On the following pages, I have attached the commentaries of Rashi, David Kimhi (RaDaK), and Nahmanides (RaMBaN) on Gen. 27:1-29, the problematic episode of how Jacob deceives his blind father Isaac in order to receive the blessing of the first-born son that should have gone to Esau. Both RaDaK (1160-1235, Provence) and RaMBaN (1194-1270, Spain) are representatives of peshat interpretation though in a less extreme form than Rashbam. For more on them, see Greenstein, pp. 253-55.

In a short paper (5 pages), I would like you to analyze how Rashi interprets this story and to compare his reading with either RaDaK or RaMBaN's readings. To do this, please pick several-- between 3 and 5-- interpretations that each exegete offers in the course of the passage as substantiation for your reading of their readings of the Biblical passage. In the case of each interpretation, you should ask: 1) What problem does the commentator find in the verse? 2) How does his interpretation solve or resolve the problem? 3) What else does the interpretation teach us?

In discussing the differences between the commentators, you may find it useful to draw upon the notion of an economy of interpretation, and to consider how both interpretations, as different as they are, are Jewish readings of the Bible.

I strongly recommend that you read Gen. 25:19- 28:9 in order to understand the larger context for the Biblical story.

For the translation, I have primarily used the JPS TaNaKH, but you should pay attention to all points where I changed the translation (primarily in order to call attention to the verse's literal meaning.)

Also, I'm just fixing up a (really lousy) rough draft.