describes the years of Yishmael after his death (Genesis 25:17), the Torah describes them in the same terms, i.e., ואלה שני חיי ישמעאל מאת שנה ושלושים שנה ושבע שנים; does Rashi imply that the Torah compliments Yishmael in the same manner as it complimented Sarah? When we accept that the word ואלה, “and these,” are a hint that he had become a penitent, as Rashi derives from the manner in which his burial is described in the Torah in same verse from the fact that he is described as having been gathered into his forefathers, and we know that a proselyte is considered as if newly born from the day of his conversion, i.e. free from sin, it follows that the years he had lived before this have now been converted as a prelude to his conversion, i.e. as part of that conversion process. Another way of explaining the Torah’s wording of the death and burial of Yishmael: the Torah did not preface his death with the unusual words: “and the lives of Sarah were,“ words which alert us that they must have more meaning than the plain text suggests. When Sarah’s death is reported, the word חיי, “lives of,” is mentioned twice, not only once. This calls for closer examination. Rashi was therefore quite correct in alerting his readers to this.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

ויהיו חיי שרה, The life of Sarah was 127 years, etc. Why did the Torah use the term ויהיו/And it were to describe Sarah's life when everyone else's life is described by the word ויחי/And he lived?

Midrash Hagadol 23:2 claims that the reason Sarah died was that she was unable to make peace with the fact that Yitzkhak was spared at the last moment. She thought he refused to be the sacrifice. The expression ויהי or ויהיו always alludes to some painful experience, whereas the expression ויחי does not. The Torah wanted to allude to the grief that caused Sarah's death.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה ועשרים שנה ושבע שנים. The Torah repeats the word “year” or “years” three times, even though this verse could have been written using the word שנה only once. We encounter a similar “waste” of the word “year” and “years” in Genesis 6:9 in connection with Noakh, as well as in connection with בני ישראל, “the Children of Israel” in Numbers 8:19 where that word occurs no fewer than five times We also find such a repetitive use of the word “year” when we are told about Avraham’s death in Genesis 25:7. Even when reporting the death of Ishmael in Genesis 25:17, the word שנה is repeated three times. Some commentators claim that this is a feature of the Holy Tongue, which endeavors to be unambiguous. When a large number of years (unit) is mentioned the word שנה, “year” appears in the singular mode, whereas when less than ten years are mentioned the years appear in the plural mode, i.e. שנים. There is an aggadic approach to these seemingly superfluous words, especially in our verse (mentioned by Rashi), which sees in the wording an allusion to the fact that Sarah, at her death, was as pure and beautiful as at 7 or 20 years, respectively. Seeing that the word שנה did not occur at the beginning of the verse, the verse concludes with the summary שני חיי שרה.

שני חיי שרה. When reporting the death of Avraham and Ishmael, seeing that the verses commenced with the words ימי שני, these words are not again repeated at the end of the respective verses. It is possible that in all of these instances, the word שני at the end is a hint that the persons concerned lived until the completion of that particular year.

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

ויהיו חיי שרה, even though the Torah never revealed the ages of other women, in Sarah’s case it became necessary to inform us of this, as her death was directly related to the purchase of the cave of Machpelah. The Torah therefore told us for how many years Sarah lived after having become a mother at the advanced age of 90.

Shabbethai ben Joseph Bass (1641–1718) (Hebrew: שבתי בן יוסף; also known by the family name Strom[1]), born at Kalisz, was the founder of Jewish bibliography[2] and author of the Siftei Chachamim supercommentary on Rashi's commentary on the Pentateuch. Commentary:

The reason שנה is written with every set... I.e., Scripture does not gather the ones and the tens in a set, and the hundreds in a separate set, as it did in Parshiyos Bereishis and Noakh. Rashi is not asking why it says שנה for 100 years, whereas it says שנים for seven years, for also in Parshiyos Bereishis and Noakh, it is always written שנה for hundreds, and שנים for smaller numbers. Rather, Rashi’s question is about the middle שנה, written after twenty, for שנה is never written three times. Perforce, it is meant to be expounded upon. Since one of them is to be expounded, so too are the rest to be expounded.

That every set is to be explained by itself. I.e., each set bears its own meaning and does not join with the other sets to form a single sum, as numbers composed of ones, tens, and hundreds usually do. This is because the repetitive שנה divides them, placing the ones on their own, and so the tens and the hundreds. According to this [Midrashic interpretation], it is not twenty-seven plus one hundred. Rather, twenty-seven represents the first years within the one hundred.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

The lifetime of Sarah was one hundred and twenty-seven years, the years of the life of Sarah. A literal rendition of the verse would read: The lifetime of Sarah was one hundred years and twenty years, and seven years, the years of the life of Sarah. Some commentaries explain that the repetition of “years” in the verse teaches that at each stage of her life, whether she was seven, twenty-seven, or one hundred, Sarah exhibited the same good qualities.1 The concluding phrase, “the years of the life of Sarah,” indicates that in each of those stages, she lived a full and complete life.

Sarah’s Death Leads Abraham to Acquire Land

THE PURCHASE OF THE FIELD OF MACHPELAH (23:1–20)

Why does the Torah present such a lengthy description of the purchase of the cave of Machpelah? Biblical narrative is usually sparing of details about realia and daily life, yet the negotiations over the purchase of the field containing the cave of Machpelah are reported fully. It seems that the purchase of the field symbolizes Abraham and his family’s legal ownership of the entire promised land.

Abraham does not wish to purchase just a cave, but rather a whole burial site. He is particularly interested in Ephron’s plot since it is apparently located on the outskirts of the town (23:9 and 17). All this would limit potential friction with Hebron’s residents and ensure him free access to the cave. Abraham struggles to find a resting place not only for Sarah, but also for the generations he hopes would descend from him. This reflects the tension between his presently temporary status (no land and no assurance of descendants in his central line) and the promise that God has repeatedly made to him (a divine promise of land and progeny).

According to the Bible, this site will also become the burial place of Abraham, Yitzkhak, Rivkah, Yaakov, and Leah (Genesis 25:9-10, 35:27-29, 49:29-32, 50:13); hundreds of years later, the nearby city of Hebron will also serve as the capital of David’s kingdom until he conquers Jerusalem.

SARAH’S DEATH (23:1–2)

Sarah lived. Though beginning with her life, the chapter actually focuses on her death and burial. However, the notice that the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah is consummated in Sarah’s tent (24:67) suggests that her life continues through the next matriarch.

And Sarah, she died in Kiryat Arba, it is Hevron, in the land of Khenaan. And Avraham, he came to mourn for Sarah and to weep (for) her.

2 וַתָּמָת שָׂרָה בְּקִרְיַת אַרְבַּע הִוא חֶבְרוֹן בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן וַיָּבֹא אַבְרָהָם לִסְפֹּד לְשָׂרָה וְלִבְכֹּתָהּ׃

ב

קִרְיַת/KirAt אַרְבַּע/ArBa

The city where Sarah died was called קִרְיַת אַרְבַּע/KirAt ArBa, which means “City of Four” in English. My research shows that the origin of the name is debated, with several different interpretations:

City of the Four Fathers: According to Jewish tradition, the name refers to four couples buried in the Cave of the Patriarchs near Hebron: Adam and Khavah, Avraham and Sarah, Yitzkhak and Rivkah, and Yaakov and Leah.
City of the Four Giants: Another interpretation holds that the name derives from four giants who lived in the area.
City of Four Righteous Ones: Another version mentions four righteous individuals who lived in the same city.
City of Four: The name originates from Four, a giant after whom the city was originally named, later known as Khebron.

What do I think this city's name refers to? We need to remember that this name comes from a specific moment in history, so we should consider what was happening then, not now. We should think about what people knew at that time. When I think of Scripture from that period, the first thing that comes to mind is the four kingdoms that Avraham defeated. But I do not mean that this name refers to those four attacking kingdoms. Those kings came from elsewhere and were defeated by Avraham and his allies. I believe the true meaning of this city's name is related to them, Avraham and his allies. Avraham was one of the four, and his allies were the other three who supported him to rescue his nephew, Lot. Avraham and his three allies fought against the four kingdoms that took his nephew captive when they attacked Sodom and Gomorrah. The other three families were Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre; add Avraham to those names, and you have four families. All heroes of that time.

BeReshit/Genesis 14:13-14

Y un sobreviviente vino y le dijo a Avram, el hebreo, el que habitaba en el Elne/Terebinth Mamre, The Emorite brother of Eshkol, the brother of Aner; he was the master who had an alliance with Avram. When Avram heard his brother was taken captive, he emptied his trained born in his house, 318 of them, and pursued them to Dan.

Avraham gathered every able-bodied man from his people for war against these four kingdoms to reclaim his nephew, and his allies went with him as well. He returned not only with his nephew but also with all the captives taken and the plunder. When he arrived back, the king of Sodom had some words with Avraham, and this is what was said.

BeReshit/Génesis 14:21-24

And said the king of Sodom to Avram, “Give to me the living, and take the goods/possessions for yourself.” And said Avram to the king of Sedom, “I lifted my hand to/towards YHVH, God Most-High/Most-High Power, who created/possesses heaven and earth, surely from a thread to a sandal strap, and surely from anything that is yours I will not take, it will not be said, ‘I made Avram wealthy.’ Besides me, only that which the young men ate and the portion of the men that went with me, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre they take their portion.”

Avraham, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre were the four prominent names of that time in the region, and I believe this city was named after Avraham and them. As we go through this chapter, we will see that Avraham held a lot of respect in that area and was considered one of the great figures.

We have already discussed this verse in a previous chapter. I concluded that Avraham, Sarah, and Yitzkhak were separated. Avraham was in Beer Shava, Sarah, as the verse suggests, was in Hebron, and Yitzkhak was in the Negev Desert. I believe that Avraham was not sojourning as YHVH instructed, but I could be wrong. However, Yitzkhak was, as we now know, the one carrying the promise. Sarah was in Hebron, which I believe was the safest place, since that’s where Avraham had stayed the longest and had allies. We don’t know why she is there and not with Avraham. I have concluded that either she is now too old to sojourn, or she is upset with Avraham over the binding of her son. This might have happened when Yitzkhak turned thirty or thirty-seven. I personally think it was when he turned thirty. They have been separated for at least seven years [definitely Avraham and Yitzkhak], but I don’t know when Sarah arrived in Hevron.

And Avraham, he came to mourn for Sarah and to weep (for) her.

I have also discussed this part of Scripture. The word בּוֹא/Bo means to come or to come in/inside. So I determined that the right word was “to come,” since he was in Beer Sheva and Sarah was in Hevron. Most commentators believe that the binding of Yitzkhak was when he turned thirty-seven, and that is why Sarah died. They said she died of a broken heart. But still, that does not explain why she is in Hevron if, at the binding of Yitzkhak, she was with Avraham and Yitzkhak in Beer Shavah; you would think she would have died there, not in Hevron.

Sarah died. No explanation is given for the cause of her death. It is reasonable to assume that it was her age, but as Abraham was last seen in Beersheba (22:19), some distance from where Sarah died, one may ask: Did Sarah know about Abraham’s binding of Isaac (Genesis 22)? Was that a factor in her death? Perhaps Sarah had been living apart from Abraham.

Kiriath-arba. Another name for Hevron.

Abraham proceeded to mourn for Sarah and to bewail her. This verse marks one of only two instances in the Torah where the root s-p-d is used to mourn. (The other is in Genesis 50:10, when Joseph mourns the passing of his father Jacob.) This is also the only place where the text mentions details of mourning in connection with a woman’s death. Even Jacob’s mourning over his beloved Rachel is not recorded (Genesis 35:19–20).

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

Baqeret Arva, literally meaning 'the city of the Four,' was named for the four giants who lived there: Ahiman, Sheshai, Talmai, and their father (Numbers 13:22). Another reason for the name is that it was called after the four couples buried there, each man and wife; Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Leah (Genesis Rabbah 58:4).

AND ABRAHAM CAME from Beer-Sheba.

TO BEWAIL SARAH AND TO WEEP FOR HER — The narrative of the death of Sarah follows immediately on that of the Binding of Yitzkhak, because through the announcement of the Binding — that her son had been made ready for sacrifice and had almost been sacrificed — she received a great shock (literally, her soul flew from her). She died (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 32).

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

ויבא אברהם, “Avraham came, etc.” According to Rashi, he came from Beer Sheva. Nachmanides adds that Rashi did not mean to imply that Avraham lived permanently in Beer Sheva at that time, while Sarah had resided in Kiryat Arba (Chevron), as it is quite unlikely that Avraham and Sarah lived in different locations long-term. Avraham heard about Sarah’s death while he was in Beer Sheva on “business.” Some commentators believe that Avraham was in the process of establishing residence in Beer Sheva and wanted to prepare everything before bringing Sarah there as well. According to the Bereshit Rabbah, Avraham returned from Mount Moriah and found that Sarah had died from the distress caused by Yitzchok’s sacrifice. Nachmanides writes that, according to the Torah, the commandment to offer Yitzchok as a burnt offering was given while Avraham was in Beer Sheva, where he was residing at the time. This is the meaning of 22:34-35: “he planted an orchard in Beer Sheva, and he resided there for many years.” This is why it took him three days to reach Chevron, since the land of the Philistines was not very close to it. If Avraham had to return from Mount Moriah to Chevron, it would not have taken more than a single day. However, the Toah reports that it took him three days to reach Mount Moriah on his way to binding Yitzchok on the altar there. If the Midrash is correct in saying that Sarah died [precisely during the time Avraham performed the binding of Yitzchok], we must assume that at the time of the Akeydah, Avraham and Sarah both lived in Chevron. Therefore, the meaning of 22:4 “it was on the third day (of Avraham and Yitzchok’s journey to Mount Moriah) must be that G’d, for reasons best known to Him, did not want Avraham to locate the mountain until the third day of his journey. He had been walking in the neighborhood until G’d indicated to him which of the mountains He had in mind. The reason he went to Beersheva after the binding of Yitzchok was to give thanks for the miracle he had experienced, and while there, the news of Sarah’s death reached him. All the commentators agree that Avraham was not at home when Sarah died. My personal opinion is that Sarah had a tent that served as her home as well as the home for her maidservants. She died inside her own tent, and the phrase ויבא אברהם simply means that he came to her tent after hearing what had happened. It is also possible that the term describes Avraham’s act of preparing to properly eulogize Sarah. Whenever someone prepares himself for a specific task, the term used to describe this preparation is ויבא, meaning "he came," or more accurately, “he became ready.” In my view, it is very unlikely that ויבא means that Avraham came from another city, as the Torah would have mentioned the city he came from to make burial arrangements for Sarah.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

KIRIATH-ARBA. Arba was the name of one of the great men of the Anakim. The identification of Arba with Abraham is homiletical, as Abraham was not of that race. When Sarah died, Abraham was elsewhere; hence Scripture states, and Abraham came.

AND TO WEEP FOR HER. The word livkotah is to be rendered as to weep for her. And bewail her father (Deut. 21:13) is similar.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

And Abraham came. Rashi comments: “From Beer-sheba.” This does not mean Abraham remained in Beer-sheba, as the verse states, ‘And Abraham abode at Beer-sheba,’ because then Sarah could not have been in Hebron. Instead, it means that Abraham went to Beer-sheba for the day for some purpose, and while there, he heard of Sarah’s death and then went to Hebron to mourn her. However, our Rabbis say, “And Abraham came from Mount Moriah.” This matches the Midrash Rashi cited earlier, which explains that when she heard about the Binding, in which her son was nearly sacrificed and almost made ready for sacrifice, her soul left her, and she died.
It appears that the Divine command regarding the Binding was given to Abraham in Beer-sheba, where he lived, and he returned there after the Binding, as the opening remark states: "And Abraham planted a tamarisk-tree in Beer-sheba and called there on the name of the Eternal, the Everlasting G-d." It also mentions, "And Abraham sojourned in the land of the Philistines many days." This refers to his dwelling in Beer-sheba, which is in the land of the Philistines, and where he was commanded about the Binding. He spent three days traveling to Mount Moriah because the land of the Philistines is far from Jerusalem. Conversely, Hebron is in the mountains of Judah, as Scripture affirms, and is therefore close to Jerusalem. Consequently, after the Binding, he returned to Beer-sheba, as it is written: "So Abraham returned to his lads and they rose and went together to Beer-sheba." This indicates that he stayed and lived in Beer-sheba for several years. If that were the case, Sarah would not have died immediately after the Binding, since Abraham would not have lived in Beer-sheba while Sarah dwelled in Hebron. It also appears that Yitzkhak was born in Beer-sheba, as previously written: "And Abraham journeyed from there towards the land of the south and abode between Kadesh and Shur and sojourned in Gerar, and Abimelech said to him, Behold, my land is before thee; abide where it is good in thine eyes." Abraham then settled in the city of Beer-sheba in that land, as it is written: "And it came to pass at that time that Abimelech and Phicol the captain of his host spoke unto Abraham, saying." Although it is not explicitly written that they came from Gerar, unlike the case of Yitzkhak, which might suggest Abraham lived there, this is not accurate. Scripture clearly states that the covenant was made in Beer-sheba. Similarly, when Hagar was sent away from Abraham’s household on the day Yitzkhak was weaned, she traveled through the desert of Beer-sheba because that was where they lived. However, after many days, Abraham traveled from the land of the Philistines and arrived at Hebron, where Sarah, the righteous woman, passed away.
However, according to the Midrash [which states that Sarah died at the time of the Binding], we must say that Abraham and Sarah lived in Hebron during the time of the Binding, and there Abraham was commanded about it. The verse stating that On the third day Abraham lifted his eyes raises this question: Since Hebron is near Mount Moriah, which is in Jerusalem, why did he not reach the mountain until the third day? The answer is as follows: The mountain G-d desired for His dwelling was not revealed to him until the third day. So, for two days, he wandered around Jerusalem, and it was not yet God's will to reveal the mountain to him. After the Binding, Abraham did not return directly to Hebron. Instead, he first went to Beer-sheba, the place of his tamarisk-tree, to give thanks for the miracle that happened to him. It was there that he heard of Sarah’s death, and he then came to Hebron. The two seemingly conflicting opinions, that Abraham came from Mount Moriah and that he came from Beer-sheba, are thus united [since, as explained, on his way from Mount Moriah, he stopped at the tamarisk-tree in Beer-sheba to give thanks for the miracle]. Accordingly, the verse stating, "And Abraham abode at Beer-sheba," indicates that after the Binding, he went to Beer-sheba and then to bury Sarah. After the burial, he immediately returned to Beer-sheba and settled there for many years. However, Scripture abruptly concludes the story of Beer-sheba, and then describes the burial, which explains the lack of chronological order in the verse, "And Abraham dwelt in Beer-sheba." It was in Beer-sheba that Yitzkhak married Rebekah, as it says, "For he dwelt in the land of the South," which is the region of Beer-sheba. Thus, all commentators agree that Abraham was elsewhere, and it was from there that he came to the burial.
In my opinion, Sarah had a tent for herself and her attendants. It is also written elsewhere that it was into Jacob’s tent, Leah’s tent, and the tents of the two maid servants. Sarah died in her tent, and Abraham entered her tent with a group of friends to mourn her. [This is a simple explanation of the phrase, and Abraham came.] It may be that the word vayavo (and he came) indicates that Abraham was moved to perform this eulogy and began doing so, because in Hebrew, when someone begins a task, they are often described as “coming to it.” This is a common usage among the Sages, as we learn in Tractate Tamid: “He came to the neck and left with two ribs on each side… He came to the left flank… He came to the rump.” Also, they say, “I have not come to this principle.” In scripture, you also see the phrase "he came for his hire," meaning he came for the purpose of the work and did it for pay. But I do not think it makes sense for Abraham to have traveled from another city to Hebron. If that were true, scripture would have mentioned that place and explicitly stated: “and Abraham heard, and he came from such and such a place.”

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

Sarah died. She did not die until a suitable successor was born, and Avraham was informed of this.

To eulogize Sarah. Literally, “to eulogize for Sarah” — a eulogy is for the honor of the deceased.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

ותמת שרה, “Sarah died.” It is very rare for the Torah to report a woman’s death. (Exceptions are Miriam, Moses’ sister, as mentioned in Numbers 20:1, and Rakhel’s early death in Genesis 35:18, along with Deborah, Rivkah’s nursemaid, in Genesis 35:8.) When such a death is mentioned, it not only honors the virtuous lives these women led but also is linked to a significant event. Sarah’s death is connected to the large sum of money her husband paid for land to bury her. Rakhel’s premature death is recorded, so we know where she was buried. Deborah’s death is noted to explain why the place where it happened became known as אלון בכות, “oak of mourning.” [Also, to highlight that Rivkah’s death has not been reported. Ed.] Miriam’s death marked the end of the well that had accompanied the Israelites throughout their long desert journey.

בקרית ארבע, This was a town previously built by Adam, as mentioned in Joshua 14:15: קרית ארבע שם חברון לפנים, האדם הגדול בענקים, “the name of Khevron in earlier times was Kiryat Arba, the greatest of all the giants.” A different version found in the midrashim states that the town's name derives from its changing ownership four times in succession. First, it belonged to the tribe of Yehudah; then it became the private property of Calev from that tribe; afterward, it became a city of priests, and eventually one of the cities of refuge. (Compare Bereshit Rabbah 58:4) This explains why only its outskirts were given to Calev, as is clear from the wording in Joshua 21:12. Also compare Baba Batra 122. ויבא אברהם, “Avraham arrived.” Some scholars argue that the term: ויבא, does not necessarily imply that the subject came from afar; even if he only came from outside the house, this term is used, as seen in Joseph’s entering Potiphar’s house, where the Torah states: ויבא הביתה לעשות מלאכתו, “he entered the house to perform his tasks.” (Genesis 39:11)

לספוד לשרה ולבכותה, “to eulogize Sarah and to weep over her loss.” He had not secured a suitable plot for her burial.

בקרית ארבע, In the town or village known as the city of the “four.” The word ארבע is the name of the person after whom the town was named, as stated in Joshua 14:15: קרית ארבע האדם הגדול בענקים, “the town of Arba, the great man among the Anakites.”

Hakketav VeHaKabalah (1785 - 1865) commentary:

To eulogize … and to weep. Generally, people mourn the death of the deceased before reflecting on the loss to the living. However, for the righteous, death is not a tragedy because it allows them to reach greater heights. Therefore, only the loss to the living warrants weeping.

Kitzur Ba'al HaTurim (approximately 1270 to approximately 1340) commentary:

The small "kaf" indicates that Abraham cried, but not excessively, because she was elderly, and also because she brought about her own death by passing judgment on her own deeds to another (cf. TB Rosh Hashanah 16b), and therefore was punished first. Additionally, one does not eulogize someone who dies by suicide.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

ותמת שרה בקרית ארבע. Sarah died at Kiryat Arba. We must understand that Kiryat Arba was not the cause of her death. The reason the town was mentioned and named is to show that it was built on the four basic elements. Typically, death signifies the departure from, or disintegration of, the four fundamental elements that make up the body. When the Torah mentions that "Kiryat Arba" is also known as חברון, it alludes to the word חבור, meaning something that is joined together. The message is that when the righteous "die," it should not be seen as a form of disintegration. The righteous are still called "alive" even after they have ceased to function in normal bodies on earth. The story in Shabbat 152 about how the grave of Rabbi Achai bar Yoshiah was disturbed by diggers on Rav Nachman's property and Rabbi Achai's reaction illustrates this idea. All this means that while the righteous are alive in this world, the four basic physical elements that make up every person are transformed into something spiritual and connect to their souls through the good deeds they perform during their time on earth. Maimonides explains this somewhat in the fourth chapter of Hilchot Yesodey Torah, where he describes how one element can be transformed into another similar element, such as earth into water. When a person cleaves to G'd, all his elements are transformed into fire, which forms the foundation of the soul. Kabbalists are familiar with this.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

And Sarah died in Kiriath Arba, where Avraham and Sarah resided after leaving Beer Sheva.

In Kiryat Arba, Arba was the name of a man who was known by this “nickname” as he had three sons, and they, just as he himself, were giants, so that there were four giants. Compare Joshua 21:11. His three sons were called ששי,חימן, תלמי.

And Abraham came, he came from outside the house, as he had not been present when Sarah died.. Alternatively, he had been out of town when Sarah died.

To eulogize, to eulogize her with words and elegies.

And to weep for her, and to weep for her. These two verbs are used on occasion without the prepositions אל and על, for instance, in Psalms 69:11 ואבכה בצום נפשי, “when I wept and fasted;” the meaning of the prefix ב in front of צום is equivalent to the preposition על, “I fasted on account of the threat to my soul.” Compare also Genesis 36:35 ויבך אותו אביו, “his father wept for him.”

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

In Kiryat Arba: the name of the person who founded or owned this town was Arba. We know this from Joshua 15:13, where he is described as the father of a giant. The reference to a town by mentioning an outstanding citizen is familiar to us from Numbers 21:27-29, where the capital of the Emorites is described as קרית סיחון, the city of Sichon.

And Abraham came: even if he did not arrive from out of town, was perfectly appropriate to describe his arrival to mourn Sarah. [Clearly, the author considers Avraham as having lived uninterruptedly in Beer Sheva ever since it was told this in 22:19. Ed.]

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Sarah died in Kiryat Arba, which is Hebron, in the land of Canaan; Abraham came from Beersheba, where he had lived before and after the binding of Yitzkhak, to lament Sarah, as is customary in mourning, and to weep and move others to weep for her.

And Avraham, he arose from upon the presence of his dead, and he spoke to the descendants of Khet to say,

3 וַיָּקָם אַבְרָהָם מֵעַל פְּנֵי מֵתוֹ וַיְדַבֵּר אֶל־בְּנֵי־חֵת לֵאמֹר׃

ג

מוּת/Mut

This word means to die, kill, have one executed, to die (as a penalty), be put to death, perish (of a nation), to die prematurely (by neglect of wise moral conduct), (Polel) to kill, put to death, dispatch, to be killed, be put to death, to die prematurely.

It appears that the primary translation of this word is the verb “to die” in some way or another. However, depending on the spelling and the prefixes or suffixes attached, it can change from the verb “to die” to the adjective “dead” or the noun “death.” Moreover, even if the word is changed to an adjective, such as “dead,” or a noun, such as “death,” the meaning of the word in Hebrew remains the same.
Where am I going with this? Well, I have always wondered why Sarah died so much younger than Avraham. If you've read from the beginning without skipping chapters and verses, you'd know what I think of her life. Sarah, in the little that is said of her in Scripture, did not have a perfect life. Yes, our Father and Creator, YHVH, was with Avraham and her, but communication was mainly done through Avraham. As I explained, right from the beginning of Sarah’s life, and it is my belief, one I have never heard before, Sarah’s first husband died, this husband being Avraham’s brother (BeReshit/Genesis 11:29-30). It was said of her that she was infertile, barren of children, even before she married Avraham. She remained so until she had Yitzkhak at the age of ninety. However, before that, she gave her maidservant to Avraham as a wife and concubine, hoping they could build a family through her, but that plan backfired on her. She was rebuked by the maidservant when she could get pregnant by Avraham, and Sarah mistreated her to the point that the maidservant ran away. The maid servant was pregnant at that time and almost died, only to be saved by Elohim, who told her to go back to Sarah and endure her treatment. Later, she had Avraham cast out his son, whom he had with the maidservant that Sarah gave to him. This happened after Sarah had her son, Yitzkhak. After this, she had to go through the pain of seeing her husband take her son to the Binding. Sarah’s life was not an easy one, not by a long shot.
This life, as I see it, has left her with many negative feelings, causing her to make poor choices and act hurtfully toward others. This is the key to her early death. Hurting yourself or others physically or emotionally is not acceptable in the eyes of YHVH. It causes the spirit within us from YHVH to suffer. When the spirit suffers, the flesh or body in which that spirit dwells can die young. If you've followed from chapter one to now, you should understand this.
This is where I am going with this. Sarah had harbored many negative emotions throughout her entire life because of her inability to have children, which led her to make poor decisions and take harmful actions that affected others. That's why I believe that the word for “dead,” here in this verse, could also mean the translation, shown above in red, as “to die prematurely or to die prematurely (by neglect of wise moral conduct).” Did she die from a broken heart because of the Binding of Yitzkhak? Or from old age? Or some other reason? It doesn't matter. That's why it's not written in Scripture. What matters is why she died so much earlier than Avraham. Throughout her story, it’s consistently mentioned that she was extremely beautiful, to the point that kings wanted to marry her. And yes, she died at 127 years old. By our standards, that's very old, but Sarah was not typical when it came to aging. Not only did she maintain her beauty throughout her entire life, but she also regained her youth at eighty-nine when YHVH performed the miracle so she could conceive Yitzkhak. Not just her external youth, but her internal youth as well. Remember, she could no longer menstruate, but after YHVH’s miracle, she could again. So, even though she appeared beautiful and young on the outside, her body had gone through the natural stages of life: childhood, puberty, menstruation, and menopause. Yet, she passed away as a woman who did not look her age, healthy and beautiful, dying 48 years before her husband.
Emotions significantly influence both the length and quality of life. This is evident from the difference in age between Avraham and Sarah as shown in Scripture. People often overlook that we aren’t only responsible for caring for and ensuring our children’s happiness. The spirit of YHVH within all of us needs to be joyful as well. A suffering spirit is something that YHVH dislikes. Must I remind you?

BeReshit/Genesis 6:3

And YHVH said, “My Spirit shall not abide/contend/judge inside Adam (mankind) forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”

Sarah didn't do too badly; she did exceed 120 years of age, but not by much. Not compared to Avraham, who reached 175 years. Avraham surpassed the maximum expected age by 55 years. I like to think of age as a gauge of a person's righteousness. Is this wrong of me? I am not sure.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

BEFORE HIS DEAD. This refers to the body. [SAYING.] The explanation of this term is provided elsewhere in this commentary.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

He got up from the presence of his deceased and addressed the sons of Khet. Since he had not yet buried Sarah, he was not considered a mourner in the strict sense. As a result, he was free to leave his house and gather the town's people.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

From before his dead one. It is assumed that the "dead one" knew what was happening around her as long as the lid had not been placed on the casket or its equivalent (see Shabbat 152). This also indicates that the dead should lie on their backs (Baba Batra 74).

He spoke to the Hittites, to say. The word “לאמור/to say” intends to counter the idea that Abraham asked for something gratuitous when he said: “תנו לי/give for/to me”, "permanent possession, etc!" Abraham would not be content with any gift from the Hittites, but this was merely an initial step towards negotiations for acquiring the cave of Machpelah.

Rabbeinu Bahya (1255 – 1340) commentary:

“Avraham rose from before his dead and addressed the Hittites, etc.” The people mentioned were members of the Hittite tribe. Genesis 10:15 states that Khet (Heth) was a son of Canaan. All tribes living in the land called the “land of Canaan” were descendants of Canaan, who was a grandson of Noakh.
The Torah teaches us a lesson in proper etiquette: when speaking to a group, one should stand instead of sitting. It repeats the phrase ויקם אברהם, meaning "Avraham rose," multiple times in verses 7-8.
It seems to have been a customary practice that when a person addressed the community, they first stood up. Once they finished speaking, they would sit down again. In verse four, Avraham refers to himself as a resident stranger while standing. By verse five, it appears he has already taken his seat. If he hadn't, why does verse seven mention him rising again? Whenever Avraham wished to speak to those gathered at “the gate of the city,” he would stand up first.
The unusual masculine form in "מעל פני מתו” instead of “מתה" is because the word "גוף" (body) is masculine. Since Sarah was a woman and had died, she was now only a body. The soul, however, does not die. Therefore, "מתו" is entirely appropriate in this context.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

To attend to Sarah's funeral arrangements, the Torah added the word מתו, meaning "his dead,” even though we all know Sarah was his wife. This phrase is a fitting description for the body of the deceased, similar to מתי, “my dead,” in verse 4, or מתך, “your dead,” in verse 6.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

After mourning Sarah, her husband needed to find a burial place. Abraham rose from before his dead and addressed the Hethite leaders and elders sitting at the city entrance of Khevron.

ABRAHAM NEGOTIATES FOR A BURIAL GROUND (23:3–18) As soon as Abraham rises from beside Sarah’s body, he looks for her burial place. Abraham addresses a group of town citizens called “the Hittites” but also “the people of the land” (v. 7) and “the town leaders” (literally “those who entered the gate of the city”; v. 10). Hittites are linked to an ancient empire centered in today’s Turkey.

As Abraham states at the beginning, he is a resident alien (a “foreigner living temporarily” among the native people) and thus relies on the goodwill of the local landowners. He clearly indicates that he wants to acquire an entire burial site, including the field, cave, and trees—not just a cave. This wording reflects Abraham’s effort to fulfill God’s initial promise to him, of land. It also anticipates his next steps in fulfilling God’s second promise of descendants (Genesis 24).

I am with you, a sojourner; I am a resident/stranger. Give/grant to me burial-land within you, and I will bury my dead before me.

4 גֵּר־וְתוֹשָׁב אָנֹכִי עִמָּכֶם תְּנוּ לִי אֲחֻזַּת־קֶבֶר עִמָּכֶם וְאֶקְבְּרָה מֵתִי מִלְּפָנָי׃

ד

תְּנוּ/Tenu

This word means give, grant, deliver, send, produce, bestow, sell, permit, ascribe, employ, devote, consecrate, dedicate, pay wages, exchange, lend, commit, entrust, give over, deliver up, yield produce, occasion, produce, requite to, or report.

Avraham was not seeking this land as a gift; he was asking to be granted the opportunity to buy land. Also, we know this is what he meant because, even though the owner of the land Avraham wanted was going to give it to him, Avraham paid full price for it. This we will see in a later verse.

אֲחֻזַּת־קֶבֶר/Akhuza-Kever

The first word is אֲחֻזָּה/Akhuza, which means possession, property, land, or possession by inheritance.

The second word is קֶבֶר/Kever which means grave, sepulcher, tomb.

What I think Avraham is asking for here isn't just land for a burial. I mean, yes, he does want that, but what I really mean is that YHVH promised this land to Avraham and his descendants. He himself won't claim it; his descendants will. So, Avraham won't be alive when they do, and he won't see it happen. What Avraham desires is to be a citizen of Kanaan, not someone with no rights in that land. He doesn't own property and lives in tents as a sojourner, someone who isn't settled or just passing through. Avraham doesn't want to bury his wife in a foreign land that doesn't belong to him; he wants Sarah to be buried in a land that is his, with all the rights of a citizen.

BeReshit/Genesis 12:7

And YHVH looked towards Avram and said, “To your seed, I will give this land.” And there he built an altar to YHVH, who looked towards him.

This is why Avraham sought permanent citizenship from the people, because he wanted them to see him and his descendants as citizens and not as outsiders in the land of Canaan. Avraham took the first step toward owning the land by becoming a citizen.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

I AM A STRANGER AND A SETTLER WITH YOU — A stranger having come from another land, but I have settled down amongst you. A Midrashic explanation is: if you agree to sell me the land then I will regard myself as a stranger and will pay for it, but if not, I shall claim it as a settler and will take it as my legal right, because the Holy One, blessed be He, said to me, (12:7) “Unto thy seed I give this land" (Genesis Rabbah 58:6).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

I AM A STRANGER. When the word stranger (ger) stands alone, it refers to a transient visitor. And a sojourner (ve-toshav) means a resident stranger. Abraham said to them, “I am a sojourner among you. We are all mortal; I do not have a possession (achuzah), i.e., an inherited or purchased piece of land for use as a burial site.”

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

I am a stranger and a sojourner with you. It was customary for them to have separate burial grounds for each family and one burial ground for interning all strangers. Now Abraham said to the children of Khet: “I am a stranger from another land and have not inherited a burial ground in this land from my ancestors. Now I am a sojourner with you, having desired to dwell in this land. Therefore, give me a burying-place for an everlasting possession just as one of you.” However, since Abraham used the word “t’nu (give), which has the same root as matanah, (gift), they suspected that he wanted it as a gift from them. They replied: “We do not regard you as a stranger or sojourner. Rather, you are a king. G-d has made you king over us, and we and our land are subservient to you. Take any burial ground you desire, and bury your dead there. It shall be yours as a possession of a burial-place forever since none of us will refuse it to you.”

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

Because I used to be a stranger here, I do not own an ancestral burial ground. The word is used in this sense by Isaiah 22:16 ומי לך פה כי חצבת לך פה קבר, “whom have you here that you have hewn out a tomb for yourself here?” “Be agreeable to the fact that I should possess a burial plot among you.”

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

“I am a stranger as well as a resident among you.” A stranger because I come from a foreign land—and a resident because I plan to settle among you. Rashi suggests that Avraham also implied that if he were denied his request, he would assert his legal rights by simply becoming a permanent resident. If you point out that, according to Rashi’s explanation on Genesis 13:7, where the Canaanites are described as the current residents of that land, it was before he became a father of children. (Such people cannot claim permanent resident status.) After all, G-d had not promised Avraham that he would inherit this land. He only promised it to Avraham’s descendants. Now that Yitzkhak was born, he was entitled to inherit part of the land.

Malbim (March 7, 1809 – September 18, 1879) commentary:

I am a foreigner (or “sojourner”) and a resident. A sojourner usually does not buy a family burial plot because he does not plan to stay long. In contrast, a resident doesn’t need to buy one because he owns his own land. Avraham, however, has been a sojourner until now but wants to become a resident. That is why he is trying to purchase a plot.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

I am a stranger and a resident. Abraham's description of his legal status is based on Maimonides' Hilchot Zechiyah U-matanah 3:11. While one must not give a gift to an idolater, one may either give a gift or sell to a resident stranger (גר תושב) because the Torah states: "the resident stranger let live by your side" (Leviticus 25:35). We should recognize that our holy Torah applies reason, especially in our conduct on this earth. Just as we, Jews, are commanded to treat resident strangers humanely, reason also dictates that people worldwide should act similarly toward one another. It is a universal duty to allow resident strangers to live peacefully and to receive gifts. This is the principle Abraham alluded to when he said: גר ותושב אנכי תנו לי, "since I am a resident stranger, give me, etc." He deliberately used the word גר, alien, rather than תושב, resident, to emphasize that although he was an alien, his residence among them gave him the right to what he asked for. There is a spiritual aspect to Abraham's description of himself as an alien. He did not consider it proper for a person to describe themselves as a "resident" on this earth, as he looked forward to a permanent status in a higher, hereafter life.

"So I may bury my dead one from before me." Abraham meant he wanted to bury Sarah without delay. Additionally, Abraham already knew he would need to pay Efron a substantial sum for a field worth only a fraction of the asking price because it contained something he desired. At the same time, he understood that once the local people heard about his willingness to pay such a price, they would assume there was hidden treasure beneath the field that they did not know about. To prevent such speculation, he emphasized early on that he was only concerned with burying Sarah promptly, i.e., מלפני, and that due to the urgency, he could not haggle over the cost. Under these circumstances, the amount he paid mattered little; the locals would not mind or suspect ulterior motives.

Rabbeinu Bahya (1255 – 1340) commentary:

“Let me have possession of a burial ground among you, etc.” It was customary for each family to have its own plot as a burial site for its members, while they had set aside a special piece of land to bury outsiders. This is what led Avraham to use the phrase: גר ותושב אנכי עמכם, “on the one hand I am a stranger, since I have come here from a distant land, and this is why I do not own a burial plot of my own. On the other hand, I have been very willing to become a resident among you, etc.”

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

I describe myself primarily as a stranger, since I have come from another country. Yet I also see myself as a resident, having lived among you for many years and planning to stay. That is why I am asking you to give me a place within your country that cannot be taken away; my own space for me and my son after me. For now, I only ask for enough to bury my dead, so I can remove my wife’s body and bury it.

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

I have come from a distant land to settle here, but in the meantime, I have made myself at home among you. Since I do not have parents here, I also lack any ancestral burial plots. Please allocate a burial plot to me that will be mine forever, deeded in perpetuity. He wanted to buy land specifically to bury his dead. Such a piece of land, deeded forever, called אחוזה, required approval from the entire local community. This becomes even clearer when Avraham offers money for the field and cave to Efron, the former owner, and the Torah carefully describes the bureaucratic process needed for Avraham to bury Sarah. (17-19) (3) MIL'FANAI [FROM BEFORE ME]. I will take it out from before me to bury it.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Although I am a foreigner here, my family and I have lived here for many years. Additionally, I am a resident alien with you: I don't have rights in this place, but I am an old acquaintance of yours. Therefore, please give me a portion of your land that can serve as a burial site, and I will bury my dead from before me.

And they answered, the descendants of Khet, to Avraham, to say to him,

5 וַיַּעֲנוּ בְנֵי־חֵת אֶת־אַבְרָהָם לֵאמֹר לוֹ׃

ה

VaYaanu | VeNey-Khet | Et-Avraham | Lemir | Lo

חֵת/Khet

The name חֵת/Khet means "fear" or "terror". He is the son of Khanaan and the ancestor of the Hittites.

The people in that region responded uniformly. Everyone agreed with what was said in response to Avraham’s request. Whether they deliberated among themselves to arrive at these responses, we do not know. However, it is written that the Khetites gave an agreed response to Avraham’s request. Could they have heard of Sarah’s passing and then gathered to discuss what it meant, deliberating that this would be what Avraham would ask of them? This looks pretty likely. Sarah’s passing would have been big news to the region. This might be why they all agreed: they were prepared for it. Another scenario is that Avraham was one of the most important figures of that time, and they could not deny him anything. Let us remember that these people recall the war with the four kingdoms and how Avraham led his 318 battleborn of his house and his allies into battle and won. These four kingdoms, which no other kingdoms could defeat, and could not even be defeated by five kingdoms put together against them. Avraham also came to this land with nearly nothing and amassed a fortune, and even the Pharaoh of Egypt could not take his wife away. Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, was probably the single most powerful person anyone in that region knew, and Avraham bested him with the help of YHVH. Everyone around knew that YHVH was with Avraham. They might not have known YHVH’s name, but they knew that Elohim was with Avraham. And it is because of this that the Khetites will deny Avraham nothing. Avraham is both respected and feared.

The members of the Hittite tribe replied. On these words, Rabbi Elazar commented that untold numbers of pens have been broken and untold amounts of ink have been used up for the Torah to repeat the expression בני חת, “the members of the tribe of the Hittites,” in this paragraph no fewer than ten times. Our sages say that we learn from here that anyone who assists a righteous person in receiving his due share is viewed as if he had observed the commandments in all the Five Books of Moses.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

ויענו בני חת…לאמור לו. The Hittites responded, …<underline>to say to him.</underline> This indicates they appointed a single spokesman to represent them. It also shows that they were not united in their approach to the matter of the sale. Therefore, they delegated someone to "speak to him," i.e., without making an immediate and final commitment. The final outcome already suggests that their original plan was to demand a very substantial price.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ויענו, they agreed by telling him so.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

The children of Khet answered Abraham, saying to him. It is possible that they discussed the matter among themselves first before giving him an official response.

“Listen to us, my lord, one lifted by ELOHIM. You are in our midst (or among us), in the best of our graves, bury your dead. None of us, (not a) man, his grave will refrain from you, bury your dead.”

6 שְׁמָעֵנוּ׀ אֲדֹנִי נְשִׂיא אֱלֹהִים אַתָּה בְּתוֹכֵנוּ בְּמִבְחַר קְבָרֵינוּ קְבֹר אֶת־מֵתֶךָ אִישׁ מִמֶּנּוּ אֶת־קִבְרוֹ לֹא־יִכְלֶה מִמְּךָ מִקְּבֹר מֵתֶךָ׃

ו

נְשִׂיא אֱלֹהִים/NeSi ELOHIM

The word נְשִׂיא/NeSi means one lifted up, chief, prince, captain, or leader.

Many translations choose “Prince of the Lord,” where the Lord stands in for the name of YHVH. However, I don’t understand why the Torah would refer to Avraham as a “prince”. Avraham has been called a “friend” by YHVH Himself, but not “His son”. The Hebrew people, however, have been called YHVH’s son as a nation, but not Avraham himself.

Isaiah 41:8

“But you, Yisrael, my servant, Yaakov, whom I have chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend.”

Shemot/Exodus 4:22-23

Then you shall say to Pharaoh, “Thus says YHVH, Yisrael is my firstborn son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me.’ If you refuse to let him go, behold, I will kill your firstborn son.”

Hosea 11:1

“When Yisrael was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.”

Jeremiah 31:9

“With weeping they shall come, and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back, I will make them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble, for I am a father to Yisrael, and Ephraim is my firstborn.”

Yes, Avraham is the father of Yisrael or Yaakov, but it clearly states that Yaakov was YHVH’s chosen one. So, I don’t think the word “prince” applies to Avraham. Friend, yes, but not a prince. However, the phrase “one lifted up by Elohim” does. Elohim brought Avraham from Ur and guided him to Kanaan from Haran. Elohim was the one who helped Avraham against Pharaoh; Elohim was the one who made everything go well for him in all he did. This is undeniable to us and to the people back then. So, calling Avraham “one lifted up by Elohim” is very accurate, especially if the Torah says so. Elohim has been guiding, watching, and helping Avraham every step of the way. Elohim lifted Avraham to who he was because he was a man who deserved it.

You are in our midst (or among us).

This is an acknowledgment that Avraham has lived with them for a significant amount of time, long enough to be considered a citizen, someone who resides in the region and is involved in many community affairs.

“In the best of our graves, bury your dead. None of us, (not a) man, his grave will refrain from you.”

The Khetites were not offering Avraham land for burial; they were offering him the option to bury Sarah in an existing grave, one that belonged to someone else with buried people from other families. This was not what Avraham had asked for. He wanted land of his own with rights equal to the people of the land. Avraham wanted full citizenship. However, the Khetites were being evasive.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

לא יכלה means will not withhold, just as (Psalms 40:12) “Thou wilt not withhold (תכלא) Thy mercies”, and (Genesis 8:2) “And the rain was restrained (ויכלא).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

MY LORD. Not our lord. One man spoke. He employed the term my lord because it is impolite to include others when one is speaking as a subordinate.

A MIGHTY PRINCE. Because thou art a prophet. The term elohim is used in the sense of great.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

במבחר קברנו קבור, “do not wait until the formalities of the purchase have been completed, but go ahead and bury Sarah.” This corresponds to a statement by our sages in Moed Katan 22 על כל המתים כולן מדחה מטתו, “it behooves us to bury all the dead with dispatch, without undue delay.”

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

נשיא אלוהים, “a prince of G-d,” they replied to his initial statement when he described his status as either a stranger or resident, asserting that he was much more than that. They regarded him as if G-d Himself had sent him. Regarding his second request, he needed to secure ancestral rights to a burial plot so it wouldn't be plowed over by its previous owner in the future. Each of them was willing to transfer ownership of the plot he had already chosen as his future burial site. Meanwhile, he should proceed to bury his dead, and they would consider it an honor to have Sarah buried in a plot that had once belonged to one of them. איש את קברו, even if Avraham, by chance, selected a plot that one of them had already designated as his own future burial ground.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

שמענו אדוני, "listen to us, my lord;" they meant: "please listen to our suggestion to select the best of our burial grounds and go ahead and bury your dead one. You do not have to ask permission from any individual to give you his plot without a fair equivalent." The reason for all this is that "not one of us would refuse you even the plot he had selected for his own burial." They said so to expedite Sarah's burial.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

שמענו אדני, this was said by their spokesman speaking on behalf of all of them. This is why he addressed Avraham as adoni in the singular, whereas the words that follow are all in the plural.

נשיא אלוהים, G’d has given you an elevated position, and we consider your status as such among us.

במבחר קברנו, they possessed many caves within which to bury the dead, and each family had such a cave reserved for interring its dead. Every corpse was buried in an individual coffin; the overall description of such a place is the word קבר, "tomb." This is why the spokesman spoke of.

איש ממנו את קברו, he considered not the individual grave but the family’s burial grounds. They intended that Avraham should ask one of them to share their family plots with him.

The words לא יכלה in verse 6 mean that no one would withhold his burial plots from Avraham if the latter chose to use them. We come across this verb in a similar usage in Samuel I 25:33 אשר כליתני היום הזה מבא בדמים, ”for preventing me from seeking redress in blood.”

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

נשיא אלוהים, “a prince of G’d,” neither a stranger nor a resident stranger as Avraham had described himself.

IN THE CHOICEST OF OUR BURIAL PLACES. In the place where we bury the chiefs of the land, there is a grave already prepared.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Hear us, my lord: Although you say that you are a foreigner and a resident alien, you are not just an ordinary person. Instead, you are a prince of God among us, with a status greater than that of the leader of a small tribe. Therefore, bury your dead in the best of our graves; none of us will refuse to let you do so, and you can choose any burial site you want. The local residents have thus declared that they have granted Abraham informal rights to their land.

And Avraham, he rose, and he bowed down to them, to the people of the land, to the sons/descendants of Khet,

7 וַיָּקָם אַבְרָהָם וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ לְעַם־הָאָרֶץ לִבְנֵי־חֵת׃

ז

VaYakom | Avraham | VaYishtakhu | LeAm-HaAretz | Livney-Khet

A council of the leaders of the land. This is not just Avraham going to some people sitting around at the city gates; this is a proper council, where the most important people gather to make and finalize significant decisions. Avraham is showing respect as one should in a situation like this. Sarah’s passing is not taken for granted, and Avraham is being addressed as the important figure he was. Not just anyone walks in, and people are ready to hold a meeting of the land’s leaders. Both parties are being respectful, taking turns speaking and responding in an orderly, proper manner.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

[AND BOWED DOWN.] Those who say that Abraham bowed down to God speak nonsense. Scripture explicitly states that Abraham bowed to the children of Heth. Bowing means a bending of the head. It is a way of showing reverence. Moses also bowed before his father-in-law.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

He bowed to the notables present, seeing they represented the whole population.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

“Avraham stood up and prostrated himself." Avraham depended on the goodwill of everyone in that town; even if Efron had been willing to sell his field or plot, Avraham would have needed approval from all the townspeople to turn it into a burial site. He had to first rise to properly prostrate himself to all of them, even to the one sitting behind him. However, for a single individual like Efron, he was not required to rise; he simply prostrated himself before him.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

He arose and bowed. Abraham explained to them that the reality was the exact opposite of what the Hittites thought. He did not see himself as a prince among them; instead, he considered them to be more deserving of honor than himself.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

He rose to his feet and folded them in a gesture of gratitude for the sons of Khet's positive response, then clearly explained what he was requesting.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Abraham arose, and prostrated himself, or bowed his head, in a formal gesture of respect and gratitude, before the people of the land, before the children of Het.

And he spoke to them to say, “If there is with your desire to bury my dead from my face (or presence), you, listen to me. Entreat/request/intercede for me with Efron, son of Tzokhar,

8 וַיְדַבֵּר אִתָּם לֵאמֹר אִם־יֵשׁ אֶת־נַפְשְׁכֶם לִקְבֹּר אֶת־מֵתִי מִלְּפָנַי שְׁמָעוּנִי וּפִגְעוּ־לִי בְּעֶפְרוֹן בֶּן־צֹחַר׃

ח

עֶפְרוֹן/Efron

The Name Efron means Place Of Dust, Ore, Malleability, Young Ones; others also say that it means Fawn-like.

We will learn that Efron was present at this gathering, yet Avraham asked for help in speaking to Efron. This is not because he couldn't do it himself; as I mentioned before, this is a council meeting, and things must be done according to the council's rules. Avraham must speak to the council's spokesperson to make any requests to Efron. He cannot speak directly to Efron. The spokesperson represents all the people, including Efron.

Let's think for a moment: if Avraham wanted the land, couldn't he have just gone to Efron personally and asked to buy the land? But he didn't. Why? Because he couldn't? Avraham has all the money he wants and can buy anything he desires. The answer could be one of two things: First, he couldn't buy the land because he isn't a citizen, and approaching Efron directly means Efron could claim it back, even if he accepts the money from Avraham. He needs witnesses. Or reason two, Avraham wanted to claim citizenship through the council and secure the rights to buy property that would be his and could not be taken away. These reasons are very similar, if not the same.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

נפשכם means YOUR WILL.

ופגעו לי — This phrase signifies entreaty, as (Ruth 1:16) “Do not entreat (תפגעי) me”.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

If it be your wish to bury my dead from before me, the purpose is this: “I will not bury my dead in another's burial ground. However, if it is your desire that I bury my dead, please ask Ephron, who has a cave at the end of his field, which is not used as a family burial place but as a field.” The meaning of the word milfanai, from before me, is that if you will not do so, I will put her in a casket. It might also mean “my dead wife, who is before me, and as a duty, I must hurry to bury her.” The reason Abraham requested and asked for me is that Ephron was a wealthy and respected man, as shown by his saying, "What is that between me and thee?" It would not be honorable for him to sell his ancestral land, as Naboth did at Jezreel. That is why Abraham did not go to Ephron to offer him a high price for the field; instead, he asked the people of the city to request it for him respectfully.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

If you want, I shall bury the dead without delay, as you have indicated when you said: במבחר קברנו קבור!" (verse 6) i.e., that I would not need to wait.

Agree with me that I shall receive an inalienable burial plot.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

“And entreat Efron on my behalf.” If you ask why all this was necessary after the assembled people had offered him many grave sites, the reason could be that Efron was not a member of the Hittites like the townspeople, so that they couldn't have spoken in his name either. He had come from afar and settled in Kiryat Arba, and after living there, they elected him as their leader.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

He said: "If it be your desire, etc." This can be understood similarly to what we are taught in Baba Batra 36: Members of the exilarch's household were not allowed to keep land just because they had occupied it, although no protest was filed because the true owners were afraid to do so. The owners were advised to keep their documents proving their rights to the land. Conversely, landowners did not usually protest immediately when wealthy people squatted on their land, hoping that the improvements made by the squatters would eventually benefit them when they reclaimed their property.

When the Hittites addressed Abraham as "a prince of G'd," claiming that none of them would deny Abraham his own burial plot, they could have alluded to two possible scenarios. First, they described him as a great and powerful individual capable of imposing his will on the local population, indicating that Abraham knew no one would dare protest his actions. Since he was a man of such caliber, the usual practice of acquiring land by occupation and silence did not apply to him. As soon as they felt powerful enough, they might attempt to remove Abraham's body from that land. What they conveyed was that their approval was based solely on Abraham representing superior force. Second, another interpretation of the Hittites' response is this: Since you are "a prince of G'd," you should not fear that we see you as someone who throws his weight around, unlike the example cited from the Talmud. While the people in the household of the exilarch were suspected of robbery, no such motive would be attributed to Abraham. His righteousness was beyond doubt. Perhaps they used the word שמענו, "listen to us," to emphasize that they considered Abraham beyond reproach. Hearing this, Abraham responded: "if you truly wish me to bury my dead, etc." Please act as mediators between me and Efron. Had Abraham not spoken these final words, we might have concluded that the Hittites' offer was made under duress.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Despite his expression of gratitude, Abraham did not want to bury his wife in the land of the Hittites. Instead, he wanted to buy a separate piece of property. He spoke with them, saying: If you are truly willing to fulfill my request and bury my dead, heed me, and intervene for me with a certain individual, Efron son of Tzokhar.

And (for him) to give/grant me the Makhpelah cave, which he has, which is at the end of his land, he will sell it in its full silver (or full price), he will give/sell to me in your midst (or in your presence), for grave land/property/possession.”

9 וְיִתֶּן־לִי אֶת־מְעָרַת הַמַּכְפֵּלָה אֲשֶׁר־לוֹ אֲשֶׁר בִּקְצֵה שָׂדֵהוּ בְּכֶסֶף מָלֵא יִתְּנֶנָּה לִי בְּתוֹכְכֶם לַאֲחֻזַּת־קָבֶר׃

ט

מַכְפֵּלָה/Makhpelah

The meaning of the name מַכְפֵּלָה/Makhpelah is double or double-fold. The name comes from the root word for "to be double" or "to fold".

Avraham’s wording could not be more precise; he is requesting to buy the cave in Makhpelah, which Efron owns. Avraham wants to buy it at full price to make it clear that he does not want a handout. He wants everything done by the book, so it doesn't seem he took advantage of the situation to get this at a reduced price. Avraham wants it with all the rights that a citizen is entitled to. Avraham wants to own it; he wants it for his land, for his property, and as his possession. He is also making it clear that he wants this transaction to go through the council and does not want a person-to-person sale. This will make him a landowner and a citizen in the eyes of all the Khetite leaders.
Avraham might not have been alive when YHVH led the Israelites into the land of Khanaan to take possession of it. Still, at this point in the story, he has the chance to become a citizen and landowner in Khanaan.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

MAKHPELAH (the root כפל means "double"); it had a lower and an upper cavern. Another reason for its name is that it is characterized by being doubled due to the couples buried there.

FOR ITS FULL VALUE IN SILVER — מלא means שלם, so the phrase signifies all that it is worth. Likewise, David said to Ornan (1 Chronicles 21:22), “for full money."

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

THE CAVE OF MAKHPELAH. A cave within a cave.

FOR THE FULL PRICE. The opposite of male (full) is chaser (lacking).

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

THAT HE MAY GIVE ME, the intent of this is “that he may give it to me in such a way that I will consider it as a gift (even) if I will buy it from him for its full value.” It is for this reason that Abraham did not mention the word “selling”.

THE CAVE OF MAKHPELAH. Rashi comments: “It had a lower and an upper cave. Another explanation [of why it was called Machpelah — the root of which is keiphel (double)] — is that it was ‘doubled’ on account of the four couples who were buried there: Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah”. But this is incorrect since Scripture states that the field of Ephron, which was in Machpelah. Thus, we see that it is the name of the place in which the field was located.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

“Efron’s field, which is situated in Machpela at the edge of his field, stood, etc.” The details provided by the Torah are intended to prove to us, the reader, that by selling the cave to Avraham Efron, he did not suffer any loss of face, and he had no reason to feel embarrassed about what he had done.

בכסף מלא, I do not want him to grant me a reduction from its real worth as a gesture to you.

בתוככם, in the presence of all of you. I do not ask for time to arrange the payment, but I am willing to pay in cash up front. Compare verse 16, where Avraham does, in fact, pay cash immediately.

לאחוזת קבר: Avraham wanted complete freedom to do whatever he wanted with the property once he had acquired it. This is the privilege granted to anyone owning an ancestral heritage. Avraham wanted it understood that, as a result of the sale, Efron would not be able to dictate to him how close to his own property Sarah or other members of his family could be buried.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

ויתן לי, “so that he will give me, etc.” Avraham never suggested that he wanted the cave of Machpelah as a gift; on the contrary, he considered it a gift bestowed upon him by Efron, even after paying a substantial sum for it.

בקצה שדהו, “at the edge of his field;” in other words, using that corner as a burial ground will not interfere with his having continued full use of his field for agricultural purposes.

Malbim (1809 - 1879) Commentary:

Let him give me. That is, as a present, at the end of his field. Although it is not customary to sell one’s inheritance, the cave is not in the main part of the field but at an extremity. Let him give it to me for its full value. Publicly let it be a gift, but privately he will receive full value.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

ויתן לי את מערת המכפלה, So that he may give me the cave of Machpelah. Abraham made a point of describing the transaction as a gift, though perfectly aware that money would be changing hands, as indicated by the words "for full monetary value." Abraham was astute enough to purchase the cave in a way that made any future complaint impossible. He was also careful to add the words: "in your midst." The Zohar (1,128) states that Efron never saw anything in that cave except darkness and calamity. This being so, Efron could later have claimed that, because of his unawareness of the cave's actual value, his consent to sell it was based on a false premise, and he could have reversed the sale. This is despite the rule that a claim that land was over- or underpriced at the time of purchase lacks validity. Abraham still worried about an idea expressed in the Jerusalem Talmud (compare Tossaphot Kidushin 42): if the undercharge was 50% or more, the sale is reversible, though not if it was between 15% and 50%.
There was also concern that the adjoining landowners could claim that the land should have been sold to them in preference to an outsider, a principle known in Jewish law as דין המצר. Another consideration for Abraham was that, after the transfer of the cave, someone might present a lien dated before the transaction, requiring him to give up his claim. For all these reasons, Abraham used both the expressions "gift" and "sale" to describe how he wanted to acquire the cave. This would protect his claim also under the heading of what is known in Jewish law as דין חליפין, i.e., acquisition by means of a symbolic transfer. Under this heading, there is no such law as אונאה, reversal of the sale due to unfair pricing. This דין חליפין applies to transactions involving either real estate or chattels, whereas such acquisition by a symbol representing the ultimate object does not apply to money, i.e., coins. Hence, Abraham's reference to receiving the land as a gift. Our sages in Bechorot 50 phrased it thus: Rabbi Chaninah stated that every time the word "כסף", i.e., silver or money, appears in the Torah, the meaning is "סלעים", 25 silver coins of a standard denomination; the exception is the use of the word "shekel" in connection with the transaction involving Abraham and Efron. In that instance, the meaning is קנטרין, a coin weighing four times the usual weight of the "shekel." This is the meaning of the Torah (Genesis 23,15), defining the "shekel" as being "four hundred shekels acceptable at any merchant." The fact that Efron arbitrarily changed the usual definition of the "shekel" value made the transaction unassailable in the future, since he himself had set the terms of the sale. Concerning Abraham's fear that the דין מצר might be invoked by a neighbor in the future, Abraham ensured the presence and consent of all the local populace who would jointly act as his broker in the transaction. This would preclude any claim at a later date. It also demonstrated that there was no outstanding lien against the property, as any such lienholder should have spoken up at that time, seeing that he was present.

Abraham used the term אחוזת קבר, "a burial plot held in perpetuity," leaving Efron the option to use the remainder of the field if he so chose. Had Abraham not used the term אחוזה, Efron could have denied him access to Sarah's grave once he had buried her there.

Rabbeinu Bahya (1255 – 1340) commentary:

ויתן לי את מערת המכפלה, “so that he may give me the cave Machpelah, which adjoins his field.” The reason it was called מכפלה is related to the expression כפל, “double.” Apparently, G’d had “doubled” the height of the cave to bury Adam’s remains inside it. The residents had been unaware of this. Efron himself was also unaware of any special significance of the cave, despite its name. He had no reason to suspect who, if anyone, had previously been buried inside that cave. [Seeing that this had occurred before the deluge, how could anybody have been aware, unless Noach had found the land of Israel intact after the deluge. Ed.] When Avraham repeatedly spoke about Efron “giving” him the cave, he did not mean that he was unwilling to pay for it. He meant that he would consider the transfer of the title to that cave to him as a gift, regardless of any commercial transaction they would conclude concerning it. To avoid misunderstanding, Avraham added the words (verse nine) בכסף מלא יתננה לי, “in return for full monetary compensation he shall give it to me.” Avraham neither asked for a gift nor even for the field (which would have meant a loss to Efron). All he asked for was the cave at the edge of Efron’s field. Efron’s response was couched in ethical and moral terms. “I have donated the field to you as well as the cave which is situated on it; it would not be fitting for someone of your stature to own merely the cave and not the field of which it is part.” He continued: “This is why I have given you the whole package as a gift, field as well as cave.” When Efron used the expression “I have given,” he meant “it is equivalent to a gift.” Avraham accepted this, and that is why he said, “I have given the money for the field, take it from me,” although Efron had not yet named his price (verse thirteen). The entire transaction was meant to create the impression that Avraham had received a tremendous bargain by being allowed to pay an outrageous price.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

He did not ask anything from Efron other than the cave, not the field in which it was situated.

This word, המכפלה, is a noun describing a subordinate function. If it were an adjective, the word מערת should have had the prefix ה. Our sages disagree concerning the meaning of the word מכפלה. Some think that it describes a cave above another cave, (root כפל, double) others claim it means a cave within another cave. Alternatively, the word describes this particular location, i.e., that the whole cave was known as the “cave machpelah” on account of the dual cave contained in that field; this is also why the field itself was considered as almost subordinate to the cave in question.

כסף מלא: each coin would be of full weight, like a brand-new coin that had not lost some of its original weight through circulation. The Torah makes this clear by adding the words עובר לסוחר, acceptable by any merchant.

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

מערת המכפלה/cave of Makhpelah, any depression in the surface of the earth is called מכפלה/Makhpelah, as the ככר הירדן/the plain of the Jordan, refers to the entire Jordan valley (13:10). This is substantiated by the Torah describing Efron’s field as being located in מכפלה/Makhpelah in verse 18 of our chapter.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Despite their offer to allow him to use any property he chose, Abraham insisted on purchasing a plot at full price, as he wanted it to be property held by the family in perpetuity. Concerning the retention of an ancestral inheritance, see, e.g., I Kings 21:1–3 and Nehemiah 2:2–5.

And Efron, he set amidst the sons/descendants of Khet, and answered Efron, the Kjetite, to Avraham, in the ears of the descendants of Khet, (and) of all that came to the gates of his city, and said,

10 וְעֶפְרוֹן יֹשֵׁב בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי־חֵת וַיַּעַן עֶפְרוֹן הַחִתִּי אֶת־אַבְרָהָם בְּאָזְנֵי בְנֵי־חֵת לְכֹל בָּאֵי שַׁעַר־עִירוֹ לֵאמֹר׃

י

This verse says that Efrom was in attendance at this council and responded to Avraham’s request. Efron did this loudly enough so everyone in attendance could hear him. Efron was described, by Scripture in this verse, as being a descendant of Khet himself. This sounds like a significant meeting, and Efron wanted to be heard. Avraham is a very important man, and whoever is involved in this meeting is to be represented as someone of importance; Efron seems to have been an important man himself. This is why it is said in this verse, “Efron set amidst the descendants of Khet,” meaning that he was one of the members of the council, and “Efron the Khetite,” meaning that he was, probably, one of the leaders of the land, if not the main leader of the city, for sure a descendant of Khet, a citizen of that land by birthrights.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

ועפרון ישב The verb is written without a ו so that it may be read ישב he sat, thus indicating that on that very day they had appointed him (Ephron) to be an officer over them. Because of the high standing of Abraham, who needed to negotiate with him, he was elevated to a dignified position (so that Abraham, whom they esteemed as a great prince, might have to negotiate with an equal and not with an inferior person (Genesis Rabbah 58:7).

לכל באי שער עירו OF ALL THAT CAME IN AT THE GATE OF HIS CITY — for they all left their work and came to pay their last respect to Sarah (Genesis Rabbah 58:7).

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

ועפרון יושב בתוך בני חת, “Efron was sitting among the Khittites (as if he were also a Hittite), like the Shunammite in II Kings 4.13.”

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

ועפרון..באזני בני חת, in a loud voice, making sure they could all hear him. In this verse, the Torah emphasizes the aural aspect of the negotiations. In contrast, in verse 18, at the conclusion of the transaction, the visible aspect, לעיני בני חת, is stressed, as at that point eye-witnesses were more important. We find such a sequence of aural perception and visual perception also in Job 29:11 כי אזן שמעה ותאשרני ועין ראתה ותעידני, “for the ear that heard acclaimed me, and the eyes that saw were my witness.”

Shabbethai ben Joseph Bass (1641–1718) (Hebrew: שבתי בן יוסף; also known by the family name Strom[1]), born at Kalisz, was the founder of Jewish bibliography[2] and author of the Siftei Chachamim supercommentary on Rashi's commentary on the Pentateuch. Commentary:

On that day, they appointed him an officer over them... If it were written יושב, it would be in the present tense, denoting that he once lived as an equal in the midst of the sons of Cheis, and he still does. But it is written ישב, in the past tense, denoting that he once lived in their midst as an equal but no longer. Therefore, Rashi deduces that on that day, they appointed him to an officer's position.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

And Efron, who was not necessarily an important member of the city, was living at that time among the children of Het; and Efron the Hitite answered Abraham in the hearing of the children of Het, of all those coming to his city gate. He, too, conducted himself ceremoniously as he approached the city council and issued a public declaration, saying:

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

לכל באי שער עירו, “in the presence of all the assembled citizens of his town.´ In connection with the dealings of Chamor and Shechem with their subjects, the Torah uses the expression לכל יוצאי שער עירו, “in the presence of all the inhabitants of his town who had come out (to the square)”. Avraham wanted to publicize his request for a burial ground even to people who were not residents of the region. The relatives of Efron, or anyone who would witness the transaction, were disqualified as witnesses, whereas total strangers were legally qualified to testify to it.

“No, my lord, hear me; the land I gave to you, and the cave that is in it to you (or is yours). To the eyes of the sons of my people, I gave it, I gave it to you to bury your dead.”

11 לֹא־אֲדֹנִי שְׁמָעֵנִי הַשָּׂדֶה נָתַתִּי לָךְ וְהַמְּעָרָה אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ לְךָ נְתַתִּיהָ לְעֵינֵי בְנֵי־עַמִּי נְתַתִּיהָ לָּךְ קְבֹר מֵתֶךָ׃

יא

Efron is basically saying that he had already given the cave and the land to Avraham. That he had done this action of giving to Avraham in a manner that the people would know that he, Efron, had done it. Stressing that he had given Avraham the land along with the cave in it. Showing that he had gone above and beyond what Avraham was asking for. However, Efron had also said that the land and cave would be for the sole purpose of Avraham burying his dead, which was not what Avraham was looking for. Avraham was seeking legal ownership of the land in the eyes of the council's leaders. He was looking for citizenship in the land of Khanaan. He does not want a gift that the descendants of Efron can later take away.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

NAY, MY LORD — You are not to buy it with money.

I HAVE GIVEN IT TO THEE (a perfect tense) — See, it is as though I have already given it to you.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

NAY. Not so, my lord, only hear me.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

IN THE PRESENCE OF THE SONS OF MY PEOPLE. The intent thereof is to state: “Behold, all the people are present, and they are knowledgeable witnesses to the sale. Therefore, do not fear denial or retraction, and so bury thy dead from now on, for it is yours and I cannot retract.” But Abraham did not do so, for even after he paid its full value in silver, he first took symbolic legal possession of the field and the cave. He established them as his possession in the presence of the people of the city, and all those who came in at the gate of the city, the merchants and the residents who happened to be there, and after that, he buried her.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

No, my master, hear me. There is no need for the community's leaders to intercede with me.

I have given you the field. In my mind, I gave it to you the moment you spoke.

“and the cave which is in it, since it is not proper that you should have to cross someone else’s property to get to the grave of your wife. Therefore,

I am telling you in the presence of all my people that I have given it to you so that you may bury your dead there, just as you asked when you referred to אחוזת קבר/burial property/land/possession.”

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

“I have given you the field,” Efron pointed out that unless he gave Avraham not only the cave of Machpelah but also his adjoining field, Avraham would have no access to the cave. (without asking permission to visit there each time).

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

"No, my lord." The word "no" means that Abraham could not merely acquire the cave but had to buy the field on which it was situated. Efron indicated that he had decided to give the whole field to Abraham because, once it served as a cemetery, it could no longer serve its original purpose. He implied all this by using the word שמעני, "listen to me carefully."

והמערה אשר בו, "as well as the cave situated on it." He meant that already at the very beginning of the discussions, when the local people had indicated their willingness to relinquish their own burial plots in favor of Abraham, he, Efron, had decided that the cave and the field were a single unit. The reason he repeated the fact that the transaction took place in full view of all the people was to make plain that anyone in the future could invoke no דין מצר/Neighbor's Right.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

Not like you say that you want to pay the full value of the property. Take it for free, as a gift, and not only the cave, but also the field.

I have already given it to you as a gift,

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

The field I gave you, I am giving it to you now.

AND THE CAVE THAT IS IN IT. You are asking only for the cave that is at the end of the field, and by sale, I am giving you as a gift the whole field and the cave.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

No, my lord, you offered to purchase a portion of my field, but I cannot accept that proposal. Instead, heed me: The entire field I have given to you, and the cave that is in it, I have given it to you; in the eyes of my people, who are all listening to my declaration, I have given it to you and will not deter you from taking it. I will clear the land for such a distinguished man as yourself, and the entire plot will belong to you; bury your dead.

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

“in full view of all my people.” He called upon everyone present to be a witness to the transaction. He implied that everyone knew he, Avraham, would not renege on an offer he himself made. In fact, as soon as he had handed over the money he took possession of both the field and the cave adjoining it. This act of taking possession was performed in full view of the people assembled be they rich, poor, tourists passing through, or residents.

And Avraham, he bowed down to the face of the people of the land.

12 וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ אַבְרָהָם לִפְנֵי עַם הָאָרֶץ׃

יב

VaYishtakhu | Avraham | LiFenei | Am | HaAretz

When Avraham heard what Efron had said, he bowed in full view of the council members and the people present at the council meeting. All who were in attendance are to be witnesses of the words spoken there and of the outcome or decision of the meeting in question.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

BEFORE THE PEOPLE OF THE LAND. Abraham bowed before Ephron in the presence of the people of the land to honor him.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

Avraham bowed. He bowed to them to acknowledge that it was in their honor that Ephron consented.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

Avraham bowed to Efron in everybody’s presence.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Abraham prostrated himself a second time before the people of the land, thereby formally expressing his gratitude for Efron’s generous offer.

And he spoke to Efron in the ear of the people of the land to say, “Oh, if only you would listen to me! I gave full silver (or full prize) of the land, take it from me, and I will bury my dead there.”

13 וַיְדַבֵּר אֶל־עֶפְרוֹן בְּאָזְנֵי עַם־הָאָרֶץ לֵאמֹר אַךְ אִם־אַתָּה לוּ שְׁמָעֵנִי נָתַתִּי כֶּסֶף הַשָּׂדֶה קַח מִמֶּנִּי וְאֶקְבְּרָה אֶת־מֵתִי שָׁמָּה׃

יג

After bowing down, Avraham spoke to Efron, and it would seem that Efron did not want to accept the payment for the land Avraham wanted; this is why Avraham said, “If you would only listen to me!” Whether Efron was doing it with good intentions or not, we do not know. Efron wanted to gift the land, and Avraham wanted to pay full price for it. Avraham said that not until he paid for the land full price would he bury his dead. Giving Efron an ultimatum. It would be that Avraham paid, or he would not bury Sarah there, and probably go to someone else's land that he could buy. Avraham wanted it to be his land where he would bury Sarah. This is perhaps why Afron said that he had already gifted it to him, but Avraham would not take it as a gift. So it would seem that this is why Avraham had to take this matter to the leaders of the land.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

BUT IF THOU WOULDST ONLY HEAR ME — You tell me to listen to you (verse 11) and to accept it without payment. I do not desire this:

BUT IF THOU WOULDST ONLY HEAR ME!—i.e., I only wish that you would listen to me and do as I ask.

נתתי/I GIVE (perfect with present sense) old French donne; English I give. I have the money ready, and I only wish that I had already given it to you.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

BUT IF THOU WILT, I PRAY THEE, HEAR ME. If you will do this, I pray thee, hear me. Or it may mean, if you will do this, I pray thee, when I will give the price of the field, take it of me.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

‘LU’ (IF) THOU WILT HEAR ME. This is equivalent to saying, “If you will hear me,” with the repetition serving to emphasize the point, similar to “if you, if you would hear me.” Such redundancies are found in these verses: "Turn in, my lord, turn in to me," "Art thou any better, better than Balak?" and "And as for me, whither shall I go?" Additionally, I turned myself and saw that the whole congregation was holy. These are examples of expressions of tautology. In my view, this also applies to the verse, "If from a thread even to a sandal tie, if I take (anything that is thine)," which means, "If, from a thread even to a sandal tie, I take anything that is yours." Perhaps in the verse before us, the meaning is, “If you are as you have said,” implying that if you speak honestly about the matter and listen to me, the sale will be finalized. A similar omission of a word appears in the verse, "And their brethren said unto them, What are ye?" which means, “What are you saying?" I also believe that a similar case is the verse, "Wherefore am I?" which means, "Why am I in the world?" Possibly, this aligns with Onkelos's translation here as, “if you will do me a favor,” meaning, “if you will do my will as you have said.”

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

I will comply with what you said, namely, to bury my dead there only if I can hand over the money for the field. I will not bury Sarah there as a result of any other kind of arrangement.

“If only you would be good enough to listen to me! Please accept the money from me so that I can proceed with the burial.”

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

“I gave full silver of the land.” The word נתתי/I gave, on earlier it stands, that Ephron said, "I gave you the field." And Abhraham answered him "שמעני נתתי?/Did you hear what I said?" with wonder. [i.e.,] You said "נתתי לך/I gave you" but you took the money from the field from me because, as a gift, I will not accept it. And the cantillation that is with נתתי proves because there is in it a geresh to separate it from מכסף השדה.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

"He said to Efron, etc." The use of the word אך indicated Abraham's desire to proceed with a minimum of further discussion.

"I have given the money for the field." Even if Efron had decided to give him the field as a gift, Abraham begged Efron to accept the money from him. If so, Abraham would accept the field as a gift.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

I wish you had listened to what I said that

I have already prepared the money for the field. If you’ll accept it, you will be doing me a favor,

And I will proceed to bury, as the matter does not permit further delay.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

Despite the offer, he, Abraham, spoke to Efron in the hearing of the people of the land, saying: Rather, if only you will heed me, when you initially said: No, my lord, heed me, I indeed listened to you. Now it is my turn to request that you listen to me: I have given you, that is, I am giving you, the silver for the field to purchase it; please take it from me, and I will bury my dead there.

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

“I have as good as given the money for the field; all that is needed is that you accept it from me.” He meant, not as Efron had indicated, that “you” have given me the field; I have already given the money for this purpose; you only have to accept it and pick it up.

And Efron, he answered Avraham, to say to him,

14 וַיַּעַן עֶפְרוֹן אֶת־אַבְרָהָם לֵאמֹר לוֹ׃

יד

VaYaAn | Efron | Et-Avraham | Lemor | Lo

My lord, listen to me. Land four hundred shekels silver, between me and between you, what is it? And bury your dead.

15 אֲדֹנִי שְׁמָעֵנִי אֶרֶץ אַרְבַּע מֵאֹת שֶׁקֶל־כֶּסֶף בֵּינִי וּבֵינְךָ מַה־הִוא וְאֶת־מֵתְךָ קְבֹר׃

טו

Efron appeared to give in, but he framed his answer to clarify the property's value while emphasizing that he valued his friendship and alliance with Avraham more than money. He simply stated the property's worth and asked, “What is that amount between us?” knowing that Avraham wouldn't change his mind. This left the decision to Avraham. From this, Avraham learned Efron’s asking price for the land. Whether Efron asked for too much or too little is unknown, since the market value at that time is unclear; what is clear is that they were friends or at least acquaintances, and the discussed sum seemed unimportant to both. Efron aimed to preserve his friendship with Avraham, or at least appear favorable in front of everyone present.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

ביני ובינך BETWEEN ME AND THEE — Between two such friends as we are, of what importance is that? Nothing at all! Leave business alone and bury your dead!

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

LAND OF FOUR HUNDRED SHEKELS OF SILVER. According to Onkelos, the intention here is that the land was valued at that amount, as he translates, “land worth four hundred shekels of silver.” Possibly, Efron meant to convey that the land’s price was fixed because, in many regions, the cost of a field was determined by its size. However, our Rabbis suggest that Efron priced it arbitrarily and excessively, and Abraham, out of sincere willingness, accepted and acted according to his own desire, thus elevating himself. If we interpret the Scripture plainly, the phrase 'land of four hundred shekels of silver' indicates either that Efron purchased it for that sum or that his ancestors did so.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

What is it? 'After all, it is a very minor transaction! It is so insignificant that the acquisition can be completed by a simple declaration, without the need for a formal document. Once you hand over the money, you can regard yourself as having buried Sarah in your property.”

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

... what is it between you and me? What difference does a small amount make, whether you want to pay it or not? Just go ahead and bury your dead.

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

“A land which is not worth more than 400 shekel silver, what is this worth talking about? Take it and bury your dead for free if you so desire.”

Among close friends like us, what significance does this hold? Rashi explains the question: Why did Efron say, “Between me and you”? What distinguishes Avraham from others? Rashi responds: “Between two friends such as we are.” He then addresses another question: Why did Efron say: ואת מתך קבור (“And bury your dead”)? Rashi clarifies that Ephron was implying: “Disregard the sale, and bury your dead.” The נ relates to, “Disregard the sale.”

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

My lord, listen to me. This land is valued at four hundred shekels of silver. Between us, what is it? We are close friends, so such a small plot of land should not worry us. Therefore, bury your dead, and let us avoid unnecessary delays over the price.

And Avraham, he listened to EfRon, and Avraham, he weighed for Efron the silver which (had) spoken in (the) ear/hearing of the sons of Khet, four hundred shekel silver to pass along as trade.

16 וַיִּשְׁמַע אַבְרָהָם אֶל־עֶפְרוֹן וַיִּשְׁקֹל אַבְרָהָם לְעֶפְרֹן אֶת־הַכֶּסֶף אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר בְּאָזְנֵי בְנֵי־חֵת אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שֶׁקֶל כֶּסֶף עֹבֵר לַסֹּחֵר׃

טז

Audio Block

Double-click here to upload or link to a .mp3. Learn more

Avraham asked for nothing more; he weighed the silver as Efron loudly announced to everyone present. In the council, this money was used as a binding trade. This was not a person-to-person sale; it was conducted through the council trading system with witnesses.

Something interesting happened to Efron’s name in Scripture: it changed in this verse (actually right when Avraham weighed the silver) and in all the verses that follow, where his name appears, and it only appears four times in this new spelling throughout the rest of Scripture. It went from עֶפְרוֹן/EfRon to עֶפְרֹן/Efron; a ו is missing. The pronunciation is still the same, just the spelling has changed. Does this mean that he went through some change? Maybe economically, in social status, or maybe in a friend capacity with Avraham and his descendants? It is challenging; the new spelling of his name’s meaning is unclear from my research. It either means the same thing or many other different things that do not make sense to me.
I think I have said this before, but in Hebrew, the numerical system is composed of the Hebrew alphabet, and because of this, it is said that the name EfRon was changed to Efron in Scripture. See, with the missing letter, the numerical value of the name Efron is 400.

The calculation is as follows, using the standard Mispar Hechrachi method:

ע (Ayin) = 70
פ (Pei) = 80
ר (Reish) = 200
ן (Nun final) = 50

Total: 70 + 80 + 200 + 50 = 400.

This number is considered notably significant because it is the exact amount of silver shekels Avraham paid Efron for the field and cave for Sarah's burial. The number 400 is also linked to the "evil eye" (עַיִן רָע, ayin ra), whose letters also total 400 in gematria, reflecting Efron's initial hesitation and eventual high price for the land. Do I believe this is the true purpose of the name change? I am not entirely convinced. Based on this chapter and Efron’s words so far, I don't see him as an evil person. I see him as a clever person of high standing among his people, and I think he's intelligent enough to do good for Avraham. Remember that Avraham's deeds in that region have made him an ally, and he has done many good things for the kingdoms around him.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

וישקל אברהם לעפרן AND ABRAHAM WEIGHED TO EFRON [THE SILVER]. The name Efron is written defectively (without the ו) to indicate that something was missing in Ephron viz, sincerity, because he promised much but did not do even the very least (Bava Metzia 87a): He took from him big Shekels, viz., centenaria (worth a full 100 smaller units) as it is said, “money current with the merchant” which means, such coins as were everywhere accepted as worth a full Shekel, for there are places where their Shekels are considerable, centenaria; old French Centenars (cf. Ruth R. 7).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

CURRENT MONEY WITH THE MERCHANT. Merchants accept only the best currency.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

Avraham listened to Efron (accepted his conditions), meaning he accepted Efron’s valuation of the field, which was that it was worth 400 shekels of pure silver; “Avraham weighed the amount of silver.” You will note that in this verse, the name “Efron” is spelled without the letter ו. The reason the sages spelled it this way is so that the numerical value of the letters in his name would total 400, which is the number of silver pieces he charged Avraham for burying Sarah in that cave. (Compare Baal Haturim)

Kli Yakar (כלי יקר), meaning "precious vessel," refers to a popular Torah commentary written by the Polish rabbi Shlomo Ephraim ben Aaron Luntschitz (1550-1619). Commentary:

וישקל אברהם לעפרן: The name עפרן is missing a 'ו'. The Ba'al Haturim explains that he had an evil eye, and the name עפרן, without a 'ו', adds up to ר״ע עי״ן (evil eye) in gematria. The reason for this is a statement in Bava Batra (9B): whoever gives a coin to a poor person is blessed with six blessings, and whoever is stingy with the poor is not blessed with these six blessings. It is for this reason that Efron lost his 'ו' (which has the numerical value of 6) - as he was stingy, he lost six blessings. Our sages also tell us (Sotah 36B) that we give the glass of blessing to a generous spirit, as the verse states טוב עין הוא יבורך (with a 'ו') - Don't read 'he is blessed', but rather 'he will bless'. Both the literal reading and the way it is read are accurate - someone who blesses others generously will be blessed with the six blessings (as depicted by the 'ו' in יבורך).

Furthermore, know that the numerical value of רע עין = 400. We find 400 in 4 different places, specifically regarding stingy people. The first is Efron, who was stingy and therefore took 400 Silver shekels. The second place concerns the brothers of Joseph, who had a bad view of Josef the righteous and were jealous of him because of the coat of many colours. The result of this was that the Jewish people were exiled for 400 years as strangers, afflicted, and in servitude. The third place concerns Esau, who had a negative view of his brothers and was jealous of Jacob because Isaac blessed him. It is for this reason that Jacob placed a space between each flock to fill the eyes of that evil man (that was to be given to Esau), because he came with 400 men. The fourth place relates to Naval, because he was a stingy man. It was for this reason that David approached him with 400 men.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

וישמע...עובר לסוחר. Silver coins were acceptable to the most discriminating merchants who weighed each coin to assure themselves that they were not being short-changed.

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

וישמע אברהם, he understood what Efron was hinting at and did not want to spell out.

עובר לסוחר, silver minted into coins, refined silver is acceptable without question anywhere. The expression עובר in that sense occurs also in Kings II 12:5 in connection with Yehoyakim, i.e., כסף עובר, as well as in Song of Songs 5:5 ואצבעותי מור עובר, “ a reference to the best quality of myrrh.

Without a vav because he said much... [You might ask:] Are not יעקב and אהרן also spelled without a vav? [The answer is:] עפרון is spelled with a vav throughout the parshah, and only here is written missing a vav. Therefore, it is to be expounded. But יעקב and אהרן are always without a vav. Where they have a vav, it is to be expounded.

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

It is almost certain that this silver was not in the form of minted coins; it was more likely a collection of metal pieces whose value was determined by weight. Abraham surprised Efron, who expected him to suggest a much lower price, after which the negotiations would continue until the two sides agreed upon a compromise sum. However, Abraham chose to refrain from the formal purchase method. He instead immediately paid the entire sum, four hundred shekels of pure, choice silver, ready currency accepted by anyone in the world.

16–18. Abraham does not haggle, but hastens to pay the required sum, high as it might be. The purchase is made according to legal custom in the presence of the town’s leaders at the city gate, the traditional seat of justice and place to notarize transactions. The text emphasizes that the purchase includes the field and all it contains. Similar declarations recur afterward (25:9–10, 49:29–32, 50:13), indicating the importance of the purchase.

And it was established (or And it rose up); The land of EfRon, which was in Makhpelah, which faced the land of Mamre, and the cave within it, and every tree in the field that is in all its borders around

17 וַיָּקָם׀ שְׂדֵה עֶפְרוֹן אֲשֶׁר בַּמַּכְפֵּלָה אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵי מַמְרֵא הַשָּׂדֶה וְהַמְּעָרָה אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ וְכָל־הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר בַּשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר בְּכָל־גְּבֻלוֹ סָבִיב׃

יז‎

The first word could mean that the land was established for Avraham as owner, as we will see in the next verse, which goes together with it, or that it rose up. What does it mean to have risen up? It could mean something of more value in the eyes of the people of the land. See, we know how the people see Avraham. As the council itself said, “Listen to us, my lord, one lifted by ELOHIM. You are in our midst (or among us), in the best of our graves, bury your dead. None of us, (not a) man, his grave will refrain from you, bury your dead.” As he was regarded as a very important man, a prophet of YHVH. Now that Avraham owns the land, it is worth more than in EfRon's hands. Also, it could mean that the land had spiritually risen, as Avraham now owned it. This is the first piece of land owned by the descendants of Avraham. Also, it sounds like Avraham got more land than he asked for, since he asked for the cave and ended up with more. If Avraham got more because that is what EfRon sold him, or because that is what the council decided, we do not know.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

AND THE FIELD OF EPHRON WAS MADE SURE (literally, it rose) — It received a rise in importance because it passed from the possession of a commoner (הדיוט an ordinary person) into the possession of a king (Genesis Rabbah 58:8). But the real meaning of the verse is: The field and the cave that was therein and all the trees … became secured to Abraham as a possession etc. (i. e. verse 17 is an incomplete sentence and must be read together with verse 18, thus: ויקם השדה וגו… לאברהם למקנה —The field etc. became secured to Abraham as a possession).

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

WERE MADE SURE. The field was made sure and passed permanently into Abraham’s possession. This verse and the one that preceded it are to be read as one verse. Similarly, the verse opening with "I am a stranger and a sojourner" (v. 4) and the verse that precedes it are to be read as one verse. The ten pairs of verses that Saadiah Gaon listed as being in reality one verse are, in fact, not to be read as one verse.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

The word ויקם teaches that a sealed document confirmed the purchase.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

ויקם, literally: “it stood up;” the subject is the field, and the Torah means that by becoming the property of Avraham, this field now had “risen” in spiritual value. שדה עפרון, one side of that field extended along the whole length of that town. Here it is described in precise detail, i.e., ממרא היא חברון, whereas previously it had been described as קרית ארבע, “the city of the four.” Later on, during the lifetime of Yaakov, it was described as ממרא קרית הארבע היא חברון (Genesis 35:27), a location where both Avraham and Yitzchok had been residents at one time or another. Earlier. In connection with Avraham (12,18), he had been described as having settled in Kiryat Arba, which is described there as “part of Khevron.” This was meant to tell us that Mamre was the founder who built a town adjacent to Khevron, which the Hittites had previously inhabited. He called that new town “Mamre,” thus memorializing himself. The “groves” of Mamre, i.e. אלוני ממרא, were situated at the entrance to that town. The cave of Machpelah, in another direction, at that time had belonged to the Hittites. After Mamre’s death, a giant by the name of Arba became very powerful and claimed the entire area, naming it Arba after himself. Several centuries later, when the Israelites had defeated most of the Canaanite tribes, they called that town Khevron.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

It “arose” for Avraham as a purchase and acquisition. The unusual-sounding word קם here also occurs in this sense in Leviticus 27:19 וקם לו, where it describes the legal procedure of redeeming property from the Temple treasurer by paying a premium. The term is chosen to represent a transaction of a permanent, enduring nature. Both were outside the actual town limits of Kiryat Arba, the present-day Khevron, then having been known as Mamre. (compare also verse 19). [The Torah makes certain that all the names by which this location had ever been known are mentioned so that no one in the future could challenge this cave as belonging to the Jewish people. Ed.]

It was elevated because it left the possession of a commoner to the possession of a king. [Accordingly,] ויקם does not mean acquisition, as in (Vayikra 25:30): “The house in the walled city shall be established (וקם), to the one who bought it,” where Rashi explains that possession is transferred from the seller to the buyer’s control. This is because there, the verse mentions the buyer after וקם, unlike here. [You might object: Here too, the next verse says]: “This became Avraham’s through a purchase” — [thus mentioning the buyer after ויקם. The answer is:] That is not a continuation of the previous verse, since the ta’amei hamikra divide [it into a separate verse].

The simple meaning of the verse is: The field came into... It seems we could ask either way: If the simple meaning works well, [why do we need the first explanation?] Rashi does not usually bring a Midrash without reason! And if the simple meaning doesn't work well, why bring it up? This question should be asked whenever Rashi brings both. The answer is: The simple meaning, on its own, raises a question. It is redundant to say, “The field of Ephron... became Avraham’s through a purchase.” Why say, “Of Ephron”? Do we not already know it was his field? Perforce, an elevation took place specifically for the field of Ephron—it previously belonged to a commoner, Ephron. However, the exposition by the Midrash of “elevation,” when on its own, also raises a question. The verse already said, “The field of Ephron was established.” Why say again, “The field and the cave...”? A further problem with the Midrash, [when on its own, is that] the next verse לאברהם למקנה. Becomes somewhat disjointed. Thus, Rashi also brings the simple meaning: the field, etc, came into Avraham’s possession. It says, “The field of Ephron,” and then repeats, “The field and the cave...” to indicate both explanations. Accordingly, ויקם applies to both. It applies to “The field of Ephron” to indicate “elevation.” And it applies to “The field and the cave” to indicate that it came into Avraham’s possession. In the simple meaning, ויקם denotes that possession of the field was transferred from the seller’s control and was established to the buyer, as Rashi explained on (Vayikra 25:30), “The house in the walled city shall be established (וקם)...” The questions of Re’m, and of the Minchas Yehudah who came after him, are thus resolved. There is no need for their forced explanations, as ויקם שדה and וקם הבית both mean the same. In the simple meaning, ויקם השדה means that possession of the field was established in the buyer’s control, the same as Rashi explained for וקם הבית. Rashi understands the word וקם to mean “shall be established,” and only says “in the control of the buyer” to explain that verse’s following phrase: “To the one who bought it.” The same applies here: ויקם means the field was established for Avraham. Whereas Re’m and Minchas Yehudah understood that according to Rashi there, וקם means “acquisition” [and thus conflicts with its meaning here]. But this isn't so, and it isn't easy to understand why they said it. (R. Meir Stern)

Steinsaltz (1937-2020) commentary:

The field of Efron that was in Makhpela, the field that surrounded the Cave of Makhpela, that was before Mamre, the field and the cave that was in it, and every tree that was in the field, that was within its border all around, were established as Abraham’s property. Abraham was not satisfied with purchasing the cave alone; he also acquired the surrounding area and an access path to the cave.

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

ויקם שדה עפרון, “Efron’s field ‘arose.” The Torah means that the handover of the money was not yet the conclusion of this transaction. The site had not become a recognized cemetery by the time Avraham handed over the purchase price, but the Torah states that after it became his property, Avraham designated the site as a burial site and then buried his wife there. It was not admissible in those days to convert a piece of land into a cemetery without the local community's approval.

To Abraham for a purchase to the eyes of the sons of Khet, with/in all who came to the gates of its city.

18 לְאַבְרָהָם לְמִקְנָה לְעֵינֵי בְנֵי־חֵת בְּכֹל בָּאֵי שַׁעַר־עִירוֹ׃

יח‎

The council made its determination, and the property was sold. The change of ownership for the sale of the property, which was outlined in the previous verse, was conducted before all witnesses who attended and done in the presence of the council members who were descendants of Khet. Avraham was now a landowner and a citizen of Khanaan. It all started with Avraham, the man who caught YHVH’s attention for having a good heart and for being loyal only to Him, and not to any other god. Even when the world had many gods, and even his family and father had many different gods, Avraham was loyal only to YHVH, who is the ONE and only LIVING POWER/GOD.
Avraham was promised the land of Khanaan, and even though it would still be a few hundred years before Avraham's descendants took it, Avraham was the one who started it all. He was the first to own land in this, the promised land of the Israelites. Avraham’s journey to this day has not been easy, so we should not expect ours to be any easier. Challenges will come and difficult times will try to bring us down, but we must persevere; we should not let it get to us, because nothing comes without effort, and nothing comes easy. We must keep in mind that, even though the road is hard, we will reach our goals in the end. Kling to YHVH and study His words that are His Law, and follow it the best you can. Please help one another and stay true to our EL/POWER, OUR STRENGTH, YHVH. Do not expect everything to fall in your lap; this is not how YHVH works. He will help only if your goal is for the good and with good intentions. Do everything by the book of the law of men, but keep within His Law. Remember, Avraham’s promise was delayed because he did not do exactly as YHVH asked when he took Lot, his nephew, with him, and only after they separated did the promise continue. This means that if you are not trying to follow His Law, things will not go as they should, as you are not keeping your part. Why should HE?
Use Avraham as an example: the good things he did, the bad choices he made. Everyone in Scripture not only tells us with words but also shows us, through the examples of others who came before us. Do not read just for reading but for knowledge, because the words and examples in these books give us life, but only if we learn them and follow them in our lives.

Rashi (approximately 1040 - approximately 1105) commentary:

BEFORE ALL THAT CAME IN AT THE GATE OF HIS CITY — In the midst of all of them, and with all of them standing by, he gave him legal possession of it.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

[IN THE PRESENCE OF THE CHILDREN OF KHET.] The local inhabitants.

[BEFORE ALL THAT WENT IN AT THE GATE OF HIS CITY.] Those who happened to be passing by.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

He weighed the money for Efron in the presence of all the assembled people, so that Efron sold the cave and the field to Avraham also in the presence of all his townspeople. He also handed Avraham a document confirming the sale.

בכל באי שער עירו/To all who enter the gates of my city. While all the people of his town were present, the expressions בכל, לכל (compare verse 10) mean basically the same. We find similar formulations in Exodus 27:19, where the two expressions occur in the same verse, i.e. לכל כלי המשכן בכל עבודתו/For every vessel of the Tabernacle in all its work.

Rashbam (approximately 1085 – approximately 1158) commentary:

“It arose” after Avraham had paid the money, a standard procedure which we are familiar with from the (misquote) in Erchin 33 ונתן הבסף וקם לו. The purchase was concluded in verse 18, i.e., the field became a מקנה for Avraham. It became an ancestral piece of property only after Sarah had been buried there, i.e., after the purpose of the transaction had been fulfilled (verse 20).

And in the presence of all, he gave him possession. [The prefix] ב usually denotes “within.” But since “within” or “inside” does not fit here, Rashi says: “In the presence of all.” Rashi did not wish to explain here, as in v. 10, that everyone left their work, because then Scripture should have written לכל, as it does there. Why is it written בכל, implying he was amongst them? Perforce, it is to be interpreted as “in the presence of all.”

And after so, buried Avraham Sarah, his wife, to the cave, field the Makhpelah, upon face Mamre, it Khevron, in the land of Kenaan.

(making it sound better)

And following this, Avraham buried his wife Sarah in the cave in the field, “The Makhpelah”, which is in front of the city of Mamre in the land of Kenaan.

19 וְאַחֲרֵי־כֵן קָבַר אַבְרָהָם אֶת־שָׂרָה אִשְׁתּוֹ אֶל־מְעָרַת שְׂדֵה הַמַּכְפֵּלָה עַל־פְּנֵי מַמְרֵא הִוא חֶבְרוֹן בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן׃

יט

Right after the council meeting, Avraham buried Sarah. He buried her in the property that was now his, in the cave that is in the field called “The Makhpelah”. This field grew and became Khevron, and it is in the land of Kanaan, now Israel.

Ibn Ezra (approximately 1089 - 1092 to approximately 1164 - 1167) commentary:

AND AFTER THIS, ABRAHAM BURIED SARAH, HIS WIFE. After the burial of Sarah, the field was designated as a burial ground, a possession belonging to Abraham and his descendants. Scripture tells of the purchase of the field of Machpelah to teach us of the superiority of the land of Israel over all countries, both for the living and the dead. Moreover, it informs us that God’s word to Abraham that he would possess the land as an inheritance was fulfilled.

Ramban (1194-1270) commentary:

AND AFTER THIS, ABRAHAM BURIED SARAH, HIS WIFE, IN THE CAVE OF THE FIELD OF MAKHPELAH, BEFORE MAMRE — THE SAME IS Khevron— IN THE LAND OF KANAAN. The reason why Scripture reverts to clarify the field, the place, and the land is that the whole section mentions the sons of Khet and Efron the Khittite. Therefore, Scripture concludes that the field was in the land of Kanaan, which is the land of Israel. And so it said at the beginning of the section: in Kiryath arba — the same is Khevron — in the land of Kanaan. All this is to explain that the righteous woman died in the land of Israel, and there she was interred, as the Khittites were of the families of Kanaan.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

אל מערת המכפלה/To the Cave of the Makhpelah, literally: “to” the cave of Machpelah; actually, the word: אל/to here appears instead of the prefix ב/in/inside. We find similar instances of the word אל being used in place of the prefix ב in Exodus 25:16, Numbers 19:6, and Numbers 19:17.

Or HaChaim (approximately 1696 - 1743) commentary:

ואחרי כן…ויקם השדה. Afterwards, the field stood as a burial plot, etc. We need to understand why the Torah had to write the words: "afterwards," something that is obvious. What could be more natural than Abraham burying Sarah at the end of these negotiations? Besides, why did the Torah repeat the words: ויקם השדה, something we read already in verse 17? The Torah wanted to confirm that the transaction complied with all and every legal form of acquisition. The words "afterwards" mean that once Abraham had weighed the money for Efron, the latter had foregone all claim to that property in perpetuity. Maimonides explains it thus in chapter one of Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah: "A Gentile loses his right to formerly owned property the moment he accepts the money as compensation for it. A Jew, on the other hand, does not acquire title to his new property until he has a written document. Once this has occurred, the property in question is like land in the desert, which anyone can stake a claim to." In other words, once the Gentile accepts the money, he loses all his former claims. Had Abraham buried Sarah before giving the money to Efron, the fact that he gave the money to Efron afterwards would not have made a complete acquisition, since the act of possession expressed by his burying Sarah would not have been performed on land he owned at the time. We need to examine if the act of חזקה, i.e., using the land for one's own purpose, is actually legally valid when the act of such חזקה is performed on land previously owned by a Gentile. In chapter two of the above-mentioned tractate of Maimonides, he writes as follows: "In the case of formerly ownerless property, or property formerly owned by a proselyte, the fact that the squatter (Jewish) has eaten the proceeds of such land for several years does not constitute an act of acquisition of either tree or the land itself until the squatter has performed an act on the body of the land itself. What kind of activity would qualify for such an event? In the case of a Jew having taken over the house of a proselyte or an abandoned house, if he whitewashed it or added a moulding about 60 centimeters high, this would constitute a valid act of acquisition. If he took earth from high ground and transferred it to fill lower ground in the same piece of land, this would be considered as an improvement of the earth and would qualify as an act of acquisition." It is clear, therefore, that if the squatter merely shifted some earth without specific intent to effect an improvement on that soil- even though he thereby levelled the ground- this would not be enough to qualify under the heading of קנין, acquisition. Maggid Mishneh (a commentator on Maimonides) writes that if the squatter spread mats on the ground to be able to sit on them in comfort and to enjoy this, this would count as a valid act of קנין, acquisition. An alternative cited by the above commentator is that even spreading the mats merely to improve the appearance of the ground in question suffices. Rabbi lbn Migosh concurs with the latter example. Thus far, the quotation from Hilchot Zechiyah Umatanah. Granted that according to the first example cited by the Maggid Mishneh anyone who benefits from an act performed on the land he squats on performs a valid act of חזקה, Abraham benefited by having buried Sarah on that land and thereby performed an act of acquisition; however, according to the opinion of Rabbi lbn Migosh that an actual improvement of the land has to take place, Sarah's burial would not have constituted such an improvement. How then did Abraham acquire that land (even though Efron had forfeited it)? Perhaps the superstructure erected around the grave, and especially the sepulchral chambers dug within the earth, which was customary at the time, constituted such an improvement in the field under discussion. These sepulchral chambers were probably whitewashed with lime to prevent the soil around them from crumbling. Now we can understand why the Torah repeated the words "ויקם השדה". It means that after Abraham had buried Sarah, the acquisition of that field by Abraham became complete.

CONCLUSION: SARAH’S BURIAL (23:19–20) More time is devoted to the negotiations than to the burial itself (on burial customs, see Va-y’chi, Another View). After Sarah is buried, the text reiterates that the field and all within it became Abraham’s rightful possession. Thus, Sarah’s grave is the first permanent, legal presence in the land promised to Abraham and to their descendants.

Tur HaAroch (Approximately 1270–1340) commentary:

ואחרי כן קבר, “after (all) this, he proceeded to bury, etc.” Rabbi Meir points out that throughout the entire chapter thus far, Avraham had always spoken of burying מתי, “my (singular) dead,”. In contrast, Efron and his townspeople had spoken about Avraham being allowed to bury מתיך, “your dead (plural).” According to this Rabbi, the words ואת מתך קבור (verse 15) of Efron, (after the price had been agreed upon), also have to be understood as including other dead family members in the future.

ואחרי כן קבר אברהם את שרה אשתו אל מערת המכפלה...היא חברון בארץ כנען. “After this, Avraham buried his wife Sarah in the cave of Makhpelah. which is in Khevron in the land of Kanaan.” The Torah goes to great lengths to describe the location of this field and its adjacent cave. The reason is that, throughout, the inhabitants of that land were described as members of the Khittite tribe, a significant Kanaanite tribe. Whenever “the land of Kanaan” is mentioned, the Torah, by implication, reminds us of the loving Providence of G’d Who gave this ancestral land to the Jewish nation. Although Avraham had only come to that land as a stranger with no claim on any part of that land, he had risen to be a highly respected member of that society, so much so that the people ceded a little of their ancestral land to have him use it as his in perpetuity. An additional reason for describing this location in such detail was to ensure we are aware of where our patriarchs are buried, to honour their memory on occasions when we are obligated to honour the dead of our people who led sainted lives by visiting their graves.

And the field and the cave that was in it (was) established/raised up to Abraham as a burial possession from the sons of Khet.

20 וַיָּקָם הַשָּׂדֶה וְהַמְּעָרָה אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ לְאַבְרָהָם לַאֲחֻזַּת־קָבֶר מֵאֵת בְּנֵי־חֵת׃ס

כ

This land now belongs to Avraham, who used it as a burial site for himself and his descendants. He legally acquired it from the sons of Khet, the original owners, with all the rights of a Kanaanite citizen. Notice how Scripture does not say Avraham acquired the land from Efron, but from the sons of Khet, which was the local council. The sons of Khet welcomed Avraham into the land of Kanaan as a fellow citizen and one of them.

Sforno (approximately 1470/1475-1549) commentary:

מאת בני חת ויקם השדה/By the sons of Khet, and the field was established; these people all agreed to the transaction.

Chizkuni (13th Century) commentary:

ויקם השדה, this formulation uses the verb קום in the sense of being stable, remaining firmly established. Examples include Numbers 30:10, which states that a vow made by a woman of age and not married must be honoured. In this instance, the Torah records that the transfer of the cave and field adjoining Makhpelah from Efron to Avraham remains valid forever. Avraham himself, of course, also acquired the legal right to be buried alongside his beloved wife Sarah.

מאת בני חת “from the Khittites.” Avraham had taken the town seal and attached it to the document registering this sale. He did so to prevent the townspeople from claiming in the future that Efron had lacked the legal right to sell the property for burial.

Radak (1160-1235) commentary:

All the townspeople had agreed to the sale of Efron’s fields to Avraham. They were pretty keen for Avraham to own an ancestral plot in their midst.

Torah Home

Tanakh Home

◄ Ch. 22

Ch. 24 ►

בְּרֵאשִׁית‎

BeReshit

Genesis

CHAPTER 23

1

וַיִּהְיוּ חַיֵּי שָׂרָה מֵאָה שָׁנָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וְשֶׁבַע שָׁנִים שְׁנֵי חַיֵּי שָׂרָה׃

א

(The) years of life of Sarah.or(The) Two Lives of Sarah.

2

וַתָּמָת שָׂרָה בְּקִרְיַת אַרְבַּע הִוא חֶבְרוֹן בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן וַיָּבֹא אַבְרָהָם לִסְפֹּד לְשָׂרָה וְלִבְכֹּתָהּ׃

ב

3

וַיָּקָם אַבְרָהָם מֵעַל פְּנֵי מֵתוֹ וַיְדַבֵּר אֶל־בְּנֵי־חֵת לֵאמֹר׃

ג

מוּת/Mut

4

גֵּר־וְתוֹשָׁב אָנֹכִי עִמָּכֶם תְּנוּ לִי אֲחֻזַּת־קֶבֶר עִמָּכֶם וְאֶקְבְּרָה מֵתִי מִלְּפָנָי׃

ד

תְּנוּ/Tenu

אֲחֻזַּת־קֶבֶר/Akhuza-Kever

5

וַיַּעֲנוּ בְנֵי־חֵת אֶת־אַבְרָהָם לֵאמֹר לוֹ׃

ה

חֵת/Khet

6

ו

נְשִׂיא אֱלֹהִים/NeSi ELOHIM

7

וַיָּקָם אַבְרָהָם וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ לְעַם־הָאָרֶץ לִבְנֵי־חֵת׃

ז

8

וַיְדַבֵּר אִתָּם לֵאמֹר אִם־יֵשׁ אֶת־נַפְשְׁכֶם לִקְבֹּר אֶת־מֵתִי מִלְּפָנַי שְׁמָעוּנִי וּפִגְעוּ־לִי בְּעֶפְרוֹן בֶּן־צֹחַר׃

ח

עֶפְרוֹן/Efron

9

וְיִתֶּן־לִי אֶת־מְעָרַת הַמַּכְפֵּלָה אֲשֶׁר־לוֹ אֲשֶׁר בִּקְצֵה שָׂדֵהוּ בְּכֶסֶף מָלֵא יִתְּנֶנָּה לִי בְּתוֹכְכֶם לַאֲחֻזַּת־קָבֶר׃

ט

מַכְפֵּלָה/Makhpelah

10

וְעֶפְרוֹן יֹשֵׁב בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי־חֵת וַיַּעַן עֶפְרוֹן הַחִתִּי אֶת־אַבְרָהָם בְּאָזְנֵי בְנֵי־חֵת לְכֹל בָּאֵי שַׁעַר־עִירוֹ לֵאמֹר׃

י

11

לֹא־אֲדֹנִי שְׁמָעֵנִי הַשָּׂדֶה נָתַתִּי לָךְ וְהַמְּעָרָה אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ לְךָ נְתַתִּיהָ לְעֵינֵי בְנֵי־עַמִּי נְתַתִּיהָ לָּךְ קְבֹר מֵתֶךָ׃

יא

12

וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ אַבְרָהָם לִפְנֵי עַם הָאָרֶץ׃

יב

13

וַיְדַבֵּר אֶל־עֶפְרוֹן בְּאָזְנֵי עַם־הָאָרֶץ לֵאמֹר אַךְ אִם־אַתָּה לוּ שְׁמָעֵנִי נָתַתִּי כֶּסֶף הַשָּׂדֶה קַח מִמֶּנִּי וְאֶקְבְּרָה אֶת־מֵתִי שָׁמָּה׃

יג

14

וַיַּעַן עֶפְרוֹן אֶת־אַבְרָהָם לֵאמֹר לוֹ׃

יד

15

אֲדֹנִי שְׁמָעֵנִי אֶרֶץ אַרְבַּע מֵאֹת שֶׁקֶל־כֶּסֶף בֵּינִי וּבֵינְךָ מַה־הִוא וְאֶת־מֵתְךָ קְבֹר׃

טו

16

טז

17

יז‎

18

לְאַבְרָהָם לְמִקְנָה לְעֵינֵי בְנֵי־חֵת בְּכֹל בָּאֵי שַׁעַר־עִירוֹ׃

יח‎

19

וְאַחֲרֵי־כֵן קָבַר אַבְרָהָם אֶת־שָׂרָה אִשְׁתּוֹ אֶל־מְעָרַת שְׂדֵה הַמַּכְפֵּלָה עַל־פְּנֵי מַמְרֵא הִוא חֶבְרוֹן בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן׃

יט

20

וַיָּקָם הַשָּׂדֶה וְהַמְּעָרָה אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ לְאַבְרָהָם לַאֲחֻזַּת־קָבֶר מֵאֵת בְּנֵי־חֵת׃ס

כ

(The) years of life of Sarah.
or
(The) Two Lives of Sarah.