Kommentar zu Bereschit 49:6

בסדם אל תבא נפשי O MY SOUL, COME NOT THOU INTO THEIR SECRET DELIBERATION (סוד may have the sense of plot) — this has reference to the story of Zimri, (Numbers 25:6-15) when the tribe of Simeon assembled and brought the Midianitish woman before Moses, saying, “Is this woman forbidden or permitted to be taken as a wife? If you say she is forbidden, who made the daughter of Jethro permissible to you in marriage” (See Sanhedrin 82b) — let not my name be mentioned in connection with that event! Indeed, it is said (Numbers 25:14) “Zimri, the son of Zalu, a prince of a father’s house among the Simeonites” — but Scripture does not state “a son of Jacob”.

FOR IN THEIR ANGER THEY SLEW A MAN AND IN THEIR SELF-WILL THEY DISABLED AN OX (‘SHOR’). The meaning of this is that they committed violence in their wrath in that they were angry at Shechem, and it was to satisfy their own desire and not because of the guilt or sins of the slain.
Now Onkelos says that the word shor (ox) should be understood as shur (wall) with a shuruk,¹¹¹The phonetic equivalent oo. Thus the word should be understood as shur (wall) rather than shor (ox). The Torah-script has no vowel signs, and for the sake of interpretation, a difficult word may sometimes be interpreted as if it were vowelled differently than the traditional reading. as in the verse, Daughters treaded on the wall (‘shur’).¹¹²Verse 22 here. Thus Onkelos translated the word shor in the present verse as “the wall of the enemy,” similar in expression to the verse: Mine eye also hath gazed on them that lie in wait for me (‘b’shuroi’).¹¹³Psalms 92:12. Ramban is thus suggesting that the enemy lies in wait for me behind his fortified walls. The meaning of the verse is thus: “and they uprooted a city surrounded with a wall, slaying their children and women after having killed the men of the city.” The word ikru (disabled) would then be similar in use to the verse, Ekron shall be rooted up (‘tei’akeir’).¹¹⁴Zephaniah 2:4.
Others¹¹⁵Mentioned in the commentary of R’dak in the name of Rabbi Yaakov the son of Rabbi Elazar. have explained that the ox, which is the largest of cattle, is an allusion to Hamor and his son Shechem, the prince of the country,¹¹⁶Above, 34:2. just as in the verses: His firstling bull, majesty is his;¹¹⁷Deuteronomy 33:17. Ye kine of Bashan, that are in the mountain of Samaria.¹¹⁸Amos 4:1. Similarly do the verses surname the great princes “rams”¹¹⁹Exodus 15:15. Eilei Moab is generally translated, “the mighty men of Moab,” but literally it means “the rams of Moab.” and “he-goats.”¹²⁰Isaiah 14:9. Atudei eretz is generally translated, “the chief ones of the earth,” but literally it means “the he-goats of the earth.”
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the verse is to be understood in its usual sense as stating that in their anger they killed each man of whom they were wrathful; and in their self-will, after their anger had been calmed by the slaying of the men, they uprooted all oxen, this being an allusion to their cattle and their possessions, including everything that was in the home and everything in the field. Now Jacob mentioned this in order to state that he had no part in all these secret deliberations of theirs, even in the removal of the cattle and possessions, or any aspect of the spoiling and plundering of the people of the city of Shechem. The word ikru [in the expression, ikru shor], has the same meaning as in the verse: Thou shalt hemstring (‘te’akeir’) their horses.¹²¹Joshua 11:6. But the expression and purport is all one.

בסודם אל תבא נפשי, may it be G’d’s will that I will not feature in their plots. Every time we encounter the expression אל, al, in the Torah, it is a curse, a request, or a command. It would therefore be wrong to translate this word here as meaning “I have not been part of their devious plot.”

בסודם אל תבא נפשי, "My soul, do not come to their counsel." We need to understand what precisely Jacob had in mind. Our sages in Sanhedrin 109 say that Jacob referred to the affair with Zimri in which the tribe of Shimon disgraced itself, and to the uprising of Korach which was a taint on the tribe of Levi. They also state that the words באפם הרגו איש "in their anger they slew a man," refer to Chamor and the men of Shechem, whereas the words וברצונם עקרו שור, "and it was their wish to uproot an ox," refer to their violence against Joseph (compare Targum Yerushalmi). These comments are all homiletical. One of the difficulties with this explanation is why Jacob would list events that were far in the future ahead of events which had already taken place, such as the violence against Joseph and Chamor? How could the word כי be used in this verse when it does not relate to anything which preceded it? Besides, why would Jacob also associate Levi with the affair in which Zimri would disgrace himself by sleeping with a Midianite princess? Why did Jacob choose the expression ברצונם, "when it pleased them," to describe Shimon and Levi's planned violence against Joseph?

בסודם אל תבא נפשי. At the time they planned their revenge I had not been taken into their confidence either about what they were going to do or about how they were going to do it. It had not been done at my suggestion. Yaakov repeats what he said in different words, continuing אל תחד כבודי, the word תחד is in the feminine mode seeing it refers to כבוד which is another word for נפש which is a feminine noun.

בסודם, “to their counsel,” a reference to the deceitful answer they gave to Shechem and Chamor in the matter of Dinah’s rape and how to compensate for this.

Who permitted you to marry Yisro’s daughter? You might ask: Why was Moshe in fact permitted to marry a Midianite woman? The answer is: Tzipporah was a proselyte. Another answer: Moshe married her before the Torah was given.

סוד, verwandt mit: זוד still im Innern etwas "kochen", auf etwas im Stillen, aber heiß sinnen, und mit: צוד das Ersonnene künstlich zu erlangen streben. In der Mitte steht סור die Mitteilung dessen, was man still ersonnen: die gemeinsame Veralung. קהל: die Versammlung zur Ausführung. Also: Gesinnung und Geist hätten Schimeon und Lewi wohl zur Führerschaft, allein ihre Mittel und Wege sind die verwerflichen, darum: darf in ihren Rat mein Wille, (der Wille meiner Nation) nicht kommen, d. h. in ihrem Rat darf nicht der Nationalwille beschlossen werden, ihr Rat nie als Repräsentant des Nationalwillens erscheinen: "in ihrer Versammlung nie meine Ehre mit angeschlossen sein" (תחד von יחד), von dem, was sie tun, nie die Nationalehre berührt werden; wenn sie "raten", darf nie mein Wille, und wenn sie "taten" nie meine Ehre aufs Spiel kommen; denn באפם הרגו איש: ihr אף, ihr Zorn war ein an sich vollkommen gerechter, allein sie haben in ihrem Zorn "Mord" geübt, haben in ihrem Zorn unschuldige Menschen erschlagen — hätten sie sich lediglich an dem "großen Junker" vergriffen, Jakob hätte sie schwerlich so hart getadelt. —

בקהלם, “in their counsel,” (may my soul not take part) there is no prefix letter ו here as we find in the word וברצונם, “and when they are well disposed;” Yaakov shuns being associated with their plans under any circumstances.

בקהלם UNTO THEIR ASSEMBLY — when Korah of the tribe of Levi will assemble the entire congregation against Moses and Aaron —

(2) KI IN THEIR ANGER. Because in their anger.

כי באפם הרגו איש, the word איש refers to people generally, as in Samuel I 14,24 ואיש ישראל נגש, where it also did not refer to a single Israelite but to the Israelite troops who were pressing for action. Yaakov too describes the whole population of the city of Shechem as איש, as if a single unit. We find that the word שור is often used also as a reference to many oxen although it is in the singular mode. Other examples of such constructions are Exodus 15,19 כי בא סוס פרעה, where the Torah speaks of all of Pharaoh’s (Egypt’s) horses, not just of Pharaoh’s personal horse. Some commentators understand the words שור as meaning the ruling prince of the land, Chamor. We have several examples of someone in a high position being referred to as שור, as for instance in Deuteronomy 33,17 בכור שורו. The word עקרו in our verse, is another word for הרגו, “they killed.” The word שור may also mean “wall, fortification,” as understood by Onkelos.

ובקהלם, “and in their congregation, etc.” a reference to the plot to kill the male inhabitants of Shechem.

When the lineage of Korach is recorded concerning the “platform,” it is said... It seems Rashi cites this so we will not ask: How does Rashi know that the verse means this? Perhaps the Torah omitted Yaakov from the episodes of Zimri and Korach because it is Scripture’s way to trace lineage back to the Twelve Tribes, but not further. Therefore Rashi cites this verse where the lineage is traced back to Yaakov. If so, why in [Parshas] Korach did the lineage go back only to Leivi? The verses seem to conflict. Perforce, it is because Yaakov had requested that he not be mentioned in the lineage there. This seems to be an answer to Re’m, who asked the question: why is Yaakov’s name mentioned in Divrei Hayamim contrary to the manner in which it is mentioned in Scripture? Re’m also asks: Nowhere is Yaakov’s name mentioned in Scripture in connection with Zimri. If so, why did we not say that Scripture fails to say זמרי בן סלוא נשיא בית אב לשמעוני בן יעקב simply because heads of families are traced back to the Twelve Tribes, not further? It seems the answer is: We see that the reason Korach’s lineage is not traced back to Yaakov is due to Yaakov’s prayer, as I wrote, for otherwise the verses would conflict. If so, with Zimri too it was due to Yaakov’s prayer. For the verse mentions the two together: “My soul will not enter their secret council (Zimri), [let my honor not be identified with their assembly (Korach)].”

The plain meaning of the verse is that the entire verse speaks about the incident with Joseph. When Jacob refers to בסודם, "their secret," he meant that he did not want to be associated with these two brothers from the moment they began to hate Joseph, although they concealed their hatred for a while. When Jacob spoke about אל תבא נפשי, this was his way of disassociating himself from any guilt concerning the behaviour of Shimon and Levi. Just as he had not transmitted spiritually corrupt genes to Reuben, so he had not burdened Shimon and Levi with spiritually defective genes when he fathered either one of them. Any evil concocted by these two brothers did not originate with him.

וברצונם עקרו שור. Was dies heißt, ist mehr als zweifelhaft . שור heißt ent schieden: Ochse, עַקֵר entschieden: lähmen, die Fußsehne durchschneiden. רצון heißt jedoch ohnehin überwiegend nur ein freundliches Wohlwollen, und da es nicht כרצונס (wie Nehemias 9, 24. 37 und Esther 9, 5) heißt, sondern ברצונם, so dürfte es wohl schwerlich hier Willkür, sondern ebenfalls Freundlichkeit bedeuten. Es dürfte daher ähnlich wie מכרתיהם ihre List bezeichnen, in welcher sie Freundlichkeit erheuchelten, שור aber, wie ׳בכור שורו הדר לו וגו, die Kraft bedeuten, die, an sich friedlich, dennoch sich im Kampfe bewährt, und wäre sodann der Sinn: "denn in ihrem Zorn haben sie Mord an Menschen begangen, und hatten schon zuvor deren sonst friedliche, aber wenn angegriffen, sich tapfer wehrende Kraft durch ihre Freundlichkeit gelähmt", hatten durch freundliches Zureden zur מילה die Kraft gelähmt, überfielen sie dann, als sie schwach waren, und so war es nicht einmal eine Heldentat! Darum

עקרו שור, “they uprooted an ox;” according to the Targum Yerushalmi, this is an allusion to their having sold Joseph. Joseph had elsewhere been compared to an ox, as opposed to his brother Yehudah, who had been likened to a lion. (Deuteronomy chapter 33) An alternate exegesis: according to Onkelos, the word שור here symbolises a חומה, wall, this was accomplished by exchanging the vowel cholem for the vowel shuruk. The wall referred to would be that around the city of Sh’chem.

אל תחד כבודי MY GLORY BE NOT THOU UNITED — let my name not be associated there with them! (Genesis Rabbah 98:5) And so it was, for it is said (Numbers 16:1) “Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath. the son of Levi” — but it does not say “the son of Jacob”. In Chronicles, however, (1 Chronicles 6:22,23), where the genealogy of Korah is traced in connection with the “Duchan” (properly, the platform — the place on which the Levites were stationed for the service of song in the Temple) it is said, “the son of Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, the son of Israel (Genesis Rabbah 98:5).

כי באפם עקרו שור, the word עקרו here has the same meaning as the word תעקר in Joshua 11,6, where G’d promises the Israelites that they will totally disable, hamstring the horses of their enemies.

וברצונם, “in order to carry out their will; their urgent desire.” In our homiletic literature, (compare Rashi) the entire line starting with אל תבא is understood as referring to misdeeds carried out by members of the tribe of Shimon in the distant future such as the leader of that tribe Zimri who slept with a Midianirte princess in an act of defiance of Jewish mores, and the infamous Korach of the tribe of Levi who wanted to usurp the position of Moses and Aaron. Due to Yaakov’s express wish here, neither of these two men had his genealogy traced all the way back to Yisrael when the Torah explains who they were. (compare Numbers 16,1 and Numbers 25,15)

כי באפם הרגו איש, “for in their anger they killed a man.” A reference to the inhabitants of Shechem.

The word כבוד is masculine... [Rashi is saying] that the conjugation for the masculine second person is the same as for the feminine third person, as it is here. Therefore תחד could be either feminine third person or masculine second person.

Jacob also wanted to state that he would not be punished for anything these two brothers had done because of his preferential treatment of Joseph being an underlying cause of the brothers' jealousy and hatred of him.

אל תחד כבדי MY GLORY BE NOT THOU UNITED — כבוד is masculine and therefore you must needs explain the phrase as though he were addressing himself to “the glory” saying, “thou, my glory, be not united with them!” תחד is exactly the same grammatical form (2nd masc. sing. and not 3rd fem. sing.) as (Isaiah 14:20) “Thou shall not be united (אל תחד) with them in burial”

וברצונם עקרו שור, “and it was their wish to uproot an ox.” Onkelos translates the word שור as סנאה, “the hated one.” It is similar to the word שור in Genesis 49,22 where it means “wall.” After they had killed the inhabitants of Shechem they climbed its protective wall. An alternate explanation understands שור as an allusion to חמור, Chamor and Schechem, the leaders of the town of Shechem. The ox is considered the largest of the domesticated animals, as we know of the description פרות הבשן, Amos 4,1, where the prophet describes the people oppressing the poor in such terms. It is also possible that the word איש describes all the people killed in Shechem, and that after having killed the males they plundered their belongings, and that Yaakov describes that with the words עקרו שור, “they uprooted all their belongings, their valuables.”

They wished to exterminate Yoseif... [Rashi is explaining: The verse does] not mean they actually exterminated him, for Yoseif ruled. Rather, they are so called because their intent was to exterminate him, as in (Devarim 26:5): “The Aramaean who destroyed my forefather,” [referring to Lavan who sought to destroy Yaakov, but did not actually destroy him].

When Jacob added: ובקהלם אל תחד כבודי, "my honour do not join their congregation," he referred to the moment when Shimon and Levi hatched the plot to kill Joseph (37,20). He did not want these two sons to be known as "the sons of Jacob" as of that moment. Jacob considered such a designation of these two as an affront to his honour. Tanchuma in Parshat Vayeshev understands the word כבוד as a reference to the presence of the שכינה which had departed from Jacob the moment Joseph had become lost. The word כי in בי באפם הרגו איש, is the justification for Jacob not wanting his name associated with these two brothers. He referred to their having killed a man although we know in retrospect that this did not happen. Jacob considered the brothers' willingness to kill Joseph and to throw him into a pit full of reptiles as equivalent to exposing Joseph to many kinds of deaths.

כי באפם הרגו איש FOR IN THEIR WRATH THEY SLEW A MAN — This refers to Hamor and the people of Shechem, and they are spoken of as איש “one” man because they were all regarded as of no more account than one man when it was a matter of attacking them. It likewise states in the history of Gideon, (Judges 6:16) “And thou shalt smite the Midianites as one man”, and similarly concerning Egypt, (Exodus 15:1) “The horse (singular) and its rider (singular) hath he thrown into the sea” (i.e. the whole army as though it consisted of but one horse and its rider). This is a Midrashic interpretation (Genesis Rabbah 99:6). The plain meaning of the use of the singular form is: a group of men is called “a man” having in mind each one separately, so that the meaning is: they slew every man with whom they were angry. Similar is (Ezekiel 19:3) “and he learned to catch the prey, he devoured (אדם) a man” (which is the same as בני אדם “men”)

וברצונם עקרו שור, "and they uprooted an ox at their pleasure." Jacob added that even after their anger had already evaporated, after they had thrown Joseph into the pit and Yehudah spoke words of appeasement to them, they continued to act evilly. The Talmud Sotah 56 states that Joseph should have been the progenitor of 12 tribes. His encounter with the wife of Potiphar whose temptations he withstood only with the greatest amount of willpower caused him to forfeit the privilege of founding the other ten tribes. Had it not been for Shimon and Levi who had wanted to uproot Joseph's future, none of this would have happened.

וברצונם עקרו שור AND IN THEIR SELFWILL THEY LAMED AN OX — they desired to exterminate Joseph who is called שור, as it is said, (Deuteronomy 33:17) “His firstling bullock (שורו) (Joseph), majesty is his”. עקרו means in old French essarter. It has the same meaning as in (Joshua 11:6) “Thou shalt hamstring (תעקר) their horses”.