Kommentar zu Bereschit 34:34

בת לאה THE DAUGHTER OF LEAH — so Scripture calls her. Why not the daughter of Jacob? But just because she “went out” she is called Leah’s daughter, since she, too, was fond “of going out” (Genesis Rabbah 80:1), as it is said (30:16) “and Leah went out to meet him”. With an allusion to her they formulated the proverb: “Like mother, like daughter”.

THE DAUGHTER OF LEAH, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE UNTO JACOB. The reason [Scripture specifies the daughter of Leah] is to state that she was the sister of Simeon and Levi, who were envious for her sake and avenged her cause. And Scripture mentions further, whom she had borne unto Jacob, in order to allude to the fact that all the brothers were envious for her.

ותצא דינה, because Yaakov had pitched his tent outside the city limits of Shechem. She left that compound to enter the town.

ותצא דנה בת לאה, Dinah, Leah's daughter went out, etc. The reason that the Torah emphasises that Dinah was Leah's daughter (something that we are well aware of) is in order to facilitate understanding of the causes underlying Dinah's excursion into town. There were three reasons for this. 1) Dinah was Leah's daughter. Had she been Rachel's daughter she would never have made such an unchaperoned excursion. Her mother Leah had "gone out" to meet her husband (30,15), something that was uncharacteristic of Jewish women. Bereshit Rabbah 80,1 claims that at the time Leah adorned herself with all her jewelry. Her daughter copied her mother, giving the impression that she was a harlot. 2) A second cause for Dinah's excursion was the fact that as an only daughter she had no female playmates; she went in search of suitable company. Inasmuch as she was a daughter of Jacob she had already acquired the reputation of being a distinguished person, something that provoked Shechem as we shall explain later. 3) לראות בבנות הארץ, "she went to take a look at the daughters of the land." According to Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 38 Shechem had brought the girls of the neighbourhood to play music around the tent of Jacob. This then was a third reason for Dinah venturing outside. From all the above you may surmise that unless Shechem had already been aware of the existence of Dinah, a daughter of the famous Jacob, even before she left her house he would not have committed the rape.

ותצא דינה בת לאה, she went forth from her mother’s tent, her father also not being at home, and she came into the town to get acquainted with other girls in the town. The reason why the Torah underscored that she was the daughter of Leah, a fact we are all familiar with, was to remind us “like mother like daughter.” Her mother had been described in 30,16 by the words ותצא לאה לקראתו, “Leah went forth to meet her husband,” suggesting that she took an initiative which was not common for her. The reason the Torah added another fact that we knew already, i.e. אשר ילדה ליעקב, “whom she had born for Yaakov,” is to alert us to the fact that what happened to her was a punishment for her father (as we explained in 32,23).

ותצא דינה בת לאה, “Dinah, daughter of Leah went out, etc.” The Torah first mentioned that Dinah was a daughter of Leah, seeing that this made her a full sister to Shimon and Levi, who avenged her disgrace. The Torah continues writing that she had been born for Yaakov, in order to tell us that her other brothers and half-brothers were also jealous on her behalf.

Deenah went out. Since Yaakov lived outside of town the verse should have said that she “came in.” However, Scripture wanted to hint that she “went out” of the guidelines of proper behavior by going to watch the locals dance and make merry.

Leas Tochter: ebenso ein Kind Leas wie der größte Teil aller künftigen jüdischen Männer; und sie war dem Jakob geboren: es lebte ebenso in ihr Jakobs Geist. Und wenn sie auch misshandelt worden, und dazu vielleicht durch ihr "Hinausgehen" aus dem väterlichen Kreis in die Mitte der Fremden Veranlassung gegeben, so war sie gleichwohl durch und durch eine Jakobstochter. Sie ging hinaus sich umzusehen unter den Töchtern des Landes, die fremden Mädchen einmal kennen zu lernen, wie לראות באבי הנחל (Cant. 6, 11). Sie war ein junges Mädchen und neugierig.

A Midrashic approach: the word לראות, “to see,” means “to see and to be seen.” We read in verse six: ויצא חמור אבי שכם אל יעקב לדבר אתו, Chamor the father of Shechem went out to Yaakov to speak with him.” About this the Tanchuma 7 Vayishlach writes: He said to him: ‘I know that your grandfather Avraham was a prince as the Hittites had acclaimed him as: “you are a prince in our midst” (23,6). I, however, am a prince in the land also. Give the daughter of a prince to a prince (my son) as a wife.” Upon hearing this Yaakov replied: “The title ‘prince’ is applicable only to a שור, ox” (not to a donkey, meaning of the name Chamor.) The Torah had written that Avraham ran to the cattle, (ox) (18,7) and it is written in Proverbs 14,4: ורב תבואות בכח שור, “a bountiful harvest is due to the strength of the ox.” An ox and a donkey cannot mate together. The Torah writes expressly: “you shall not plough with an ox and a donkey together.” In the Book of Prophets (Kings II 14,9) we find the following statement: “The thistle in Lebanon sent the following message to the cedar in Lebanon. ‘give your daughter to my son in marriage.’ But a wild beast in Lebanon went by and trampled down the thistle.” The wild beasts in that parable are the sons of Yaakov who have been compared to wild beasts. In the blessings bestowed on Yaakov’s sons by their father, Yehudah is compared to a lion (49,9); Dan is compared to a snake (49,17); Binyamin is compared to a wolf (49,27); Naftali to a gazelle (49,21). When the Book of Kings spoke about the wild beasts trampling the thistle, the reference was to the sons of Yaakov Shimon and Levi killing the male inhabitants of Shechem. The prophet Hoseah also complains about a similar occurrence in Hoseah 6,9 where he wrote about what would happen to the people of Shechem in his own time because they encouraged depravity. The people would be murdered because they had been guilty of sexual misconduct.

וישכב אתה AND HE LAID WITH HER — naturally (vaginally).

AND HE LAY WITH HER, AND HE AFFLICTED HER. He lay with her in natural gratification; and he afflicted her unnaturally. This is Rashi’s language. But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said: And he afflicted her naturally because she was a maiden.” But there is no need for this for all forced sexual connection is called “affliction.” Likewise, Thou shalt not deal with her as a slave, because thou hast afflicted her.¹²⁶Deuteronomy 21:14. And so also: And my concubine they afflicted, and she is dead.¹²⁷Judges 20:5. Scripture thus tells — in Dinah’s praise — that she was forced, and she did not consent to the prince of the country.

נשיא הארץ, the prince of the land, etc. Shechem's position in the community was the reason that no one came to Dinah's assistance when she cried for help against being raped.

וירא, the reason why the Torah uses the word ויעניה when what Shechem had done was more in the nature of a seduction that a violent rape, is that this term is used in connection with a virgin having intercourse, something usually very painful for her. The term is also used on account of this reason in Deuteronomy 22,29.

וישכב אותה ויענה, “he slept with her and subsequently abused her.” According to Rashi the word וישכב describes normal intercourse, whereas the word ויענהdescribes a more perverted method of sexual intercourse. Ibn Ezra understands the word ויענה as describing the pain involved in her having intercourse as she had been a virgin. Nachmanides writes that there is no need for all these explanations, seeing that any intercourse in which the woman is being raped is described in the Bible as עינוי, i.e. that is the meaning of the word ויעניה. In this instance, intercourse by mutual consent appears to have preceded the rape. The opposite was the case in the rape of Tamar by her half-brother Amnon. (Samuel II 13). There the rape is mentioned before the sexual intercourse. Some commentators suggest that Dinah had first been seduced, whereas Amnon never bothered to seduce Tamar.

Schechem, der Sohn, scheint der נשיא zu sein, hieß doch die Stadt nach ihm. Er war der "Gutsherr"; die Einsassen waren völlig von ihm abhängig, sonst wäre ja auch die spätere Gefügigkeit derselben vollends unbegreiflich.

ויענה AND HE AFFLICTED HER — unnaturally (anally) (Genesis Rabbah 80:1).

וישכב אותה ויעניה. He slept with her by forcing her. We must understand the sequence of how the Torah reports what happened [not "he forced her and slept with her," Ed.] in light of a statement in Horiyot 10 where the encounter between Yael and Siserah is described. The Talmud says that when the wicked derive physical pleasure this is a source of pain for the righteous. The Torah therefore tells us that although Shechem slept with Dinah in a perfectly natural way, not subjecting her to painful perversions, Dinah felt tortured instead of enjoying the experience. Her distaste of Shechem is obvious; this is why Shechem had to expend so much effort by "speaking to her heart."

And mistreated her. Elsewhere this word implies deprivation from relations (see Rashi 31:50). She believed that after this no Israelite would want to marry her, but in the end her brother Shimon married her.

על לב הנערה [AND SPAKE] LOVINGLY TO THE DAMSEL (literally, he spoke to the heart of the maiden) words that would appeal to her heart: See how much money your father has lavished for a small plot of field. I will marry you and you will then possess the city and all its fields (Genesis Rabbah 80:7).

ותדבק נפשו, this was the opposite of Amnon having raped Tamar whose infatuation with her turned to disgust the moment he had satisfied his biological urge. (Samuel II 13,14-16)

ותדבק נפשו בדינה בת יעקב, his soul felt a strong attachment to her on account of her beauty as well as on account of the fact that she was the daughter of an outstanding personality, Yaakov.

ותדבק נפשו בדינה, “His soul became attached to Dinah.” At that time Dinah was eight years and one month old. Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 72,6) arrive at this conclusion by assuming that Leah’s prayer that her fetus should be a girl was offered when she was in a state of advanced pregnancy. Dinah was born before Joseph as the Torah mentions Rachel as becoming pregnant after her birth. Joseph was born 14 years after Yaakov had arrived in Charan when Yaakov started serving Lavan an additional six years for his sheep. They stayed in Sukkot for 18 months before moving on to Shechem. This makes Joseph seven and a half years old at that time. Dinah was seven months older than he (Joseph was born at the end of a seven month pregnancy) so that made Dinah eight years and one month when she was raped.

Nachdem er ursprünglich, durch Sinne gereizt, in sinnlicher Lust Jakobs Tochter gewaltsam misshandelt hatte, fesselte der sittliche und natürliche Liebreiz der Jakobstochter ihn so, dass er ein dauerndes Verhältnis wünschte.

בדינה בת יעקב, because she was the daughter of the widely respected Yaakov, someone of an international reputation. The Torah confirms this once more later in verse 19 when it describes Shechem as desiring the “daughter of Yaakov.”

וידבר על לב הנערה, seeing that he had caused her pain, he now did his best to soothe her feelings as he was intent of marrying her and needed her consent. He hoped that his being the crown prince would help sway her opinion in his favour.

אל חמור אביו לאמור, “to his father Chamor, to say:” The word לאמור means that he wanted his father to speak to Yaakov on the subject. Alternately, the word is merely used to underline the urgency with which Shechem viewed the matter. He wanted his father to be insistent. We find a similar use of the word לאמור in connection with the wife of Potiphar in Genesis 39,14, where she wanted to underline that the fact that her husband had brought a Hebrew slave into the household resulted in her almost being raped.

קח לי — der Herr Schechem spricht ziemlich sultanisch. Dass sie seine Frau werde, scheint ihm nur von seinem Wunsche abzuhängen, war er doch der Gutsherr und sie — ein fremdes Judenmädchen.

והחריש יעקב עד בואם, he refrained from starting a quarrel until his sons would have been informed of what happened so that they could be on their guard against their adversaries.

עד בואם, until they came home. Jacob sent a message to them asking them to return home.

ויעקב שמע כי טמא, Shechem, who had already been mentioned (hence his name does not need to be repeated here and a pronoun will do) and that as a result of what he did, Dinah had been defiled by an uncircumcised person who had been intimate with her.

Jakobs Schweigen offenbart die ganze Sachlage. Jakob war ein Greis, vielleicht schon siebenundneunzig Jahre. Wenn hier etwas mit Vernunft, Vorstellung auf dem Wege des Rechts zu tun gewesen wäre, so hätte er wohl nicht geschwiegen. Wenn der greise Vater zum Fürsten geht und sein geschändetes Kind zurückfordert, — wenn überall noch die Stimme des Rechts ein Gehör zu finden hoffen durfte — so wäre der Eindruck jedenfalls ein größerer gewesen, als der durch die jungen Brüder zu erzielende. Jakobs Schweigen zeigt, dass von vornherein vom Rechte nichts zu erwarten gewesen und nur ein Weg der Gewalt offen erschien, der der jungen Kräfte bedurfte.

והחריש יעקב, he did not raise a fuss in the town but waited until his sons would come home from the field. Similarly, when Chamor came to speak to him, Yaakov waited with answering him by telling him that he preferred to wait until his sons were present.

ויצא חמור, when he noticed that Yaakov’s reaction had been silence he began to worry about reprisals.

וכן לא יעשה AND THUS IT OUGHT NOT TO BE DONE — viz., to do violence to a maiden, for even the heathens have trained themselves (literally, have fenced themselves round) against unchastity as a consequence of the Flood which had come upon the world as a punishment for this sin (Genesis Rabbah 80:6).

AND THUS IT OUGHT NOT TO BE DONE. I.e., to do violence to maidens, for the nations “had fenced themselves round” against unchastity as a result of the Flood. This is Rashi’s language. But I do not know this, for the Canaanites were immersed in unchastity with women, beasts and males, as it is written, For all these abominations have the men of the land done, that were before you,¹²⁸Leviticus 18:27. and they did not begin such practices in that generation [but rather it was their traditional behavior], and even in the days of Abraham and Isaac, the patriarchs feared lest they kill them in order to take their wives. Instead, the expression, and thus it ought not to be done, refers back to the word beyisrael (in Israel): because he had wrought a vile deed in Israel… and thus it ought not to be done among them. This is why Scripture said in Israel for it was not a base deed among the Canaanites. And Onkelos translated: “It is not proper that it be done,” meaning that it is forbidden, and that is why it was a base deed in Israel.

ובני יעקב באו מן השדה, during this time Chamor had come from the town to speak to Yaakov, finding the brothers present.

ויתיצבו האנשים ויחר, the sadness and sorrow described by the Torah as the brothers’ reaction pertained to the despicable deed that had been perpetrated against a member of Yisrael’s family. This was in spite of the fact that whereas Jews do not rape unmarried virgins, gentiles are known to be guilty of this. Seeing that even in gentile circles it was taboo to rape the daughters of prominent citizens, the Torah adds the words וכן לא יעשה, that such a thing was totally unacceptable. Their anger, ויחר, therefore was turned against the perpetrators and against those who had condoned the act.

ויעצבו…כי נבלה עשה בישראל. They were distressed… because he had committed a disgraceful act against Israel, etc. The Torah uses two expressions, 1) "they were angry," and 2) "they were distressed" to indicate that Shechem had been guilty of two wrongs. It would have been shameful for the family of Jacob even if Shechem had married Dinah, seeing that they would not give their sister to an "unclean" person. However, that would have been merely distressing. The fact that Shechem had raped their sister, something that was repugnant even to the local inhabitants, i.e. וכן לא יעשה, aroused their anger. Bereshit Rabbah 80,6 states that the Gentiles had accepted sexual restrictions upon themselves after the deluge. This included rape.

ובני יעקב...בישראל, the rape of Dinah was considered as a stain of the spiritual wholeness of all the family of Yisrael.

וכן לא יעשה, “such a thing must not be allowed to happen.” Rashi writes that even the gentile nations had agreed to outlaw rape. Nachmanides takes issue with Rashi, saying that the Canaanites had certainly practiced rape and worse sexual perversions as testified by the Torah in Leviticus He therefore explains the words וכן לא יעשה, as referring to what was forbidden to Jews, seeing that the Canaanites did not consider it as something immoral.

For the gentiles constrained themselves from illicit relationships as a result of the Flood. And one who transgresses is sentenced to death. So did they accept upon themselves, as Rashi mentioned in Parshas Chayei Sarah [24:16]. Although this was beyond the requirement of the law [i.e., to be sentenced to death in a case where the woman is unmarried]. And so too, the expression גדרו עצמן implies: they constrained themselves, although Hashem did not command it. Nachalas Yaakov objected to this answer: The prohibition on unmarried women was merely a constraint and decree that the descendants of Noach [placed upon themselves. If so,] why was Shechem liable for death? The Rambam says because of robbery, and the Ramban says because of Shechem’s various evil deeds, [but no one says that he was liable to be executed for engaging in illicit relations]. And Rashi does not mention the above reasons because he is not seeking to explain why Shechem was liable for death, but to explain that “Such a thing should not be done” even with an unmarried woman. This raises the question of Re’m: [“Is not an unmarried woman permitted to the descendants of Noach?”] to which Rashi answers, “For the gentiles constrained themselves....” See there for elaboration. [An alternate approach:] You might ask: Is not an unmarried woman permitted to the descendants of Noach? The answer is: Since Shechem kidnapped her and thereby had relations with her, it is considered like illicit relations. Thus, he was liable to be executed. (Re’m)

Von einem doppelten Gefühle waren die Männer beherrscht; עצב, von dem Schmerze der gewaltsamen Verzichtleistung, dem schmerzlichen Gefühle des Verlustes: ihre reine, sittlich keusche Dina war nicht mehr, sie hatten sie verloren, auch wenn sie sie aus Schechems Händen wieder erlangten. Dies das eine, das persönliche Gefühl. Die verruchte Tat aber "brannte" sie; denn 1/נבלה (— נפל נבל ,נול bezeichnen denselben Begriff in verschiedenen Kreisen. נול und נפל: Trümmer, Schutt; נבל: Welken der Blätter, Schwachwerden der Kraft, Ersterben des tierischen Lebens, Ersterben der sittlichen Kraft, allgemein: das In-Trümmergehen eines früher kräftigen Wesens. Daher נבלה: eine Tat, die von völliger sittlicher Entartung zeugt, eine Schandtat. Auch eine Tat, die die völlige sittliche Unwürdigkeit dessen voraussetzt, an welchem sie geübt wird, so selbst Hiob 42, 8. So auch נַבֵל: etwas als unwürdig, oder als nichtswürdig behandeln. Hier dürfte es in beiden Bedeutungen zu fassen sein —) hatte er an Israel geübt, eine Tochter Jakobs zu schänden!

כי נבלה עשה בישראל, “that a vile deed had been committed against Israel;” it would have been a vile deed against anyone, all the more so against the daughter of a man of the stature of Israel.

מן השדה כשמעם,”returned from the field after hearing (about Dinah’s rape).” They returned prematurely, in a hurry.

וכן לא יעשה, it was totally unforgivable for something of this nature to be done. This is why they were so angry that it had been done to them (of all people).

Jakob, die schwache, durch nichts geschützte Familie, kann — das erfuhren sie bei diesem ersten Zusammenstoss derselben mit den andern Völkern — nur gesichert sein durch Anerkennung ihres sittlichen, geistigen Adels, durch welchen sie eben in ihrer materiellen Schwäche das siegreiche Göttliche zur Erscheinung bringt und als solche Israel ist. Hier aber war diese Menschenwürde in Israel getötet: denn so würde sonst nicht geschehen sein; gegen eine einheimische, berechtigte Bürgerstochter hätte er das nicht gewagt; nur weil es ein "Judenmädchen" eine בת יעקב, gewesen, war solches geschehen. Das fühlten sie tief. Die kräftige "Sehne des festen Auftretens" den andern Völkern zu überlassen, war ihnen eben eingeschärft worden. Sie sollten es gleich erfahren, dass es doch Fälle geben könne, in denen, wie hier, wo es sich um Rettung der Reinheit, der Sittlichkeit handelt, man wünschen könne, das Schwert aus Esaus Händen in die eigenen nehmen zu können; dies das: ויחר להם.

וכן לא יעשה, “and such a thing must not happen,” even to the daughter of common parents, much less one of a distinguished family such as ours.

חשקה means desires.

וידבר חמור אתם לאמור, Chamor spoke to them, saying, etc. Perhaps the word לאמור here means that he was willing to pay damages due to the father of a virgin who has been raped or seduced. He may also have been willing to marry her if her father and brothers were willing. This is why he continued: "give her to him as a wife."

וידבר חמור אתם, with Yaakov and his sons.

(8-12) Darum wendet sich auch Chamor nicht an den Vater, sondern an die jüngern Söhne. Eine eigentümliche Rolle spielen hier die beiden Väter. Für Dina hätte Jakob auftreten müssen. Er schweigt, denn er weiß, man würde ihn, den "Alten", auslachen. Allein auch Chamor fühlt, dass er mit seinem Antrage bei Jakob, einem Vater, nichts ausrichten werde; dem lasse sich die Ehre seiner Tochter durch nichts ersetzen; fürchtet auch wohl von Jakob durchschaut zu werden, dass die vorgespiegelten materiellen Vorteile einer Verbindung mit dem einflussreichen Gutsherrn bloße Floskeln wären. Darum wendet er sich an die jüngeren Söhne, die er durch solche Aussicht gewinnen zu können meint. Schechem aber wendet sich an Vater und Brüder: leget mir so viel ihr wollt מהר ומתן auf, Geldverpflichtung des Mannes gegen die Frau und Geschenke an die Familie. — Soweit lautet der Antrag ganz schön. Der gnädige Herr hätte nur so gnädig sein müssen, die Tochter zuerst wieder der Familie zurückzugeben und dann frei um sie zu werben. So aber, die Tochter und Schwester im Raubverließ, mit Vater und Bruder unterhandeln, heißt nur: eine formelle Zustimmung zu einer bereits vollzogenen Gewalt erschwindeln wollen.

בבתכם, not “your sister,” although she was the sister to 11 brothers, but “your daughter,” seeing her status as the daughter of Yaakov was the foremost consideration. Besides, each of Dinah’s brothers was concerned for her well being as if she had been his daughter, not just his sister.

On the other hand, maybe Chamor wanted to disclaim any responsibility to pay damages in accordance with Ketuvot 41 that when the rapist comes forward admitting "I have raped, or I have seduced the daughter of so and so", he is not required to pay the damages mentioned in the Torah. We have a rule that self-confessed sinners are free from financial penalties. The words לאמור שכם בני could be understood as "seeing that my son has freely admitted his guilt he is not subject to the penalty imposed on rapists." We should not understand this verse as testimony by the father that his son had committed a felony because under Noachide laws a father may testify against his son (Maimonides Hilchot Melachim chapter 9).

בנותיכם תתנו ואת בנותינו תקחו לכם, the sons of Yaakov, on their part made intermarriage something that was in their honour, “i.e. to give and to take.” When Shechem and Chamor presented this proposal to their townspeople they reversed it to make it appear as if they were the ones bestowing honour, when they said: “we will take and we will give.” (verse 31) They did this in order to seduce their townsfolk to submit to circumcision.

והתחתנו אותנו, the word אותנו here means the same as if the Torah had written either עמנו or בנו, “with us.”

וסחרוה, the letter ח in this word is the reason why the Torah did not need to write the word בה, i.e. תסחרו בה, “you may trade feely in it.” The vowel kametz under the letter ח instead of the semi vowel sheva we would have expected is what saved the Torah the word, or rather the extra letter ב by adding the word בה to the word וסחרו.

וסחרוה,. Event though normally, newcomers were not allowed to engage in the kind of commerce or artisanship which would compete with that practiced by the local inhabitants. We have this principle in Baba Batra 21, where it is spelled out as the right of the local inhabitant who feels economically threatened by competition from a new immigrant. He is accorded the right to lodge a complaint against the newcomer practicing his trade in his town. [an ancient form of the policy of “closed shop.” Ed.]

ואתנו... וסחרוה, and trade within it.

והאחזו בה, and buy yourselves freehold property there until you will be equal to the prominent people of the town.

מהר DOWRY, refers to the Ketuba (the sum settled by the husband on his wife as set forth in the Ketuba — the marriage contract (Genesis Rabbah 80:7).

‘MOHAR’ (DOWRY) ‘UMATAN’ (AND GIFT). Mohar [refers to the bridal gifts given at the time of] the marriage-contract which is given to maidens, as it is written, according to the dowry of virgins,¹²⁹Exodus 22:16. these being the presents which the young men send to the maidens whom they marry. Umatan are garments or silver and gold which the groom sends to her father and her brothers. In Bereshith Rabbah the Rabbis said:¹³⁰80:7. “Mohar is parnon (the wife’s settlement); matan is parapurnon (the additional settlement above the usual dowry),” these being in the language of the Jerusalem Talmud¹³¹Yerushalmi Kethuboth 5:8. “the regular dowry” and “the usufruct estate,” that is to say, that which he gives her of his properties to be accounted as if she had brought them from her father’s house, the produce of which belongs to him.
The reason for this conciliatory gesture is in order that they willingly give her to him as a wife, as the maiden did not consent to him and she steadily protested and cried. This is the sense of the verse, And he spoke comfortingly unto the damsel.¹³²Verse 3 here. Therefore Shechem said, Take me this young maiden to wife,¹³³Verse 4 here. as she was already in his house and in his power, and he feared not her brothers because he was the prince of the country and how could they take her by force out of his house? Now Shechem’s great desire was because the maiden was very beautiful. However, Scripture did not narrate her beauty as it did in the case of Sarah, Rebekah and Rachel because it did not want to mention that which was to her a stumbling-block of iniquity,¹³⁴Ezekiel 18:30. while Scripture speaks only in praise of the righteous women but not of this one. Similarly, Scripture does not mention what happened to her after her rescue from Shechem’s house. In line with the simple meaning of Scripture she stayed with her brothers, “shut up, living as widows,”¹³⁵See II Samuel 20:3. as she was considered defiled in their sight, as it is written, Because he had defiled Dinah their sister.¹³⁶Verse 13 here. Our Rabbis have differed on this matter.¹³⁷Bereshith Rabbah 80:10. The most feasible opinion is that of he who says¹³⁷Bereshith Rabbah 80:10. that Simeon took her, and upon her death, he buried her in the land of Canaan, this being in agreement with what we have said, i.e., that she was with him in his house as a widow, and she went down with them to Egypt, and there she died but was buried in the Land of Israel. Her grave is known by tradition to this day as being in the city of Arbel with the grave of Nitai the Arbelite.¹³⁸Aboth 1:7. He was a leader of the Sanhedrin in the early days of the Hasmoneans. As for Dinah’s grave being near that of Nitai the Arbelite, see my Hebrew commentary, p. 190, for data from other medieval itinerants. Ramban’s testimony though is that of an eye-witness when he travelled through the land. It is possible that Simeon brought up her remains from Egypt out of pity for her while the Israelites were still in Egypt or that the children of Israel brought them up together with the bones of her brothers — all the tribes — just as our Rabbis have mentioned.¹³⁹Mechilta, Exodus 13:19.

הרבה עלי מאד, as a penance he would be prepared to pay over and above the customary amount of a dowry.

הרבו עלי מאד מוהר ומתן, “demand of me much dowry, etc.” All these conciliatory offers were designed to have Yaakov’s family agree to Dinah being married to Shechem of her own free will, seeing she was already captive in the house of Shechem, and Shechem and Chamor had no reason to fear that she would be kidnapped. They only wanted a willing bride instead of an unwilling one. This is also the reason why the Torah reports that Shechem “talked to the heart of the girl.” (verse 3)

במרמה WITH GUILE — cleverly

AND THE SONS OF JACOB ANSWERED SHECHEM AND HAMOR HIS FATHER WITH SUBTLETY. Now Hamor and Shechem spoke to her father and her brothers,¹⁴⁰Verse 11 here. but the patriarch did not answer them at all as his sons spoke in his place on this matter out of respect for him for since the affair was a source of shame to them, they did not want him to speak about it at all.
There is a question which may be raised here. It would appear that they answered with the concurrence of her father and his advice for they were in his presence, and it was he who understood the answer which they spoke with subtlety, and, if so, why was he angry afterwards?¹⁴¹Further, Verse 30. See also Ramban further, 49:5. Moreover, it is inconceivable that Jacob would have consented to give his daughter in marriage to a Canaanite who had defiled her. Now surely all the brothers gave that answer with subtlety, while Simeon and Levi alone executed the deed, and the father cursed only their wrath.¹⁴²Genesis 49:7. [But if all the brothers shared responsibility for the answer and the plan, why did Jacob single out only Simeon and Levi for chastisement?] The answer is that the craftiness lay in their saying that every male of theirs be circumcised,¹⁴³Verse 15 here. as they thought that the people of the city will not consent to it. Even if perchance they will listen to their prince and they will all become circumcised, they will come on the third day, when they were in pain,¹⁴⁴Verse 25 here. and will take their daughter¹⁴⁵“Daughter.” in Tur: “sister.” from the house of Shechem. Now this was the advice of all the brothers and with the permission of their father, but Simeon and Levi wanted to take revenge of them and so they killed all the men of the city.
It is possible that Jacob’s anger in cursing their wrath¹⁴²Genesis 49:7. was because they killed the men of the city who had committed no sin against him; they should have killed Shechem alone. It is this which Scripture says, And the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and Hamor his father with subtlety, and spoke, because he had defiled Dinah their sister, for they all agreed to speak to him craftily because of the base deed which he had done to them.
Now many people ask: “But how did the righteous sons of Jacob commit this deed, spilling innocent blood?” The Rabbi (Moshe ben Maimon) answered in his Book of Judges,¹⁴⁶Hilchoth Melachim, IX, 14, with slight textual changes. The Book of Judges is the last of the fourteen books which comprise Maimonides’ great life work: The Mishneh Torah, or Yad Hachazakah. saying that “sons of Noah”¹⁴⁷Or “a Noachide,” a term denoting the human race. See Seder Bereshith, Note 222. are commanded concerning Laws, and thus they are required to appoint judges in each and every district to give judgment concerning their six commandments¹⁴⁸The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc. which are obligatory upon all mankind. “And a Noachide who transgresses one of them is subject to the death-penalty by the sword. If he sees a person transgressing one of these seven¹⁴⁸The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc. laws and does not bring him to trial for a capital crime, he who saw him is subject to the same death-penalty. It was on account of this that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty because Shechem committed an act of robbery and they saw and knew of it, but they did not bring him to trial.”
But these words do not appear to me to be correct for if so, our father Jacob should have been the first to obtain the merit of causing their death, and if he was afraid of them, why was he angry at his sons and why did he curse their wrath a long time after that and punish them by dividing them and scattering them in Israel?¹⁴²Genesis 49:7. Were they not meritorious, fulfilling a commandment and trusting in G-d Who saved them?
In my opinion, the meaning of “Laws” which the Rabbis have counted among their seven Noachidic commandments¹⁴⁸The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc. is not just that they are to appoint judges in each and every district, but He commanded them concerning the laws of theft, overcharge, wronging, and a hired man’s wages; the laws of guardians of property, forceful violation of a woman, seduction, principles of damage and wounding a fellowman; laws of creditors and debtors, and laws of buying and selling, and their like, similar in scope to the laws with which Israel was charged, and involving the death-penalty for stealing, wronging or violating or seducing the daughter of his fellowman, or kindling his stack, or wounding him, and their like. And it is also included in this commandment that they appoint judges for each and every city, just as Israel was commanded to do,¹⁴⁹Deuteronomy 16:18. but if they failed to do so they are free of the death-penalty since this is a positive precept of theirs [and failing to fulfill a positive precept does not incur the death-penalty]. The Rabbis have only said:¹⁵⁰Sanhedrin 57a. “For violation of their admonishments there is the death-penalty,” and only a prohibition against doing something is called an “admonishment.” And such is the purport of the Gemara in Tractate Sanhedrin.¹⁵¹58b. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 192. And in the Jerusalem Talmud¹⁵²Not found in our editions. See my Hebrew commentary, ibid. they have said: “With respect to Noachide laws, a judge who perverts justice is to be slain. If he took a bribe he is to be slain. With respect to Jewish laws, [if after having heard both parties] you know perfectly well what the proper legal decision should be, you are not permitted to withdraw from the case without rendering a decision, and if you know that it is not perfectly clear to you, you may withdraw from the case. But with respect to their laws, even though you know the law perfectly well you may withdraw from it.” From this it would appear that a non-Jewish judge may say to the litigants, “I am not beholden to you,” for it is only in Israel that there is an additional admonishment — “Lo thaguru’ (ye shall not be afraid) of the face of any man,¹⁵³Deuteronomy 1:17. meaning, “You shall not gather in, [i.e., restrain], your words before any man”¹⁵⁴Sanhedrin 6b. This explanation is based upon the common root of the words thaguru and ogeir (gathering) as in the expression, gathering in summer, (Proverbs 10:5). — and surely he is not to be slain for failing to make himself chief, overseer, or ruler¹⁵⁵Proverbs 6:7. in order to judge superiors. [Ramban thus disagrees with Rambam, who writes that the people of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty by not having brought Shechem to justice.] Moreover, why does the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] have to seek to establish their guilt? Were not the people of Shechem and all seven nations¹⁵⁶Deuteronomy 7:1. idol worshippers, perpetrators of unchaste acts, and practitioners of all things that are abominable to G-d? In many places Scripture loudly proclaims concerning them: Upon the high mountains, and upon their hills, and under every leafy tree, etc.;¹⁵⁷Ibid., 12:2. Thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations, etc.?¹⁵⁸Ibid., 18:9. For all these abominations have the men of the land done, etc.¹⁵⁹Leviticus 18:27. However, it was not the responsibility of Jacob and his sons to bring them to justice.
But the matter of Shechem was that the people of Shechem were wicked [by virtue of their violation of the seven Noachide laws]¹⁴⁸The six commandments prohibit idolatry, blasphemy, bloodshed, incest, robbery, and eating a limb or flesh which was cut from a living creature. The seventh one is the commandment to establish courts to enforce these laws. Together, these laws are generally referred to as “the seven Noachide laws.” Ramban will later set forth his thesis that the seventh commandment also requires that they establish laws regulating all civil matters such as damages, business regulations, labor laws, etc. and had thereby forfeited their lives. Therefore Jacob’s sons wanted to take vengeance of them with a vengeful sword, and so they killed the king and all the men of his city who were his subjects, obeying his commands. The covenant represented by the circumcision of the inhabitants of Shechem had no validity in the eyes of Jacob’s sons for it was done to curry favor with their master [and did not represent a genuine conversion]. But Jacob told them here that they had placed him in danger, as it is said, You have troubled me, to make me odious,¹⁶⁰Verse 30 here. and there,¹⁴²Genesis 49:7. [i.e., at the time he blessed the other children], he cursed the wrath of Simeon and Levi for they had done violence to the men of the city whom they had told in his presence, And we will dwell with you, and we will become one people.¹⁶¹Verse 16 here. They would have chosen to believe in G-d and trust their word, and perhaps they might have indeed returned to G-d and thus Simeon and Levi killed them without cause for the people had done them no evil at all. It is this which Jacob said, Weapons of violence are their kinship.¹⁶²Genesis, 49:5. And if we are to believe in the book, ‘The Wars of the Sons of Jacob,’¹⁶³This is the Midrash Vayisu. See Eisenstein, Otzar Midrashim, p. 157, and L. Ginzberg’s, The Legends of the Jews, Vol. I, pp. 404-411. their father’s fear was due to the fact that the neighbors of Shechem gathered together and waged three major wars against them, and were it not for their father who also donned his weapons and warred against them, they would have been in danger, as is related in that book. Our Rabbis have mentioned something of this conflict in their commentary on the verse, Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow.¹⁶⁴Further, 48:22. They said,¹⁶⁵As quoted here, the comment appears in Rashi, ibid. See also Bereshith Rabbah 80:9. “All the surrounding nations gathered together to join in battle against them, and Jacob donned his weapons to war against them,” just as Rashi writes there.¹⁶⁴Further, 48:22. Scripture, however, is brief about this because it was a hidden miracle,¹⁶⁶See Ramban above, 17:1. for the sons of Jacob were valiant men, and it appeared as if their own arm saved them.¹⁶⁷Psalms 44:4. Scripture is similarly brief about the matter of Abraham in Ur of the Chaldees,¹⁶⁸See Ramban above, 11:58. and it did not at all mention Esau’s wars with the Horites. Instead, Scripture mentions here that there was the terror of G-d upon the cities that were round them,¹⁶⁹Further, 35:5. and they did not all assemble to pursue after the sons of Jacob¹⁶⁹Further, 35:5. for they would have fallen upon them as the sand which is on the sea-shore in multitude.¹⁷⁰I Samuel 13:5. And this is the meaning of the terror of G-d,¹⁶⁹Further, 35:5. for the terror and dread¹⁷¹See Exodus 15:16. of the military prowess they had seen fell upon them. Therefore Scripture says, And Jacob came to Luz… he and all the people that were with him,¹⁷²Further, 35:6. in order to inform us that not one man among them or their servants was lost in warfare.¹⁷³See Numbers 31:49.

במרמה, they demanded that the people circumcise themselves expecting them to refuse. Alternatively, they thought that Shechem and Chamor, although prepared themselves to circumcise themselves, would not be able to convince the townsfolk to follow their example.

ויענו בני יעקב, The sons of Jacob replied, etc. We have to understand exactly what wisdom Onkelos attributes to Jacob's sons when he translates the word במרמה as "with wisdom" instead of as "with guile." At first glance it appears that the sons of Jacob simply meant to deceive Chamor and Shechem. Besides, what is meant by וידברו אשר טמא את דינה?

ויענו בני יעקב, Yaakov himself did not utter a single word of falsehood or deceit, even though seeing that he had been the injured party he could have excused such conduct. He left the matter in his sons’ care and if they used subterfuge he did not interfere. The brothers did not consider their conduct as reprehensible for people who had defiled their sister and were still holding her captive.

ויענו בני יעקב את שכם ואת חמור אביו במרמה, “the sons of Yaakov answered Shechem and his father Chamor speaking with cleverness, etc.” Nachmanides writes that although both Chamor and Shechem had addressed both Yaakov and his sons, only the sons replied, Yaakov remaining totally silent. Seeing that they felt that their father had been greatly insulted by what happened, they did not want him to get involved in the discussion at all. Nachmanides’ explanation presents us with a problem, as it appears from the plain text as if the sons of Yaakov had spoken at the instigation of their father and with his complete approval. In fact, Yaakov appears to have been fully aware of the intent of the brothers for the men of Shechem to become so weakened by their circumcision that they could be killed without putting up a fight. Seeing that the brothers said what they said in Yaakov’s presence, we must assume that their answer was inspired by their father. What is difficult to understand is Yaakov’s anger at Shimon and Levi’s conduct afterwards! Furthermore, it is quite inconceivable that Yaakov would give his consent to Dinah being married to a Canaanite, especially to a Canaanite who had already defiled her before marriage! There can be no question that the entire family was united in their answer and the reason for their answer. If so, why was Yaakov angry only at Shimon and Levi? The only thing that was objectionable was that Shimon and Levi, in their desire to avenge their sister’s rape, vented their rage on all the citizens of the town, instead of restricting themselves to punishing only Shechem. We must understand that when the verse tells us “they answered במרמה, “with cleverness,” this did not refer to their intention at that time to kill the whole town but they contemplated one of two scenarios unfolding. 1) If the people of Shechem would agree to circumcise themselves, this would afford the brothers an opportunity to rescue their sister without encountering much opposition due to the weakened state of the males of that city. 2) If the people would refuse to circumcise themselves. Shechem would then be obliged to release Dinah. Failing his doing so, they would kill Shechem only. Another difficulty in the whole episode is what made the righteous sons of Yaakov spill innocent blood? Maimonides, addressing this problem, argues that mankind had been obliged to institute a proper judiciary and to try and convict people who had broken their laws by the death penalty. Whenever a person who had committed a violation of the seven Noachide laws went untried and unpunished, every member of society had the right or duty to execute such a person by the sword. Seeing that all the people of Shechem had condoned Dinah’s rape by not trying Shechem, Shimon and Levi did not do anything wrong in killing them.. Although most of the 7 Noachide commandments are negative commandments, i.e. “don’ts,” the commandment to have a judiciary is a positive commandment, and as such the principle of the existence of the commandment is equivalent to the sinner having been forewarned and exposed himself to execution by violating the commandment does not apply here. Failure to establish courts, while a violation of the commandment, does not result in the violator becoming guilty of the death penalty. After all, the inhabitants of the land of Canaan were guilty of many severe sins such as idolatry, incest etc., but this did not authorize Yaakov’s sons to play G’d’s executioner. On the other hand, raping one of their family members was a crime committed directly against Yaakov’s family, and this is why they were within their rights, basically, to avenge this wrong when there was no court that would do so. The people of Shechem were blindly obedient to their leader, not caring that by doing so they breached the covenant G’d had made with mankind after the deluge, a covenant based on the agreement to observe the 7 Noachide commandments that apply uniformly to all of mankind. Yaakov’s anger was based solely on his sons having exposed him to the danger of being killed by hugely superior forces of the surrounding region. He also was angry at the brothers having violated their own undertaking to live peacefully with these people on condition that they circumcise their males, a condition which they had fulfilled. These people had not harmed them individually or collectively at all, and their dishonouring their promise would ruin Yaakov’s reputation in the entire region.

... This is difficult: If [only] Shechem sinned, what was the sin of the [rest of the] city [for which they ‎deserved] to die? Rambam (Hilchot Melachim 9:14) answered that Noachides are commanded to ‎set up courts, and [for]any sin which they violate, they are killed. Here, they witnessed the evil act ‎‎[of Shechem kidnapping Dinah] and did not judge him. For this they deserved to die, for they failed ‎to judge him. But truthfully, these words are surprising, for how could they have judged the son of ‎their prince, since they feared him? Even though they are commanded to judge, that is when they ‎can judge, but “G-d exempts one who is under duress” (Bava Kama 28b), and how could they have ‎judged him?
It appears that there is no difficulty [explaining why all the males in Shechem deserved to die], ‎because [a war between] two nations is different. The Jewish people and the Canaanites are ‎considered two nations, as it is written “and we will be one nation” (Bereishit 34:16), [implying ‎that] initially they were not considered one nation. Therefore they were permitted to fight, like ‎any nation who fights another nation, which the Torah permits. Even though the Torah says, ‎‎“When you draw near to a city to fight it, you shall offer peace” (Devarim 20:10), that applies when ‎they have done nothing to Israel. When they have acted against Israel, as they did here when they ‎breached them to commit an evil act, then even though only one of them sinned, since he is part ‎of the nation and since they instigated, it is permitted to avenge this from all of them.‎ This is so with all wars which they encountered, like “Attack the Midianites” (Bamidbar 25:17). Even ‎though there were many who had done nothing, this is not a [valid] distinction. Since they were ‎members of the nation who acted wickedly against [the Jewish people], it was permitted to ‎engage [all the Midianites] in war, and such is the case with all wars.‎

Jakobs Söhne sprachen vor dem alten Vater, weil sie etwas sprechen wollten, was nicht ganz mit der jüdischen Ehre und Geradheit übereinstimmte. War ein Makel daran, so sollte der nur auf sie fallen können. Für sich waren sie ganz beruhigt, denn es war ja der, der טמא את דינה, und um sie aus seinen Klauen zu retten, hielten sie sich zu allem berechtigt. Seine Vorspiegelungen zogen sie gar nicht in Erwägung.

במרמה, “with slyness;” the sons of Yaakov expected that only Sh’chem and his father Chamor would agree to this condition to circumcise themselves on account of their love for the girl (but they never expected that all the males of the city would do so). They reasoned that seeing that not all the males in that city would perform circumcision on themselves, they would be free to take their revenge on them. This is the mirmah that the Torah speaks about here. At any rate they were fully justified to attack the population of that city as we will explain shortly.

אשר טמא BECAUSE HE HAD DEFILED — Scripture (the Sacred Historian) says that there was no deception (מרמה) in this because he had defiled Dinah their sister (Genesis Rabbah 80:8).

וידברו, אשר טמא; they said that the kind of ipso facto voluntary circumcision which Shechem and his father were willing to perform on themselves was not relevant after Shechem had already defiled their sister. They considered this as in the category of אתנן זונה, offering the price paid to a whore as a sacrifice on G’d’s altar.

Actually, the cleverness of the sons when they answered Chamor במרמה consisted in that they answered him in such a way that their proposal seemed extremely plausible. Shechem and Chamor did not feel that they needed to be on guard against reprisals. The brothers lulled Chamor into a false sense of security by the very fact that they threatened to take some action if their proposal was not accepted; they thus made him believe that if the town accepted the proposal of mass circumcision the whole chapter of the rape would be closed. The word וידברו, a term describing harsh words, indicates that the brothers first harped on the fact that their sister had been sullied. By doing so they ensured that Chamor and Shechem could not accuse them of giving conflicting signals, i.e. suggesting intermarriage while at the same time condemning the people of Shechem for their immoral behaviour.

They then continued speaking in a friendly tone, saying לא נוכל, "we cannot intermarry, etc.," suggesting that they would like to but could not under existing conditions, i.e. while the males of Shechem remained uncircumcised. When they described the condition of the local inhabitants as אשר יש לו ערלה, they meant that whereas the local people were not required to circumcise themselves, it was not enough for Chamor or Chamor and Shechem alone to perform circumcision on themselves. In fact, even if they were to circumcise themselves as a voluntary act they would still be regarded by Jews as ערלים, seeing they did not fulfil a commandment by removing their foreskin.

They would consider intermarriage with the people of Shechem and the merging of the two clans only on condition that the entire male population of Shechem would be circumcised. They emphasised this in order to forestall an offer by Chamor and Shechem to circumcise only themselves and their future male offspring. The brother's entire purpose was to facilitate killing the people of Shechem with a minimum of resistance on the part of the latter. They worded their conditions so that they would not be suspected of merely tricking the people of Shechem.

חרפה הוא THAT WERE A DISGRACE — Amongst us it is somewhat of a blot on our pedigree, for if one wishes to revile another, he says to him: “You are an uncircumcised person”, or “the son of an uncircumcised person”. The word חרפה always means “reviling”.

כי חרפה היא לנו, it would appear that none of the circumcised men among us were fit to marry our sister.

ויאמרו ...כי חרפה היא לנו, to be intermarried with the uncircumcised, seeing that our males are all circumcised.

לתת את אחותינו, “to give our sister.” Afterwards they spoke of “we will take our daughter.” In the first instance they spoke on their own behalf, whereas later on they spoke on behalf of their father. It is possible that the word “our daughter” is used here in a sense similar to “our sister,” as we find in Kings II 8,18 where Yoram the son of King Yehoshaphat of Yehudah is reported to have taken a daughter of king Achav of Israel as a wife although Achav did not have a daughter. The word “daughter” there clearly refers to “sister.” This is also the way Targum Yonathan translates it.

כי חרפה היא לנו, “for it is something shameful in our eyes.” Their argument was as follows: “if you do not circumcise yourselves as part of the bargain then one fine day you will declare all of us as baaley mum, cripples or deformed because we lack a foreskin.”

נאות לכם means WE WILL CONSENT UNTO YOU: it has the same meaning as (2 Kings 12:9) ויאותו “and they consented”.

אך...נאות, we would be willing.

Will we be reconciled with you. Rashi is saying that נאות does not mean נויה (beauty) or נאוה (habitation). For if so, in v. 22 it should not have written יאותו לנו but ינאו לנו, which is the correct conjugation for נוי.

נֵאות, wie נאות ein Hebel heißt, mit dem etwas in Bewegung gesetzt wird, also אות: das geistige Mittel, womit irgend eine Erkenntnis bewirkt wird. Niphal, daher: sich als Mittel hingeben, als Brücke, damit ein anderer ,האות etwas erreiche.

להמול means TO BE CIRCUMCISED — It is not an active infinitive (Kal), but a passive infinitive (Niphal).

To be circumcised. I.e., it is in the passive form, not the active. This is because the root is מול, and if [it was active] it would be written לָמול. And if the root is נמל, then it would be written לִנְמוֹל.

Sie sahen nur die Alternative: Entweder, dies geschieht nicht, und das war das Wahrscheinlichste, denn sie konnten keinen natürlicheren Einwand finden, die Verschwägerung mit dem Herrn des Landes abzulehnen; oder es geschieht: dann konnten sie in dem geschwächten Zustande der Umgebung ihre Schwester befreien. In allem dem lag noch nichts sehr Tadelnswertes; denn eine Schwester aus so schmählichen Zuständen zu retten, sind alle rechtlichen Mittel erlaubt.

וְנָתַנּוּ THEN WILL WE GIVE — The second נ has a Dagesh because it serves the purpose of two -נs - וְנָתַנְנוּ (cf. Rashi on Genesis חנני 33:11).

ונתנו, with a dagesh in the second letter נ to double it. The meaning is the same as the regular future ניתן “we will give.” A similar construction of this verb is found in Lamentations 5,6 מצרים נתנו יד, meaning the same as נתננו, “we hold out a hand to Egypt.”

ונתנו את בנותינו לכם, "and then we will give our daughters to you, etc." Here the brothers displayed great astuteness. As a rule, swindlers prefer to be very vague when describing the conditions under which they enter into commitments; not only that, but they usually leave the other party many loopholes in order to lure that party into entering into the desired contract. The sons of Jacob reversed this procedure in order to remove any doubt from the people of Shechem that they were being tricked. They offered their daughters in marriage without reservations and explained that as a result they themselves would marry the local girls. All of this was designed to convince Chamor and his people that their intentions were honourable.

ואת בנותיכם נקח לנו AND WE WILL TAKE YOUR DAUGHTERS TO US — You will find that in the proposition which Hamor made to Jacob (Genesis 34:9) and in the reply of Jacob’s sons to Hamor (in this verse) they (both parties to the proposition) regarded the sons of Jacob as being the more important — that they should take of the daughters of Shechem whomsoever they would select for themselves and that they should give their daughters to them (the men of Shechem) as they (Jacob’s sons) would think fit, as it is written, “and we will give our daughters’’ — as we think fit — “and we will take your daughters unto us” — whomsoever we please. When, however, Hamor and his son spoke to the inhabitants of their city (v. 21) they reversed the matter, saying, “their daughters we will take to us for wives, and our daughters we will give unto them", instead of saying “they will give their daughters to us, and they will take our daughters to themselves", in order to induce them to consent to be circumcised.

ולקחנו את בתנו, even though she is at this point in time locked up in your house we will liberate her from you.

ואם לא תשמעו, "If you are not agreeable, etc." This was also a clever move. They did not threaten retaliatory action for the rape of their sister but only told Chamor that in that case they would take their sister and leave the region. They made it clear that they did feel insulted and that therefore they could not consider remaining in a region where rape went unopposed. On the other hand, if the people were to circumcise themselves en masse this would show a change of heart on their part towards the laws of sexual purity. It was the brothers' astuteness that caused Chamor to tell his people that the family of Jacob were sincere (verse 21).

ואם לא...בתנו, as we explained on 34,9

ולקחנו את בתינו, “we will take our houses, etc.” They did not threaten to liberate their sister by force. The reason they did not was because they were speaking on behalf of their father.

We will take our daughter and go. Since Shechem was unaware that relations with the uncircumcised was a disgrace to them, there was nothing to avenge. With this answer they accomplished three things: 1) They concealed their desire for revenge. 2) They convinced him that circumcision was the only way to acquire Deenah. 3) They gave the impression that if everyone were circumcised they would stay.

והלכנו, with all our wealth which you would otherwise benefit from.

The brothers also intended to speed up a decision by Chamor and Shechem personally when they held out the prospect of "we will take our daughter and leave." Perhaps Chamor thought that as soon as Dinah would be removed from the region the brothers would prepare to take their revenge.

והוא נכבד, in spite of his high reputation he did not hesitate to agree to circumcise himself, because he had taken such a liking to the daughter of Yaakov.

ולא...לעשות הדבר, to gather together the men of his town and to speak with them.

(19-24) Es erscheint als etwas ganz Ungeheuerliches, dass eine ganze freie Bürgerschaft sich bereit finden lasse, sich zu beschneiden, damit er die Dina behalte! Ein ungewöhnlicher, nur hier, und zwar wiederholt vorkommender Ausdruck zur Bezeichnung dieser Ortsbewohner dürfte in dieser Beziehung vielleicht einige Aufklärung bieten. Wiederholt werden sie Raw Hirsch on Genesis 34: 24 יוצאי שער עירו genannt. Eine städtische Bevölkerung heißt sonst: באי שער העיר. So bei Abraham (Kap.23, 11. 48), wo eine städtische Volksversammlung, ein Gemeinderat, über den Fall zu entscheiden hatte. Der Ausdruck יוצאי שער עירו scheint fast darauf hinzuweisen, dass die Bewohner der Stadt Schechem größtenteils Bauern, Landleute waren, die ihr Beruf täglich hinaus aufs Land führte. Demgemäß waren bielleicht Chamor und Schechem Gutsherren der ganzen Gegend, die Leute von ihnen abhängig und ihnen hörig, gewöhnt, sich dem Herbsten zu unterwerfen.

והוא נכבד מכל בית אביו, “and he was the most revered person of his father’s family.” He knew that they would not refuse his request.

והוא נכבד, seeing that he was highly esteemed. he was able to persuade the citizens of his town to circumcise themselves for his and their sake.

ויבא...אל שער עירם, this is where they would hold an assembly of the elders of the town together with the other influential citizens as was the custom pertaining to all matters of common concern. We find examples of such conduct both in Deuteronomy 25,7 and in Ruth 4,1. where the word השערה means that this is the place where assembles were held.

שלמים means peaceable and whole hearted.

THESE MEN ARE PEACEABLE WITH US. The men of the city thought that they hated them as they saw them dejected, and it angered them very much. Perhaps they guarded themselves against them and installed in their city bars and doors, for Jacob’s sons were mighty men and valiant men for the war.¹⁷⁴Jeremiah 48:14. But now Hamor and his son Shechem told them, “Do not fear and do not keep distant from them for they are whole-hearted with us.”

שלמים הם אתנו, they are of a totally peaceful disposition towards us. They do not intend to revenge themselves for the indignity their family has suffered.

שלמים הם אתנו, "they are at peace with us." They do not harbour hatred against us that we should have to be afraid they are out to trick us.

האנשים האלה שלמים הם אתנו, they are quite peaceful towards us even though I raped their sister; the reason is that they are anxious to live side by side with us and to become one people. They are asking for a very minor concession on our part, that all out males must circumcise themselves as they are all circumcised themselves. He argued that acceptance of such a demand would not deprive his townsfolk of anything of value. In return for complying with their demand his countrymen would become co-owners of the extensive property of Yaakov’s family רחבת ידים לפניהם. Even though they do possess extensive herds and flocks, the land is more than adequate to support these animals without our having to limit the grazing land allocated to our livestock.

שלמים הם אתנו, “they are of a peaceful disposition toward us.” Chamor and Shechem made this statement as the people of their town believed that Dinah’s family now hated everyone in their town, having had visual evidence of the faces of Yaakov’s sons after the rape of their sister.

רחבת ידים, “enough large places:” we find the word: יד used in this sense also in Deuteronomy. 23,13 ויד תהיה לך, “you shall have a small place there” and explained in this sense by Ibn Ezra.

והארץ הנה רחבת ידים FOR THE LAND, BEHOLD, IT IS LARGE ENOUGH (literally, wide-handed) — the metaphor is that of a man whose hand is large and generous, and the idea is: “You will lose nothing if they dwell and trade in the land, for much merchandise is brought here and there are no buyers for it”.

רחבת ידים, “the land is big enough,” according to Ibn Ezra this is a reference to the many areas in the region which offered good pasture.

When the Torah quotes Chamor and Shechem as saying: "we will take their daughters for ourselves," this was a clever ploy by Chamor and Shechem who wanted to make their own people believe them that Jacob's sons harboured no enmity because they considered the local people superior, so much so that they looked forward to intermarry with them.

בהמול means by every male of us being circumcised (infinitive Niphal).

אך נאותה להם LET US CONSENT UNTO THEM in this matter, and because of this they will dwell with us.

‘MIKNEIHEM’ AND THEIR SUBSTANCE AND ALL THEIR BEASTS. The reason for referring to cattle by the word mikneihem is that beasts of the herds which are in the field are called mikneh — [from the root kanah, which means “acquire”] — because whether they are clean or unclean, they are the mainstay of a man’s substance, just as it is written, Behold, the hand of the Eternal is ‘b’miknecha’ (upon thy cattle) which are in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the herds, and upon the flocks.¹⁷⁵Exodus 9:3. And those which do not constitute a herd, as, for example, single beasts in the house, are not called mikneh, and they are included in the term, and all their beasts. It may be that [mikneh and “all their beasts” both refer to the same cattle], and the redundancy is for the purpose of emphasis, meaning, and all their beasts which were very numerous.

מקניהם, this is one of 3 instances where the letter י after the נ is missing in this word. As spelled, the word means “they are cattle.” [Ibn Ezra sees in this a hint that the people of Shechem saw in Yaakov’s family and belongings prospective property of theirs, placing man and beast on the same footing. Ed.]

מקנהם וקניים וכל בהמתם, “their cattle, their chattels and all their livestock.” According to Nachmanides the word מקנה refers to animals which form part of the herd, and which represented the backbone of the family’s wealth. Animals that were not part of carefully supervised herds, are called בהמות, i.e. stray animals tagging along. It is also possible that the reason why Chamor spoke both about מקנה and about בהמות was to emphasise that the livestock of Yaakov’s family was extremely numerous.

To this matter and, as a result, they will settle with us. Rashi is answering the question: The verse seems to implythat the sons of Yaakov asked for consent to live with them. But it was just the opposite!

כל יוצאי שער עירו, “here the Torah speaks about people leaving his city,” whereas in 23,10, it spoke about כל באי עירו, “all the people coming into the gate of the town.” In this instance no one was allowed to leave the city until after he had been circumcised. In chapter 23 above everybody came in order to pay their respects to Sarah on the occasion of her forthcoming burial.

שני בני יעקב TWO OF THE SONS OF JACOB — They were his sons (the sons of Jacob, a wise and clever man), but they acted as any man named Simeon and Levi would do — as other people would do who were not his sons — for they did not take counsel with him (Genesis Rabbah 80:10).

בהיותם כואבים, according to normal reactions of people to such an operation, and according to the plain meaning of the text, the meaning is that they had been in pain during the first and second day after the circumcision, and they were now in even greater pain,

ויהרגו כל זכר, these men had not circumcised themselves in order to become Jews and embrace monotheism but only in order to lay their hands on the vast possessions of the family of Yaakov, as their leaders Chamor and Shechem had promised them.

ויהרגו כל זכר. They killed every male. Why did they kill people who had not actively committed a sin? Why did they not first kill the truly guilty, i.e. Shechem?

ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, this was because the pains are strongest on the third day after the circumcision. In view of this the sages permitted bathing the child with hot water on the Sabbath after the circumcision, if it coincided with being the third day after the operation.(Shabbat 134). Even hot water boiled on the Sabbath itself is permissible to be used for this when there is no other, as the potential danger to the life of the infant overrides the Sabbath legislation not to boil anything on that day.

ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, “It was on the third day, when they were in a lot of pain, etc.;” according to Rashi every wound or injury is especially painful on the third day after it has been inflicted. His explanation appears to conflict with what the Talmud stated in the chapter dealing with circumcision, where the washing of the wound on the third day if it occurs on the Sabbath is permitted, adding that it is clear from this that it may certainly be washed on the first day after the circumcision. (Shabbat, 134) Some commentators hold that the Torah described the last day when the brothers could kill with impunity, as they had failed to do so on the first or second day when no resistance at all would have been forthcoming. Some commentators say that the inhabitants of the town were numerous, and not all of them had gone along with the request of their king and prince until the third day of their deliberations. This was the day when all the male inhabitants of the town were in great pain and could not defend themselves. There is yet another opinion according to which the brothers actually killed the men of Shechem on the first day after their circumcision, the day which was the third day after Dinah’s rape.

ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, “it was on the third day, when they were in pain, etc.” It is an accepted fact in science that amongst all creatures the “third” is always relatively weak. It makes no difference whether it is the third day after a woman has given birth or whether it is the third day in the development of anything else. This is all due to the fact that the third day was under the aegis of the planet Mars. This is why the pain after a wound has been inflicted is always greater on the third day. This is why the pain of circumcision is greatest on the third day, weakening the person who has undergone this procedure. Our sages in Shabbat 86, have ruled that it is permissible to perform all kinds of procedures otherwise prohibited on the Sabbath for a person on the third day after he has been circumcised, as he is weak and even his life may be in some danger.
Experts of a science known as Techunah, (a form of astronomy) wrote that the third day is the day under the influence of the horoscope cancer which in turn is presided over by Samael. Samael’s personal servant is the planet Mars. This knowledge prompted our sages in Taanit 27 to decree that the אנשי מעמד, the Israelites representing the people every day in the Temple, were not to fast on Sundays (first day of the week) as this was the third day after Adam had been created on Friday, the 6th day of the week, so that in counting a completed universe this day was actually the third day. This is also the reason we take some fragrant plants at the conclusion of the Sabbath and pronounce a benediction over them as the third day is ushered in and we want to face it having performed an additional mitzvah. Our spiritual self is strengthened by means of the pleasant fragrance.

Shimon and Leivi acted as other people... Rashi knows this because Scripture should have just said, “Shimon and Leivi.” Why is it [also] written, “Two of Yaakov’s sons”? Thus Rashi explains as he does. (Maharshal)

(25-31) Nun beginnt das Tadelnswerte, das wir keineswegs zu entschuldigen brauchen. Hätten sie Schechem und Chamor erschlagen, es wäre kaum etwas dagegen zu reden. Allein sie haben die wehrlosen, preisgegebenen Menschen nicht geschont, ja, sie haben noch mehr getan, haben geplündert, haben überhaupt die Ortsbewohner das Verbrechen des Gutsherrn mit büßen lassen. Das war durch nichts gerechtfertigt. Jakob wirft ihnen daher auch vor, ihr habt mich "getrübt"; unser Ruf, unser Name, unsere Ehre war klar wie ein Krystall, ihr habt sie getrübt, habt "mich in übeln Geruch gebracht", selbst unter dem Kenaani und Perisi. Und wenn ihr so nicht recht, so habt ihr auch nicht klug gehandelt, wir sind so wenig zahlreich etc.

ויהי ביום השלישי בהייותם כואבים, “it was on the third day (after circumcision) when they were all in pain, etc.” it is difficult to understand why the brothers had insisted that all these people circumcise themselves when they had meant to kill them anyways. Why did they have to resort to such deceit? Our verse may provide the answer by reporting that on that day the men of Sh’chem regretted having circumcised themselves. It was on account of that Shimon and Levi killed them. There had been no intent to kill them when they demanded that they circumcise themselves if they wanted to become members of the clan of Semites. Their act of circumcision was perceived by them as an initiation rite. Also, there is no reason to assume that they should have been in greater pain on the third day than on the previous two days. In fact, it is likely that they had not been able to circumcise themselves all on a single day, and the third day that the Torah speaks of was the day when these circumcisions were completed. This is why Shimon and Levi did not take their swords until the third day.

ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותם כואבים, “It was on the third day when they are in pain:” they were all in pain and regretted having agreed to undergo circumcision: when Yaakov’s sons heard about this and they also heard that Chamor and Sh’chem had altered the conditions they had agreed to with them, i.e. that no one was allowed to leave the town before he had undergone circumcision, plus their having presented the whole agreement as due to enhancing the honour of the people of Sh’chem instead of in response to an ultimatum by the sons of Yaakov, plus the fact that they boasted that henceforth the herds and flocks of Yaakov’s family would (verse 23) be theirs, they decided to attack the city’s inhabitants. The reason they had waited until the third day was that it took the people of Sh’chem until that day to complete the process of circumcising all the men and boys. On that day those who had been circumcised on the first day were still suffering from pains and relatively weak. This is why the Torah writes: ויבואו על הער בטח, “they came into the city unopposed, without having to worry.” This is also how Onkelos translated it. A different exegesis: Shimon and Levi entered the town while the inhabitants were sitting, feeling themselves secure.

אחי דינה DINAH’S BROTHERS — because they risked their lives for her they are designated as her brothers (Genesis Rabbah 80:10)

ויבואו על העיר, the people there felt perfectly safe, so that Shimon and Levi did not need to take any precautions. Whenever the word בטח occurs throughout Scriptures, it refers to the people feeling secure, unworried, just as in this verse.

ויקחו שני בני יעקב, in this instance, Shimon and Levi, although all the brothers were in complete agreement of what was being planned. We know this from verse 13 ויענו בני יעקב במרמה, “the sons of Yaakov responded, deceitfully.” When it came to carrying out their plan, the other brothers were afraid and did not risk their lives in that undertaking. Only Shimon and Levi considered the fate of their sister as paramount. אחי דינה; the Torah accords them full points for considering themselves as the brothers of Dinah par excellence, although at least four more of the brothers were Dinah’s brothers both from the father and from the mother.

ויקחו שני בני יעקב שמעון ולוי, ”and Shimon and Levi, two of Yaakov’s sons, took, etc.” By reading the text carefully it is possible to deduce the ages of these two sons of Yaakov when they destroyed the city of Shechem. We know from the text that Yaakov stayed at his uncle Lavan for twenty years. During the first 14 years he worked for his two wives Rachel and Leah, whereas during the remaining six years he worked in order to establish an economic base for himself and his family. After the first seven years of his service Lavan cheated him by giving him Leah instead of Rachel as his wife. Leah bore Reuven for Yaakov after a pregnancy of seven months. Another seven months (or so) later Shimon was born. It follows that when Yaakov left Lavan and interrupted his journey at Sukkot, Shimon was 2 months shy of 12 years old. Yaakov stayed at Sukkot for 18 months before moving on to Shechem. This means that at that time Shimon was 13 years and four months. His younger brother Levi was only 12 years and nine months old at that time. The Torah called both of them by the name איש, meaning they had attained puberty. This is the meaning of the words איש חרבו, “each man his sword.”

Because they risked their lives for her... [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why does it say, “Brothers of Deenah?” Perforce, it tells us that they acted out of brotherhood and not because they were violent.

Actually, the sons of Jacob did not intend to kill anyone except the guilty party; however, all the inhabitants formed a human barrier to protect their king and prince. As a result the sons of Jacob were forced to kill the townspeole under the heading of killing a רודף, a pursuer, someone who endangers the life of the avenger. When the Torah states that they killed all the males this means that they succeeded in killing Chamor and his son only after killing the other males in the town. Had they not done so they could not have executed someone who was guilty of death.

Ihre einzige Antwort: הכזונה וגו׳ enthält das ganze MotiRaw Hirsch on Genesis 34: Der Herr hätte sich das nimmer erlaubt, wenn es sich nicht um ein fremdes, verlassenes Judenmädchen gehandelt hätte. Dieser Gedanke hatte in Schimeon und Lewi das Bewusstsein geweckt, dass es Momente gebe, in welchen auch Jakobs Familie zum Schwert greifen müsse, um Reinheit und Ehre zu beschützen. So lange auf Erden nur das Recht geachtet wird, dem die Gewalt schützend zur Seite steht, so lange muss auch Jakob wohl zum Schwert zu greifen wissen. Sie wollten auch gar nicht klug handeln. Sie wollten sich gefürchtet machen, damit keiner weiter ein Ähnliches wage. Jakobs Töchter werden nicht als Preisgegebene dastehen. Sie waren jedoch zu weit gegangen, das an Unschuldigen zu rächen, was mächtige Schuldige begangen.

ויהרגו כל זכר, “they killed every male inhabitant; they were all guilty as gentiles are also commanded to appoint a judicial court in every town and when it became known that Sh’chem had raped Dinah and abducted her, refusing to release her, he should have been tried and convicted.”

בטח IN SECURITY — because they (the men of Shechom) were ill. The Midrashic explanation, taking בטח in the sense of confident, is: that they relied upon the strength (i.e. the merits) of the old man (Jacob) (Genesis Rabbah 80:10).

בטח, they were feeling as secure as if they were numerous and not 2 against a whole town.

The Aggadaic explanation is: They were confident of the power of the “old one.” This refers to Yaakov. Alternatively, [it refers to Avraham. They were confident] of Avraham’s prayer for them, as explained in Parshas Lech Lecha (12:10). (Maharshal)

Another reason they killed all the males in the city was that they had all been accessories to the crime by keeping Dinah captive after the rape. This was tantamount to kidnapping. According to the Noachidic law the penalty for kidnapping is death. Gentiles are not guilty of the death penalty for sleeping with an unmarried girl.

In eigentümlicher Weise schließt sich diese Geschichte der vorhergehenden an. Wie wir dort vorübergehend ein קול יעקב, eine menschliche Regung in Esaus Gemüt aufblitzen sahen und darin den Keim der Humanität erkannten, der auch einst in Esau zur vollen Entfaltung aufgehen soll: so sehen wir hier mit einem Male vorübergehend das Schwert Esaus in Händen der Söhne Jakobs, und lernen daraus zur Aufhellung der jüdischen Geschichte die Wahrheit: dass, wenn wir zuletzt das Volk geworden sind, an dessen Händen am wenigsten vergossenes Blut klebt, wenn wir das mildeste, weichherzigste Volk geworden sind, dies nicht etwa in unserer Schwäche, in etwaiger Feigheit beruhe — die letzten Tage unsers nationalen Staatenlebens haben unsere Tapferkeit und unseren Kriegsmut in so gefürchteter Weise gezeigt, dass die tapfersten Legionen Esaus gegen uns herbeigerufen werden mussten. Wir können auch das Schwert schwingen, können auch blutdurstig werden. Unsere Menschlichkeit und Milde sind Früchte der Erziehung, die Gott uns durch unser Geschick und sein Gesetz hat angedeihen lassen.

You will note that the Torah (or the brothers) describes all the people of having "defiled their sister" (34,26). This shows that they all shared equally in the guilt of kidnapping. The reason the Torah does not speak about these people having "stolen" their sister is that the principal sin they were guilty of was that it was the kind of robbery which could not be made good. [If you kidnap a virgin and you give back a woman who has been defiled by sexual intercourse out of wedlock this is not a proper restoration. Ed.] The Torah makes it plain by using the term "they had defiled," that if the sin had not been one that could not be reversed the brothers would not have killed all the males in the town. While it is certainly true that the people of Shechem were not the only ones in the world guilty of such crimes, and Noachides who have committed robbery are all guilty of the death penalty, the brothers could certainly not be expected to play executioners in all such instances. They lacked the power to do so. Jacob himself alluded to this when he accused Shimon and Levi as "distressing" him, especially in view of the fact that his family was "numerically weak" (verse 30).

Allein nur in den Mitteln und in dem Maß des Ausschreitens liegt das Tadelnswerte. Das Motiv, das Schimeon und Lewi bewegte, der Zweck, den sie anstrebten, waren die heiligsten und berechtigsten. Der Geist, der sie erfüllte, war der unentbehrlichste für eine Familie, die, als Jakob zum Volke heranwachsend, das Herbste über sich ergehen lassen, die tiefste Erniedrigung erdulden und doch mit aller Elastizität des Geistes und mit allem Adel der Gesinnung aufrecht erhalten bleiben sollte für die welthistorische Auferstehung zu einem unsterblichen Gange durch die Geschichte sonder Gleichen. Noch auf seinem Sterbebette werden wir den greisen Vater Fluch über die Mittel und die ausschreitende Leidenschaftlichkeit, segnende Anerkennung aber über die Motive und die Gesinnung aussprechen, und Schimeon und Lewi eine solche machtlose, zerstreute Stellung im künftigen Jakob Israelvolke anweisen sehen, dass das materielle Heft in Israel nie in ihre Hände zur maßlosen Ausschreitung gelangen könne, ihr kräftiger, der geistigen und sittlichen Würde und Bestimmung stets bewusster Geist aber belebend, erhaltend und rettend in allen Kreisen des Volkes gegenwärtig und wirksam bleibe. Dasselbe Schwert, das Lewi hier zur Rettung der sittlichen Schwesterehre nach außen wandte, sehen wir später gegen die eigenen Brüder nach innen gewandt, wo es galt, rücksichtslos — את אחיו לא הכיר ואת בניו לא ידע — die Brüder aus der eigenen Entartung empor zu retten.

Another reason why the Torah speaks of "who had defiled" is to justify the brothers looting the belongings of the inhabitants of Shechem. Their property served as דמי בושת, compensation for the humiliation Dinah had suffered at the hands of these people. The amount of such compensation is determined in accordance with the relative stature of the victim as well as the perpetrator of the crime. In this instance both Shechem and Dinah were of very elevated stature so that the compensation due was of the highest category. The entire possessions of the townspeople may not have sufficed to provide adequate compensation for the shame Dinah had suffered. She was a person who was unique in the whole world. When I mentioned earlier that a self-confessed sinner is free from financial penalties, this does not apply to the money paid as compensation for shaming someone (Ketuvot 41).

Züge endlich, wie sie uns aus diesen und noch ferneren Ereignissen in der ersten Jakobsfamilie begegnen, dürfen uns zugleich die Notwendigkeit andeutend erkennen lassen, die vorhanden gewesen sein mag, diesen Menschenstamm in dem "eisernen Tiegel" des Leidens zu dem Adel der Gesinnung zu erläutern und zu stählen, der sie befähigen sollte, für den Menschheit erlösenden Musterwandel dereinst erwählt zu werden. Nicht weil wir der gefügigste, sondern weil wir der ungefügigste, härteste Völkerstamm gewesen — עז שבאומות wie die Weisen bemerken — hat uns Gott zu seinem Werkzeuge gewählt, um aus uns seinen härtesten, ausdauerndsten Stahl zu schmieden, und an unserer Gewinnung zuerst die Wundermacht seiner Waltung und die Wunderkraft seines Gesetzes zu zeigen. —

In his Hilchot Melachim chapter 9,14, Maimonides explains that the reason all the inhabitants of Shechem were guilty of death was that they had failed to establish a judiciary which would deal with the robbery committed by Shechem. Whence does Maimonides know that the common people had to judge their king or crown prince? Is it not a fact that even amongst the Israelites individuals do not have to testify against the King, and one does not sit in judgment of him (Sanhedrin 16)? Accordingly, we are forced to conclude that the guilt of the people of Shechem consisted in their being active accessories to the crime. They may even have advised Shechem how to successfully rape Dinah. Nachmanides refutes Maimonides' argument claiming that the Noachides were not commanded to establish a permanent judiciary but to settle matters that come up for litigation. He claims that the death of the people of Shechem was primarily for the sin of idolatry which all of them had been guilty of for a long time. His words require proof, and they do not account for the brothers looting the town.

ואת חמור ואת שכם בנו הרגו, they went looking for them and found them.

ויקחו את דינה; there is an aggadic commentary (Bereshit Rabbah 80,11) according to which Dinah felt so ashamed that she did not want to leave the house of Shechem until Shimon swore to her that he would marry her, and that this is the meaning of 46,10 where among the issue of Shimon one is described as being named “Sha-ul son of the Canaanite (woman). “Supposedly, the father of that child was Shechem, i.e. Dinah had conceived him at the time of the rape.

ויקחו את דינה מבית שכם, “they took Dinah from the house of Sh’chem;” Rabbi Yudon claims that they had to drag her along on the floor, as she was unwilling to come along willingly. Rabbi Chunia claims that it is a known fact that a girl or woman who has had sexual relations with a gentile is difficult to separate from that gentile (Compare B’reshit Rabbah 80,11).

על החללים UPON THE SLAIN — to strip the slain.

העיר אשר טמאו, unless according to the mores of Shechem (city) such behaviour was no longer considered despicable, Schechem would not have done what he did. He felt sure he could get away with it, as his townspeople would not object. However raping virgins was commonplace in Shechem already. They behaved in the manner described in Genesis 6,2 “they took women for themselves from wherever they chose.” [the punishment for this type of violence had been the deluge. Ed.]

בני יעקב באו על החללים, The sons of Jacob came upon the slain and plundered the city. This means that all of Jacob's sons participated in the looting. They were entitled to do so as they had all suffered humiliation by the rape of their sister. Each one was entitled to take his share. Maimonides has written in Hilchot Na-arah Betulah chapter 2 that the court gives due consideration to the respective stature in society of both the rapist and the victim before it decides the amount of money to award to the victim's father and to her family. Dinah's brothers were all included in what Maimonides described as the victim's "family." This is why they all assembled there to determine their respective shares of the compensation due them. When they determined that the combined wealth of the townspeople was not adequate, they simply carted off all their belongings on behalf of their father to whom all this belonged. Although we have a rule that if someone is executed for a crime we do not exact financial penalties in addition, this rule does not apply to Gentiles (compare Tossaphot Eyruvin 62).

בני יעקב באו על החללים, to undress them and to take all their possessions

אשר טמאו אחותם, to demonstrate by means of this that the men of this city had defiled their sister. This became public knowledge in the region after the sons of Yaakov killed the people who had tolerated this crime, the townspeople had watched the violent rape and had not lifted a finger to stop it. The sons of Yaakov also took all the movable possessions of the city of Shechem both in the city and the fields belonging to that town.

חילם means THEIR WEALTH. Examples are: (Deuteronomy 8:17) “hath gotten me this (חיל) wealth”; (Numbers 19:18) “and Israel acquireth (חיל) wealth”; (Psalms 49:11) “and they leave (חילם) their wealth to others”.

ואת כל חילם, silver, gold , and precious stones.

From the term שבייה. The accent is, therefore, on the latter syllable. But if the accent was on the first syllable, like with קמו and שבו, the root would be שוב. Then it would mean “returning.”

שבו has the meaning of taking captive (i.e. it is the Kal. perfect, 3rd pl. of the root שבה and means “they took captive”), and therefore it is accented on the last syllable (whereas שָׁבוּ, accented on the first syllable, is the same form of the verb שוב and means “they returned”).

ואת כל אשר בבית, chattels. The word בבית is a general term, a place where most chattels are kept.

עכרתם YE HAVE TROUBLED ME — This has the same meaning as (Berakhot 25b) “troubled (עכורים) waters” (i.e. waters that are disturbed, not clear). He meant “Now my mind will never be clear (without worry)”. There is an Agada, (Genesis Rabbah 80:12) “He said: the wine in the cask was clear but you have troubled it”. The Canaanites had a tradition that they would fall by the hands of the sons of Jacob, but they thought that this would happen only when the condition was fulfilled as expressed in the verse (Exodus 23:30) “when thou shalt in-crease, then shalt thou inherit the land”; consequently they had been silent until now (i.e. they had not attacked them).

להבאישני, to ruin our reputation. We have the same word used in a similar sense in Exodus 5,21 הבאשתם את ריחנו, where the overseers of the Jewish people accuse Moses and Aaron after the failure of their first audience with Pharaoh which had resulted in an increased workload, that they had ruined the reputation of the people as diligent workers.

להבאישני, the local population would accuse us of having gone back on our agreement after the people of Shechem had circumcised themselves.

Yaakov said. Yaakov had thought that they intended to rescue Deenah with their subterfuge and perhaps to kill Shechem as well, not to slaughter the entire city.

ויאמר...עכרתם, an expression meaning “destruction.” The word is used in this sense in Samuel I 14,29 עכר אבי את הארץ, “my father has destroyed the land.” [I do not see this meaning in the root עכר either here or in Samuel. I would translate it more appropriately as “confused, caused confusion. Ed.]

“When your numbers will increase, then will you inherit the land.” This is a verse in Parshas Mishpatim (Shemos 23:30). It implies: after you are fruitful and multiply, then you will inherit.

מתי מספר means A FEW MEN.

להבאשני, to cause me shame. The Canaanites in the region will despise me and try to remove me from the district as one removes a person who exudes a putrid stench. Yaakov reacted in the time-honoured fashion of being afraid, almost a trademark of his, whereas his sons were stout-hearted men willing to avenge the shame inflicted upon their very personalities.

They had, therefore, been silent. But now they will think the time has come, and they will attack us.

הכזונה implies as one unprotected.

?הכזונה, only a harlot does not have anyone standing up in her defense, avenging violence done to her. יעשה, “shall the people who you are afraid of rising up against us be allowed to get away with such conduct? את אחותנו, who was not a harlot. It is incumbent upon us to avenge her disgrace. Once the inhabitants of the region will understand this they will have no reason to attack us.”

ויאמרו הכזונה יעשה את אחותינו, They said: "Should we have let him treat our sister like a harlot?" We need to understand how such a reply could have had any bearing on Jacob's concern for the survival of his family in a possible confrontation with the other Emorites in the region? After all, Jewish law provides that if the surrender of a specific individual is demanded by enemy forces as a condition to save the lives of the remaining prisoners, then such an individual must be surrendered (Jerusalem Talmud Terumah chapter eight) in order to save the lives of all the people who this individual is part of. There is no requirement for all the people to become martyrs even if the alternative is the commission of a serious crime of ערוה, incest or other sexual crime. Seeing that this is so before such a sin has been committed, it is all the more so after the crime has already been committed and cannot be reversed!

?ויאמרו הכזונה, is Shechem to be allowed to treat our sister as if she were a harlot, and we should not avenge the shame she was subjected to?

הכזונה יעשה את אחותנו, “is our sister to be treated like a whore?” Rashi wrote כתרגומו ית אחתנא, but I have not been able to understand what he had in mind.

Abandoned. Rashi is answering the question: Only a woman who willingly abandons herself to relations with any man is called a harlot. If so, how could Shechem possibly make her a harlot, when she did not willingly abandon herself? Thus Rashi explains [that here it means] “abandoned.” I.e., Shechem acted as if she was [property that has been] abandoned.

?הכזונה יעשה את אחותנו, ,“is he (Sh’chem) to be allowed to treat our sister as if she were a harlot?” Rashi explains the word את in this phrase as emphasising the singular mode as the word אחותנו, occurs several times in the Bible in the plural mode although not spelled in the plural mode with the letter י. [In Aramaic it would then have to be spelled אחותנא instead of אחתנא.

אחותנו The Targum renders it as an accusative — ית אחתנא “our sister”,) so that the meaning is: Should one (be permitted to) make our sister become as a woman who has no-one to protect her (Genesis Rabbah 80:12).

To our sister. Rashi is answering the question: Perhaps הכזונה should be interpreted as missing a ב, as if it said הכבזונה עשה את אחותינו? Then it would mean, “Should he do with our sister as one does with a harlot?” Accordingly, זונה would indeed mean harlot, [contrary to Rashi’s explanation of “abandoned”]. Therefore Rashi cites Onkelos who translates [את as] ית, proving that it does not mean “with.” This explains why Rashi said that הכזונה means “abandoned.”

Perhaps the brothers merely wanted to calm the fears of their father saying that a confrontation with the Emorites would be a real danger only if they had killed the people of Shechem without an adequate reason. Under the circumstances, when kidnapping and rape had been committed, they did not think the other Emorites would raise much of a fuss. Legally speaking, of course, Shechem had not been guilty of harlotry seeing Dinah had been unattached at the time. Categories of sexual intercourse forbidden to the Gentiles include only homosexuality, adultery, bestiality, and intercourse with the sister of the same mother.

It is also possible that the brothers considered their action as one that would serve notice on the Emorites not to take liberties with their family. Having seen what happened to an individual who used violence against a member of Jacob's family, the Emorites would take this to heart and be forewarned of the consequences of such deeds in the future.