Commentary for Genesis 49:34

ואגידה לכם THAT I MAY TELL YOU — He wished to reveal to them the end of Israel’s exile but the Shechinah departed from him and he began to speak of other things (Genesis Rabbah 98:2).

IN THE END OF DAYS. These are the days of the Messiah, for Jacob alludes to him in his words, even as he said, Until Shiloh come, and his be the obedience of peoples.⁷³Verse 10 here. Now our Rabbis have said⁷⁴Pesachim 56a. that Jacob wished to reveal the end of Israel’s exile, but the Shechinah (the Divine Presence) departed from him. Thus in the opinion of all scholars, the end of days is a reference to the days of the Messiah.

(1) YA'AKOV CALLED. He sent for them.

באחרית הימים, at the end of the period allocated to life on earth as we know it. Yaakov speaks of the arrival of the Messiah which will signify the end of the existence of the nations that oppose G’d and the Kingdom of G’d on earth. At that time the measure of sin that these nations accumulate will be full to overflowing, so that G’d will feel at liberty to bring about the appropriate retribution. [the concept is as old as Avraham, to whom G’d explained that realisation of his offspring disinheriting the Canaanites will have to await the time when the measure of sin of these people will be full. (Genesis 15,16). Ed.] Our author, drawing on various prophecies of the Books of Prophets to support his interpretation of באחרית הימים, “the end of days,” quotes Jeremiah 46,28: “for I will make an end to all the nations among which I have banished you; but I will not make an end of you!” He also quotes Bileam’s prophecy in Numbers 24,14 detailed in verse 17, in which he prophesies the doom befalling all the nations pre-eminent in his time and describes Israel as triumphant at that time. He adds that his prophecy is not one the fulfillment of which is imminent, but that much time will elapse before it will be realised. Similar prophecies are not only found in Michah 4,1 but even in our chapter when blessing Yehudah in verse 10, Yaakov speaks of the time frame he has in mind as the one when Shiloh will arrive, the one to whom nations will pay homage.

In the end of days. See Rashi. When the Divine Presence departed he was concerned that his sons were tainted with sin, but they pointed out that the root letters of the word cheit — “sin” — do not even appear in their names. He replied that neither do the letters comprising keitz — “the end [of days]”.

ויקרא, he called them in to assemble around him

אשר יקרא אתכם באחרית הימים, “what will happen to you in the latter days.” At this point Yaakov wanted to reveal to his sons details about the ultimate redemption of the Jewish people, but this vision was withheld from him by G’d, so that he had to make do with allusions to earlier events, although he managed to insert hints of what was to happen still later. The words עד כי יבא שילה, are proof of this.

ויקרא יעקב אל בניו, “Yaakov called in his sons.” According to a Midrash, Yaakov commenced his blessing from the point where Yitzchak had concluded blessing his son as it is written: “Yitzchak called Yaakov and blessed him” (Genesis 28,1). Moses in turn commenced his blessing (Deut. 33,1) from the point where Yaakov had left off. David in turn, at the commencement of the Book of Psalms, began with the words with which Moses had left off, i.e. אשרי האיש, “happy the man who has not followed the counsel of the wicked.” Moses had concluded (Deut. 33,29) his blessings of the Jewish people with the words: “happy Israel, who can compare to you?” Referring to this David said in Psalms 119,100 “I have gained more understanding than my elders .”

He wished to reveal the End... [How does Rashi know this? The answer is:] Since Scripture uses two expressions, “gather around” and “come together,” it hints to the End. For it is written (Yeshayah 66:12), “He will gather the scattered ones of Yehudah.” And it is written (Tzephaniah 3:19), “He will gather the lost one,” which hints to the last exile. Anoher answer: Since it is written, “In latter days,” which is superfluous, [perforce] it hints to the End of Days which will be in latter days.

(1-2) הקבצו — האספו sind keineswegs gleichbedeutend; es ergibt sich dies schon aus der Erwägung, dass האסף selbst von einem Individuum gesagt werden kann: עד האסף מרים. (Raw Hirsch on Genesis 49: B. M. 12, 15). אסף heißt: etwas aus dem Kreise, oder der Örtlichkeit, wo es eigentlich nicht hingehört, dorthin aufnehmen, wohin es gehört. Es liegt immer die Verwandtschaft mit עזב darin, ein Loslösen von allem andern, Un gehörigen. Daher הֵאָסְפו: Reißt euch von allem Fremdartigen los und findet euch alle in dem einen gemeinsamen Ziele beisammen! Lasst euch alle von dem einen Gemein samen umfangen, aufnehmen! Stellet euch alle auf einen Boden! הֵאָ הֵאָסְפו fordert daher die geistige Sammlung auf einen einzigen Punkt, für ein einziges Ziel, wie die Weisen darum treffend erläutern: הטהרו! Wörtlich hieße es: Lasset euch aufnehmen (d. h. von eurer gemeinsamen Bestimmung).

האספו ואגידה לכם, “gather around so that I can tell you, etc.;” in the next verse we read הקבצו ושמעו, “assemble and listen!” Here Yaakov is about to tell his sons that they will go into exile. On the other occasion he refers to the second exile. (B’reshit Rabbah 99,6)

אשר יקרא אתכם, “what is going to happen to you;” here Yaakov intends to foretell the future; these were not meant to be blessings, as we do not find that he blessed Reuven, Shimon, and Levi. When the Torah writes in verse 28 of this chapter: וזאת אשר דבר להם אביהם, “and this is what their father had said to them,” (followed by “their father blessed them”) we have to understand that verse as follows: “this was what he foretold them.” The details of his blessing were not spelled out by the Torah.

Then Yaakov called for his son's: He sought to reveal the appointed time for the end but it became concealed from him (Pesachim 56a.) Yaakov asks, "Perhaps there is sin (חטא) among you?" They said, "No, if you examine our names, you will not find the letters ח or ט in them. Then he said unto them, "Arise, there is also no ק or ץ letters (end) in them.

(2) COME TOGETHER. For the seventy persons had increased during these 17 years and had become a numerous people, and according to the words of our Sages, to (six) hundred thousand.

את אשר יקרא אתכם, a reference to future events, מקרה, events that are not the direct outcome of man’s initiatives. The word occurs in this spelling (with the letter א instead of ה at the end) in Jeremiah 13,22 מדוע קראני אלה?, “Why did these things happen to me?” Or, in Isaiah 51,19 שתים המה קוראותיך, “these two things have befallen you.” There are many other examples of a similar nature in Scripture.

קבץ hingegen — (verwandt mit קפץ schließen, כוץ zusammenschrumpfen, כבש zu sammenpressen, bezwingen, selbst יבש trocken, das Feste, im Gegensatz zum Zerfließenden, גביש, ein Edelstein, vielleicht der Diamant, seiner Festigkeit und Härte willen), — bezeichnet immer ein räumliches, äußeres Zusammenfinden mehrerer.

את אשר יקרה אתכם, “what will befall you.” Yaakov referred to what would occur at the end of the 430 years when the people of Israel would be redeemed from slavery and exile. The wording used by Yaakov forces us to give this interpretation to his words. If this is not what he referred to, the Torah should not have added: באחרית היםים, “at the end of the years (that had been predicted),” but באחרית ימים בסוף העולם, “at the end of the history of the present world. I have heard an explanation that understands Yaakov as having alluded to the end of the first 5000 years of human history. (B’reshit Rabbah 98,2 and 99,5) Yaakov therefore was prevented by G–d from revealing whatever he had foreseen concerning that era. Yaakov could not understand why the vision was suddenly concealed from him, and he asked what his sons could be guilty of seeing that the letters ח and ט, both letters of the word חט(א) in the word “sin,” do not appear as part of the names of a single one of them. He was told by the Holy Spirit that at the same time none of the names of his sons contains the letters ק orצ , the letters forming the word קץ, end, (and צדיק, righteous) which are a prerequisite for such “end” being revealed to the bearer of such a name. The Holy Spirit added that as far as his having called upon his sons to gather around him was concerned, how come that he invited only them, but failed to include the Holy Spirit in his invitation? (Compare Isaiah, 43,22) ולא אותי קראת יעקב, “but you have not called upon Me, Yaakov?!” He was told that it was not part of his particular task, (virtue) to go revealing G–d’s secrets. (Proverbs 11,13) When Yaakov heard this, he changed course and began to address each son individually, i.e. ראובן בכורי אתה, “Reuven, you are my firstborn;”

באחרית הימים, seeing that Yaakov did not say: ימים, “years,” but הימים, “the years,” it is clear that he spoke of years that we have already heard about. He referred to the 400 years which G-d had already revealed to his grandfather Avraham as the period his descendants would be strangers, and part of this time even slaves, in a country not their own.

(3) WHAT IS TO BEFALL YOU. With respect to their power and their inheritance.

The meaning of the words את אשר is the same as כאשר, “when;” the word את frequently means the same as מן, “part of.” Yaakov, after all, did reveal only a very small fraction of what would happen to the tribes in the אחרית הימים, the period when the tribal heads had long died and their offspring had become part of the Jewish nation. Some of what he predicted was to occur relatively soon, other parts much later. When he used the words באחרית הימים he meant that what he spoke about would be as real as what would happen on the morrow. He referred specifically to the period when the Israelites would settle in the Holy Land, describing events that would take place then. Whatever he told them had been inspired by the spirit of prophecy. Parts of the prophecy concerned Israel when settled peacefully on its land, other parts spoke of events occurring during wars which would threaten the nation’s continued existence. He listed the names of his sons in the order of their birth up until Yehudah only.

Wir haben somit hier zwei Aussprüche: Gebet euch zusammen eurem einen Ziele hin, so möchte ich euch vergegenwärtigen, was euch am Ende der Tage treffen wird. Eigentlich was euch a. E. d. T. rufen wird (siehe Kapitel 24, 12). אחרית ist wohl von קץ zu unterscheiden. קץ ist das Ende, womit etwas aufhört, אחרית ist das, was nachher kommt, nachdem das andere geendet, somit hier: nachdem die jetzigen Zeitentwicklungen abgelaufen, also: die Hinterlassenschaft der Tage, das Ziel der Völkergeschichte.

Wir wissen aus dem Verfolg, dass Jakob in diesem Augenblick seine Söhne nicht in ihrer Übereinstimmung, sondern in ihren charakteristischen Verschiedenheiten im Geiste erblickte. Deshalb: "So verschieden ihr auch seid, gebt euch in eurer Verschiedenheit ganz dem einen Geiste hin, so will ich euch enthüllen, was euch am Ziele der Tage werden wird". Erst muss ein Sinn alle Söhne der Jakobsfamilie durchdringen, ehe das אחרית הימים kommt. Es kommt nicht, so lange nicht das האספו sich verwirklicht hat, ja — vielleicht — wird es so lange nicht einmal begriffen, und darum folgen hier von dem אחרית הימים nur kurz andeutende Pinselstriche.

הקבצו ושמעו! diese beiden Worte des sterbenden Vaters tragen die ganze jüdische Geschichte bis zum אחרית הימים. Materiell seid ihr בני יעקב, eine machtlose Minorität. Weil ihr aber eine so machtlose Minderheit seid, הקבצו, haltet zusammen, wachset ineinander, lasset euch nicht zerfällen, im קבוץ, in der Eintracht liegt eure Stärke; — und שמעו בני יעקב: nur durch eins kann die materiell schwächste Minderzahl der stärksten Majorität den Sieg abgewinnen, es ist der Geist, es ist שמעו, es ist die Hingebung an Geistiges, darum: שמעו בני יעקב! habet ein Ohr, habet Sinn fürs Geistige, "durstet" nach Geistigem, wie das Wort in seiner Tiefe heißt (שמע ist das geistige צמא), schöpfet, trinket gerne Geist! Dies ist das Testament unseres Vaters Jakob. "Eintracht und Geist" darin erkennt er Stärke und Leben seiner Kinder, und "wenn der Durst nach Geist in euch wach wird, so habet keinen anderen Durst als nach den Überlieferungen eures Vaters Jisrael, ושמעו אל ישראל אביכם!" Der Trunk aus dem jüdischen Born des Geistes und einträchtiges Zusammenhalten, dahin lautet das älteste Vermächtnis unseres sterbenden Vaters und das ruft uns noch das späteste Prophetenwort zu: והאמת והשלום אהבו (Secharja 8. 19). Raw Hirsch on Genesis 49: 3. הקבצו ,האספו, waren die ersten Gedanken, die Jakob beim Anblick seiner Söhne um sein Sterbelager erfüllten. Das Aneinanderhalten und das wache Interesse für alles Geistige war zunächst das Vermächtnis für alle. Soll aber eine solche, aus so verschiedenen Elementen bestehende Gesamtheit eine innere und äußere Einheit bilden, so bedarf sie einer Leitung; diese leitende Spitze sucht Jakob und mustert dazu seine Söhne. Am natürlichsten wäre diese Stellung dem Erstgeborenen zugekommen. Daher wendet er sich zuerst an Reuben.

כח .כחי, iKraft, verwandt mit כה: so, und dies verwandt mit כהה: dunkel werden. כה ist jene dunkle Quelle eines werdenden Wesens, die wir in uns und überall nur in ihren Produkten erkennen, die aber an sich uns stets dunkel bleibt, wir nennen sie Kraft; כה: so, ist Bezeichnung des Bildes, des Entwurfes, wonach sich etwas gestalten soll.

און verwandt mit הון, die Fähigkeit, etwas zu erwerben und zu besitzen. (Siehe oben Kap.35, 18.) Jakob spricht: du bist כחי, entweder: du bist derjenige, in dessen Bildung und geistiger Erziehung und Pflege sich zuerst meine Kraft gezeigt; oder: in dir ruht meine Kraft, durch dich wirke mein Geist still weiter. Mit der gelungenen oder misslungenen Erziehung des ältesten Sohnes und der ältesten Tochter ist fast das ganze Werk der Erziehung, und hätte jemand die zahlreichste Familie, gewonnen oder verloren.

ראשית אוני: bist mein erster Besitz; vergl. oben אשר לקחתי מיד האמרי וגו, Jakobs erste Errungenschaft war Reuben.

יתר: was weiter reicht als ein anderes; in der Zeit: übrig bleiben; im Raume: die über ihren natürlichen Umfang hinaus gespannte Sehne. Daher יֶתֶר entweder Substantiv: Vorzug an Würde und Vorzug an Macht, wobei man dann aber supplieren müsste: dir gebührte. Wahrscheinlicher aber ist es Adjektiv, und zwar stat. const. von יָתֵר wie יֶרֶך von יָרֵך.‎ כֶתֶף von כָתֵף: bevorzugt an Würde etc. שאת, wahrscheinlich hier: Hoheit, Würde, wie שאתו תבעת אתכם (Job 13, 11) משאתו יעצו להדיח (Psalm 62, 5), umsomehr, da die jüdische Würde נָשִיא heißt (siehe zu Kap.25, 16): du bist בכור, und als solcher bevorzugt an Würde, und darum auch bevorzugt an Macht. Als Erstgeborener hast du die Bestimmung, נשיא deiner Brüder zu sein, Oberhaupt und Leiter deiner Familie, und darum auch einen größeren Anteil an materieller Macht zu erhalten, damit der geistigen Führerschaft die materielle Grundlage nicht fehle. Möglich auch, dass es geradezu: tragen hieße, du solltest am meisten zu tragen haben (im Gegensatz zu Esaus אלופים sind אלופינו מסובלים, die Belasteten), und darum auch einen größeren Anteil an Macht.

ושמעו אל ישראל אביכם, preserve the teachings Israel taught throughout his life. When you do that you will be entitled to call yourselves בני ישראל, “The Children of Israel.” He, on the other hand, will be proud to call himself “your father.” It means that you as well as I have contended successfully when facing challenges set for you by G’d and by man. As a result, you will not forfeit the good G’d has in store for you.

הקבצו ושמעו, this was the introduction to his prophetic utterances, just as in Moses’ parting speech to the nation the words האזינו השמים והארץ (Deut. 32,1) were the opening line. The prophetess Devorah in her victory song extolling G’d, (Judges 5,3) also began with a similar opening, i.e. שמעו מלכים, “listen, pay attention, kings!”

וראשית אוני THE BEGINNING OF MY VIGOR — That is the first drop [of semen], as he had not experienced a seminal emission from all of his days [until that time] (Genesis Rabbah 98:4).

REUBEN MY FIRSTBORN THOU ART.⁷⁵This is the order of the Hebrew words: Reuven b’chori atah. Ramban will transpose the order of the words for the purpose of deriving the meaning of the verse. The sequence of this verse is, “Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the first-fruits of my strength, the excellence of majesty, and the excellence of power,” and its purport is as follows: “You are the first-born of my might and the first-fruits of my strength when I was the excellence of majesty (se’eith) and position” — the expression being similar to that found in the verses: Shall not his excellency (‘se’eitho’) make you afraid?⁷⁶Job 13:11. When he raiseth himself up (‘mise’eitho’) the mighty are afraid,⁷⁷Ibid., 41:17. ‘mise’eitho’ meaning ascendancy and power — “and when I was at the height of strength (oz) for war” — the expression being similar to that found in the verses: And He will give strength (‘oz’) unto His king;⁷⁸I Samuel 2:10. And the strength (‘ve’izuz’) of battle.⁷⁹Isaiah 42:25.

כחי וראשית אוני יתר שאת ויתר עז, although it sounds as if Yaakov is describing more than one facet of Reuven, it is a single statement incorporating what writers call “poetic license.” כחי, my power, my economic might; We find the word און as also referring to money, i.e. economic power in Hoseah,12,9 אך עשרתי, מצאתי און לי, ”I have become rich, I have gotten power.” Also in Job 20,10 the word און appears in the sense of economic power, וידיו תשבנה אונו, “his own hands must give back his wealth.”

Unstable as water. You lost the kingship because a ruler must be levelheaded. You have gone up your father’s bed. You lost the priesthood because you caused the Divine Presence to depart from your father’s bed and the Holy Temple is the “bed” of our heavenly Father. You profaned. You wished to prevent me from fathering more children so that your inheritance would not be reduced; therefore you have forfeited the extra portion of the firstborn.

יתר שאת ויתר עז, פחז כמים אל תותר; you are as unstable as water; you will therefore not enjoy an advantage over your brothers, the advantage which would have consisted of יתר שאת, enhanced social position and the entitlement to the firstborn’s extra share in the inheritance as well as the status of priesthood. Even though you are biologically, ראשית אוני, and as such would have been entitled to privileges involving an extra share in my inheritance, (based on Deuteronomy 21,17) as well as

ראובן בכרי אתה, "Reuben, you are my firstborn, etc.," What news did Jacob convey to us with this statement? What did Jacob mean when he described Reuben as "my strength and the first of my vigor?" Although Bereshit Rabbah 98,4 mentions that Jacob meant to say that whereas he had not emitted a drop of semen until he married at 84 years of age, Reuben had not been able to contain himself, we still need to know why Jacob mentioned this at this time. Furthermore, why did he appear to repeat himself by describing Reuben as 1) "my strength," and 2) "the first of my vigor?" Another difficulty in this verse is the expression יתר שאת ויתר עז. Whereas the Midrash we have just referred to understands the word שאת as a reference to the Priesthood whereas the word עז is a reference to Royalty, we need to know why Jacob did not mention that as a firstborn Reuben was entitled to two portions in the inheritance seeing that he did dwell on details of the birthright. Onkelos does refer to this by saying that Jacob meant that Reuben should have been entitled to three shares of the inheritance. Another enigmatic statement in this verse (4) is the expression פחז כמים אל־תותר, "unstable as water, you have lost your advantage;" Rashi comments that Reuben lost his advantage as a firstborn because of his instability, the instability being that he defiled Jacob's bed in the incident with Bilhah (35,22). This still does not tell us why Jacob could not have merely said אל תותר, without describing Reuben as פחז כמים. After all, Reuben's instability was only an additional way of describing his sin. All we needed to know to justify that Reuben was deprived of his privileges as the firstborn was the fact that he had committed a sin against his father. Why did Jacob phrase Reuben's sin in the plural, i.e. "your father's beds?" Why did Jacob create the impression that Reuben had committed two wrongs when he said: אז חללת, "at that time you defiled," as if Reuben had also defiled his bed at a different time? It gives the impression that the defilement Jacob speaks about did not occur at the time Reuben mounted his father's bed. If that is so we are entitled to know what precisely Jacob is talking about. On the other hand, if mounting his father's bed was defiling it he should have said so in unmistakable terms.

ראובן בכורי אתה; Yaakov repeated this theme a second and a third time when he continued: כחי, וראשית אוני. The reason was that theoretically, Reuven was entitled to three advantages. 1) birthright; 2) priesthood, as every firstborn in each family was automatically what the כהן would be after the sin of the golden calf when that privilege was transferred to the tribe of Levite who had not participated in that sin. 3) the position of political head of the nation, known as מלכות in the language of our sages.

ראובן בכורי אתה, “Reuven you are my firstborn, etc.” Yaakov meant to imply that due to his being the biologically first born, he should normally have been accorded a preferential rank, as is customary for firstborns, such as being the family’s priest, as well as its leader in secular matters. However, on account of the unfortunate incident in Genesis 35,22, he had disqualified himself for such preferential treatment. When he demonstrated an inability to control his biological urges, something Yaakov compares to the unstoppable tendency of water to flow downhill, he proved unfit for the task normally allotted to firstborns in those days. An alternate explanation of the line בכורי אתה כחי וראשית אוני יתר שאת, is: “you were my firstborn as long as you were reminiscent of the first product of my virility. At that time you possessed the advantage known as יתר שאת, the word meaning the same as in Job 13,11 הלא שאתו תבעת אתכם, “will not his height terrify you, etc?” The expression ויתר עוז refers to superior physical power, such as is useful in battle. You possessed this advantage only as long as you fulfilled the function of the firstborn. Since this task has been transferred to Joseph, you no longer possess it, as elaborated on by Rashi. You forfeited your advantages.

ראובן בכורי אתה, “Reuven you are my first-born.” As a first-born Reuven was entitled to three advantages over his younger brothers. He was entitled to all the privileges normally accruing to the first-born; he was entitled to be the family priest; and he was entitled to a position of authority including Royalty if and when his family would develop into a nation. He lost all three parts of what would have accrued to him by reason of his being the biological first-born due to his sin. He lost the ordinary privileges of being a first-born as Yaakov gave those privileges to Joseph. He lost the priesthood to Levi, and he lost his status as potential king of the Jewish people to Yehudah. This is the deeper meaning of Yaakov saying (verse 4) “water-like, impetuously-you cannot be foremost.” The expression פחז is used in that sense by our sages in Shabbat 88 where they quote a Gentile referring to the Israelites saying to G’d at Mount Sinai: “we shall do and we shall hear,“ ”you are still an impetuous nation referring with your mouth to matters your ears have not heard yet.”
Yaakov referred to the priesthood when he said יתר שאת, “foremost in rank.” Yaakov referred to the eventual status of Royalty when he said יתר עז, “foremost in power.” The expression עז denoting such power is found in Samuel I 2,10 ויתן עז למלכו as well as in Psalms 99,4 ועז מלך משפט אהב, “Mighty king who loves justice.”

He had never had a nocturnal emission. [Rashi knows this] because אוני is redundant, for it is already written כחי, and אוני and כחי have the same meaning as Rashi explains. [Question:] A woman cannot conceive from her first act of relations. [So how could Reuvein the son of Leah, have been conceived from Yaakov’s first drop? The answer is:] Perhaps Leah had been deflowered by a piece of wood. Re’m answers: She had deflowered herself with her finger. There are other answers; see there. Nachalas Yaakov writes: If not for what they wrote, I would explain that Leah did not actually conceive from the first drop. Rather, all of Yaakov’s drops were for [the purpose of conceiving] Reuvein, as Yaakov never had a nocturnal emission due to improper thoughts. See what he says there.

ראובן בכורי אתה, Reuven you, who are my firstborn,” and who should have received a double share of my inheritance; and you who should also have shouldered the yoke of being the priest among your siblings, and from whom eventually the first King of the Israelites should have been crowned, (in accordance with Chronicles II 21,3) “and the title of Royalty he gave to Yehoram for he was the firstborn,” you will not enjoy all this as it has been transferred to Joseph, and the priesthood to Levi, and the Royalty to Yehudah, all because you have been as unstable as water, as a kettle that boils over and spills its contents.” (Compare Chronicles I 5,1) As a result, the only privilege a firstborn enjoys that you still possess is the hollow title of having been the firstborn of my sons. In this respect you are comparable to water, the first physical element in the universe. You are the original, (oldest) of the people that make up the Israelite nation, the 12 tribes.” Water is insubstantial; it cannot be poured out completely, as opposed to something dry which can be emptied without the loss of any part of it. In the Talmud, tractate Shabbat folio 55, where the meaning of the word פחז in our verse is discussed by different scholars, [there is a lengthy debate about what constituted the sin of a number of illustrious people such as Reuven, the sons of High Priest Eli, Solomon, Yoash, Pinchos, David, King Yoshia, and others Ed.] each offering a different opinion; the conclusion arrived at is that the scholars of the Mishnah agreed to disagree. The common denominator of their discussion is that the text describing their respective sins cannot be understood at its face value but is a metaphor describing a character weakness on the occasion. (B’reshit Rabbah 99,6)

וראשית אוני, “and the first product of my virility.” Even though we have a tradition that a woman never conceives as a result of the first time she has engaged in sexual intercourse, it is possible to achieve such conception by means of what is called: מעיכה, “squeezing,” in the Talmud tractate Yevamot, folio 34.[It is quite difficult to accept this interpretation as the Torah makes plain that Leah did not get pregnant from the first time she slept with Yaakov, seeing that in Genesis 29,31 it states clearly that G-d helped her get pregnant when He observed that Yaakov “hated” her. Clearly this was not before the first night. Ed.]

אוני means MY VIGOR, as (Hosea 12:9) “I have gained me (און) strength”; (Isaiah 40:26) “by the greatness of His (אונים) might”; (Isaiah 5:29) “and to him that hath no (אונים) might Ho increaseth strength”.

What Yaakov is referring to is that although Reuven as the first-born was entitled to a double portion of his father’s estate, his conduct resulted in his forfeiting this advantage and forfeiting his chance of being the leader among his brothers. פחז כמים, having been unstable like water, you will no longer enjoy your excellence, i.e. יתר שאת, neither the rights of the first-born nor the claim to be king over the tribes.

יתר עז enhanced political clout by supplying the kings of the Jewish nation from your tribe, you have forfeited all this by having displayed character weakness. (compare Chronicles II 21,3 where the claim to the throne by Yehoram was based on his being the firstborn).

יתר שאת, this expression encompasses both the birthright and the priesthood, both of which are primarily a description of an aristocratic social standing.
ויתר עז, a reference to the political power, Royalty. Kings need to excel in this fortitude, toughness described by the word עוז. We find the expression used in that sense in Samuel I 2,10 ויתן עוז למלכו, “He will give power to His king.” Yaakov is reminding Reuven: “you would have enjoyed all these advantages over your brothers if you had not become guilty of a great sin.” This is why he continued with פחז כמים, you were precipitous as water in not restraining your biological urges which led you to mount the couch of your father. You did not stop to consider what a sin with far ranging effects you would make yourself guilty of by your lack of self control.

Before commencing to explain these verses we need to understand why Jacob did not honour the Torah's commandment of not showing preference (in terms of inheritance) to the firstborn son of the wife he loved when the true firstborn was the son of the wife he hated (Deut. 21,16)? Jacob treated Joseph the firstborn son of his beloved wife Rachel, as entitled to the privileges that are accorded to the son of the wife he hated when the latter had been born earlier. The question also arises whether the patriarchs were obligated to accept the norms of the Torah, seeing that the Torah did not become the law of Israel until the revelation at Mount Sinai. After all, we find that Jacob married two sisters while both were alive, something that contravenes Torah law. Abraham too did not perform circumcision on himself until he was advanced in years whereas Torah law stipulates circumcision on the eighth day or as soon as possible thereafter. We can find numerous other instances of the patriarchs not acting in accordance with Torah law. In view of the two examples we have quoted about the patriarchs not complying with what became Torah law thereafter, the whole question of why Jacob treated Joseph as his firstborn seems irrelevant. I have found that Nachmanides (Genesis 26,5) explains that the reason Jacob did marry two sisters while both were alive was that he was not in the Holy Land at the time. His words do not sound convincing. Who told Jacob that Torah legislation applied only within the boundaries of ארץ ישראל? The fact is that the commandments which the patriarchs did not observe apply equally in ארץ ישראל and outside it.

כחי וראשית אוני יתר שאת, “my might and first fruit of my virility, exceeding in rank;” Yaakov refers to what Reuven would have been entitled to, i.e. an extra share in the inheritance as a result of being the first born. ...

יתר שאת SUPERIORITY IN DIGNITY — Since you were the first-born it was proper that you should be superior to your brothers by being endowed with the priesthood. This term שאת “lifting up” alludes to the נשיאות כפים the raising of the hands when the priests pronounce the benediction (cf. Onkelos).

אל תותר, you will no longer enjoy any advantage over your brothers.

I believe that the patriarchs received the Torah from Shem who in turn had received it from Noach; Noach had received it from Chanoch who had received it from Adam himself. Adam, of course, had received the Torah from G'd. This is based on Job 28,27: "Then He saw and told, etc.,…and He said to Adam." Zohar 1,199 attributes the revelation of Torah laws to Adam as the basis of G'd instructing him how to work and preserve the גן עדן. I have explained this in connection with Genesis 2,15. At that time Adam (and the patriarchs subsequently) were only commanded seven laws on pain of death. These laws are the ones commonly known as the Noachide laws, those applicable to mankind as a whole. All the other commandments which G'd revealed to Adam had only one purpose, namely to enable man to accumulate reward if he observed them. If he failed to observe those laws he was not liable to punishment. This situation continued until G'd revealed Himself to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai.

The word אוני refers to financial strength. As in Hoseah 12,9: מצאתי און לי, “I have become rich!”

ויתר עז SUPERIORITY IN POWER — meaning in royal rank, as is meant by עז in (1 Samuel 2:10) “And he will give strength (עז) unto His king”. And what caused you to lose all these?

The patriarchs made a point of observing all these commandments as an expression of their love for G'd. This is what G'd had told Isaac in Genesis 26,5. Yuma 28 states that Abraham not only observed all the commandments of the Torah but even such Rabbinic ordinances as Eyruv Tavshilim. No doubt Abraham instructed his children in these matters as he wanted them to qualify for the reward in store for those who observed all these commandments. Whenever the patriarchs observed that by not observing one of these commandments they would achieve something important immediately, they decided to opt for the immediate benefit. This is what happened when Jacob decided to marry Rachel in addition to Leah. He wanted to have children by Rachel, i.e. that at least some of the tribes should be her offspring. Jacob was especially entitled to do so since he was a prophet and acted in accordance with instructions received from G'd directly. We can understand this better when comparing what Maimonides wrote in chapter 9 of his Hilchot Yesodey Torah. He states that if a properly accredited prophet instructs the Jewish people to violate one of the Torah's commandments on a temporary basis, he is to be obeyed. Maimonides quotes the incident when Elijah rebuilt a private altar and sacrificed on it on Mount Carmel as a case in point. The same applied to Jacob's having married two sisters. According to Bereshit Rabbah 85,8, an angel exploited Yehudah's desire to have sexual intercourse by guiding him to Tamar, thereby ensuring that the kings who would come out of him had a matriarch who was both of suitable ancestry and of high moral calibre. At any rate, there are instances when it was obviously preferable not to apply the strictures that would become anchored in law at a later time in Jewish history.

The meaning of the word שאת is as in לשאת, “bearing,” self assured posture.

According to what we have said so far we must assume that the fact that Jacob used Reuben's misdeameanour to deprive him of the privileges which come with the birthright was quite legal, halachically speaking. Alternatively, Jacob had received instructions from G'd directly concerning this. We have all of this spelled out in Chronicles I 5,1 where the fact that Reuben was deprived of his birthright because he had mounted his father's bed is stated clearly, although it also states that though Ephrayim and Menashe became the new firstborns, they did not replace Reuben as the titular first-born.

It is still not clear why the birthright was not given to Yehudah instead of to Joseph or any of the other older brothers. The Zohar on Vayishlach page 176 explains this. "At the time when Jacob slept with Leah (the first night of his marriage), he thought only about Rachel all the time since he was under the impression that he was sleeping with and impregnating Rachel. Restoring the birthright to Joseph was no more than an example of Jacob's original intention being fulfilled."

Whereas this explained why Jacob gave the birthright to Joseph once he took it away from Reuben, why did the Torah have to mention that Reuben had defiled Jacob's bed? The birthright would have belonged to Joseph anyways. [I confess I have great difficulty with this Zohar because Leah was not impregnated on the first night of her marriage; when Reuben was conceived, eventually, Jacob was well aware that he was sleeping with Leah. If he had pined after Rachel knowing that he was sleeping with Leah this would have been most inappropriate. Ed.] In order to answer our problem we must remember that all the manifestations of spirituality in the world are divided into three categories. One category of spirituality is sacred, holy. A second category is secular; the third category of spirituality is evil. Each one of these categories produces "offsprings" corresponding to its nature. The category of holy spirituality produces offspring which is good, provides eternal bliss, and it strives for abstract intelligence, etc. The category of secular spirituality is characterised by its interest in the consumption of that which is aestethically pleasing, and that which provides enjoyment for the senses. The third category of spirituality is characterised by its interest in idolising every abomination. Its adherents commit every sin in the book. They steal, cheat, deceive, and consume mostly forbidden foods. They engage in illicit sex and indulge only in gratifying their lust, etc. These three categories between them comprise every human being, the good ones, the secular oriented ones, and the evil ones.

Inasmuch as the Jewish people belong to the holy category of spirituality, G'd has commanded them not to taste i.e. absorb things which characterise evil, be it in the form of food or drink, speech or thought, or even perceptions that are of a visual, aural or of an olfactory nature. Prohibited foods (i.e. the sense of taste) comprise such things as eating living tissue, eating unclean animals, eating reptiles and insects or diseased animals, or even animals which died a natural death. Forbidden drink includes the consumption of wine designated for idolatrous purposes, wine made from grapes of vines which are less than four years old, etc. Forbidden speech includes lying, slander, coarse language, character assassination, etc. Forbidden thoughts include the study of idolatry with a view to practicing it, fantasies of an erotic nature, considering oneself superior to others, pride, etc. Forbidden use of one's vision include examining a woman's physical beauty, as elaborated on in the Zohar Kedoshim page 83. Forbidden sounds include listening to women sing, etc. Forbidden smells and fragrances include forbidden smells such as the incense offered in pagan rites. In all these matters there are secular as well as sacred elements. G'd decreed that it was mandatory to observe the sacred elements whereas it was permitted to take advantage of the secular elements. Whenever a person associates himself with one of either of these elements by making use of them, his soul forms some kind of attachment with the root underlying such element be it positive or negative.

Seeing that this is so even a pure soul is subject to some degree of contamination when its owner gets involved in one of the secular elements. As a result, such a person (body as well as soul) will experience a process of afflictions either in this world or by the soul alone in the Hereafter to cleanse him of that contamination. This is the mystical dimension of the "laundry" mentioned in Shabbat 152 where the soiled souls are described as being handed over to the "washer" after death before they can take their seat at the king's table. During the period the "clothes" are being washed their owners are incarcerated. You should appreciate that once a forbidden category of spirituality has made contact with a person, that person's soul in turn develops a yearning for that particular category of the forbidden. The attraction between them is mutual. When a soul (personality) has become infected with the impurity represented by adultery, such a soul will begin to develop a yearning for this kind of impurity. The same holds true of all other categories of the forbidden. A person's desire to partake of evil increases in direct proportion to the quantity of evil he has absorbed and the frequency with which he has done so. On the other hand, a person's path to saintliness is similarly accelerated in proportion to the efforts he makes to distance himself from evil and to embrace only what is sacred and holy. The rule one must remember is that there is nothing in this world which does not contain elements of either negative or positive spirituality. Our only yardstick for knowing what contains negative spirituality is that which is forbidden by the Torah. In his volume Sefer Hayashar chapter 9, Rabbeynu Tam writes that when examining a number of personalities (נפש) as to their inherent tendencies, one will find that some people have absolutely no inclinations to commit adultery whereas others have. The difference is accounted for by the owners of these respective personalities having absorbed negative spirituality. Once a sufficient amount of such evil has been absorbed it is almost impossible for that personality to hate evil sufficiently for that hatred to be of assistance in combating evil tendencies. This is the mystical dimension of what we are taught in Sukkah 52 that man possesses a relatively small organ (male organ) whose demands grow in proportion to the freedom one grants it to satisfy its desire and which becomes progressively more satiated in proportion to the frequency with which it is denied its desire.

There are people who display a strong tendency towards evil, a tendency which intensifies as they grow up, whereas others can control their evil urges with ease and are able to repent and find their way back to innocence with relative ease. Such tendencies are the result of the composition of their respective life-force at the time of conception. The holy thoughts and aspirations of the parents at the time of marital intercourse determine to a large degree the natural tendencies which we will observe in their offspring. If a parent concentrated on physical gratification at the time he engaged in procreation, he cannot be surprised if he transmitted tendencies of the desire to fulfil himself sexually to his offspring. If at the time the father indulged in marital relations with his wife he fantasized about some other woman's body, he cannot be surprised if his offspring develops adulterous or promiscuous tendencies. [This concept is not dissimilar to present-day theories about the genetic material injected into the sperm determining the quality of the body. In this case we speak about "moral" genetical material. Ed.] We have an interesting story about this in the Eyn Yaakov on Berachot 10. King Chiskiyah had failed to marry having seen with his mental eye that his offspring would not be worthy. He fell sick, and Isaiah told him to make his last will and testament as he was going to die. When he challenged the prophet why death at such an early age had been decreed upon him the prophet accused him of failing to fulfil the first commandment of the Torah, to procreate. He did not accept Chiskiyah's reason for not marrying and told him that the worthiness of his children was G'd's concern, whereas his only concern should have been to keep G'd's commandment. In the course of the conversation Chiskiyah suggested to Isaiah that he should give him his daughter in marriage and that perhaps their combined merits would suffice to produce worthy children. After refusing initially, Isaiah agreed in the end. The result was that Chiskiyah produced two idol-worshipping sons Menashe and Ravshakeh. Menashe and Ravshakeh may have been born with idolatrous tendencies due to thoughts which their father had entertained at the time he begat them. If one observes a person who has always conducted himself in the most pious manner commit an obvious sin, one must assume that he was not aware that he committed such a sin. Our argument that the various manifestations of spirituality we encounter contain both positive and negative elements is best proven by the tree of knowledge. The fact that G'd planted that tree within גן עדן is proof that it contained positive elements. G'd's garden is certainly not a place in which He had planted evil incarnate. Bereshit Rabbah 21, claims that if only Adam had waited till nightfall before eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge he could have used the juice to proclaim the sanctification of the Sabbath with it. [I have not found this in the section of the Midrash quoted. I presume this is based on the prohibition applying only "on the day you eat from it," as opposed to "the night you eat from it," etc. Ed.] This is in accordance with the view expressed in Sanhedrin 70 that the tree of knowledge was the grapevine.

In view of all the above you are bound to ask how it was possible that sainted patriarchs such as Abraham and Isaac could have fathered such sons as Ishmael and Esau respectively? The answer is that they carried within themselves residual evil bequeathed to them by their forefather Terach who was an idol worshiper. When Abraham was born he contained elements of such tendencies. Abraham was able to suppress and isolate such tendencies by dint of his character; the residue of such suppressed tendencies resurfaced in Ishmael, however. Nonetheless Abraham was not yet totally free from the residual evil tendencies bequeathed to him by his father so that even Isaac was born with them. Isaac, in turn, suppressed them and isolated them by means of his enthusiastic pursuit of holiness. He was so successful in this regard that our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 63,8 state that Esau had to be born first so that by absorbing the residue of negative spiritual input remaining from earlier ancestors, Jacob could emerge free from such taint.

Let us now examine what happened when Jacob married. Since he was born without negative spiritual residue, why did he produce a Reuben who demonstrated some negative traits? This could only have been due to Jacob's thoughts at the time he conceived Reuben not having been perfect. Jacob's purity of thought and his deed were not perfectly matched at that moment. Our sages in Nedarim 20 list nine categories of children who are spiritually defective from the time of their conception; one of these categories is the child of a man who has two wives and who at the time of marital relations believed that he was in bed with his other wife. Although Jacob's situation was different in that he had every reason to believe that he was in bed with Rachel, the objective fact was that he did not have the correct thoughts at the time. This is proven by the fact that Reuben later became guilty of a misdemeanour involving his father's bed, something that not one of the other eleven sons of Jacob ever became guilty of. Even Joseph who was exposed to sexual harassment of a very intense nature did not succumb. While it is true that the Talmud in Shabbat 55 states that if someone accuses Reuben of having committed a transgression such a person is in error, this referred merely to the legal aspect of the matter, not to its moral implications.

As to Yehudah sleeping with Tamar- something which suggests something less than 100% chaste behaviour by a son of Jacob- there are two answers. 1) First of all, he had no idea that she was his daughter-in-law; 2) the fact that an angel arranged things in such a way that he was actually acting under some kind of duress as explained by our sages in Makkot 23 on Genesis 38,26. The word ממני in that verse is understood by our sages as referring to a heavenly voice which claimed that the whole incident had been engineered by heaven. Since we do not have an allusion to such heavenly intervention in the case of Reuben, we are entitled to blame him for his act.

I have seen a comment by the outstanding scholar Rabbi Yehudah Rosenis in his volume Parshat D'rachim in which he comes to the defence of Reuben claiming that the status of Bilhah was that of a woman who had been seduced by his father Jacob, something he derives from her description as "his father's concubine." This means that Bilhah had never been betrothed to Jacob; l cannot agree with this. I am convinced that Jacob acquired Bilhah by betrothing her to him in the traditional manner as l have explained at the appropriate place (Genesis 30,3). As to the term "concubine" used by the Torah in 35,22, perhaps that was what Reuben thought. He was in error, however, and that may have accounted for his conduct. Alternatively, the Torah hinted at the reason that Reuben disturbed his father's bed. He argued that not only had Jacob down-graded his mother Leah during Rachel's lifetime, the fact that he slept primarily in Bilhah's tent now that Rachel was dead was an even greater insult to his mother. Her place had now been usurped by a mere concubine. The facts of the matter are that Bilhah had always been a proper wife of Jacob; this is why the Torah describes Reuben's action as equivalent to having slept with one of Jacob's wives.

Having said all this we understand the words of the Zohar according to which the cause of the problem was that Jacob had thought of fathering his firstborn son Joseph at the time he was sleeping with Leah. This is precisely what Ezra had in mind when he described Reuben's losing his birthright in the Book of Chronicles I 5,1. Had Jacob been thinking of Leah at the time he slept with her, Reuben would never have been capable of the deed ascribed to him.

We are now able to explain the various verses beautifully. When Jacob was about to deprive Reuben of his birthright he was poignantly aware that if one of his sons had displayed such a moral weakness he had to look for the source of that weakness in something he himself had been guilty of. The cause was, as we explained, that the father had bequeathed to his son some spiritual values be they positive or negative. Inasmuch as Reuben's sin consisted of a sexual aberration, Jacob was anxious to distance himself from the accusation that he was a contributory cause to Reuben's behaviour. He was afraid that in his heart Reuben would accuse his father of being the cause that he was capable of such a mistake. This is why he said first: "Reuben you are my firstborn." People who are guilty of adulterous behaviour fall into 3 categories. 1) They commit adultery and as a result father children who are morally inferior. 2) They commit adultery but do not cause their partner to become pregnant. Such intercourse can again be subdivided into several categories such as intercourse with a married woman which fortuitously does not result in that woman becoming pregnant. Alternatively, the adulterous male engages in intercourse with another male, or he ejaculates outside his female partner. Finally, he might commit the "act" only in an erotic dream at night, accidentally. 3) A person arouses himself by means of erotic thoughts. All of the afore-mentioned are degrees of actions which are abhorrent to G'd. Jacob referred to all three alternatives by saying to Reuben: "my firstborn," "my strength," "my vigor." When he said בכודי אתה, "you are my firstborn," he meant that he had not fathered any child prior to Reuben. Neither had he slept with a woman without benefit of betrothal and marriage certificate as this also would not have been appropriate. He then continued to say כחי, "my strength," meaning that he had not emitted sperm previous to that occasion. When he continued: ראשית אוני, "the first of my strength," he meant that he had never done anything that could be subsumed under any of the headings of adulterous behaviour we have listed.

When Jacob said כחי וראשית אוני, he also hinted that Reuben was the result of the first drop of semen he had ever ejaculated. This is an indication that Jacob had not slept with a virgin, as a virgin could not have become pregnant from her first intercourse. Instead, Jacob had removed the hymen with his finger in order not to let a single drop of his semen go to waste deliberately. This was a further indication that his physical passion did not dominate him and that he did what he did as a sacred duty only. As a result, Reuben had absolutely no reason to blame Jacob's past conduct for any of his own shortcomings. Jacob told Reuben all this not in order to boast about his piety and self-control but in order to be sure that Reuben did not suspect him of being implicated in any way in his having defiled his father's bed.

Jacob added the words יתר שאת ויתר עז as an allusion to the double portion of his father's inheritance that the firstborn is entitled to. Jacob had referred to this when he said: "you are my firstborn." On the other hand, there are other distinctions such as the priesthood and royalty which are not necessarily tied to being the firstborn. There are occasions when such honours are bestowed on people who are not firstborn. Reuben had also forfeited the chance to receive such honours.

Jacob may also have been telling Reuben that the honours of priesthood and Royalty which he would have been entitled to more than any other firstborn and which far outweighed other hereditary advantages of the firstborn he had also forfeited by his behaviour.

Up until this point Jacob dealt with the fact that he himself had not been at fault in the matter. From this point on Jacob proceeds to list the reasons that Reuben forfeited the privileges which come with being a firstborn. He deals with the distinctions Reuben has forfeited as well as with the roots of the mistake he committed.

פחז כמים The impetuosity and the precipitance with which you so hastily showed your wrath, just like water that rushes headlong in its course — therefore

UNSTABLE (‘PACHAZ’) AS WATER, YOU HAVE NOT THE EXCELLENCY. Pachaz is a noun, derived from the expression, Vain and reckless (‘upachazim’) fellows,⁸⁰Judges 9:4. meaning “hasty and impulsive people.” Our Rabbis have made steady use of this word: “I was looking at my image in the water and my evil inclination rose (pachaz) within me,”⁸¹Nedarim 9b. that is “my evil inclination leaped upon me” They said further: “It is their recklessness (apichzeihu) which they are revealing,”⁸²Sanhedrin 57a. See Note 63 in my Hebrew commentary, p. 265. meaning their impulsiveness. “A reckless (p’chizah) people, who spoke before listening, you still retain your recklessness (‘b’pachzuteich’),”⁸³Shabbath 88a. meaning “hasty and impulsive.” It is possible that this word pachaz is a permutation of the word chipazon (hurry).⁸⁴As is the case with the words; keves and kesev, both of which mean “lamb,” and other similar words. Jacob was thus saying: “Since you burst forth as water, you shall no longer excel for thou wentest up to thy father’s place of repose in thy haste and impulsiveness. Then didst thou profane them,⁸⁵The Hebrew is mishk’vei (places of repose), which is in the plural form. Hence Ramban writes otham (them). when your recklessness ascended my couch like the rising and gushing water.” This is similar to the Scriptural description of water: Now, therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, mighty and many, even the king of Assyria and all his glory; and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks; and he shall sweep through Judah, overflowing as he passeth through.⁸⁶Isaiah 8:7-8.
Our Rabbis have said:⁸⁷Shabbath 55b. It is found here in Rashi in the form mentioned by Ramban. “Then didst thou profane He Who hovered over my couch, meaning the Shechinah” that used to abide above my [Jacob’s] couch. Yet the verse says, Forasmuch as he [Reuben] defiled his father’s couch,⁸⁸I Chronicles 5:1. This clearly shows that it was “the couch” which was defiled and not, as the comment of Rashi would have it, the Shechina. Ramban proceeds to answer that Scripture modifies the expression out of respect for the Divine Presence. thus clearly stating that it was the couch which was defiled! But perhaps [out of respect for the Divine Presence, Scripture] modifies the expression there.
But if [we accept the explanation that Scripture modifies the expression], it is possible that the word alah (going up) refers to [Jacob, thus saying, “then didst thou profane my couch upon which I used to go up],” just as in the verse, Nor go up into the bed that is spread for me.⁸⁹Psalms 132:3. Thus Jacob’s intent is to say: “Then thou didst defile me;” He spoke in the third person⁹⁰Alah, “he” went up. only as a matter of respect. Similarly, the verse, Forasmuch as he defiled his father’s couch,⁹¹I Chronicles 5:1. is a Scriptural modification, meaning “forasmuch as he [Reuben] defiled the one who goes up⁹²I.e., Jacob. His name though is not mentioned directly, as a matter of respect. upon his father’s couch.”
From the literal meaning of this verse it would appear as I have explained it in Seder Vayishlach,⁹³Above, 35:22. i.e., that it was Reuben’s intention to disqualify Bilhah from his father so that she should no longer give birth to children, thus lessening his share as the firstborn. It was for this reason that Jacob said to him that it was reckless and impulsive to think that he would gain thereby, whereas he had no profit from it but only loss.

כי עלית על משכבי אביך, for through your having mounted your father’s bed, (you disgraced, etc.). Reuven having been deprived of his privileges as first-born has been spelled out more clearly in Chronicles I 5,1-2) “He was the firstborn of Israel; but when he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, son of Israel, so he is not considered as first-born in genealogy.”

פחז במים, "Hasty, like water, etc." Jacob accused Reuben of acting with haste, not trying to control his emotions and urges, failing to vanquish the spark of evil which was rooted within him. As a result of that failure he would be deprived of the three distinctions we have described i.e. birthright, priesthood and royalty.

כי עלית משכבי אביך, when you committed that act, חללת יצועי, you defiled my couch; your act prevented me from having any further marital relations with my wife Bilhah. My grandfather explained the expression יתר שאת as an allusion to atonement. [שאת from the root נשא, to elevate, i.e. to forgive as in ונשאתי לכל המקום, “I will forgive the whole place” (Genesis 18,26) Ed.] If so, far from putting down Reuven in his final words to him, Yaakov blessed him by offering his forgiveness at this time for the sin he had committed. against him.

אז חללת יצועי עלה, at that time you defiled your father’s dignity. Alternatively, Yaakov may have referred to Reuven’s act being a desecration of G’d’s honour. As an appropriate punishment, Reuven’s own status, which had been one of special honour, would be diminished accordingly.

אז חללת יצועי עלה, “then you desecrated Him Who abode on my bed.” According to our sages, Yaakov referred to Reuven having desecrated the Presence of the Divinity, which was ever present near his father’s bed. Another explanation: your פחז, i.e. “your haste,” which was comparable to the ease with which water gushed forth from a spring, caused you to forfeit your advantage, for in your haste to ascend my couch you desecrated it thereby. Ibn Ezra understands the word עלה here as meaning “disappeared, withdrew,” as if the Torah had written עלה מעלי, “distanced himself from me.” He quotes David in Psalms 102,25 אל תעלני בחצי ימי, “do not let me die when only half my allotted lifespan is over.” Rabbi Joseph Kimchi views the paragraph as a blessing (just as the others) each of the sons receiving a blessing compatible with his personality. He includes the wish that just as he is willing to forgive Reuven for his indiscretion, so may the Lord also forgive him this sin. As a result you will be able to display the natural advantages common to a firstborn. The word שאת appears in the context of forgiveness, (Genesis 4,7 with Kayin). Yaakov described Reuven’s inability to control his libido as comparable to water gushing forth. The episode was understood by Yaakov to have been a momentary failure of reason controlling natural urges, resulting in his couch being desecrated. The word עלה belongs to the words פחז כמים instead of being part of חללת יצועי.

The Name... [Rashi knows this] because “profaned” refers to Hashem. “To profane” can be said regarding Hashem, as in the expression חילול השם. But “To profane” cannot be said about a bed, and he who explains it so is mistaken.

Es ist zu bedauern, dass die Radix פחז nicht öfter vorkommt. Aus אנשים רקים ופוחזים sieht man ebenfalls, dass es einen Charaktermangel bedeutet (Richter 9. 4). Allein unbestimmt bleibt, welchen. Unglücklicherweise steht es hier mit Wasser zusammen. Es gibt aber kaum etwas, das so verschiedene Auffassungen zulässt wie Wasser. Wasser hat keine innere Festigkeit, somit: Haltlosigkeit wie Wasser. Wasser fließt immer nach unten, strebt nach dem Niedrigen (wofern es nicht vergeistigt zur Regenbildung in Wolken aufsteigt). Wasser ist flüssig, bewegt sich rasch vorwärts etc. Im Munde unserer Weisen heißt איפחו צלוחיתו: das Überfließen des Glases. Die allgemeinste, dem Flüssigen als solchem innewohnende Eigenschaft wäre: der Mangel an Kohäsion, somit die Haltlosig- keit. — אל תותר ist Hiphil und heißt darum wohl nicht: du darfst keinen Vorzug haben, sondern ist Prädikat zum Subjekt פחז, die Haltlosigkeit deines Charakters gestattet dir den Vorzug nicht, weil du etc., da hast du den entweiht, der etc., also: dich; es ist milde umschrieben. Indem nun aber gleichwohl hier gesagt ist: du bist der köstlichste Edelstein in meinem Schatz, bist כחי וראשית אוני, allein zum Führer der Familie taugst du nicht, der muß עז sein, der darf sich nicht durch linde, schmeichelnde Winde und auch nicht durch stürmende Orkane bewegen lassen, muss innere Charakterfestigkeit haben, nicht haltlos wie Wasser sein — so ergibt sich aus allem dem, dass denn doch der ganze Vorgang nicht jene Bedeutung haben könne, die in dem schroffen Worte וישכב sein יתר שאת ויתר עז war und כח אביו וראשית אונו liegt. Einem Sohne, der וגו׳ sollte, wird auch ein sonst leichteres Vergehen hoch angerechnet. Ein wirkliches Verbrechen hätte ein Jakob bei einem Reuben nicht so milde und leicht als פחז כמים bezeichnet.

כי עלית על משכבי אביך, “you went up to your father’s bed;” On which occasion did this take place? At the time when Leah traded Yaakov’s turn to spend the night with Rachel for the mandrakes her son Reuven had found. (Genesis 30,15). (Br’eshit Rabbah 96.4)

כי עלית, “when you mounted;” “you desecrated Him Who is present even when I have intimate relations with my wife.” Yaakov accuses Reuven that as of the day when he invaded his privacy, he no longer had marital relations with Bilhah. Furthermore, when you desecrated my couch, you desecrated yourself and removed the sanctity of the kingship and the first-born status from yourself. Thus Jacob transferred the first-born status to Joseph. There are commentators who explained that Jacob said all of this to his other sons so that they should not wonder why he spoke so harshly to Reuven who had sinned gravely. The word עלה occurs in the sense of “departing, withdrawing its presence,” also in Psalms 102,25: על תעלני בחצי ימי, “do not take me away in the midst of my days.”

אל תותר THOU SHALT NOT BE SUPERIOR— you will not receive all these many prerogatives that were proper to you. And what was this impetuosity which you displayed?

יצועי עלה, the indirect mode עלה, “he mounted,” means “you were about to mount.” We find numerous instances in Scripture when a past tense is not really a past tense, such as when Avraham said to Efron that he had already given the money for the cave of Machpelah, נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני, when what he meant was that he had the money all ready and prepared. (compare Genesis 23,13). [Avraham could not have paid for the field at that time, not having wanted to buy the field nor even having made an offer to buy it. He would have considered it improper to ask someone to sell an ancestral field. Ed.]

When Jacob added אל תותר, he hinted that although Reuben had displayed haste in doing something which held no advantage for him, he had not displayed the same haste when it came to doing something useful, i.e. repenting his mistake. Our sages in Baba Kama 92 say that it was Yehudah who triggered Reuben's eventual repentance. Although Bereshit Rabbah 84,19 states that G'd complimented Reuben on being the first human being who had repented [without having been accused by anyone as yet, Ed.], Reuben had not uttered a confession of his sin until he had heard about Yehudah doing this during Tamar's trial. Perhaps Reuben's tardiness in confessing his mistake was the reason that royalty was conferred on the descendants of Yehudah instead. It was Yehudah's reward for being the cause that triggered the final stage in Reuben's repentance. Reuben may have lost the priesthood to the descendants of Levi as a result of later developments as mentioned in Deut. 33,8 לאיש חסידך אשר נסיתו במסה, "Be with Your faithful one whom You tested at Massah" (when that tribe did not complain). Regardless of when Levi qualified for the priesthood, Reuben forfeited his claim to it already during Jacob's time. The words אל תותר mean that Reuben was deprived of all his erstwhile advantages over his brothers. Jacob transferred one of his former distinctions to Joseph, a second one to Yehudah, and he left the third one pending until G'd eventually accorded it to part of the tribe of Levi.

חללת יצועי עלה, “you did defile Him Who used to ascend my couch. (The Holy Spirit)” Yaakov’s curse was to remain in force until Moses Deuteronomy 33,6 said: יחי ראובן ואל ימות, “may Reuven live and not die.” In the meantime it had been Moses who was allowed to ascend to G–d’s residence on the Mount; (Exodus ומשה עלה 19,3). An alternate interpretation of this phrase: “you have desecrated my couch which until that time had been on a higher level than that of my father and grandfather, each of whom had had a son that was not loyal to the Jewish tradition.” Yaakov, as if speaking about a third person, when he said משכבי אביך, “the couch of your father,” instead of: “my couch,” repeated this method when saying יצועי עלה, “he ascended my bed.”

כי עלית משכבי אביך, אז חללת BECAUSE THOU WENTEST UP TO THY FATHER S PLACE OF REPOSE; THEN PROFANEDST THOU Him Who hovered over my couch — the Name of the Shechina that used to abide above my couch (Shabbat 55b and Rashi there).

Jacob said כי עלית to explain how it was possible that a son of his could commit such an act. He hinted that at the time (the wedding night) his thoughts had been confused as he had been under the impression that he had married and was sleeping with Rachel. In other words, he had actually slept in two beds, physically he had shared Leah's bed, whereas mentally he had considered himself in bed with Rachel. This is the reason Jacob spoke about Reuben having mounted משכבי אביך, the beds (pl) of your father. This was the original cause of Reuben eventually becoming guilty of his misdemeanour. When Jacob added the word אז, then, he indicated that the true defilement took place then; the first time Reuben desecrated his father's bed was at the time he was conceived in the wrong womb, Leah's instead of Rachel's. Jacob's משכבים were desecrated at that time, whereas Reuben personally had defiled Jacob's יצוע when he mounted the bed in Bilhah's tent.

פַּחַז is a noun (a segolate noun like נַחַל) and has its accent therefore on the first syllable, and the entire word (both syllables) is punctuated with Patach, for were it the past tense of a verb, half of it (the first syllable) would have been punctuated with Kametz and the other half with Patach, and its accent would have been on the last syllable.

יצועי denotes a couch, because it is spread (root יצע) with mattresses and sheets; it occurs in this sense frequently in Scripture: (Psalms 132:3) “Nor go up into the bed that is spread for me (ערש יצועי)” ; (Psalms 63:7) “When I remember thee upon my (יצועי) couch”.

שמעון ולוי אחים SIMEON AND LEVI WERE BRETHREN in the plot against Shechem and against Joseph. Scripture states, (Genesis 37:19—20) “And they said one to another… (literally, one to his brother) come now therefore and let us slay him” (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9). Now, who were these? Should you say Reuben or Judah was one of them — but they were not consenting parties to slaying him (cf. Genesis 37:21, Genesis 37:22 and Genesis 37:26). Should you say they were the sons of the handmaids (Dan, Naphtali, Gad or Asher) — their hatred of Joseph was not so perfect a hatred that they would wish to kill him for it is said, (Genesis 37:2) “whilst a lad he used to be with the sons of Bilhah and with the sons of Zilpah etc.” Issachar and Zebulun would certainly not have spoken thus in the presence of their elder brothers. Consequently one must needs say that they were Simeon and Levi whom their father called “brethren” (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9).

SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BRETHREN. Jacob is saying that they possess the attribute of kinship for their hearts were inflamed concerning their sister.⁹⁴Ibid., 34:25-26. He is thus stating in their defense that they acted as they did out of their brotherly zeal, thus suggesting [that were it not for this extenuating circumstance], they would have been deserving of great punishment and their sin would have been unforgivable since what they did to the people of Shechem was an act of violence.
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that he is saying that Simeon and Levi are real brothers, uniting in fraternity and brotherhood in counsel and deed. Now I have already explained⁹⁵Ibid., 34:13. that Jacob was angry with Simeon and Levi for having committed violence when they killed the people of the city of Shechem, for they⁹⁶The people of the city committed no wrong. It was Shechem who violated Dinah, and the people were not in a position to protest his action. had not sinned against them at all. They even made a covenant with them and they were circumcised, thus being enabled to return to G-d and become included within the people of the household of Abraham, part of the souls that they had gotten in Haran.⁹⁷Above, 12:5. A reference to the proselytes whom Abraham and Sarah had brought “beneath the sheltering wings of the Shechina” (Rashi, ibid.) Jacob was additionally angry with them lest people say that the matter was done at his suggestion, thus creating a profaning of G-d’s Name, as people will say that the prophet has committed violence and plunder. This is the intent of the verse, Let my soul not come into their council—⁹⁸Verse 6 here. this is an excuse for he was not in their council when they answered the people of Shechem with subtlety,⁹⁹Above, 34:13. and he was not united in their assembly when they came upon the people of the city and killed them. It was for this reason that he cursed their anger and wrath.¹⁰⁰Verse 7 here. And so did Onkelos translate: “My soul was not in their council when they assembled to strike, etc.”

מכירותיהם The reason why Yaakov used such a dual, pluralistic, mode of the word was the special relationship which existed between Shimon and Levi, a relationship almost like that of twin brothers, as if the term אחותיהם instead of merely אחים, would describe their mutual brotherliness. However, their special relationship appeared to concentrate on their doing something negative, i.e. they used destructive tools, weapons in the pursuit of their designs.

Brothers. Because of your brotherhood you should have received the kingship after Reuvein lost it, but a king, who is charged with establishing justice, cannot be a violent person.

שמעון ולוי אחים, Shimon and Levi are brothers, etc. Jacob stressed the fact that Shimon and Levi were brothers as their similarity was natural, they shared many attitudes, something that is not always the case between brothers. It is also possible that Jacob referred to their joint action in Shechem as well as their plan to dispose of Joseph at the time, when he described their brotherliness. Jacob may have meant that these two between them shared the element of fire in an exaggerated manner. Our sages in Yuma 22 describe that Saul committed one sin which cost him the kingdom whereas David committed two serious sins without forfeiting his kingdom. The reason for this was that Saul was even-tempered by nature whereas David was impetuous by nature as we know from Samuel I 16,12 where the prophet describes David as אדמוני, red cheeked, i.e. hot-blooded. When G'd judges people He makes allowances for their natural tendencies, their genetic mix. Although someone who contains a greater than average share of the element of fire will be most enthusiastic in his service of G'd as a result (as we know from the tribe of Levi), this enthusiasm does not act as a barrier against his committing errors on occasion. Such errors also reflect his genetic composition. The fact that a person such as Saul was of an even temperament usually acted as a barrier against his falling victim to the lures of the evil urge. When Jacob described Shimon and Levi as אחים the word is derived from חם, heat. Jacob cursed their anger because when it erupted it was apt to prove unusually destructive. Anger is rooted in the element fire.

שמעון ולוי אחים, they had acted like brothers in their concern for their sister Dinah, as the Torah credits them in Genesis 34,25.

כלי חמס מכרותיהם, “their occupation with weaponry is stolen.” Onkelos understands the word מכרותיהם as similar to מגורותיהם, “places where they sojourned,” meaning that both Shimon and Levi had (stolen?) weapons from their uncle Esau and they used them to perpetrate acts of violence in the land they sojourned in. Other commentators feel that the expression כלי חמס defines their lifestyle, i.e. wherever they sojourned they used strong-arm methods to get their way and to secure their livelihood. Still other commentators understand the word מכרותיהם as derived from מכירה, “sale,” Yaakov saying that these two brothers had figuratively speaking “sold themselves” to the use of violence, similar to Judges 5,18 עם חרף נפשם למות, “a people that mocked death.”

Their hatred was not so complete... Rashi did not give the reason of “They would not have spoken before their older brothers” because Yoseif had told Yaakov that [the older brothers] were calling the handmaids’ sons “slaves.” Thus Yoseif slandered the handmaids’ sons, and they would have had a justification [to speak before their older brothers,] since Yoseif called them “slaves.” Thus Rashi gives a stronger reason, [that their hatred was not so complete]. (Maharshal)

In Schimeons und Lewis Charakter tritt ein Zug hervor, der sie, um an die Spitze der künstigen Leitung gestellt zu werden, eigentlich ganz besonders befähigt hätte. Sie sind אחים, haben das brüderliche Gesamtgefühl (von אחה durch einen alle durchschlingenden Faden an einander gereiht) in hohem Grade bewährt, das ohne allen Egoismus sich von dem dem Geringsten des Familienkreises zugefügten Unrecht ebenso getroffen fühlt, als wäre es ihm selbst geworden. Allein: .כלי חמס מכרתיהם מכרתיהם: entweder von כור, wovon כור, der Tiegel, in welchem etwas bereitet wird, und dann מכֵרה allgemein: Mittel; wahrscheinlicher aber von כרה .כרה: graben; im Vergleich mit חפר ergibt sich, dass חפר bis auf den Grund graben, Wasser aus der Tiefe holen heißt, daher überhaupt: Verborgenes ans Licht bringen, wovon: erspähen, und auch jenes Erschrecken und Erbleichen, das eintritt, wenn eines Menschen bisher verborgen gewesene Vergangenheit ans Licht gezogen wird, während בוש vielmehr die Scham über getäuschte Erwartung von der Zukunft ausdrückt. Dem zur Seite heißt כרה: das erste Abstechen einer Grube, die erste Anlage, dann überhaupt: Zurichtung, z. B. eines Mahles, endlich auch: die Erwerbung, Aneignung eines Gutes oder einer Person: אשר כריתי לי (erst. B. M. 50, 5), ואכרה לי (Hosea 3, 2), so dass die Wurzel in ihrer ursprünglichen Bedeutung mit קרה ,קרא: etwas zu sich rufen, verwandt, und somit: etwas zu sich bringen, etwas zu erlangen suchen, zu bedeuten scheint. So: וגם selbst Wasser habt ihr nur auf ganz (fünf. B. M. 2, 6) מים תכרו מאתם בכסף ושתיתם friedlichem Wege von ihnen für Geld zu erlangen suchen müssen für euren Durst. Im Hinblick auf die zitierte Stelle Hosea 3, 2 dürfte dann מְכֵרָה ganz eigentlich die Bewerbungen um eine Person bedeuten. Schimeon und Lewi haben ihre ganz friedlich und freundlich aussehenden Bewerbungsmittel, Bedingungen, die sie unter dem Scheine als מהר ומתן dem Schechem auferlegten, zu Werkzeugen der schreiendsten Gewalttat gebraucht.

שמעון ולוי אחים, כלי חמס מכרותיהם, “Shimon and Levi are brothers, their kinship is the use they make of weapons.” Yaakov implied that whereas they had displayed their being brothers when avenging the rape of innocent Dinah, their sister, they had failed to do so in their treatment of Joseph, their brother. (B’reshit Rabbah,98,5 and 99,7)

שמעון ולוי אחים, “Shimon and Levi are full brothers.” This point is recorded by Yaakov to inform us that these two were always of the same mind, as opposed to the other brothers. However, while generally speaking, this is laudable, it could become dangerous when their wrath is aroused.

כלי חמס INSTRUMENTS OF VIOLENCE (חמס may mean something that has been usurped from another) — This business of murdering is חמס, not rightly theirs; it is part of the blessing conferred upon Esau; it is his business and you have usurped (חמסתם) it from him (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9).

INSTRUMENTS OF VIOLENCE ‘M’CHEIROTHEIHEM.’ According to Onkelos and all commentators,¹⁰¹Rashi and R’dak. the meaning of the verse is as if it were written: instruments of violence ‘m’garotheihem’ (in their sojournings). This is similar to the verses: Thy sojourning (‘m’chorothayich’) and thy nativity,¹⁰²Ezekiel 16:3. There too m’chorothayich is as if it were written m’gorothayich. into the land of their sojourn (‘m’churatham’).¹⁰³Ibid., 29:14. Thus the commentators said that the meaning of the verse is that they did violence in the land of their sojourn.¹⁰⁴That is, the people lived with them in peace, and they did not act accordingly. Now if so, the approximate sense of the verse is as follows: “They had instruments of violence in the land of their sojournings,” it being referred to as “the land of their sojournings” since they lived there afterwards.¹⁰⁵At the time when Simeon and Levi wrought punishment upon the city of Shechem, they had just entered the land. How then could Jacob refer to the event as having taken place in the land of their sojourning? Ramban answers that this is a reference to the future.
But in my opinion Jacob is saying that “the instruments of violence are their dwelling places,” i.e., the essence of their lives, even as the expression, the days of my pilgrimage (‘m’gurai’).¹⁰⁶See above, 47:9. He is thus saying that the very instruments of violence are their dwelling places for they live and sustain themselves by them. A similar expression is found in the verse: The desert yieldeth them bread for their children.¹⁰⁷Job 24:5. The word “yieldeth” is not in the Hebrew text. Ramban interprets the meaning of the verse as follows: “The desert is to him bread for his children,” for there he has the opportunity to rob and plunder. Similarly, the verse here says that the sword is their livelihood. Ramban’s interpretation of the above verse in the book of Job is also found in his commentary to that book. See Kitvei Haramban, I, p. 80. And it is on account of this that their father divided them in Jacob¹⁰⁰Verse 7 here. so that they should not unite and scattered them in Israel so that they should not assemble. This was indeed so, for Simeon’s inheritance in the Land was contained in the inheritance of the children of Judah, as it is written, And their inheritance was in the midst of the inheritance of the children of Judah,¹⁰⁸Joshua 19:1. with the cities of Simeon set apart from one another throughout the entire tribe of Judah. And Levi’s inheritance consisted of the Cities of Refuge,¹⁰⁹See Numbers 35:1-8. which were scattered through all Israel.¹¹⁰See Joshua, Chapter 21.

Whereas the terms מכורותיך and מולדתיך occur in Ezekiel 16,3-4, describing close relatives in one’s birthplace, in our verse, the vowel tzeyreh under the letter כ converts this word into one that could have been written with a dagesh, i.e. from the conjugation piel, the strong, transitive conjugation, suggesting that these emotions were evident only when the two brothers engaged in a scheme of doubtful ethical merit. The construction of the word is parallel to Job 37,12 where the word מסבות, describes clouds in constant motion foreboding turmoil, nature at its most destructive. Examples of the expected vowel chirik becoming a tzeyreh instead, are found in Lamentations 2,9, as well as in Numbers 8,26, and in Psalms 74,18. In all those examples the addition of the extra “dot” next to the chirik converts the meaning into something stronger, more aggressive, more intense.

כלי חמס, their swords, (weapons) have become instruments of violence. [used aggressively instead of defensively. Ed.] Yaakov considered the slaying of the male population of Shechem as having been illegal. He did not consider the men of the city responsible for the sin of rape committed by their crown prince Shechem. Seeing that their act was illegal they endangered their whole family, including their father, as they could not count on G’d’s protection against the avengers of Shechem when the wrong they had committed themselves had brought that attack upon them. The fact that in the event, G’d did protect them, was not thanks to these two brothers.

כלי חמס מכרותיהם, people who make use of weaponry in their day to day activities are not suitable material for wielding political and military power. Hence neither one of them will be accorded the status taken away from Reuven. (compare Proverbs 29,4 where Solomon describes a king’s primary characteristic as being במשפט יעמד ארץ, “seeing to it that the rule of law and justice prevails on earth.”) Shimon and Levi had disqualified themselves from claiming such a distinction.

Yissachar and Zevulun would not have spoken before their older brothers... You might ask: How did Shimon and Leivi speak before Reuvein? Maharshal answers: Reuvein was not there at the time, as he had gone to attend to his father [see Rashi, 37:29].

Once such anger is kindled it results in excess heat and that is why Jacob compared their anger to כלי חמס מכרותיהם, the use of weapons to commit violence. By stressing the word מכרותיהם, (from the root הכר, something one is conscious of), Jacob indicated that Shimon and Levi's tendencies to commit acts of violence were not something they had inherited from their father, something deeply rooted in their subconscious, but when such sentiments surfaced they became very conscious of them as such. The cause of their excesses was the extra amount of fire in the basic composition of their respective bodies.This genetic imbalance was responsible for such deeds as their act of violence against Joseph.

כלי חמס מכרותיהם, “their weapons are lawlessness.” (JPS) Their very close relationship is a dangerous weapon.

מכרתיהם denotes weapons. In the Greek language the word for a sword is fiaxmoa (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 9). Another interpretation of מכרתיהם is: (taking מכרתיהם as מגרתיהם their sojournings with an interchange of כ and ג) in the land of their sojournings they got into the habit of using weapons of violence, מכרתיהם being of the same root as (Ezekiel 16:3) “Thine habitation (מכרתיך) and thy nativity [is in the land of the Canaanite].” This is how Onkelos renders it.

מכרותיהם, as if the Torah had written במכרותיהם. The construction is parallel to ארץ מגוריהם, the land of their sojourn, i.e. the land in which they sojourned. The people of Shechem had lived peaceably side by side with the family of Yaakov, there being no war-like actions between them. [The author apparently sees in the word מכרותיהם the root הכר, “to recognise someone, i.e. to know him well.” Yaakov describes the deed of Shimon and Levi against the people of Shechem as having been perpetrated on friendly unsuspecting neighbours. Ed.] Ezekiel 21,35 as well as 29,14 also speaks of מכורותיך meaning מגורים the place where one resides. Onkelos also translates it in this sense. Midrash Tanchuma Vayechi 9 understands the word as applying to their swords. In Greek a sword is known as makirin.

Another explanation of מכרותיהם: in the land of their sojournings (מגורתם)... [Rashi knows this] because the כ of מכרותיהם is interchangeable with a ג, since they are among the group of letters of ג–י–כ–ק [that are interchangeable].

The word מכרותיהם also contains the root מכר, sale. Jacob referred to the sale of Joseph as an act of violence perpetrated by these two brothers, seeing that Joseph had not been guilty. Although all the brothers had participated in that sale, closer examination of what happened will show you that these two brothers were the instigators of all that violence. They were the ones who said to each other in 37,19: "let us see what will become of his dreams when we will set out to kill him, etc." (compare Bereshit Rabbah 99,6).

The word מכרה is familiar to us from Kings II 12,6, where the expression: איש מאת מכרו, means: “each from his buddy.”

..*Gather together and I will tell you:* Rashi says he [Yaakov] wanted to reveal the date of Moshiach's coming, but the Shechina departed from him. To explain: when he focused and looked at every subsequent generation and saw what would happen to the Jewish people until the coming of Moshiach, he saw the length of the bitter Exile and the great darkness. He became greatly saddened and the Shechina departed from him as a result [of his sadness]. However, the Tribes [his sons] comforted him by saying Shema Yisroel, Hashem Elokeinu, Hashem Echad. Rashi comments on that verse, Hashem is now our G-d, but in the future [the Times to Come] He will be One and his Name will be One. [Thus, they were comforting Yaakov by pointing out that] he should be happy with the knowledge that in the Times to Come, after Moshiach's coming, Hashem will be One for the entire world [as the verse says] "on that day, He will be [One and His Name will be One]. [Yaakov accepted his sons' comfort] and [added his own prayer] "may the glory of the Name of His Kingdom be blessed forever and ever." That it may be speedily in our days, amen.

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”.

ארור אפם כי עז CURSED BE TIIEIR WRATH, FOR IT IS POWERFUL — Even when he was reproving them he did not curse them but their anger. That is what Balaam said: (Numbers 23:8) “How can I curse them since אל hath not cursed them?” (Genesis Rabbah 99:6)

ארור אפם, they shall not succeed to take revenge in their anger and to wreak destruction when it is vented on the innocent. Seeing that they abused their brotherliness in the past, I do not wish to be associated with their method of operation. Their close association is potentially dangerous.

ארור אפם, may their level of anger be reduced, restricted. Yaakov wanted to achieve this by making it harder for them to earn their livelihood, so that they would be fully occupied doing that and caring for their families. They would have to spend their energies by traveling far and wide to secure their livelihood. However, the status of priesthood would remain the domain of the firstborn as it had been before Reuven became guilty of his indiscretion. This status was changed only after the sin of the golden calf when it was transferred en masse to the Levites (some of them). Compare Deuteronomy 10 8, בעת ההיא וגו'.

ארור אפם כי עז, "cursed be their anger for it is very strong, etc." Jacob only cursed their excess anger. This is why he added: כי עז. Every person needs to harbour a certain amount of hatred otherwise he could not receive a reward in the Hereafter for having controlled his anger and made it subservient to his duty to serve the Lord. Jacob realised that he had to find a way to "cool" this anger which was liable to flare up from time to time. Inasmuch as both brothers suffered from an excess amount of fire in their genetic mix, Jacob hoped that by separating them from one another he could forestall future outbursts or at least make such outbursts of anger less harmful. This is why he added: "I will separate them within Yaakov, etc."

ארור אפם, whenever we encounter the expression ארור it involves denial of some blessing or something good and welcome to the party subject to the curse. For instance, we read in Maleachi 2,2 וארותי את ברכותיהם, “I will turn their blessings into a curse.” The words ארור אפם must be understood as a type of prayer by Yaakov, who wishes that Shimon and Levi be denied at least a part of their willfulness of character, as something that has become too strong to endure. Yaakov repeated the same thought in different words to make his point more insistently. This is why he added the words ועברתם כי קשתה.

אחלקם ביעקב, “I will separate them within Yaakov;” this happened indeed. The ancestral portion of the tribe of Shimon was completely enclosed by the territory of the tribe of Yehudah, whereas the ancestral portion of the tribe of Levi did not exist as such at all, but there were 48 cities allocated to that tribe which had been chosen by G’d to be the spiritual mentors of the people, and whose cities also served as alternate cities of refuge for people who had killed human beings through carelessness. Rabbi Joseph Kimchi explains that Shimon and Levi who had demonstrated brotherly love by their jealously avenging the honour of their sister Dinah, employing weapons of war in their pursuit of the perpetrators, were now blessed by Yaakov. He said that when they used such weapons, which are normally cursed weapons, in their rightful anger, as a result of venting their anger in a noble cause, they would henceforth be deprived of such emotions that normally are considered as negative virtues. The word ארור, describes a deficiency, lack of virtue. By distributing them among the various tribes, Yaakov hoped to infuse rightful anger when the occasion would arise also in the hearts of the other tribes. Some commentators hold that Yaakov even wished to share some of this rightful anger and apparently unbridled behaviour demonstrated by these two sons of his, and they understand the word תבוא in אל תבא נפשי in the same sense as Leviticus 22,7 ובא השמש וטהר, where it means that as soon as the sun sets the priest in question is purified, that he too wishes to be purified by having a share in the righteous anger displayed by Shimon and Levi on the occasion in question. I do not believe that such an explanation is tenable, for if it were, how will these scholars explain the words ובקהלם אל אל תחד כבודי, “may my honour not be considered as at one with theirs?”

אחלקם ביעקב¸ ”I will disperse them within Yaakov,” so that they will not be able to conspire together. Yaakov added ואפיצם בישראל, ”and I will scatter them in Israel.” He wanted to make it difficult for the members of these tribes to all assemble in one place simultaneously. History proves that Yaakov’s intention was carried out. The territory of the tribe of Shimon was an enclave within the territory allocated to Yehudah (compare Joshua 19,1), and the Levites were assigned 48 separate towns throughout the territories of the various tribes. The dispersal of the Levites was to prove especially beneficial as it helped fulfill Moses’ blessing in Deut. 33,10 that the Levites were to disseminate Torah knowledge throughout the land of Israel.

This is what Bilam meant ... “How can I curse one whom God has not cursed?” “One” refers to Yaakov, as Rashi explains in Bamidbar 23:8.

ארור אפס וגו׳, darum darf auf ihrem אף und ihrer עברה kein Segen ruhen, muss ihre rücksichtslose Heftigkeit vom Fluch gehemmt bleiben. אף, rad. אנף (verwandt mit ענף .חנף ,ענב ,ענף: der Zweig, der die Säfte des Stammes hinausträgt; ענב: die ganz äußerlich gewordenen gesammelten Säfte: die Beere; חנף: wo alles nur äußerlich, ohne alles Innerliche ist: der Heuchler). אנף: die Gemütsbewegung, die nach außen getreten, sich äußerlich im Gesichte etc. ausspricht, (חמה, die Wut, die im Innern kocht). עברה von עבר: die ganz sich überschreitende Wut, das Außersichwerden, Aus- sichhinausfahren, wobei die Besonnenheit völlig verloren ist. Also: wenn sie etwas in ihrem Zorn wollen, so ist er עז, durch nichts zu überwinden, und ihre עברה ist קשה: hartnäckig, durch keine Vorstellung oder Rücksicht zu schwächen; darum müssen beide von ארור getroffen, müssen ערירים, unfruchtbar, erfolglos gemacht werden, ihr אף und ihre עברה darf nie Propaganda machen können, und demgemäß soll ihre Stellung im künftigen Volke werden. Sie sind zur Führerschaft untauglich, ja als Führer wären sie geradezu gefährlich. Während Reuben zu wenig Selbständigkeit, zu wenig inneren Halt hatte, war in ihnen das Bewusstsein der Kraft zu heiß und kannte, wo es das Gesamtwohl galt, keine Rücksicht. —

ארור אפם, “cursed be their anger;” this is not a curse, but a blessing. How so? Yaakov wishes them that whatever they will plan in anger should not succeed, so that they will learn the lesson not to act out of anger. An alternate exegesis of these words: Yaakov exclaims: “how disgraceful and despicable is their anger!”

אחלקם ביעקב I WILL DIVIDE THEM IN JACOB — I shall separate them from each other inasmuch as Levi shall not be numbered among the tribes (cf. Numbers 26:62) and thus they (Simeon and Levi) will be divided (cf. Genesis Rabbah 98:5). Another interpretation is: both of these tribes will be dispersed in Israel, and this happened, for you will find that the very poor — the Scribes and elementary teachers — were all of the tribe of Simeon, and this was so in order that this tribe should be dispersed, since such poor people must wander from city to city to eke out a livelihood. As for the tribe of Levi, He made them travel round from one threshing floor to another to collect their heave offerings and tithes; thus He caused them also to be “scattered” but in a more respectable manner (Genesis Rabbah 99:6).

אחלקם ביעקב, the tribe of Levi was scattered between 48 cities throughout the land of Israel and its various tribes, as described in Joshua chapter 21, so that the tribe of Shimon remained isolated from its close associate.

אחלקם ביעקב, so that they will not constantly be next to one another. Shimon’s ancestral territory in the land of Israel actually became an enclave within the boundaries of the land allocated to the tribe of Yehudah. Shimon and Levi (who had no territorial claims after being granted the status formerly occupied by the firstborn after the golden calf episode) had no common territorial boundaries, so that the danger of their joint cooperation resulting in a repeat of what happened at Shechem was drastically reduced. In Bereshit Rabbah 99,7 the words אחלקם ביעקב, are understood as referring to the 24 thousand members of the tribe of Shimon who were killed as a result of Zimri’s brazen act of sexual union with a Midianite princess. This resulted in 24 thousand wives of these men becoming widows, These widows were distributed to the other tribes, 2000 to each tribe, so that anyone having to go begging was from the tribe of Shimon. As a result, G’d said that the Levites were to be similarly distributed among all the tribes seeing he did not deserve a better fate than that of his partner in crime Shimon. Seeing that the Levites became dependent on the tithes, etc, voluntarily given to them by the farmers of the other tribes, their basic livelihood was no less precarious than that of the widows and orphans of the members of the tribe of Shimon who had been killed by a plague by G’d at Shittim.( Numbers 25,9) It is a historical fact then that Yaakov’s prediction came true. Seeing what had happened, G’d elevated the Levites by granting them 10% of the combined harvests of all the other tribes. However, the Levites, just as the members of the tribe of Shimon, had to visit all the threshing floors and request from the local farmers to give the tithe tithes they were obliged to give to a Levite to them. [The Midrash endeavours to justify Yaakov saying both אחלקם ביעקב, and אפיצם בישראל, meaning that each of these tribes will be busy looking for handouts and not have spare time for aggressive ventures such as those hatched by their respective founding fathers. Ed.]

Another explanation: There will be no poor... There is a question on the first explanation: [“I will divide them” is explained. But] what is the meaning of, “And scatter them throughout Israel?” Thus Rashi brings the second explanation. We need not ask: If the second explanation is for, “And scatter them,” why is it considered another explanation? The first explanation [was only for, “I will divide them,” but] did not explain, “And scatter them.” The answer is: The second explanation goes also on, “I will divide them.” [Accordingly, the verse] means as follows: “I will divide them” from one another. And how will I do this? I will “scatter them.” In other words, “And scatter them” comes to explain, “I will divide them.” (Maharshal)

Es ist von tiefster Wichtigkeit, dass hier sofort, bei der Grundlegung des jüdischen Volkes, jede, wäre es selbst im Gesamtinteresse, das Sittengesetz und das Recht verkennende Ausschreitung mit Fluch belegt wird. Alle anderen Staaten und Völker vindi- zierten sich das Prinzip, dass das Gesamtinteresse alles heiligt, List und Gewalt, die im Privatleben mit Verachtung und Galgen bestraft würden, für vermeintliches Staatswohl geübt, mit Bürgerkronen und Lorbeer zu belohnen seien, das Sittengesetz nur fürs Privatleben gelte, Politik und Diplomatie aber nur den Kodex des Interesses kennen dürfen. Das Grundvermächtnis des jüdischen Volkes belegt hier selbst für das gerechteste Ziel im Gesamtinteresse geübte List und Gewalt mit Fluch und verewigt die Lehre, dass selbst im Gesamtleben und für die Gesamtheit nicht nur die Ziele, sondern auch die Mittel und Wege rein sein müssen. —

אחלקם ביעקב, “I will separate them between the tribes of Yaakov and disperse them.” We find that indeed the ancestral share of Shimon became an enclave within the ancestral portion of Yehudah. Levi’s share was divided into 48 cities between the twelve tribes.

He allowed his dispersal to be more honorable. “I will divide them throughout Yaakov” refers to Shimon. “Scatter them throughout Yisroel” refers to Leivi. Therefore [referring to Leivi] it is written “Yisroel,” which is a more honorable [as compared to “Yaakov”].

Es wird jedoch nur ihr אף und ihre עברה mit ארור belegt. Der Fluch trifft weder sie noch ihr Streben an sich.

אחלקם ביעקב ואפיצם בישראל.‎ חלק: teilen, nicht in der Absicht, ein bisheriges zu schwächen, vielmehr: verteilen eines Wertvollen, damit so viele als möglich Anteil daran erhalten.

הָפיץ ,פוץ hingegen: ein Zerteilen in möglichst kleine Teile, damit ein bisheriges Ganze nicht mehr als solches beisammen sei.

יעקב: .die Galutherscheinung des jüdischen Volkes, gedrückt, verfolgt ישראל: die durch Gott gewonnene siegreiche Erscheinung des jüdischen Volkes.

Demnach: die Gefahr für das Gesamtwohl durch Schimeons und Lewis übergroße Heftigkeit ist nur in der Blütezeit des Volkes vorhanden, wo es eine mächtige Gesamtheit bildet, die leicht durch den Einfluדד zweier solcher, von glühendem Kraft- und Gesamtgefühl erfüllter, kompakter Stämme hingerissen werden könnte. Darum in :ישראל אפיצם, im blühenden jüdischen Staat sollen sie zerteilt werden. Wie auch geschehen. Lewi erhielt gar keinen Anteil am Lande, und seine Existenz war durch מעשר lediglich auf das freie Wohlwollen jedes einzelnen hingewiesen. Es war ja der jüdische Zehnte, im Gegensatz zu dem späteren und heutigen Zehnten der Kirche und der Gutsherrschaft, durchaus ממון שאין לו תובעים, eine Abgabe, zu welcher der Bodenbesitzer allerdings verpflichtet war, auf welche aber kein Lewite irgend einen direkten Anspruch hatte. Der Verpflichtete konnte den Zehnten jedem aus dem Stamme Lewi geben, der ihm beliebte, und keiner konnte ihn von ihm fordern. Schimeons Gebiet war ganz eine Enklave von Juda und machte ihn völlig von diesem mächtigen Stamme abhängig. Somit war für die Zeit der Blüte Schimeons und Lewis politischer Einfluss völlig paralysiert.

Allein im Galuth, wo die Wucht des Geschickes alles niederbeugt, und die Nation selbst auseinander gerissen ist, da liegt die Gefahr, dass alles Selbstgefühl verloren gehe und der Druck jede geistige Kraft ertöte. Auf dass selbst der als Hausierer vagierende Jude auf den europäischen Gassenbuben mit stolzem Selbstgefühl hinabblicke, und er, zu Boden gedrückt und über die Erde hingestreut, das Selbst- und Gesamtgefühl sich bewahre, dazu: אחלקם ביעקב, dazu war es höchste Wohltat, dass die Zerteilung der Stämme Schimeon und Lewi im jüdischen Staate die natürliche Folge hatte, dass, als der Staat in Trümmer ging und die Nation nach allen Gegenden hin zerstreut wurde, in dieser Zerstreuung überall sich auch Söhne Schimeons und Lewis befanden, die die Kraft und den Mut, das Feuer und den edlen jüdischen Stolz durch die Pflege des den Staat überlebenden jüdischen Geistes wach und lebendig erhielten. Zu dem Kern der jüdischen Lehrer der Jugend und der Wissenschaft, kommentiert eine alte Überlieferung, stellen jederzeit die Stämme Schimeon und Lewi das bedeutendste Kontingent. ,משמעון סופרים ומשנים בבתי כנסיות ומשבט לוי בתי מדרשות שהיו עוסקין בתורה "Lehrer der Schrift und der Mischna in den Synagogen von Schimeon, und von Lewi Lehrhäuser, wo das Studium der Thorawissenschaft gepflegt wird" (ב"ר צ"ח).

Yaakov wanted to tell when Moshiach was going to come, and the Shechina departed from him. What that means that is that Yaakov requested the coming of Moshiach, to reveal the Guela. Through this, the Shechina departed from him. What that means is that he elevated himself [spiritually] and he went so much higher than himself through prayer. He went away from himself to the Shechina.

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך THOU JUDAH, THY BRETHREN SHALL PRAISE THEE — Because he rebuked the first three tribes in harsh terms Judah began to move away that he (Jacob) should not censure him for the incident with Tamar; Jacob therefore recalled him with words that would soothe him: Judah, you are not like these! — you your brethren may indeed praise (Genesis Rabbah 99:5).

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, anyone who interprets these words to mean that the brothers ought to praise Yehudah is grossly mistaken. The reason that Yaakov transfers the status of leader of the brothers, and, ultimately, hereditary royalty to Yehudah, was not his excellence as much as his older brothers’ unfitness. Yehudah’s elevation to this status would be initiated by his own brothers by their own volition, not through his father imposing him on the rest of the brothers. (compare the end of our verse “and the sons of your father will prostrate themselves before you.”) In Numbers 26,20 when Moses appoints Joshua as his successor, G’d suggests that he on his own account transfer his mantle of leadership to Joshua, [although G’d could have removed it from Moses and then Himself have bestowed it on Joshua. Ed.]

יהודה אתה, “you are the one who is fit to fill the position of royalty. The reason is that you are not stained with fatal flaws which would disqualify you from becoming king.

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, "Yehudah- as to you, your brothers will praise you, etc." Why did Jacob have to add the word אתה when he addressed Yehudah? Apparently the word was meant to exclude someone else. Besides, why did Jacob not say: וידך, "and your hand, etc," instead of simply: ידך, "your hand?" The same applies to the missing conjunctive letter ו in front of ישתחוו לך.

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, they will elevate you to the position of royalty instead of Reuven, for the royalty, or potential for royalty of which I have deprived him your brothers will bestow upon you. We have proof of this happening from Samuel II 5,1 when David was crowned in Chevron by all the tribes of Israel. We are told in Bereshit Rabbah 99,8 that when Yehudah saw that Yaakov suddenly served up Reuven’s sin, as well as that of his brother Shimon and Levi, he became afraid that his own sin with Tamar would be the next one to be referred to by his father. He only calmed down when Yaakov began his remarks to Yehudah with the words “your brothers will elevate you to the position of royalty because you had the strength of character to publicly acknowledge and repent your having slept with your daughter-in-law Tamar.”

יהודה אתה יודוך אחיך, “as far as you, Yehudah are concerned, your brothers will have to admit to you, etc.” They will acknowledge you as already foretold in your very name, for they will realize that your hand will vanquish the neck of your enemies thereby saving them.

יודוך אחיך, “your brothers will acknowledge you.” According to the plain meaning of the text this is a reference to the Israelites eventually acclaiming David, a descendant of Yehudah as their king.
ישתחוו לך בני אביך, “the sons of your father will prostrate themselves before you.” He did not say: “the sons of your mother.” There was no need for him to say that Leah’s sons would acknowledge Yehudah as their leader. The point Yaakov made was that even the sons of his other wives would also acknowledge him as their leader. Yaakov referred to Yehudah (verse 9) as גור אריה instead of as אריה, a fully grown lion. He added the word גור seeing Yehudah had still been a child (less than 20 years old when the brothers first deferred to him). He called him אריה on account of his physical power which [paralleled that of the lion, the king of the beasts. He is also called גבור, to reflect Proverbs 30,30 “the lion is the mightiest of the beasts and recoils before none.” Yehudah is described in similar terms in Chronicles I 5,2.

In the days of Dovid... [Rashi knows this] because Yaakov should have blessed Yehudah with, “You shall rule over nations,” or, “You shall be king.” Why did he say, “Your hand will be on the neck...”? To allude to Dovid. (Maharshal)

Indem Jakob seine Söhne mustert, um den zum Führer Tüchtigen zu finden und er bereits Reuben, Schimeon und Lewi für diese Führerschaft untauglich gefunden, ruht endlich sein Blick auf Juda mit dem Ausspruch: Du bists, du bist der Berufene, du vereinigst die erforderlichen Eigenschaften, die Reuben einerseits, Schimeon und Lewi andererseits nach entgegengesetzten Seiten hin fehlen; ידך בערף אויביך: nicht erst dein Schwert, deine natürliche Macht sitzt in dem Nacken deiner Feinde, du begehst keinen Mord, du brauchst keine כלי חמס deinen Feinden gegenüber. Die Entfaltung deiner natürlichen Macht wird so achtunggebietend sein, dass deine Feinde dir den Rücken kehren, dich nicht anzugreifen wagen und froh sind, wenn du sie in Ruhe lässest. Und nach innen wirst du in solcher edlen Überlegenheit dastehen, dass deine Brüder sich dir freiwillig unterordnen.

יהודה, אתה יודוך אחיך, “Yehudah your brothers will agree to your becoming king;” (your father’s sons will prostrate themselves before you [end of the sentence] (B’reshit Rabbah 99,8) We find this prediction having come true in the time of King David.. The numerical value of the letters in the word “Yehudah,” equals 30, corresponding to the 30 qualities required of a person who is fit to become Royalty. (Ethics of our fathers, 6,6) The thirty qualities (virtues, and privileges accorded) referred to have been enumerated in the Talmud tractate Sanhedrin, folio 18. An alternate interpretation of the words: יודוך אחיך: all the Israelites collectively, not only the members of his tribe will become known as יהודים, “Jews,” derived from his name Yehudah. (B’reshit Rabbah 98,6) Not only this, but the Messiah, the king of the Israelites after the final redemption will be descended from him.

יהודה אתה יודוו אחיך, as to Yehudah, “your brothers will acknowledge you (as leader);” we have a play on words here, using Yehudah’s name as synonymous with the owner’s position amongst this brothers. The word יודרך, is equivalent to ישבחוך ויכבדוך, “they will praise you and honour you.” This will happen when they see you subduing your enemies, i.e. ידך בעורף אויביך, ”your hand will be around the neck of your enemies.” When this happens, they will prostrate themselves before you.

ידך בערף איביך THY HAND IS ON THE NECK OF THINE ENEMIES — a prophecy fulfilled in the days of David, a descendant of Judah, who said (2 Samuel 22:41) “Thou hast also made mine enemies turn their back unto me” (Genesis Rabbah 99:8). (The Hebrew may signify, “Thou hast given me my enemies’ necks”)

יודוך, they will crown you. The word is abbreviated in its spelling, being the equivalent of יהודוך, (as in Psalms 45,18) Similar constructions [a letter being omitted, Ed.] are found in Kings II 6,27 where we have יושיעך instead of יהושיעך). The latter and proper spelling is found in Samuel I 17,47 i.e. יחושיע. At any rate, even though the word יודוך is derived from הוד as in הוד מלכות, “regal majesty,” the letter י is not an integral part of the word, but is added as part of the constructions known as חטופי פ'ה, the first root letter in roots commencing with the letter ה being shortened in sound. When we encounter to word הוציא, a transitive past construction derived from the root יצא, the first root letter of יצא has actually been omitted, the letterה in הוציא not being part of the root, but substituting for the letter י of the root. The same is true of the root ישב and the transitive construction of that verb as הושיב. We encounter the same phenomenon in Exodus 15,5 where the Torah wrote ירה בים. In our case the root of יודך is הרה. [The author quotes more examples of this kind, which I think we can skip. Ed.]

יודוך אחיך, your brothers will accept you as king as they admit that you are fit to rule.

ידך בעורף אויביך, a reference to King David, who was victorious in all his wars against his enemies. We have a parallel verse said by David himself in Samuel II 22,41 ואויבי תחת לי עורף, “He made my enemies turn tail before me.”

It appears that Jacob's intention was to assure Yehudah that contrary to the blessings for the other brothers which were predictions for the distant future after Israel would take possession of the land of Canaan, Yehudah himself would already experience the esteem of his brothers. We have confirmation of this in Chronicles I 5,2 where we read: "for Yehudah became more powerful than his brothers and a leader came from him." At the appropriate time, Yehudah's hand would be at the neck of his enemies. At that time his brothers would prostrate themselves before him and he would become their king. This prophecy was fulfilled during the reign of Saul when David won great victories and the Jewish people crowned him king.

בני אביך THY FATHER’S CHILDREN — Because they were born of different wives he did not say “thy mother’s children” as Isaac said (Genesis Rabbah 99:8). (He meant: all thy brothers will bow down to thee. Had he said “thy mother’s children”, he would have included only Judah’s brothers who were born of the same mother as himself.)

וישתחוו, in order to enthrone you.

ידך בעורף אויביך, so that they will flee from you so that you do not destroy them. We find a similar construction in Exodus 23,27 ונתתי את כל אויביך אליך עורף, “I will make all your enemies turn their backs on you.”

ישתחוו לך בני אביך, when they will observe that you are successful, then they will prostrate themselves before you and declare that you are fit to be their king. When Yitzchok blessed Yaakov in Genesis 27,29 he referred to “the sons of your mother” prostrating themselves before him. Seeing that Yitzchok had only one wife this was quite normal. Seeing that Yaakov had four wives it would not have been good enough to refer to the sons of Yehudah’s mother, as that would have included only half the tribes. By phrasing the blessing as applicable to the “sons of your father,” Yaakov included all 12 tribes.

בני אביך, Yaakov chose this formulation because having had four wives it was the simplest way. On the other hand, when Yitzchok (who had only one wife) blessed Yaakov, he spoke of בני אמך, “the sons of your mother” (27,29)

וישתחוו לך בני אביך; you will rule over all your brothers (fellow tribes), but not over all the other nations,

גור אריה A YOUNG LION — He prophesied this with reference to David who, when he began his military career, was but as a whelp — as it states, (2 Samuel 5:2) “when Saul was king over us it was thou that didst lead out and bring in Israel” — but who later on became as a lion when they made him king over themselves. That is what Onkelos means by translating it “A ruler he shall he בשרויא” — at the beginning

גור אריה יהודה, an expression similar to כפיר אריות, (Judges 14,5) the young, not fully grown lion is called גור, whereas the fully mature lion is known as כפיר as we know from Ezekiel 19,2 בתוך כפירים רבתה גוריה, “a young lioness crouched among the fully grown lions.” The young lion enjoys the advantage of speed and self-confidence, hence more aggressiveness, over an aging lion. It is not surprising therefore that when complimenting Yehudah, Yaakov compares him to a young lion rather than to a fully mature one who is already on the way to decline.

גור אריה יהודה, although Yehudah is not a fully grown lion, i.e. not enjoying the trappings of royalty, possessing a land, etc, he is at least comparable to a lion cub, preeminent among his brothers. In the future he will rule as king in the full meaning of the word. All this, in spite of the fact that

גור אריה יהודה, "Yehudah is a lioncub." The Zohar section 1, page 237 explains that initially Yehudah would be like a cub, גור, whereas later on he would be a fully grown lion, אריה. If this was so, why did Jacob have to tell us that there was a time when Yehudah was still only a cub? Besides, what did Jacob mean when he said: מטרף בני עלית "you removed yourself from my son, from the kill?" According to our sages the word בני may be read both as belonging to what was mentioned before as well as to what follows, i.e. "you my son have arisen." Accordingly, Yehudah had distanced himself from what the brothers had done when Jacob had exclaimed: "my son has been torn to shreds." It is difficult to reconcile this with the facts. Why would Jacob have assumed suddenly that Yehudah had no share in the brothers' plot to deceive him and to make him believe that Joseph had become the victim of wild animals? On the contrary, is it not more likely to believe that Jacob had never suspected any of his sons to have laid a hand on Joseph? We must view the statement of our sages as דברי קבלה, as reflecting insights to which we are not privy. The words כרע רבץ מי יקימנו, also present a difficulty. Not only do these words not make sense as part of the blessing, but why did Jacob suddenly switch to indirect speech when up until now he had addressed Yehudah directly?

גור אריה יהודה; at the beginning of his career he would be only a גור, a cub, one that has not attained maturity. Even so, such a lion is stronger than all the other beasts. Yehudah was also the first of the tribal princes to offer his inaugural sacrifice (Numbers 7,12). When it came to the war against the Canaanites in Judges 1,2 this tribe was the one leading all the others. Again, at Geva in Binyamin (Judges 20,18) the tribe of Yehudah was in the lead in the tragic civil war against the tribe of Binyamin. [at any rate a heavenly voice or the High Priest after consulting the Ephod had announced that Yehudah should be in the lead. Ed.] The first of the Judges who were heads of the nation after the death of Joshua who had failed to appoint a successor, was Othniel son of Knaz from the tribe of Yehudah. (Judges 3,9). Eventually, when David was appointed King of all the Israelites, this גור, “young lion,” became a fully grown mature lion, i.e. אריה,

מטרף בני עלית, “you my son, removed yourself from the prey.” The reason the simile of טרף, prey, is used by Yaakov, is that it is appropriate for someone described as אריה, lion. You got up and removed yourself from treating Joseph as “prey.” The word טרף here is to be understood as a transitive verb. Some commentators understand the word as an intransitive verb, so that the words מטרף בני עלית would be an allusion to David (re-incarnate of Yehudah) standing by the lion that had become his prey. He had succeeded in killing a lion and a bear, which gave him the courage to engage in battle against Goliath. (compare Samuel I 17,34) David’s victory over Goliath was the foundation of his subsequent greatness.

He equated him with a lion which is the strongest of the animals; and compared him to a young lion, regarding his lightness and alacrity [being] beyond the adult lion. That is why he used two nouns, as "cub" alone is also said about other animals when they are small; as it is stated (Lamentations 4:3), "Even jackals offer the breast, and suckle their cubs." And the intention here is cub of the lion species, and it is a construct phrase. And so did Yonatan ben Uzziel translate, "I compare you, Judah, to a cub that is the child of lions." But to me, it appears that gur is an expression of provoking, [like] the expression, "every day, they provoke (yaguru) wars" (Psalms 140:3); [and] "begin to inherit, and provoke (hitgar) war against it" (Deuteronomy 2:24). And the explanation of "gur lion" is a lion that is provoked, as he is at his most dangerous then.

Likewise, when Tamar was sentenced to die... Rashi is saying that “my son” refers to Yehudah, not to Yoseif. [There are two proofs to support this:] First, Yehudah as well was Yaakov’s son, [so the verse would not say, “You (Yehudah) have risen above plundering my son (Yoseif).”] Second, Yehudah removed himself also from the plundering of Tamar, as Rashi explains. If he removed himself from plundering them both, why would it say [only] “my son,” referring to Yoseif? Perforce, “my son” refers to Yehudah.

Du vereinigst den Mut der Jugend und die Besonnenheit des Alters in dir, hast keine Lust an Kampf und Raub um des Kampfes und Raubes willen, bist keine Hyäne und kein Wolf, bist ein Löwe und über gemeinem Raubmord erhaben.

גור אריה יהודה, all young free roaming animals are known as גור. Yehudah is distinguished as being described as a young lion, the king of the beasts. This was a hint that David, in due course, would be descended from him. The numerical value of the first letters in the three words:גור אריה יהודה, is the same as that of the three letters in the name דוד =14.

מטרף בני עלית, “you removed yourself from the temptation to treat my son as your prey.” According to Rashi here; “you did not consider that killing my son Joseph would be an achievement.” Yaakov admits that he had once suspected him of having killed Joseph. In the Talmud Sanhedrin 6 and 7, the expression בצע used by Yehudah when persuading his brothers not to kill Joseph (37,26) is not understood as Yaakov praising Yehudah for not killing; rather it is a compliment to him for admitting to have been wrong when he accused his daughterinlaw Tamar of harlotry when it had been he who had sought out an assignation with someone whom he thought of as a harlot. He had cancelled the decree to execute her and the two fetuses she was carrying, thereby publicly shaming himself. (Genesis 38,26)

מטרף FROM THE PREY (literally, tearing) — From the deed of which I suspected you when I said (Genesis 37:33) “Joseph is torn in pieces, an evil beast hath devoured him” — and by that Judah was meant who was likened to a lion —

מטרף בני עלית, you my son Yehudah, seeing that after you have risen from dealing with the spoils of war you had acquired stature and were held in awe, have lain down like a lion, supremely confident that no one would dare disturb your rest. No enemy will dare to become the one to disturb your sleep and to attack you. This is the plain meaning of the verse repeating the word Yehudah twice in the same sequence. All those who understood Yaakov as referring to the sale of Joseph in this verse do not understand the sentence structure nor paid attention to the tone signs.

מטרף בני עלית, you were spared by my son Joseph who did not kill you in his wrath although he hated you. This is the meaning of the words כרע רבץ כאריה, seeing that at that time he was like a crouching lion, one in repose, i.e. not representing a threat to anyone This is why Joseph did not issue you orders to kill you.

מטרף בני עלית, due to the surfeit of loot you rose to a position of distinction and glory as we know from Samuel II 8,13 “David gained fame when he returned from defeating Edom in the valley of Salt.”

כרע רבץ כאריה, “He will kneel and crouch like a lion.” It is the nature of a lion that after having secured its prey it kneels and crouches, stretching out and not leaving that spot even if danger appears to threaten it. Here too, Yaakov alludes to David, who after securing prey, did not flee the site out of fear of a counter attack (avengers). Some commentators see in the words מטרף בני עלית, a description of how the Jewish people after vanquishing their enemies will arise, and assume a posture of fearlessness, unconcern. [as opposed to Yaakov who, after Shimon and Levi killed the male inhabitants of Shechem, worried about retribution by the surrounding Emorites. Ed.]

In order to understand these verses a short introduction will enable us to gain a deeper insight into the ways of the Torah. We perceive Adam as a tree from which all the holy souls that would ever enter the world were suspended. When Adam sinned, evil assumed a limited rule in our world and captured many of these holy souls. According to our Kabbalists it has been the task of the Jewish people to rescue as many of these holy souls who are kept prisoners within the קליפה (forces of negative spirituality), using the holy Torah and G'd's commandments all of which G'd has implanted in our midst as our weaponry. On occasion, even a close personal attachment such as the rape of a person containing a holy Jewish soul and the impure soul of a Gentile may result in a new life of a positive kind. Shechem's deep-seated attachment to Dinah, the daughter of Jacob whom he had raped may be an example of such a phenomenon (Genesis 34,33). According to Kohelet Yaakov, Dinah infused Shechem with part of her holy soul, something which eventually resulted in the emergence and liberation of the soul of Rabbi Chanina ben Tradyon. This is alluded to in the word רחבת in רחבת ידים (Genesis 34,21) the letters of which are an acronym of the respective first letters in the name דבי חנינה בן תרדיון.

כרע רבץ וגו׳. Nicht in Kampf und Schlachtgewühl wohnt Judas Größe, nicht der aufflackernde Mut, der in der Stunde der Gefahr sich Achtung zu verschaffen weiß und dann erlahmt, ist, was ihn kennzeichnet; selbst wenn er ruht, bleibt er Löwe, die Achtung gebietende Größe, die er in der Ruhe entfaltet, schafft Sicherheit nach außen und gewährt unter seiner Leitung den Frieden, der die bestimmungsgemäße Entfaltung im Innern möglich macht. — Es ist zu bedauern, dass die eigentliche Bedeutung des לביא nicht bekannt ist. Sie ist gewiß so charakteristisch wie גור und אריה. Möglich, dass seine Bedeutung in der Wurzel לבה liegt, die rabbinisch: entflammen, anfachen, gleichbedeutend mit להב, heißt, und hieße לביא der Löwe in seiner Erregtheit, der entflammte Löwe. וכלביא מי יקימנו: wer möchte machen, dass er wie ein entflammter Löwe aufstehe!

מטרף בני עלית, “you removed yourself from the kill, my son;” [our author does not accept this as the appropriate translation. Ed] He interprets the line as a prophecy, i.e. David’s eventually becoming the King of all of Israel, will be based on the skills he will demonstrate in overcoming attacks upon him by a bear and a lion, and his having prevailed in those encounters. (Compare Samuel I 17,36) His performance when facing Goliath was witnessed by many, in addition.

בני עלית THOU WENTEST UP, O MY SON — from that murderous deed you withdrew saying, (Genesis. 5:26) “what profit is it if we slay our brother”, and similarly did he act when Tamar was condemned to death, for he said “She is righteous: mine is the blame” (cf. Rashi on Genesis 38:26), therefore as a reward כרע רבץ HE STOOPED DOWN, HE CROUCHED etc. — as we are told of the days of Solomon (1 Kings 5:5) “[Israel dwelt safely] every man under his vine etc.” (Genesis Rabbah 99:8).

וכלביא מי יקימנו, once Yehudah will attain the position of king, he will be like such a lion who on occasion will lie down languidly just like a lion, a time when no one can frighten him into rising because he has become afraid of the enemy.

כרע רבץ כאריה, my father of blessed memory explained this verse as follows: during the period of David, Yehudah crouched as does a lion who at the time when he is afraid of other ferocious beasts does not lie down and relax, but only crouches. This he does in order to be able to rouse himself at a moment’s notice when attacked. However, at a time when he does not face imminent danger he lies down relaxed. Similarly, David. Seeing that he was involved in wars practically during the entire period of his reign and had to be ready to rise at a moment’s notice to face his enemies and to kill them, he was like a lion concerned about staying alive. However, his son Solomon, could afford to lie down in repose seeing that all the nations were afraid of him and none dared attack him. There was no one around who would rouse him from his slumber.

On other occasions a soul which was taken captive at the time Adam sinned may emerge of its own accord at the time when the forces in charge of the קליפה decide to swamp earth with many new lives (souls). Such formerly captive holy souls who have initiated their own conversion to Judaism will often make every effort to pursue the path of goodness. This explains the phenomenon that converts very often become more meticulous in their observance of Jewish law than natural-born Jews. Ruth the Moabite and Naamah the Ammonite are part of the phenomenon we have just described. Their souls had become captive due to the acts of incest committed by their ancestor when Lot's daughters slept with their father. When their "captor" i.e. the force or angel in charge of releasing impure souls into the world, released a quantity of such souls, hoping to contaminate the earth with still more negative spirituality, two of the souls originally held captive escaped and turned out to become Ruth and Naamah. The fact that Ruth became the ancestor of David whereas Naamah became the wife Rechavam indicate the sins of their ancestor who slept with his daughters. Lot's older daughter who had the effrontery to call the name of her son i.e. מואב, i.e. "from my father," had committed a greater offence than her younger sister who called the child of that union בן עמי. The fact that Ruth was descended from Moab whereas Naamah was descended from Ammon reflects the phenomenon that the greater the spiritual morass that one has emerged from the greater the effort at one's spiritual rehabilitation. This is why David and a whole dynasty of kings is descended from Ruth, whereas Naamah the offspring of Lot's younger daughter is comparativeley less illustrious (compare Baba Kama 38 where the Talmud even attributes G'd's command to treat Ammon more mildly than Moab to the minor difference between the acts committed by Lot's two daughters). It is important to remember that if a person of lesser stature than Lot had perpetrated these acts he would not have had the good fortune that in the cause of centuries at least two good people came out of him. [I have some problem with the whole premise; according to the seven Noachidic laws it was perfectly permissible for a father to sleep with his daughter, all the more so since Lot was not even aware of it. Ed.] Just as there are different levels of righteousness amongst the observant Jews, i.e. goodness is a relative term, so there are different degrees amongst the people whose souls originate in the pool at the disposal of the forces of the קליפה. Amongst the many kings and leaders of Gentile society, all of whose souls originate in the pool of souls provided by the forces of the קליפה, some are models of virtue whereas others are models of debauchery, perfidy, and cruelty. This is the mystical dimension of what we are taught in Sotah 49 that בעקבות משיחה חוצפה יסגא, that "in the days preceding the arrival of the Messiah, effrontery will become prevalent." The sages meant that as the number of holy souls amongst the pool of souls controlled by the forces of the קליפה becomes more and more depleted, the tempering influence exercised on the whole pool of spiritually negative souls by the holy souls held captive will cease. This accounts for the fact that in days of old the souls that found their way back to the realm of holy souls produced spiritual giants such as Abraham, Sarah, Ruth and the like. Even in later generations converts such as Shemayah and Avtalyon are examples of souls who became spiritual giants amongst our people. Onkelos is another such example. Present day converts, however, are the souls who had already been greatly impoverished during their prolonged stay as captives amongst the pool of spiritually deficient souls, a pool which had been more and more depleted of such souls as the one of Abraham, Sarah, etc. The Talmud describes the period preceding the arrival of the Messiah by using the term עקבות, heels. This is an allusion to the pool of the impure souls which by that time will contain only relatively insignificant souls from the pool of holy souls that the forces of the קליפה had captured when Adam sinned. These souls are described as no more than "heels," the lower extremity of the human body, i.e. a relatively derogatory term. We can find confirmation of that thought in the Zohar 1, page 258.

With the help of this introduction we can begin to understand the advice given by G'd to Yehudah when He sent His angel and almost forced him to have intercourse with the woman whom he considered a harlot (as described in Bereshit Rabbah 85,8). On the one hand, according to Torah law, it was not appropriate for Yehudah to have sexual relations with his daughter-in-law. [I have chosen this expression because Noachide law, which Yehudah was subject to, permits relations between a father-in-law and daughter-in-law. Ed.] Inasmuch as Yehudah was unaware of that woman's identity at the time, he did not know that he committed a forbidden act. Moreover, he acted under heavenly compulsion. The combination of all these factors enabled him to release the souls of Peretz and Zerach who were part of the souls captured by the forces of evil at the time Adam ate from the tree of knowledge. We know that these two souls contained within them great spiritual potential since great people are descended from them. The "captor" of such souls, i.e. the forces of the קליפה, can be presumed to have guarded them especially carefully so that they should not escape from his clutches. No wonder then that a great individual of the calibre of royalty such as Yehudah was needed to become the instrument of their release from that captivity. Unless such a soul had been accused of the morally depraved sin of incest (the appearance of it) it might never have been able to escape its original environment amongst the spiritually inferior pool of souls.

This is what the Torah had in mind when it states, using indirect speech, i.e. G'd is speaking: גור אריה יהודה. This means that prior to Yehudah's union with Tamar he had only been a cub. This was also hinted at when his father had said to him previously: אתה יודוך אחיך, up until now you only merited that your brothers deferred to you by dint of some personal stature you possessed; this stature did not yet have historic significance. Yehudah acquired significance as a historic personality only as a result of his divinely induced union with Tamar. If you want proof of this, just search our records and see which great personalities other than Peretz and Zerach are descended from him. Once Yehudah had united with Tamar he qualified for the title אריה, a fully grown lion. Jacob then went on to explain the underlying cause of Yehudah's spiritual rise. It was מטרף בני עלית, "you my son were able to tear yourself away from the prey" i.e. from the pool of captive holy souls that had been snatched by the forces of the קליפה as the result of Adam's sin. Your divinely induced union with Tamar enabled some of these souls to become free once more and join the pool of holy souls. The sons you have acquired for yourself as a result of this union enable you to establish an everlasting dynasty.

When the Torah continued with כרע רבץ, this is a reference to the prey which proved to be the source of Yehudah's spiritual ascent, something G'd had referred to when He told Cain in Genesis 4,7: "sin crouches at its door;" Yehudah had not had a prior opportunity to rescue the precious souls of Peretz and Zerach.

When the Torah continues calling Yehudah both אריה and לביא, this is a hint that these souls were guarded within the קליפה by a power comparable to a לביא, so that only an אריה, a fully grown lion, had the power to rescue them. Yehudah was that "lion" of a holy soul who could perform such a deed successfully. As of that time the sceptre would not depart from Yehudah, i.e. he had laid the foundation for an enduring dynasty. We are still looking forward daily to the resumption of the monarchy by a descendant of Yehudah (the Messiah).

לא יסור שבט מיהודה THE SCEPTRE SHALL NOT DEPART FROM JUDAH — Even after the house of David ceases to reign. For this refers to the Chiefs of the Exile in Babylon who ruled over the people with the rod (שבט) having been appointed by the government (Sanhedrin 5a; Horayot 11b).

THE SCEPTRE SHALL NOT DEPART FROM JUDAH. Its purport is not that the sceptre of royalty shall never depart from Judah, for it is written, The Eternal will bring thee, and thy king whom thou shalt set over thee, unto a nation that thou hast not known, thou nor thy fathers,¹²²Deuteronomy 28:36. with the result that the people and their king will be in exile, devoid of royalty and nobility, and for a long time there has not been a king in Israel! The prophet Jacob did not assure Israel that they would not enter captivity under any circumstances because Judah would rule over them. Instead, the purport of the verse before us is that the sceptre shall not depart from Judah to any of his brothers, for the king of Israel, who will rule over them, will be from the tribe of Judah, and none of his brothers will rule over him. The same meaning applies to the expression, there shall not depart a lawgiver from between his feet, which means that every lawgiver in Israel who carries the king’s signet shall be from Judah. It is he who will rule and command in all Israel, and he will have the seal of royalty until the coming of his son, who [will have] the obedience of all people, to do with all as he pleases, this being a reference to the Messiah. “The sceptre” is thus an allusion to David, who was the first king to have the sceptre of royalty, and “Shiloh”¹²³Ad ki yavo Shiloh, “until Shiloh come, and his be the obedience of peoples.” is his son, who will have the obedience of the peoples.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra’s assertion that “Shiloh” is a reference to David is impossible for Judah never possessed a royal sceptre prior to David. And even though the tribe of Judah was honored and marched first in the desert,¹²⁴See Numbers 2:9. the word sheivet (sceptre) applies only to a king or prince, as it is written: A sceptre (‘sheivet’) of equity is the sceptre of thy kingdom;¹²⁵Psalms 45:7. the sceptre of the rulers;¹²⁶Isaiah 14:5. a sceptre to rule.¹²⁷Ezekiel 19:14.
Now this verse before us alludes to the fact that Jacob made the tribe of Judah king over his brothers and bequeathed to Judah sovereignty over Israel. This is what David said: And the Eternal, the G-d of Israel, chose me out of all the house of my father to be king over Israel forever; for He has chosen Judah to be prince, and in the house of Judah, the house of my father, and among the sons of my father He took pleasure in me to make me king over all Israel.¹²⁸I Chronicles 28:4.
Jacob said, It shall not depart, in order to allude to the fact that another tribe¹²⁹Benjamin, for Saul was from the tribe of Benjamin. will rule over Israel, but once the sceptre of royalty comes to Judah it will not depart from him to another tribe. This is the intent of the verse, For the Eternal, the G-d of Israel, gave the kingdom over Israel to David forever, to him and to his sons.¹³⁰II Chronicles 13:5. The reason for Saul [being appointed the first king over Israel] was that the request for royalty at that time was distasteful to the Holy One, blessed be He.¹³¹See I Samuel 8:5-9. Ramban will explain why the people’s request for a king was unpleasing to G-d “at that time.” He did not wish to appoint a king over them from the tribe to whom royalty belonged and from whom it was never to depart. He therefore granted them a temporary royalty. It is this which Scripture alludes to when it says, I give thee a king in Mine anger, and take him away in My wrath.¹³²Hosea 13:11. Having given him unwillingly, He therefore removed him in His wrath, as he and his children were killed¹³³I Samuel 31:6. and his royal line was interrupted. The reason for all this was that at this time Samuel was judge and prophet who was fighting their battles according to the word of G-d, saving them in times of trouble, and it was improper for them to request a king during his lifetime, even as Samuel said to them, And the Eternal your G-d is your king,¹³⁴Ibid., 12:12. and Scripture further states, They have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not be king over them.¹³⁵Ibid., 8:7. It was for this reason that He did not grant them permanent royalty. The verse stating, Thou hast done foolishly; thou hast not kept the commandment of the Eternal thy G-d, which He commanded thee; for now would the Eternal have established thy kingdom upon Israel forever,¹³⁶Ibid., 13:13. This verse clearly indicates that had Saul not sinned, his kingdom would have endured forever, which seems contrary to Ramban’s above thesis. Ramban’s answer is stated in the text. means that had not Saul sinned, his descendants would have had sovereignty over some part of Israel, but not over all. This is the meaning of [the expression], upon Israel, [rather than “upon all Israel].” Perhaps Saul would have reigned over the tribes that were descended from his mother,¹³⁷Rachel. Joseph and Benjamin were her sons, and the tribes of Benjamin, Ephraim and Menasheh were her descendants. namely, Benjamin, Ephraim and Menasheh, as Judah and Ephraim were considered as two nations in Israel.¹³⁸There would then have been no contradiction between the permanent sovereignty of both Saul and David, as Judah and Ephraim are separate nations. Or again, Saul might have been king, subject to the king of Judah.
In my opinion, the kings from other tribes, who ruled over Israel after David, went against the wish of their father Jacob by diverting the inheritance of Judah to another tribe. Now they relied on the word of Achiyah the Shilonite, the prophet who anointed¹³⁹We do not find in Scripture that Jeroboam was anointed king. But see Horayoth 11 b, where it is stated that kings of Israel were anointed although not with the Oil of Anointment prepared by Moses. Jeroboam, who said, And I will for this afflict the seed of David, but not forever.¹⁴⁰I Kings 11:39. But when [the ten tribes of] Israel continued to crown kings one after another of the rest of the tribes, and they did not revert to the kingdom of Judah, they transgressed the testament of the ancestor, and they were accordingly punished, just as Hosea said, They have set up kings, but not from Me.¹⁴¹Hosea 8:4.
This was also the reason for the punishment of the Hasmoneans, who reigned during the Second Temple. They were saints of the Most High, without whom the learning of Torah and the observance of Commandments would have been forgotten in Israel, and despite this, they suffered such great punishment. The four sons¹⁴²Judah the Maccabee, Elazar, Jonathan and Shimon, were all slain by the sword. of the old Hasmonean Matithyahu, saintly men who ruled one after another, in spite of all their prowess and success, fell by the sword of their enemies. And ultimately the punishment reached the stage where our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said:¹⁴³Baba Bathra 3b. “He who says, ‘I come from the house of the Hasmoneans,’ is a slave,” as they were all destroyed on account of this sin.¹⁴⁴The Hasmoneans were priests of the tribe of Levi. By assuming the crown of royalty, they transgressed the command of Jacob, who said as long as royalty exists in Israel it should not be removed from the tribe of Judah. All this is elucidated by Ramban further in the text. Now although among the children of Shimon, there was cause for punishment on account of the Sadducees,¹⁴⁵Reference here is to Yochanan Hyrcanus, son of Shimon, who towards the end of his long reign became a member of the sect of the Sadducees, who, in opposition to the Pharisees, denied the Oral Traditions. See Kiddushin 66a. all the children of the righteous Matithyahu the Hasmonean were deposed for this only: they ruled even though they were not of the seed of Judah and of the house of David, and thus they completely removed “the sceptre” and “the lawgiver” from Judah. And their punishment was measure for measure, as the Holy One, blessed be He, caused their slaves¹⁴⁶A reference to King Herod. to rule over them, and it is they who destroyed them.
It is also possible that, [in addition to the Hasmoneans having sinned for assuming royalty when they were not of the tribe of Judah], they sinned in ruling on account of their being priests, who have been commanded: Guard your priesthood in everything that pertaineth to the altar, and to within the veil; and ye shall serve; I give you the priesthood as a service of gift.¹⁴⁷Numbers 18:7. Thus it was not for them to rule, but only to perform the Service of G-d.
In Tractate Horayoth of the Jerusalem Talmud¹⁴⁸3:2. I have seen the following text: “We do not anoint priests as kings. Rabbi Yehudah Anturya said that this is on account of the verse, The sceptre shall not depart from Judah. Rabbi Chiya the son of Rabbi Abba said [that Scripture states concerning the king], To the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel.¹⁴⁹Deuteronomy 17:20. Now what is written afterwards? The priests the Levites … shall have no portion.”¹⁵⁰Ibid., 18:1. Thus taeching by juxtaposition that the priests are not to act as kings. Thus the Sages have taught here that kings are not to be anointed from among the priests, the sons of Aaron. Now at first the above text explains that this is out of respect for the tribe of Judah since sovereignty is not to depart from that tribe. Therefore, even if Israel, out of temporary necessity, raises a king over itself from the other tribes, he is not to be anointed so that the glory of royalty should not be upon him. Instead, such kings are to be merely as judges or officers. The reason for mentioning “priests” [when the same stricture applies to all tribes other than Judah] is that even though the priests as such are suited for anointment,¹⁵¹For any priest who is designated as the High Priest enters upon his new duties through anointment (Horayoth 11 b). we are not to anoint them as kings, and the moreso the rest of the tribes. It is as the Rabbis said in the Gemara:¹⁵²Horayoth 11b. The principle is mentioned there, but Ramban’s quote follows the text of Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Melachim I, 10). we are to anoint only the kings of the house of David.¹⁵³See Note 139 above. And Rabbi Chiya the son of Rabbi Abba, [who in the above text from the Jerusalem Talmud based the law upon a verse in the book of Deuteronomy], explained that anointing priests as kings is forbidden by a law of the Torah, which says that the priests the Levites, even all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion nor inheritance¹⁵⁴Deuteronomy 18:1. in royalty. This comment is a matter which is fitting and proper.

לא יסור שבט מיהודה, the position of royalty which all his 12 brothers bestowed on him, i.e. that they all prostrate themselves before him, will not be removed from him until Shiloh. Yehudah, i.e. King Rechavam of Yehudah son of Solomon who wanted to confirm his ascendancy to the throne in Shilo, which is very close to Shechem. (Kings I 12) [In the event, his stupidity in listening to inexperienced irresponsible counselors lost him most of his kingdom so that he ruled only over Yehudah and Binyamin. Ed.]

לא יסור שבט מיהודה, once he will have attained the formal position of king, as hinted at by the wordsוכלביא מי יקימנו in the previous verse, the scepter symbolising his rule will not move to any other tribal leader, unlike that of King Sha-ul, who, although crowned with G’d’s approval, was deprived of founding a dynasty by G’d Who had rejected him on account of his disobedience (a promise by the prophet Nathan to David who had also sinned, compare Samuel II 7,15). When the kingdom of Yehudah headed by a monarch of Davidic origin did collapse and was destroyed by the Babylonians, this did not contradict what Yaakov had predicted here that the scepter would not pass to others from the tribe of Yehudah. Yaakov spoke only about a period during which the state and the kingdom would continue to exist, prophesying that as long as that condition existed the rule would not be transferred to anyone belonging to another tribe. He had not addressed the possibility of Jewish statehood being lost altogether.

לא יסור שבט מיהודה, the ruler is called שבט because he exercises authority over the people and disciplines them if they disobey. He uses his power like a father uses his rod on a disobedient son. In fact, the rod or scepter, or its equivalent, are carried by people in authority in order to remind those who are subservient to them as a symbol of their power to exact punishment. We find such a שבט called שרביט הזהב, “the golden scepter,” and whether the king extended it or failed to extend it to a supplicant determined if he would be executed. (Esther 5,2) The expression also occurs in the sense we have mentioned in Isaiah 14,5 and in Psalms 45,7.

לא יסור שבט מיהודה, “The rod will never leave Yehudah, etc.” According to Ibn Ezra this means that even before having been crowned king officially, already when Israel would be in the desert, the army group featuring the tribe of Yehudah will march at the head of the people.

From Dovid and on... Rashi is answering the objection: Until Shaul there was no king in Israel! Thus Rashi explains that it means, “From Dovid and on,” and Dovid is from the tribe of Yehudah.

Diese in Judas Kern wurzelnde zwiefache Einwirkung nach außen und innen befähigen ihn, für das "Zepter und den Schreibgriffel": Schirmherr der Macht und des Geistes zu werden. שבט, verwandt mit שפט ,שפת, ist der Ausdruck für die ausübende Gewalt, die die Dinge in gehörige Ordnung bringt und darin erhält. Es weicht nicht die ordnunggebietende Macht und nicht מחוקק בין רגליו. Man braucht hier nicht an שליתה בין רגליה zu denken. Aus 4. B. M. 21, 18 ׳באר חפרוה וגו zusammengestellt ist mit dem Fürstenstab, und מחוקק wo ,כרוה וגו׳ במחוקק במשענתם beide gebraucht werden, wenngleich nicht zum Ausgraben des Brunnens (חפר), so doch zum anlegenden Vorstechen (כרה), ergiebt sich jedenfalls, dass מחוקק einen Schreibgriffel von größerer Dimension und Festigkeit als unsere Federn bezeichnet, vielleicht ein Werkzeug, um in Stein Inschriften zu meißeln. Ja, die Konstruktion: במחוקק במשענותם lässt fast vermuten, es sei מחוקק eine als Schreibgriffel dienende Spitze am Stabe gewesen. Jedenfalls ergibt sich daraus, dass der Herrscher den Herrscherstab und den Schreibgriffelstab sitzend "zwischen den Füßen" gehalten haben, und sich hierauf das לא יסור מבין רגליו beziehen könne. Zepter und Gesetzesschreibgriffel werden stets zwischen Judas Füßen ruhen. Die Autorität, die dem göttlichen Gesetze Achtung und Bewusstsein im Volke verschafft, ריש גלותא) שבט) und נשיא) מחוקק) wird stets aus Juda sein.

לא יסור שבט מיהודה, according to a Midrash this line is to be understood as in Jeremiah 2,21: “it will not blossom;” the word appears in this sense there סורי הגפן נכריה, “the vine blossomed into an alien vine.” In other words: Yaakov cautions that the rod of Yehudah as a ruler will not blossom forth

It comes to explain when the monarchy will come to him. And he said, "It should not come to your heart that you will be in poverty until the time of your monarchy, 'as the sceptre and rulership will not depart from you,' as they will always consider you great... ...

לא יסור שבט מיהודה, “the rod (mace) will never leave Yehudah;” once the crown will be placed on a member of the tribe of Yehudah (King David), it will never be placed on the head of someone belonging to another tribe; (as opposed to the first King of Israel, Shaul, who had been unable to establish a dynasty.)

ומחוקק מבין רגליו AND THE LAWGIVER FROM BETWEEN HIS FEET — This refers to the scholars of the Torah: the Princes of the Land of Israel (as Hillel and his descendants who were Heads of Schools only and had no political power) (Sanhedrin 5a; Horayot 11b).

ולו יקהת עמים, the mass of the people, who under the rule of his father Solomon, had been tightly controlled, as we know from Kings I 5,4 now assembled at Shechem to enthrone Rechavam as described in Chronicles II 10,1 where the people had all assembled in order to place him on his father’s throne. We know that Shechem was very close to Shiloh from Joshua 24,1 and the whole paragraph following. The description in what is reported in that paragraph sounds as if could all have taken place at Shiloh. [seeing that Joshua refers to the people listening to him “in the presence of the Lord”, i.e. at the Sanctuary which stood in Shiloh. Compare Joshua chapter 18,1 for similar wording referring directly to a presence of the people in Shiloh, in the presence of the Lord, i.e. the Tabernacle which had been erected there.” Ed.] Furthermore, in verse 26 of chapter 24 Joshua also concludes by stating that all of the exhortations in the chapter demanding from the people to remain loyal to G’d and His Torah had been addressed to them at the מקדש ה', G’d’s Sanctuary. All this supports the view that the precise location was Shiloh, whereas the region in which Shiloh was situated was Shechem, hence the reason both locations were mentioned. These two locations are linked in one sentence also in Judges 21,19 as well as in Jeremiah 41,5. There was open space at Shechem around the famous oak located near Shechem. At that location a mass rally could be held easily. The people would pay homage to the Sanctuary in Shiloh from that vantage point, as it was in their line of vision. This exegesis refutes the view of the heretics, especially that of the Christians, who claim that the שילה spelled here with a ה at the end and the city known as Shiloh spelled in Scripture as שלו as in Samuel 1,24 (where Elkanah would make his pilgrimages and where the Sanctuary stood) are not the same, the one in our verse referring to the Saviour, while the one in Samuel being a reference to the town. Yaakov, as opposed to the view of the Christians, did not elevate the position of Yehudah to that of being a Saviour beginning with that point in “time,” but he predicted that after the death of Solomon, the high point in Jewish history, a decline would set in as documented by the 10 tribes withdrawing their support of a king from the tribe of Yehudah.

ומחוקק מבין רגליו, that his descendants would sit on the throne as judges, and that other members of his tribe would be among those who would be scribes for the judges as was the custom.

ומחוקק מבין רגליו, a reference to the sons of Yehudah, i.e. that his appointment as forecast by Yaakov will be hereditary, just as the priesthood is transferred from father to son. (if the son is worthy and the people do not object) The expression מבין רגליו is analogous to the afterbirth, which exits from between the mother’s legs (Deuteronomy 28,57) The reason why the king is referred to as מחוקק, is because he has the authority to legislate laws, חוקים. Yaakov said that this authority of an informal nature would not depart from Yehudah until he would have someone from his tribe who wields formal authority, i.e. is elected king, a reference to David.

עד כי יבא שילה, “until Shiloh emerges,” a reference to David who will be the first king establishing a dynasty; the מחוקק mentioned in our verse refers to the scribe recording the king’s edicts. The expression מבין רגליו, is a description of how the scribe holds the book in which he writes between his legs, seeing that he sits at the feet of the ruler whose decrees he records for publication and for posterity. The word שילה means “his son,” based on the word ובשליתה יוצאת מבין רגליה ובבניה אשר תלד in Deuteronomy 28,57, which means “the afterbirth which issues from between her legs and the babies she bears.” Nachmanides queries this commentary which is attributed to Ibn Ezra, saying that Yaakov could not have referred to David, claiming that the word שבט, “scepter” cannot be used except in conjunction with a crowned head. He supports this with several quotes from Scripture, stating that until David’s advent to the throne, no one from the tribe of Yehudah had possessed such a symbol of authority. The promise of the scepter of Royalty not departing from Yehudah, is not meant to suggest that it will never depart from Yehudah, i.e. the dynasty of David. It could not mean that as the Torah has stated specifically in Deuteronomy 28.36 that יולך ה' אותך ואת מלכך אשר תקים עליך אל גוי אשר לא ידעת, “that the Lord will lead you and the king you appointed over yourself into exile to a nation whom you have never heard of.” In other words, not only the people but also their (former) king will experience exile in a foreign land. Clearly, when in exile, they will not have a king of their own ruling over them, whether Davidic or otherwise. What Yaakov meant was that as long as there would be kings in an independent state of Israel, such a king would be from the tribe of Yehudah through his illustrious scion David. Jerusalem would not be ruled by a king from some other tribe.

King Moshiach that the kingdom is his. This refers back to the beginning of the verse. It means: “The rod” of rulership “will not depart from Yehudah,” and even during exile they will have a limited authority, continuing “until Shiloh comes,” the one “that the rod is his.” Rashi says “kingdom” instead of “rod”, but it means the same. (Nachalas Yaakov)

AND UNTO HIM SHALL BE AN ASSEMBLAGE (‘YIKHATH’) OF PEOPLES. Yikhath amim means an assemblage of peoples, as it is said with reference to the Messiah, Unto him shall the nations seek.¹⁵⁵Isaiah 11:10. Of similar meaning is the verse, The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth ‘likhath eim,’¹⁵⁶Proverbs 30:17. meaning “the gathering of wrinkles in his mother’s face due to her old age.” In the Talmud¹⁵⁷Yebamoth 110b. Nehardea was a town in Babylonia, renowned as the seat of the academy founded by Shmuel. His colleague Rav was head of the academy in Sura. we find a similar expression: “They gathered assemblies (d’makhu k’hiatha) in the streets of Nehardea.” It could also have said here in the verse, kehiyath amim, instead of yikhath amim. This is the language of Rashi.
Now it does not appear to me to be correct to explain, as Rashi does, likhath eim to mean the gathering of wrinkles in the mother’s face. And the expression, makhu k’hiatha, is nothing but a phrase to express disputes and questions, suggesting that the matter was disputed with many questions and interrogations, for in the language of the Sages, one who finds difficulty with a certain point of law is referred to as kohah. Such an example is found in the Midrash Chazit:¹⁵⁸Another name for Shir Hashirim Rabbah. The name Midrash Chazit is derived from the first word of the opening of this Midrash. It begins with the verse in Proverbs 22:29: “Chazita (Seest thou a man.…)” The Midrash quoted here is in 3:13. “They all handle the sword,¹⁵⁹Song of Songs 3:8. as they all study the Law with minds sharpened as a sword, so that if any problem comes before them, the law should not be moot (kohah) to them.” There are many other similar examples of the usage of this word there in the Midrash Chazit. This is also the origin of the expression in the Gemara:¹⁶⁰Negaim 4:11. See also Tosafoth Yebamoth 110b. “Rabbi Yehoshua kihah and declared it to be clean,” meaning that he asked many questions and refuted all arguments of those who held it to be unclean until he was compelled to pronounce it to be clean. In many old texts in the Gemara Baba Metzia¹⁶¹52b. we also find the saying: “He who d’kohi on coins is called a malevolent soul,” meaning that he who is strict and causes difficulty in accepting a coin from another [on the grounds that it is slightly worn shows himself to be stingy in his dealings].
Grammarians¹⁶²R’dak in his Book of Roots, under the root yakah. have said concerning yikhath that its root is yakah, thus explaining it in the sense of obedience and acceptance of a command. Hence yikhath amim would mean that the peoples would listen to him and do whatever he commands them to do; and despiseth ‘likhath eim’¹⁵⁶Proverbs 30:17. means “despising accepting her command.”
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the word yikhath is similar in expression to the verse, He that eateth the sour grapes his teeth ‘tikhenah’ (shall be set on edge),¹⁶³Jeremiah 31:29. and its root is kahah, with the letter yud in the word yikhath being similar to the yud in the word yitzhar. The purport of all words having the root kahah is weakness and collapse. The verse before us is thus stating that the rod of the oppressor will not be removed from Judah until his son, who will bring about the meakness of the peoples and their collapse, will come, as he will weaken them all by sword. Similarly, the verse, If the iron be ‘keihah,’¹⁶⁴Ecclesiastes 10:10. means “if the iron be dull and unable to cut” — similar to [the expression] in the language of the Sages, sakin she’amda,¹⁶⁵Beitza 28b. Literally, “a knife which has stood.” (a knife which has become dull) “or has been partly broken and contains notches.”
Again I found a similar use of the word kohah there in Midrash Chazit,¹⁶⁶1:57. See Note 158 for derivation of the name Midrash Chazit. [with reference to the period of the Exodus when Israel was to eat of the Passover-offering]: “The Holy One, blessed be He, directed at them a most pleasant odor from the Garden of Eden, and their souls were koheh, to eat. They said to Moses: ‘Our master Moses, give us something to eat.’ He answered them: ‘So did the Holy One, blessed be He, say to me: There shall no alien eat thereof.’¹⁶⁷Exodus 12:43. So the Israelites arose and separated the aliens from among them. Now their souls were koheh to eat, etc.” The purport of the word koheh here is that their souls were weakened and their bodies overcome on account of their desire to eat of the Passover-offering to which there had been attached this good odor from the Garden of Eden. In a similar vein are the expressions mentioned above: “The Law should not be kohah to them,”¹⁵⁸Another name for Shir Hashirim Rabbah. The name Midrash Chazit is derived from the first word of the opening of this Midrash. It begins with the verse in Proverbs 22:29: “Chazita (Seest thou a man.…)” The Midrash quoted here is in 3:13. meaning “faint and deficient in their hand”; the expression, makhu k’hiatha,¹⁵⁷Yebamoth 110b. Nehardea was a town in Babylonia, renowned as the seat of the academy founded by Shmuel. His colleague Rav was head of the academy in Sura. means that they were asking questions which induce a weakening of the soul from the great pressure and concentration. It may be that it is an expression of disproof and smashing refutation, such as, “Parich Rav Acha.”¹⁶⁸Kiddushin 13a. “Rav Acha objected” Ramban is suggesting that it means: “Rav Acha asked a crushing question.” They similarly use the expression [in connection with the question of the wicked son in the Passover Hagaddah]: “You too hakheih his teeth,”¹⁶⁹Mechilta Bo 18, toward the end. meaning “break them or weaken them by your words,” for with respect to the flesh you can only use the term “weaken” but not “break” although the intent of weakening and breaking is alike, and the word kehiyah includes both.

שילה .עד כי יבא שילה kann von שול: der äußerste, untere Saum, das äußerste Ende sein. Jakob liegt hier auf seinem Sterbebette am ersten Anfange des Volkes, zu welchem noch kaum der Grundstein gelegt ist, und schaut hinab auf den allerletzten Spröß- ling aus Judas Stamm. Das Suffix ו ist mit ה geschrieben, zum Zeichen der Schwäche, und indem Jakob die letzte Generation שילה nennt, sagt er damit: es wird eine Zeit kommen, wo man das מלכות בית דוד in seinem tiefsten, untersten Ende erblicken wird, wo Juda nicht als ארי, nicht löwenstark, sondern weiblich schwach, und also erscheinen wird, dass man es in seinen letzten Zügen liegend halten werde, wo Judas Macht und Manneskraft fast verschwunden sein wird, und gerade dann — wenn die welthistorischen Totengräber schon den Sarg für Judas verendenden Leib bestellen, לו יקהת עמים, wird es sich männlich erheben und ihm יקהת עמים zufallen.

עד כי יבא שילה, “not until the Tabernacle in Shiloh will be ruined. The word יבא in this line does not mean “he will come,” but is an expression denoting ruin, just as in Isaiah 60,20: לא יבא עוד שמשך, “your sun will never set again;” An alternate interpretation of this verse: instead of referring to Yehudah’s ascent to the throne being still a long way off, Yaakov promises that once on the throne of the Kingdom of Yehudah, the rod symbolising the power of the holder of it will not be usurped per by another tribe, as it had been done after Saul’s dynasty collapsed until the coming of the Messiah, symbolised by the word שילה, in other words, not ever. G–d confirmed Yaakov’s promise to David in Samuel II 7,16: through the prophet Natan. A third possible interpretation of our verse; David will not lose the throne of all of Israel until after the fateful assembly in Sh’chem,- very close to Shiloh- when ten tribes crowned Jerobam as their king, and Rechavam, Solomon’s son retained the loyalty only of his own tribe and that of the tribe of Binyamin. Still another interpretation of our verse: in spite of many revolutions, exiles etc. that will occur after the first King from the tribe of Yehudah, David will ascend the throne, when the Messiah will arrive who will be from the tribe of Yehudah, and he will rule without anyone disputing his right to do so. (Attributed to Rav Rachmiel? Yitzchok)

And you will legislate decreed commands upon others; meaning to say, until Shiloh comes, you will be an officer and ruler. But when Shiloh comes, you will be a king. As when the day comes for Shiloh to be destroyed, the monarchy of the House of David will sprout"; as it is written (Psalms 78:60, 67, 70), "He forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh... And He rejected the tent of Joseph... And He chose David," and Jerusalem which He selected. Hence the monarchy of the House of David is dependent upon the coming of the day of Shiloh. And Jacob announced to him that he will be king then. But [even] until the coming of Shilo, he would not be in lowliness. It is however as it is written (I Chronicles 12:39) [and all of Israel] "came to Hebron to make David king..."

ומחוקק מבין רגליו, “nor will scribes be absent from sitting at his feet.” In those days it was the custom for the royal scribes to sit at the feet of the ruler.

עד כי יבא שילה means until the King Messiah will come, whose will be the kingdom (Genesis Rabbah 99:8). Thus too does Onkelos render it. A Midrashic interpretation is: שילה is the same as שי לו, a present unto him, as it is said, (Psalms 76:12) “Let them bring (שי) presents unto him that is to be feared.”

עד כי יבא שילה, the word שילה is a composite of the root שול meaning שולים, boundaries, margins. The other part of the word is based on the root שלה, the root of the word שלום. Shalom, commonly understood as “peace,” means “the end of the road,” after whatever wrangling in order to achieve an objective has been successfully concluded. Yaakov is saying that until the advent of שילה, i.e. the second part of that word, Yehudah’s pre-eminence will be marginal, narrowly bounded. Once the Messiah will arrive, however,

שילה; a reference to David’s son, seeing that the meaning of the word is derived from Deuteronomy 28,57 ובשליתה, i.e. “and against her afterbirth, etc.” Onkelos understands the word as referring to the Messiah. He bases himself on the variant spelling here still having the same meaning as שלו, “his.” This is also the way Bereshit Rabbah 99,8 understands the word שילה in our verse. Yaakov would be saying that Yehudah’s preeminence would not be short-lived, but would continue until the coming of the Messiah, the one to whom royalty would belong permanently. The whole blessing to Yehudah could then be compared to a father saying to his son: “accept this token in the meantime until I can give you the real thing!”

עד כי יבא שילה. A reference to David’s son (offspring), i.e. the Messiah.

A Midrashic interpretation שי לו, a present unto him... The Midrash explains Shiloh as referring to the redeemer, but instead of saying that שילו means שלו (his), it is two words: שי לו — “a present unto him.”

יקהת rad. יקה, identisch mit קהה, wie) יאל und יעל ,אלה und יסף ,עלה und יפח ,ספה und יפת ,פחה und פתה): istumpf werden. So: das Auge, das spottet ליקהת אם der Stumpfheit der alten Mutter (ProRaw Hirsch on Genesis 49: 30, 17). Hier also: die Stumpfheit, die Altersschwäche der Menschheit. Es kommt also die Zeit, wo der jüdische Geist an seinem Ende scheint, und dem gegenüber die Menschheit alt und stumpf geworden ist, hat alles durchgelebt, alles durcherprobt, fühlt, es muß ein neuer, regenerierender Geist kommen, und den wird der letzte Sproß aus Juda bringen.

עד כי יבא שילה, “until the arrival of Shiloh, when the kingdom will be split, and Jerovam will be appointed to rule over ten of the twelve tribes. Yaakov refers to the people after the death of Solomon assembling to appoint Jerovam and to dissent from Rechavam, Solomon’s son and successor. [There is no verse in the Bible stating that this occurred at Shiloh;] perhaps our author understands “shiloh” as a reference to the prophet Achiyah Hashiloni, who had first informed Jerovam that he would become king over the ten tribes in Kings I 11,29, and who resided in Shiloh, as we know from Kings 14,2. Ed.] An alternate explanation: Yaakov simply referred to Achiyah the prophet who stemmed from Shiloh, and who told Jerovam who was at the time fleeing from the wrath of King Solomon that he would become King over ten tribes, but at the same time warning him not to interfere with the Kingdom of Yehudah, a remnant of David’s empire. (Kings I 11,2931.)

ולו יקהת עמים means AND UNTO HIM [SHALL BE] AN ASSEMBLAGE OF PEOPLES. יקהת is a noun from the root יקה and is not a verbal form although it has the appearance of one, for the י is one of the root-letters as it is in the word יפעתך (Ezekiel 21:20) “thy brightness” from root יפע, only that it is sometimes omitted. There are many root-letters that are subject to this rule and are known as עיקר נופל (root-letters that may be omitted) as, for example, the נ of נוגף and of נושך and the א of אחותי in (Job 13:17) ואחותי באזניכם (where the root is חוה) “and let my declaration be in your ears”, and the אבחת of א in the phrase (Ezekiel 21:20) אבחת חרב “the point of the sword”, or the א in אסוך in the phrase (2 Kings 4:2) (אסוך שמן) (root סוך) “a pot of oil”. So, too, here, ויקהת a noun (from a root יָקַה to assemble, as שמחה the construct of which is שמחת from שמח) — an assembly of nations. And so it is actually said with reference to the Messiah, (Isaiah 11:10) “Unto him shall the nations seek”. Of similar meaning is the word יקהת in (Proverbs 30:17) “the eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth ליקהת אם i.e. despiseth “the gathering of wrinkles in the mother’s face” (due to old age). In the Talmud we find a similar meaning of the root .יקה: “they sat and gathered assemblies (ומקהו אקהתא) in the streets of Nehardea” (Tr. Yevamot 110b). It could have also said קהיית instead of יקהת.

ולו יקהת עמים, nations will subordinate themselves to him displaying their weakness. The meaning of the word קהה as weakness is supported by Kohelet 10,10 אם קהה הברזל, “if the axe is blunt, etc.” A blunt blade is a weak blade. The survivors of the wars preceding the arrival of the Messiah will have been weakened sufficiently, heeding the instructions of the Messiah as predicted by Bileam in Numbers 24,17.

ולו יקהת עמים. The word יקהת is a noun meaning “obedience,” as it is also in Proverbs 30,17 ותבוז לקהת אם, “and disdains to relate with obedience to his mother.” Yaakov predicts that all the nations will show obedience to the king stemming from Yehudah. This prophecy began to be fulfilled in the days of King David, and in an even greater measure during the reign of his son Solomon.

ולו יקהת עמים, “to whom the gathered nations will belong.” The Messiah will rule over all of them. We have here a clear statement that Yaakov “crowned” Yehudah as authority over the other brothers, assuring him of eventual rule over the entire Jewish nation. This raises the question of why Sha-ul who was from the tribe of Binyamin was appointed king over Israel at all? We must remember that in G’d’s and Samuel’s eyes, the very demand for a king at a time when the judge and Seer Samuel led the Jewish people successfully in war and peace, was anathema to G’d. Samuel, i.e. G’d, therefore did not want at that time to appoint a king from the tribe of Yehudah, the very tribe who once it supplied a king would at the same time have founded that king’s dynasty, as predicted by Yaakov here. Even if Sha-ul had not sinned by failing to completely wipe out Amalek, his dynasty would have extended only over his own tribe, not over the whole people of Israel. He might possibly also have ruled over the tribe of Ephrayim. The Kings who ruled over the ten tribes all did not do so with G’d’s approval, i.e. they violated Yaakov’s last will and testament by doing so, and even the Hasmoneans who were otherwise fully traditional and meticulously observant but arrogated the mantle of Royalty to themselves, were punished by their family being completely wiped out, as stated by our sages. Their sin was that they made the scepter depart from the rightful claimants, a scion from the house of David. As a symbol of all this, only kings descended from David had ever been anointed with the oil of anointing described in Exodus 29,7 and elsewhere. Rash’bam explains the words לא יסור שבט מיהודה to mean that the position of authority accorded by his brothers to Yehudah will not be usurped until Yerovam and ten tribes secede from the Davidic dynasty at Shechem, (very close to Shiloh, compare Kings I chapter 12) Shiloh and Shechem are names used interchangeably This becomes clear in Joshua 24,1 and the whole paragraph following. Joshua’s referring to the people standing in the presence of the Lord, i.e. near the Tabernacle which was in Shiloh, makes all this very plausible. Yet another explanation of the words לא יסור שבט, understands the following words עד כי יבא שילה, as a description of the “sun” represented by Shiloh, the presence of the Shechinah, i.e. the Tabernacle, at that time. Only then would the kingdom (and dynasty) of David the scion of Yehudah truly begin to assert itself as we know from Psalms 78,60 ויטוש משכן שילו, אהל שכן באדם, “He forsook the Tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent He had set among men.” Yet another approach to our verse understands the words to mean that Yehudah’s authority and preferential status as first among the princes and leader in the battle formations of the Jewish army will last until Joshuah will erect the central Tabernacle at Shiloh [for the first time in a permanent location, Ed.] From then on, all the people will congregate around that Tabernacle in equal measure so that Yehudah will no longer need to be “first” in the sense of providing inspiration for the remainder of the nation.

The eye that mocks the father and despises ליקהת אם the gathering of wrinkles upon her face. Rashi is citing a proof that יקהת with one י means gathering.

ולו יקהת עמים, “and to whom the gathered nations will belong.” The ten tribes will congregate at Shiloh to crown Jerovam as their head. This has all been spelled out in Kings I 12,1. The crowning took place at Sh’chem, but Shiloh and Sh’chem were practically next door (about 10 k.m.) to one another. Compare Joshua 24,1, and immediately after that Joshua 24,26 where Joshua is reported as recording all this “at the Temple of the Lord,” (which was at Shiloh) without any mention of Joshua having had to move to there to do this. This comment is mentioned here only as a reply to heretics who insist that Shiloh cannot be the name of a town, as a town is always feminine in Hebrew, so that the masculine יבא, “he will come,” would be inappropriate. Essentially, Yaakov describes the greatness of Yehudah as lasting from when David ascended the throne until his grandson Rechavam forfeited most of his kingdom. Seeing that Yaakov did not want to spell out the decline of Yehudah, he worded it in a manner that lets us draw these conclusions ourselves.

עד כי יבא שילה, the words עד כי are to be understood in a sense similar to Genesis 28,15 כי לא אעזבך עד אשר אם עשיתי את אשר דברתי לך, ”and I will not abandon you until I have carried out all that I have said to you.” The meaning of that line is not that after G’d had fulfilled the promise made to Yaakov in the dream of the ladder He would abandon him, but that after that stage had been reached Yaakov would be able to manage on his own. Similarly, after Shiloh, Yehudah, i.e. its scion David, would proceed to grow in importance and following without overt intervention by G’d.

They sat and gathered אקהתא [assemblies] in the streets... They gathered assemblies around themselves, which came to hear their words; see there.

ולו יקהת עמים, “and nations will flock around him.” According to Rashi the word יקהת refers to an assembly of people. Other commentators understand the word as referring to people subordinating themselves. Still another view understands the word as describing people disciplining themselves and willingly accepting commands. Yaakov predicts that other nations will accept the rule of Yehudah upon themselves without challenging any of it.

אסרי לגפן עירה BINDING UNTO THE VINE HIS FOAL — He (Jacob) prophesied of the land of Judah that it would run with wine like a fountain: the vines will be so productive that a man of Judah will bind to a vine one foal and he will fully load it with the grapes of only one vine, and from the produce of only one branch he would load one ass’s colt.

אסרי לגפן עירה, an עיר, young ass, needs to be tied to a single vine to load it with many grapes

אוסרי לגפן עירה, this is one of the things that help us recognise the Redeemer when he comes. 1) he will manifest himself as Messiah by a foal borne by a she-ass. (Zecharyah 9,9) The reason this indicates that he is the Messiah is that he does not arrive on a horse, an animal which is ready for battle, for war. The final battle involving the nations of the world will already have been fought and won by G’d at the time he will manifest himself. He will commence his reign when peace already prevails. 2) the fact that he will tie his ass to a גפן, a vine, will be a symbol that he is destined to rule over the Jewish people, the people who have been compared to a grape vine as stated in Chulin 92. The prophet Isaiah 5,7 also referred to the Jewish people as G’d’s vineyard.

אסרי לגפן עירה, "He ties his ass to a vine, etc." There are numerous explanations of this verse; their common denominator is that they are all of a homiletical nature. Perhaps the verse is again speaking about the arrival of the Messiah who has been mentioned at the end of the last verse, i.e. עד כי יבא שילה. Jacob had described that period as one when all the nations of the world will seek out the Messiah. This verse would then describe the Messiah as tying his donkey to the vine, i.e. Israel. Israel has been compared to the vine in Psalms 80,9: "You plucked up a vine from Egypt, You expelled nations and planted it." The "donkey" in this verse refers to the Gentile nations. We have several instances in the Bible in which the Gentile nations are compared to donkeys. The first such instance is in Genesis 22,5 where Abraham compares the Gentiles to the donkey (according to Kidushin 68). We also have a very clear such comparison in Ezekiel 23,20 where the prophet compares Israel's promiscuity with Gentiles as a lust for the flesh of donkeys. When Jacob proceeds to speak of the שרקה an especially long vine, as a branch to which the Messiah will tie his she-ass's colt, he makes a fine distinction between the male and female souls that originate in the domain of the קליפה. He calls the male, עיר, whereas he calls the female אתון. When speaking of Israel as a whole, i.e. גפן he describes the Messiah as tying the male Gentiles to the whole vine, whereas when speaking of the female Gentiles he speaks of the Messiah tying them to a single branch of that vine. Not that much restraining power is needed to control the females.

אסרי לגפן. The letter י in the word אסרי is an addition, similar to the letter י in Deuteronomy 33,15 שכני סנה, and other examples of a similar construction. Also the letter י in בני אתונו, is an addition. The entire expression ולשרקה בני אתונו is a duplication, seeing that the word שרקה means the same as גפן, perhaps a superior type of vine. The entire verse is a praise of the quality of the land apportioned to the tribe of Yehudah which yields such bountiful harvests that the farmer can tie his ass to the vine after having eaten from its grapes, without any worry. There are so many grapes on a single vine that they suffice to make up a full load for his ass. Similarly, there is so much wine that even if he were to launder his garments in wine instead of in water, he would not run short of wine. Yaakov repeats the theme once more in different words, saying: ובדם ענבים סותה, the expression דם ענבים refers to wine, the word סותה to garments. Naturally, this is an exaggeration permissible to poets.

אסרי לגפן עירה, “he will tie his ass to a vine.” Seeing that grapes will be in such abundant supply he will not worry that by tying his ass to a vine the ass would be tempted to eat the grapes.

Onkelos explains as referring to the King Moshiach. Accordingly, אוסרי לגפן עירה means: Israel will surround the city of Jerusalem. ולשורקה בני אתונו means: Israel will build the Temple.

Jakob sieht also משיח, und wie sieht er ihn? Er sieht den Menschheitretter, den Völkerüberwinder nicht zu Roß, sondern auf jungem Esel. — "Esel" ist überall, als Lasttier, Repräsentant des friedlichen Wohlstandes, der friedlichen nationalen Größe, während Rosse die kriegerische Macht repräsentieren. So wird unter allen unreinen Tieren nur der Esel herausgegriffen, um durch פטר חמור die Weihe des ganzen beweglichen Besitzes auszudrücken. Es ist dasjenige Tier, das ruhigen Schrittes den Menschen und seine Güter trägt. So sollte die jüdische Königsmacht nicht in Rossen ihren Ausdruck finden. Dem jüdischen Könige war verboten להרבות סוס. Sollte der jüdische König ja auch erst לאחר ירושה וישיבה nach völliger Eroberung und gesicherter Besitznahme des Landes, also ausdrücklich nicht zunächst zu kriegerischen Zwecken, erwählt werden, und dürfte eben darin die Versündigung des Volkes zu Samuels Zeiten gelegen haben, dass sie einen König zur Landesverteidigung gefordert, wie Samuel ihnen Kap.12, 12 vorwirft: ותראו כי נחש מלך בני עמון בא עליכם ותאמרו לי לא כי מלך ימלוך עלינו ודי אלקיכם מלככם! Darum erscheint hier der einstige wirkliche, wahrhaftige, Israel und die Menschheit erlösende König auf בני אתונו ,עירו. Zwei hervorstehende Züge treten hier im Bilde der zu erwartenden kommenden Zeit hervor. Der König der Menschheit reitet nicht auf einem Rosse, sondern auf einem Esel: er kommt also als König des Friedens; und er bindet sein Tier an Weinstöcke. Wenn man das Tier, und noch dazu עיר, das geweckte, mutige Füllen, an Weinstöcke bindet, so ist das ein Zeichen von einer unendlich gesteigerten Entwicklungspotenz der Natur (die Weinstöcke stämmig wie unsere Bäume) und von übergroßem Wohlstand und Überflusse. Überfluss in unendlich gesteigertem Segen der Natur, und Friede in der Menschenwelt, das sind ja die beiden Merkzeichen, die überall im Munde der Propheten diese endliche Zeit charakterisieren. So lange das friedliche Tier nicht in seine Würde eingesetzt ist, die Führer der Menschen vielmehr auf kriegerischen Rossen erscheinen, und so lange man die Tiere nicht an Weinstöcke bindet, so lange sind wir noch sehr fern von der zu erwartenden Regenerierung der Natur und Menschenwelt. (Vergl. über den jüdischen König und משיח Jeschurun 71. 127 ff.)

סותה, a variant of the word: מסוה, “veil, or mask.”

שרקה means a long branch; corière in old French

(2) TO A single CHOICE VINE. ...

ולשרקה בני אתונו, this is a reference to a third symbol by which the Messiah will be identified, that not only will he tie his ass to a vine but to a sorekah, a choice vine. The wine from such vine illuminates the eyes of the Just of their respective generations, something that cannot be said of an ordinary vine.

סותה, “his garment.” The letter כ at the beginning of this word has been omitted. Alternatively, the word is derived from מסוה, the cloth Moses wrapped around his forehead so as not to frighten the people by the rays of light his face emitted upon his return from the mountain. (Exodus 34,33)

From the idea: Those who ride on white donkeys... This verse refers to Torah scholars. צחורות means white. I.e., Torah scholars who wear white garments [are riding on donkeys]. Alternatively, it means they ride on white donkeys from place to place in order to learn Torah.

Alternatively, our verse speaks of two different periods of well known redemptions. The first is the redemption from Egypt, whereas the second refers to the ultimate redemption in the days of the Messiah who is descended from David. Concerning he first redemption, Jacob said: אסרי לגפן עירה, he ties his donkey to a vine, similar to the verse in Psalms 80,9 a period when G'd humbled a single nation before the Jews, i.e. the Egyptians. Concerning the redemption in the future, Jacob speaks of the שרקה, the whistle, in the sense that the prophet Zachariah did in Zachariah 10,8: אשרקה להם ואקבצם כי פדית, "I will whistle to them and gather them, for I will redeem them." Jacob speaks of בני אתונו, i.e. the plural, since at that time Israel will be redeemed from many different nations. At the time of the Exodus, the redemption comprised the defeat of Egypt and the Canaanites, i.e. seven of the Canaanite nations. The remainder of the seventy nations were not humbled before Israel at that time. When the final redemption will occur all the other nations too will be humbled before Israel. These are the בני אתונו, the offspring of the original עירה.

Einen Beweis für die Richtigkeit unserer Auffassung dürfte die Stelle Secharja 9, 9. liefern: גילי מאור בת ציון הריעי בת ירושלם הנה מלכך יבוא לך צדיק ונושע הוא עני ורכב על חמור ועל עיר בן אתונות, freue dich sehr und jauchze; denn siehe, dein König kommt dir, er ist ein צדיק und נושע": er ist kein 1/מושיע; משיח kommt nicht, um uns zu helfen, sondern in seinem Beispiel uns zu lehren, wie uns geholfen würde; er ist צדיק, ein gerechter Mensch, und deshalb wird ihm geholfen. Er ist kein Gott, der hilft, sondern er ist ein Mensch, dessen Größe darin besteht, dass er in so eminenter Weise "gerecht" ist, dass ihm um seiner Gerechtigkeit willen Gott hilft, Gott ihm zum Siege verhilft. Er ist ferner עני, erscheint ohne Civilliste, und endlich nicht als Kriegsheld, sondern רוכב על חמור, als Bringer des Friedens und des Wohlstandes, das bezeichnet חמור, und speziell wiederholt: "auf einem Füllen, Sohn von Eselinnen". Es ist dies sehr eigentümlich. Es scheint: er ist רוכב על חמור, aber nicht aus Armut, sondern der חמור ist עיר בן אתונות. Er hat, während andere Könige einen Marstall voller Rosse haben, אתונות, eine Zucht von Tieren friedlicher Beschäftigung; das Tier, das ihn trägt, ist ein aus seinem Friedensreichtum erzogenes Tier. So auch hier: בני אתונו ,עירה. Das letzte schwache Ende (שילה) stellt sich plötzlich וְלוֹ) männlich dar, und ihm gegenüber erklären sich die Völker bankrott. Obgleich er aber so männlich stark geworden, bleibt er doch an sich bescheiden weiblich (עירה und ;סותר) selbst nachdem er männlich die Welt erobert hat, und seine ganze Männlichkeit besteht darin, dass er friedliche Reichtümer sammelt (כני אתונו). In einem Gemälde, das mit so wenigen Pinselstrichen ein Bild von der bedeutsamsten Dimension hinhaucht, ist man berechtigt, die leiseste Nuance zu beachten.

כבס ביין HE WASHED IN WINE — all these phrases indicate abundance of wine.

ולשרקה בני אתונו, a repetition for literary purposes, similar to expressions such as יהודה וישראל, when both words are references to the same people, or as the expression איש תחת גפנו ותחת תאנתו, “each man under his grape vine and under his fig tree” This expression which occurs frequently in the Book of Kings, etc., simply describes the economic affluence of the people, not that each man will own fig trees and grape vines.

כבס ביין לבושו, the fourth sign identifying the Messiah is that he will be able to launder his garments in blood. He will have to do this as he will find many people who have been slain in the war preceding his coming, and he will assist in their burial. (compare Isaiah 63,2 מדוע אדום ללבושך “why are your garments so red?”) Another allusion to this is found in Psalms 110,6 ידין בגויים מלא גווית, “he works judgment on the nations piling up bodies.”

Perhaps Jacob referred to a concept which we know from the Zohar Pinchas page 231, that in the domain of the סטרא אחרא, the realm of the spiritually negative manifestations of the ten emanations, the power of female is actually stronger than that of the male. The male just takes the "left-overs" of the female and is therefore known as the יותרת הכבד. [We find two expressions involving the כבד in Leviticus 9,10 where the Torah speaks of: ואת היותרת מן הכבד, "the addition coming out of the כבד," and in Leviticus 3,15 where same is described as: ואת היותרת על הכבד, "the addition which is on the כבד." According to the Zohar the word כבד does not merely mean liver but is a hyperbole for the male with whom Lilith consorts. The spiritually negative forces in this world are sometimes referred to as Samael sometimes as the serpent. Samael is the male part of that team, Lilith, is the female. When adultery is committed, the female partner is released from the כבד, i.e. מן הכבד. Having once been released it assumes a dominance over its former partner so that it will qualify for the description על הכבד, "on top of the כבד." It follows that in the scheme of the powers of evil described by the Zohar, the female is viewed as stronger than the male. Ed.] Jacob described that in his dreams he found it relatively easy to battle the male forces i.e. Samael, whereas he found it much more exhausting to battle the female forces i.e. Lilith. Even when he finally won a victory against those forces, such a victory was not absolute and his dominance could not be compared to his dominance over the parallel male forces of Satan. In view of Jacob's personal experiences in battling the forces of Satan he referred to the שרקה as the female of these forces and said: At the time when G'd will whistle, i.e. announce the coming of the final redemption and will gather in the children of the she-ass, i.e. the forces which emanate from the female of the קליפה, He will also "tie them up," i.e. subdue them, before Israel.

כבס וגו׳. Er sieht diesen letzten Sprössling Judas — sein Kleid ist rot, aber nicht von Menschenblut, Traubenblut hat es gefärbt. סותו von סוה, wovon מסוה, Hülle, Überwurf.

סותר denotes a kind of vesture, but there is no other example of the word in Scripture.

כבס ביין לבושו, after the grapes have been stamped on with the feet to squeeze out the juice and to store them in the wine-presses, the workers’ clothing has become stained in the process as described by Isaiah 63,2 מדוע אדום ללבושך ובגדיך כדורך בגת?, “Why is your clothing so red, your garments like his who treads grapes? The prophet continues there in verse 3: “I trod them down in My anger trampled them with My rage. Their lifeblood bespattered My garments and all My clothing was stained.” After completing the process described one can drink the wine. This is why Yaakov continued with חכללי עינים מיין ולבן שנים מחלב. Who are the ones whose eyes are darker than wine and whose teeth are whiter than milk- the answer is found in Proverbs 23,29-30 those who linger over wine and those who go in search of mixtures of wine.”

Do not be concerned at the fact that we divide this verse by applying part to the time of Moses and part to the time of the redemption at the time of the Messiah; you, my reader, are surely familiar with the words of the Zohar section 2, page 120, that Moses is viewed as the redeemer who redeemed our forefathers and as the redeemer who will lead their children back to the land of their ancestors as is written in Kohelet 1,9: "מה שהיה הוא שיהיה. The first letters of the first three words of that line form the acronym משה. Solomon alludes to the fact that he who has been a redeemer in the past will again be a redeemer in the future. Do not counter by saying that the redeemer of the future will be from the tribe of Yehudah and will either be descended from king David or will be king David himself reincarnate (compare Sanhedrin 98 based on Ezekiel 37,24: "and My servant David will be king over them"). In view of all these prophecies how could we say that the redeemer of the future will come from the tribe of Levi?

אסרי is the same as אוסר (i.e. the yod is redundant). Similar forms are: (Psalms 113:7) “who raiseth (מקימי instead of מקים) the poor out of the dust”, (Psalms 5:1) “that art enthroned” (היושבי instead of היושב) in the heavens”. In the same way is בני אתנו (instead of בן אתנו) to be explained. Onkelos translates v.11 as having reference to King Messiah: גפן “the vine” symbolizes “Israel” (cf. Psalms 80:9): “Thou didst pluck up a vine out of Egypt”); עירה (taken as עיר city with the ה suffix instead of ו, like סותה instead of סותו in thin verse) means Jerusalem; שורקה alludes to Israel as the prophet exclaims (Jeremiah 2:21) “Yet, I had planted thee a noble vine (שורק)".

סותה, as in כסות, a kind of garment

You must realise that the soul of Moses was composed of all twelve tribes of Israel, all the 600.000 being "branches" of it. David's soul therefore was also a branch of Moses' soul. This is also why you find that while in the desert Moses performed the duties of both king, priest, Levite, prophet, scholar and military hero. He was only able to perform all these functions because his soul comprised all branches of holiness. When the redeemer will appear in the future, it will be revealed that Moses was the root of all monarchy in Israel and that David will be perceived as שילה (numerical value of =345משה).

בני אתנו Onkelos translates by: they will build His Temple (איתנו), connecting this word with the expression שער האיתן “The gate of the entrance” of the Temple mentioned in the book of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40:15). He further renders it in another manner, namely: גפן the vine represents the righteous; בני אתנו he paraphrases by: who occupy themselves with the Torah by teaching it” — with an allusion to the idea expressed in (Judges 5:10) “Ye that ride on white asses (אתונות)” (cf. Eruvin 54b, where this is referred to the scholars who ride from city to city and from district to district to teach the Law, thus making the explanation of the Torah shining-white as is the light at noon-day; cf. also the Targum on this verse).

כבס ביין לבושו, "he will launder his garments in wine, etc." In order to understand these words we must recall a statement in the Zohar Chadash on Parshat Bereshit that in order to be redeemed from the fourth of the four exiles Israel experiences we must possess the redeeming merit of Torah study and Torah knowledge. In the absence of such merit the redemption may be long delayed. Jacob alluded to this when he said כבס ביין לבושו. The specific strength of the king who will be the Messiah is his preoccupation with Torah. The Torah knowledge is symbolised by his wearing purple robes (colour of wine).

The words כבס ביין he renders by “their garments will be of fine purple” — resembling wine in colour. The word צבעונין “coloured garments” in the Targum is the rendering of סותה — for a woman attires herself in these to entice men to take notice of her (so that the word denotes a garment that attracts notice to its wearer, being a noun formed from the root סות, to entice or allure). Our Rabbis, too, explained this word (סותה) in the Talmud (Ketubot 111b) in the sense of allurement — the allurement of intoxication: they say, “And as for the wine in question, perhaps you will say that it cannot intoxicate — remember that Scripture says of it סותה “its allurement” (i.e. it has an allurement so that people drink more and more of it).

If at the appointed time, G'd forbid, the Jewish people will not be able to provide such a purple mantle for their redeemer because they are devoid of Torah knowledge, then the redemption will be characterised by the advent of a cruel king, someone like Haman, and the "blood of grapes," i.e. real Jewish blood, instead of blood commuted into the wine of Torah learning, will flow in order that G'd will be able to keep to His schedule for the redemption (compare Sanhedrin 97). The "sparks" of sanctity remaining amongst the Jews may then be released only through very painful afflictions. In other words, Jacob warns that redemption can come about by means of a dignified mode of life, one that includes Torah study, or, G'd forbid, by means of a demeaning way of life and the resultant loss of dignity. The reason Jacob chose the simile of grapes is that in order to produce wine from grapes they have to be pressed, i.e. they have to be "tortured" to release the best that is within them.

The reason that Jacob speaks only about דם ענבים, blood from the grapes, and not from a branch of the vine or a whole cluster of grapes for instance, is to console us that even if the redemption will become possible only by means of additional afflictions it will not cause a major dismemberment of the Jewish people.

Just as the grapes are a minor part of the whole vine, so the garment of the Messiah described here is not כסות, something large enough to serve as a total garment, but a diminutive סותה, a mini-garment. There would not ever be sufficient blood from the grapes to enable a whole garment to be drenched in it, as opposed to a redemption which occurs as a result of the people's Torah's study, the merit of which would suffice to dye the whole mantle of the Messiah purple.

חכלילי [HIS EYES] ARE RED — חכלילי denotes redness, as the Targum renders it: they shall become red. Similar is (Proverbs 23:29) “who hath redness (חכלילות) of eyes?” Redness of eyes is associated with wine because that is what usually happens to those who drink much wine — their eyes become red.

HIS EYES ARE ‘CHACHLILI’ (FROM WINE). The Commentators¹⁷⁰Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and R’dak. say that the word chachlili denotes redness, and it means that his eyes will become red from drinking much wine. Of similar meaning is the verse, Who hath ‘chachliluth’ (redness) of the eyes?¹⁷¹Proverbs 23:29.
Now it appears to me that this is a case of a word whose letters are transposed,¹⁷²Thus, instead of the order of the letters being cheth, kaf, lamed, it should be understood as if it were written: kaf, cheth, lamed, suggesting the act of painting, as will be explained further. it being derived from the expression, Thou didst paint (‘kachalt’) thine eyes.¹⁷³Ezekiel 23:40. The lamed is doubled — [chachlili] — as is customary in many places, and it denotes the process of painting eyes which is known and frequently mentioned in the words of our Rabbis. In Arabic also its name is “al kachul.” The verse is thus stating that Judah’s eyes are colored with wine for just as others paint them with puch (eye-paint),¹⁷⁴Jeremiah 4:30. which is the Arabic “al kachul,” so does he paint them with wine, and just as others whiten their teeth with ointments, so does he whiten them with milk, the comparison indicating the abundance of wine and milk in Judah’s land, just as Onkelos mentioned.¹⁷⁵“His mountains will be red with his vineyards, and his wine-presses will drip with wine” (Onkelos). Similar in meaning is the verse, Who hath ‘chachliluth’ of eyes,¹⁷¹Proverbs 23:29. [the letters in the word chachliluth are to be transposed to read] kachliluth” (paint), with the verse stating that the drunkard has his eyes painted by wine and he cannot hide his drunken state. It is possible that the verse is stating, “Who has coloring of eyes?” meaning “who needs to paint his eyes always? They that tarry long at the wine,¹⁷¹Proverbs 23:29. since the wine dims their eyes, causing them to tear, and be consumed away in their sockets,¹⁷⁶Zechariah 14:12. thus making it necessary for him to have his eyes constantly painted.” Scripture, in the book of Proverbs, is thus speaking of the disgrace of wine and the external evils of contentions and wounds which befall he who drinks it in abundance, while in his house there will always be the cry of “Woe” and “Alas.”¹⁷¹Proverbs 23:29. It then also mentions this specific harm which affects his body, namely, the dimming of his vision, and many other sicknesses. This is a correct interpretation and elucidation of the subject.

חכלילי, the redness of eyes is called thus.

חכלילי עינים מיין, the fifth of the identifying marks of the Messiah will be the onset of an unusually long period of economic progress, plentiful harvests, etc. This has also been predicted in Psalms 72,16 “let abundant grain be in the land to the tops of the mountains, let his crops thrive like the forest of Lebanon.” Our sages have paraphrased this in Shabbat 30 when they described the affluence in messianic days by crediting the soil of Israel with producing ready to eat rolls and garments made of the finest wool.

חכלילי עינים מיין, "He will be red-eyed from wine, etc." This is best understood as similar to Psalms 68,7: "He sets the prisoners free, safe and sound," as explained in Bamidbar Rabbah 4 that the Israelites were redeemed by G'd בכושרות, the word being divided into בכי, weeping and שירות, songs. The Egyptians did the crying, the Israelites the singing. חכלילי עינים, "red-eyed;" the colour red is reminiscent of judgments, everything connected with redness is an allusion to the power of judgment which involves the blood of one party versus the blood of his adversary. The reason Jacob said: מיין, from wine, is a reminder that judgment originates in wine, [had Adam not eaten from the tree of knowledge, i.e. the vine, judgment in the sense of retribution would have had no place on earth. Ed.]

Yaakov adds something else which is an exaggeration when he says: חכלילי עינים סותה, not only Yehudah’s clothing would be red but even his face and eyes. The word עינים describes the exterior appearance, as in Proverbs 23,29 למי חכלילות עינים? “Who suffers from redness of his eyes? The word עין, עינים, to describe an exterior appearance is also used to describe the manna in Numbers 11,7.

הכלילי עינים מיין, “red-eyed from wine;” due to the large quantities of wine he consumes his eyes will reflect the redness of that wine. Similarly, the amounts of milk consumed will be reflected in the whiteness of his teeth. Other commentators understand the word שנים as referring to the crags of a rock, suggesting that milk will be flowing from between crags in the rocks. Still other commentators interpret the word חכלילי as a comparative mode, meaning that the eyes will be even redder than wine, and the teeth even whiter than milk. Nachmanides says that the meaning is exactly the reverse, i.e. citing Ezekiel 23,40 כחלת עיניך, “you daubed your eyes.” The letter ל was repeated here, something not unusual. The message Yaakov conveys is that whereas normally women daub their eyes with a bluish coloured cosmetic, Yehudah will employ reddish looking cosmetic for that purpose. Similarly, whereas others whiten their teeth by applying cosmetics, Yehudah will use milk instead. The entire verse is a euphemism for the abundance of both wine and milk that Yehudah will experience in his territory. The wine will drip from his eyes like tears, so that envious youngsters will have to use cosmetics constantly in order to compete.

Er sieht dieses sein letztes Geschlecht: sieht die Wiederkehr des Paradieses auf Erden, die ganze Natur paradiesisch verjüngt, die Menschengröße nicht in Unterjochung und Zerstörung der Menschen, an dem Gewande ihrer Großen kein Tropfen Menschenblut, und er sieht dies Geschlecht — (הכלי: nur bei Augen, glühende Glänze) — feurigeren Auges als Wein, weißer an Zähnen als Milch — Lebensmut und Lust sprüht ihnen aus den Augen, die Weiße der Zähne zeugt von ihrer Gesundheit. —

חכלילי עינים מיין, ‘he will be red-eyed from wine;” having drunk a great deal of wine, the colour of his face will reflect this. (Compare Samuel I 16,12). [The comment is complimentary in nature. Ed.]

מחלב [AND THE WHITENESS OF HIS TEETH IS] FROM MILK— because of abundance of milk, for there will be in his land good pasture for herds of flock. The verse is therefore to be explained as follows: There will be redness of eyes because of abundance of wine and there will be whiteness of teeth because of abundance of milk (the ם of of מיין and מחלב is not the מ comparativum: “His eyes shall be redder than wine etc.”). According to the Targum עינים means mountains which are called thus because from thence as a point of observation one can see afar off (i.e. it translates by “the mountains are red with wine”). He (Onkelos) further translates the verse in a different way, taking עינים in the sense of fountains and continuous flow of the wine-press. The word נעווהי which Onkelos uses signifies his wine-presses. It is an Aramaic word that occurs in (Avodah Zarah 74b): “as for a tank (נעוא), cleanse it with hot water”. (The translation of the Targum is therefore: “His vats will stream with wine”.) The words יחורון בקעתה his valleys (the places wore mountains are, as it wore, cloven, בקע) are the Targum of [לבן] שנים, taking the second word in the sense of שני הסלעים rocky crags (cf. 1 Samuel 14:4 and Rashi on פי החירות Exodus 14:2 — where פִי = שִׁנַּיִם — and the reference there to the valley between the rocks).

ולבן-שנים, the result of drinking milk produces this whiteness of the teeth. We find a parallel expression in Song of Songs 5,1 שתיתי ייני עם חלבי, “I have drunk my wine with my milk.” Isaiah 55,1 describes a similar theme,בלא כסף ובלא מחיר יין וחלב, “(come buy). without money or any cost, wine and milk. “The word “ul-ven,” must be understood as if it had the vowels making it “ulavan.” When it is in a possessive mode, the grammar is quite in order so that it is ulven. In a similar possessive mode in Deuteronomy 32,14 we find “vachalev tzon,” describing “the chalav of sheep.”

ולבן שנים מחלב. Due to drinking a lot of milk his teeth are white. Some commentators understand the word שנים in our verse as describing the teeth-like points of the rocks being white from the drippings of excess milk by the sheep and goats. Accordingly, even these so-called teeth have to be explained allegorically, as a reference to the Messiah. [I believe that all the commentators who chose the path of interpreting Yaakov’s words allegorically, simply could not credit that he would waste his last few minutes on earth with describing mundane matters as being the essence of what he had to communicate to his children at that time, even if these words were garbed in poetic language. The sages were convinced that behind this lovely prose there must be hidden far more profound spiritual messages. Ed.]

Dies war etwas von dem אחרית הימים von welchem Jakob seinen Söhnen wohl noch ein mehreres hatte enthüllen mögen, als ihm vergönnt war. —

ולבן שנים מחלב, “and his teeth whiter than milk.” The phrase is a metaphor for wishing good health, even one’s teeth being free from white milk. We find a similar metaphor in Lamentations 4,7: צחו מחלב, “whiter than milk;”

(3) UL'VEN (WHITENESS). Like "lavan" (white). When it is in the construct case, one says "ul'ven," as from "halav" (milk), we get (Deut. 32:14) "vahalev tzon" ("milk of flocks").

To continue with the “Messianic” interpretation. אסרי לגפן עירה, the word הגפן is a metaphor for the concept of the Jewish nation, כנסת ישראל, an expression used in the same sense in Psalms 80,9 גפן ממצרים תסיע, “You transplanted a vine (the people of Israel) from Egypt.” Just as the word גפן is used as a metaphor for the Jewish people in Psalms, so the word שרקה is used in a similar sense in Jeremiah 2,21, ואנכי נטעתיך שורק כלו זרע אמת, “whereas I had planted you as a vine, all with the choicest seed.” The prophet, of course, compares the Jewish people to a vine, normally yielding excellent grapes, but somehow having become corrupted. When such vines are at their best, the grapes they produce do not even have kernels, (i.e. seedless grapes)

Yaakov continues with אסרי, this King Messiah, when he arrives, will tie together two vines, i.e. the Kingdom of Yehudah and the Kingdom of Ephrayim who had been bitter competitors until then, as predicted in clear language by Ezekiel 37,19 ועשיתם לעץ אחד”so that they will become a single stick.” The reason Yaakov chose the expression אסרי for this kind of unification can be well understood when we read in Hoseah 10,10 באסרם על שתי עוונותם, an expression used by the prophet when referring to these two kingdoms. The most effective union, one that is least likely to come undone, is the one described in Hebrew by the verb אסר and קשר respectively. עירה and בני אתונו, refer to the King Messiah of whom it has been said in Zecharyah 9,9 that he will appear riding on an ass, on a donkey foaled by a she-ass. Yaakov continues with כבס ביין לבושו, here the word לבושו is an alternate for בגדו a word also used in Psalms 45,9 an expression used in Kohelet as describing one’s words of wisdom and one’s good deeds. In other words, tangible phenomena that we are familiar with are used as substituting for meta-physical, abstract concepts by our sages and patriarchs. Yaakov refers to ביין with the vowel patach under the letter ב, meaning a specific wine as distinct from wine generally. The fragrance of good wine envelops the people who drink it. Compare Hoseah 14,8 זכרו כיין לבנון, “His scent is like the wine of Lebanon.” The wine Yaakov speaks of is well known for its fine bouquet. A similar reference to the fragrance of wine occurs in Song of Songs 7,10 וחכך כיין הטוב, “and the breath of your mouth is like the choicest wines.” We believe that the thrust of these allegorical interpretations is that if ever Yehudah were in difficulties in matters physical, then spiritual mental faculties should compensate for what he could not accomplish in the natural way. This is the definition of the Messiah in Isaiah 11,2 “the spirit of the Lord shall alight upon him; a spirit of wisdom and insight; a spirit of counsel and valor, a spirit of devotion and reverence for the Lord.” The prophet continues.והריחו ביראת ה' ולא למראה עיניו ישפוט ולא למשמע אזניו יוכיח ושפט בצדק דלים והוכיח במישור לענוי ארץ והכה ארץ בשבט פיו, וברוח שפתיו ימית רשע. “He shall sense the truth by his reverence for the Lord. He shall not judge what his eyes behold, nor decide by what his ears perceive; thus shall he judge the poor with equity and decide with justice for the lowly of the land. He shall strike down with the rod of his mouth and slay the wicked with the breath of his lips.” ובדם ענבים סותה, Yaakov mentions the appearance as something comparable to how it appears after it has been laundered, whereas he describes the wine as symbolic of a pleasant fragrance but here he uses it in connection with the external appearance of something. All these hyperboles are just that, a parable.

He continues: חכלילי עינים מיין ולבן שנים מחלב, having already mentioned wine as symbolising fragrance as well as symbolising an impressive appearance, he did so because he views them as the most appropriate description of something that looks pleasant and inspiring. Such a perception of what looks beautiful is also echoed in Lamentations 4,7 ”Her elect were purer than snow and whiter than milk,” and in Song of Songs 5,10 the example for such a lovely appearance is “my beloved is clear-skinned and ruddy.” The appearance of wine is most impressive and it is reddish and sparkling as described in Proverbs 23,31 “do not ogle that red wine as it lends its colour to the cup.” It is described as if giving off sparks. Pure white colour is also extolled in Exodus 24,10 when the elders before the revelation at Mount Sinai feasted their eyes on a Divine appearance described as “like a brick of sapphire, and the essence of the heavens in purity.” The whitest parts of the human body are the teeth They are praised for their whiteness also in Song of Songs 6,6 where their whiteness is compared to that of “a flock of ewes climbing up from the washing pool.” [The author continues in this vein for a few more lines. Ed.] The point he is trying to make is that over and beyond any physical perfection we know of in this world, the perfection of virtues, albeit intangible, is superior to anything perfect but tangible on earth. Hence the superiority of the Messiah with his virtues and supernatural qualities. Yaakov, using his prophetic insights, addresses each of his sons with the degree of prophetic insight he has been granted in describing the future in store for him.

לחוף ימים TOWARDS THE COASTS OF THE SEAS — (לחוף is the same as על חוף): by the shore of the seas will be his land. הוף means “border” as Onkelos has it; old French marche; English border. [והוא לחוף אניות] means he will constantly be at the haven of ships — the port — whither the ships bring merchandise. For Zebulun was engaged in business and provided food for the tribe of Issachar whilst these engaged in the study of the Torah. It is to this that Moses alludes, (Deuteronomy 33:18) “Rejoice Zebulun in thy going out. and Issachar in thy tents”, — Zebulun goes forth to trade and Issachar studies the Torah in the tents (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 11; cf. Rashi on Genesis ישב אהלים 25:27)

לחוף ימים, the beaches of the sea which was sort of rubbing the shore, חופף. If you were to ask what good this was seeing the shore was so high that one could not descend to the water to buy merchandise from the ships, Yaakov adds

Zevulun will settle. See Rashi. Zevulun’s blessing precedes that of Yissachar both here and Devarim (33:18) because Torah study is impossible unless someone provides the scholars with their basic needs. For the same reason the study is accredited to scholar and supporter alike.

זבלון, up until this point Yaakov listed his sons in the chronological order of their birth, not paying attention to who was their mother. At this juncture he mentions Zevulun before Issachar although the latter had been born earlier by the same mother, Leah. Concerning this anomaly we read in Bereshit Rabbah 99,9 that the fact that Issachar chose the pursuit of Torah as his vocation whereas Zevulun supported him financially with his marine endeavours enabling his brother to concentrate on his Torah studies, he deserves to be mentioned first. The concept underlying this preferential mention of Zevulun here is explained in Proverbs 3,18 as עץ חיים היא למחזיקים בה, “the Torah will prove a tree of life to those who support it (financially).” Moses followed Yaakov’s example when blessing Zevulun before Issachar (Deuteronomy 33,18) when he said שמח זבולון בצאתך ויששכר באהליך, “rejoice Zevulun when you set out (on your journeys) and Issachar in your tents.” Everywhere else Issachar is mentioned ahead pf Zevulun.

זבולון, Zevulun is the only one of Yaakov’s sons not mentioned in order of his seniority vis-à-vis his brothers. His name was mentioned ahead of its proper place in order for the name of his brother Yissachar to appear in between his name and that of Dan. The reason is that his ancestral heritage was situated between that of Dan and Yissachar.

His land will be by the חוף ימים. [Re’m explains that חוף ימים does not mean “seashore.” It means “border town.” And] since it is written ישכון, implying his dwelling place, this refers to his land — which will be on the border [between Eretz Yisrael and foreign lands]. But he himself will [not be there; he will] be at “a harbor of ships.” I.e., he will spend time [away from his land,] at the port where the ships bring merchandise. Nachalas Yaakov rejected all this and said that the land of Zevulun was at the edge of the sea, the dividing place between Eretz Yisrael and foreign lands; thus all the ships passed through his land. See there.

Mit Juda hatte Jakob gefunden, was er suchte: Führer und Träger der ganzen Zukunstsbestimmung des jüdischen Volkes bis in die fernste Zukunft. Jetzt geht er die anderen Söhne durch, und zeichnet mit kurzen Worten eines jeden Eigentümlichkeit für den künftigen Volksverein, bis er in Josef wieder zu einem Ruhepunkt kommt. In Juda war der Wehrstand gefunden, ihm schließt sich in Sebulun der Nährstand an. חוף von חפף, (wovon חופה die Umhüllung), die Hafenbucht, wo das Meer von möglichst vielen Seiten schützend vom Lande umschlossen ist, vielleicht auch, weil in einer solchen Bucht die Strömung des Meeres gehemmt ist und daher die Wogen am Gestade sich reiben, von חפף, rabbinisch: reiben. Sebulun wird also an einer Hafenbucht der Meere wohnen, dadurch wird er selbst zu einem Hafen für Schiffe werden, er wird von Handelsschiffen aufgesucht werden, die von dort den Produktenreichtum des Landes aufsuchen werden, aber Welthandel wird er nicht treiben, sein äußerster Rahon wird sich an Sidon, diese bedeutendste Handelsgröße der alten Welt, lehnen. Er wird ein Handelsstamm, allein in dies kommerzielle Streben nicht aufgehen. Er lässt sich aufsuchen von den Schiffen der Handelswelt und lehnt sich, kommerziell sich unterordnend, an Sidon.

והוא לחוף אניות, “and he shall be in ports for ships.” Having used the expression לחוף ימים in the beginning of this verse for Zevulun, Yaakov repeats the simile for the ports in which Zevulun’s ships will anchor. There are towns that are situated right next to the shores of the sea, as opposed to others which are further inland, making it more difficult for ships unloading their cargoes to transport them to their customers. They will therefore prefer to anchor further away from such shores, so that other towns will enjoy the trade generated by ships anchoring there. The shores in the territory of Zevulun will make landing and unloading there easy for these sailors.

זבולון לחוף ימים ישכון, “Zevulun (his territory) will border on the ocean.” The sons of Yaakov are listed here in the order of their births. The only exception is that Zevulun although younger, is mentioned ahead of his brother Yissachar. The reason is that the territory of Yissachar was located between that of Dan and that of Zevulun. An alternate explanation: the reason why Zevulun here appears before his senior brother Yissachar was because Yaakov foresaw that in the future it would be thanks to the financial support of that tribe, that the Tribe of Yissachar could devote themselves to intensive Torah study.

וירכתו על צידן AND HIS BORDER SHALL BE UNTO ZIDON — the end of his territory will extend close up to Zidon. ירכתו means his end, as (Exodus 26:22) ולירכתי המשכן “and for the ends of the Tabernacle”.

לחוף אניות, that he speaks of inlets where there are harbours at which ships can lie at anchor. There are no high cliffs there making making ships and their wares difficult to access. Yaakov’s reference to

והוא לחוף אניות, he will travel beyond the borders of his own land with ships carrying and bringing all kinds of wares. Part of these rare wares are the chalazon, the worm needed to provide the blue colour for the tzitzit, fragrances needed for the daily incense offerings. Many of these, as well as the silicon from which to make glass, were found on his shores and he would export such items. Deuteronomy 33,19 describes the members of the tribe of Zevulun as harvesting the bounty of the sea and the hidden hoards of the sand.”

לחוף ימים ישכון, part of his ancestral heritage will be situated along the shores of the sea as stated in Joshua 19,11 ועלה גבולם לימה, ”their boundary ascended to the sea.” Moses had already hinted at this in Deut. 33,19 when he said כי שפע ימים ינקו, “they will draw from the riches of the sea.” The word חוף describes something covered, or better: “a place where ships can find refuge from the storms.”

והוא לחוף אניות, “and he will border seas.” There are many locations in the sea itself which do not qualify as anyone’s heritage.

על צידון, “as far as the city of Tzidon.” This city was an international trading center, as is known from Isaiah 23,2: דומו יושבי אי, סחר צידון, “moan you dwellers of the coastland, you traders of Tzidon, once thronged by seafarers over many waters.” This is also why some hundreds of years later, Moses blessed that tribe by saying: שמח זבולון בצאתך ויששכר באהלך, “rejoice Zevulun when you set out, and you, Yissachar, in your tents.” Moses referred to Zevulun setting out on ocean voyages for trading purposes.

צידון, a well known harbour, a center of trade and commerce, illustrates the nature of his blessing. In Isaiah 23,2 Tzidon and its traders are mentioned as having been a great trading center in the past that has been ruined by the Assyrians in the prophet’s time. This is also why Moses, when blessing the Jewish people before his death, (Deuteronomy 33,18) describes Tzidon in its heyday as a model for Zevulun, who will enjoy similar prosperity.

והוא לחוף אניות, he, Zevulun, will constantly be as a haven for ships. Most of his mercantile endeavours will be related to wares brought from overseas. Hence, ships will constantly anchor on its coast.

The word: על, before the word: צידון, means “close by.” Another example of that word being used in this sense is in Exodus 40,3: וסכות על הארון, “you will make the Dividing curtain screen it.”

וירכתו על צידון, his borders will extend as far north as the coastal town Tzidon. The meaning of the word על in this phrase is similar to the meaning of the word עד, “as far as.” The word על occurs as meaning “as far as” also in Joshua 2,7 על המעברות, “as far as the fords.”

וירכתו, as if the Torah had written ולירכתו as in Exodus 26,23 ולירכתו המשכן, “at the rear of the Tabernacle.”

יששכר חמר גרם means ISSACHAR IS A BONY ASS — he bears the yoke of the Torah (i.e. obligations) like a strong ass upon which may be placed a heavy load (Genesis Rabbah 99:9).

יששכר חמור גרם, he is not like Zevulun who engages in voyages with mariners to distant lands to engage in trade and commerce. He stays at home toiling his earth sharing the fate of his donkeys, his beasts of burden.

יששכר חמור, not ready to fight a war. This corresponds to the saying of the sages in Avodah Zarah 17 אי ספרא לא סייפא, “if your vocation is books, it cannot be skill with a sword.”

יששכר חמור גרם, "Issachar is a bony donkey, etc." We learn in Nidah 31 that the meaning of the verse is that G'd had a hand in the conception of Issachar having guided Jacob's donkey to the tent of Leah on that night (Genesis 30,16). Just as Jacob had not remained in his regular abode that night, so Issachar, the son who had been conceived during that night, would be "crouching between boundaries." Inasmuch as Issachar is the model of a person who devotes his life to Torah study, Jacob alluded to the phenomenon that Yeshivah students have a habit of moving from place to place. Every action which is not proper produces consequences which reflect that impropriety. Leah's action appeared too forward for the conduct associated with the traditional way of life of Jewish women, even though her intention was wholly honourable. In spite of the discomfort associated with the lifestyle of the Yeshivah student, he does not let this diminish the effort he lovingly devotes to Torah study.

יששכר חמור גרם, like a strong donkey possessing strong bones. He is able to lie down while carrying his load and to get up again while still having his load on his back.

רובץ בין המשפתים, “crouching between boundaries.” Some commentators equate the word משפתים with “loads,” i.e. משואות, that the ass crouches with loads that it is carrying on either side of it. The ass is not allowed the luxury to lie down and rest, but has to snatch brief moments during which to renew its strength while crouching. The intensity with which the members of the tribe studied Torah was compared by Yaakov to this simile.

יששכר חמור גרם, “Issachar is a strong-boned donkey.” According to the plain meaning of the text he is like a donkey whose proportion of bones far overshadows the amount of its flesh. People who engage in constant study of Torah will not be found to amass much flesh. The people of the tribe of Issachar are burdened down by the weight of their Torah study as the donkey is burdened down with physical loads.
רובץ בין המשפטים, “he lies down between the sheepfolds.” Donkeys work both by day and by night and even when they lie down briefly, they lie down between the boundaries of the towns instead of in their own stables at the home of their owners.

גרם: Knochen, jedoch nicht dasselbe wie עצם .עצם bedeutet das Feste Starke, Markige, verwandt mit םoא, Ansammlung von Kräften. גרם findet sich in גרם המעלות (Kön. 9, 13) als Treppenstufe, also als das stetig vorwärts und aufwärts .2 Führende — (davon auch כרם, der terrassenartig angelegte Weinberg] — so auch גרם" rabbinisch: vermitteln, veranlassen, herbeiführen. Demgemäß scheint גרם nicht Knochen als Last tragende, sondern Glied und Gelenk als die bewegende, arbeitende Hebelkraft zu bezeichnen. dass חמור als Bild eine Charakterseite bezeichnet, die vollständig allem Edlen ebenbürtig erscheint, ist aus Jesaias 32, 20 ersichtlich. Dort heißt es: אשריכם זורעי על כל מים משלחי רגל השור והחמור: ihr seid die Fortschreitenden Cuer ist der Fortschritt], denen jedes Gewässer gleichgilt, daran die Gottessaat zu säen, die sich hingeben, um Stier gleich sich ans Joch schirren zu lassen und Esel gleich Lasten zu tragen, (wörtlich: die rüstig den Fuß des Ochsen und des Esels strecken, d. h. die den rüstigen Schritt des Ochsen und des Esels schreiten, wie שלח אצבע ,שלח יד. So Job 30. 11. 1. גלי שִלֵחו (sie wollen meine Füße strecken, d. h. mir vorschreiben, wie ich wandeln soll שור: die Thatkraft, die wirkt; חמור: die Kraft des Tragens. Also חמור גרם eine gelenke Kraft, die schwere Lasten auf sich nimmt und rüstig weiter fördert. Eine solche Kraft wird Issachar entfalten, eine Kraft, die arbeitet und trägt, שור und חמור in sich vereinigt. משפתים: der Ort, wo zwei Reihen geordneter Geräte sind. Wie wir die Häuslichkeit durch Herd bezeichnen, so im Hebräischen durch geordnete Reihen von Geräten. So wird Ps. 68, 14 durch אם תשכבון בין שפתים! der Gedanke ausgedrückt: O, wenn ihr doch nur immer im Gegensatz zu den "Heereskönigen" euch mit der Lebensaufgabe der נות בית, der im Hause zu erfüllenden Pflichten begnügen möchtet! Also: Issachar ist ein starker und rüstiger Arbeiter, der am heimischen Herde der Ruhe genießt, im Bilde: ein Lasttier, dessen Gelenken man es ansieht, dass es tüchtig arbeiten kann und gearbeitet hat, und der nun innerhalb des Wohlstandes des häuslichen Kreises, den er mit seiner Arbeitskraft selbst geschaffen hat, ausruht.

יששכר חמור גרם, “Issachar is a bony donkey;” in the Talmud tractate Niddah, folio 31 this line is understood as Yaakov saying that a bony donkey was the cause of Issachar having been born. How so? When Yaakov came home from the field and Leah heard the donkey he was riding on braying, she went out of her tent to meet him and brought him to her tent. During that night she became pregnant with Issachar. (B’reshit Rabbah 99,10)

רובץ בין המשפתים, “crouching between boundaries.” His territory was hemmed in on both sides between his tribal brothers as spelled out in Joshua 19,10-23.

רבץ בין המשפתים CROUCHING BETWEEN THE FOLDS — Like an ass that travels day and night and has no permanent stable of its own, so that when it wishes to rest it croucheth down between the borders — i.e. at the bounds of the cities whither it is earring merchandise .

בין המשפתים at the outer edges of town, where the surrounding fields are under cultivation. We encounter the expression for tilling the soil as applying not only to oxen but also to donkeys in Isaiah 32,20 אשריכם זרעי על כל מים, משלחי רגל השור והחמור, “happy shall you be who sow by the waters, who send out oxen and donkeys to plough and spread the seed.” We find a similar contrast between these two tribes expressed in Moses‘ blessing in Deut. 33,18שמח זבולון בצאתך ויששכר באהליך “enjoy your departures (on voyages) Zevulun, and you, Issachar, enjoy your pursuing your vocation in your tents.”

He saw that rest is good. Unlike the pursuit of material wealth, the acquisition of Torah knowledge involves toil of the soul but quiescence of the body. For this reason the Torah was given on Shabbos.

גרם. A donkey with strong bones. And, due to his strength, רובץ בין המשפמים when he lies down to rest, he does so between two שפיתות, open type of containers able to contain the loads that he will carry. These are placed on either side of him. [the word seems to describe a recessed setting such as on a stove which has holes into which the pots are lowered to be surrounded by the fire underneath. Ed.] The unique nature of this kind of stove is that the pots are not capable of being moved or removed from it until the cooking or boiling is complete and the fire has gone out. Yaakov describes a simile in which Issachar, i.e. the donkey can hold out until he has completed the job assigned to him. The whole verse is a parable symbolising how Issachar accepts the yoke of the Torah and studies Torah with all the energy at his command. He does this in addition to shouldering the burden of derech eretz, i.e. doing justice to the more mundane demands made upon everybody living on this planet.

המשפתים, a reference to the load the donkey carries. Yaakov uses the word in the plural mode, to indicate that Issachar will be loaded with not only one burden but two, carrying one on his right side, the other on his left. His soil will be extremely good, as if to say that he will not join battle formations in war but will belong to the troops bringing the supplies to the front lines. He will pay a special tax to the king to be allowed this arrangement, hence ויהי למס עובד. This is what Yaakov had in mind when he said of Issachar וירא מנוחה כי טוב. Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 98,12, and 99,10 explain the entire blessing as a prophecy that Issachar would make his primary occupation the study of Torah, and Yaakov depicting such a way of life as something lovely and rewarding for those who pursue it. The more one labours and immerses oneself deeply in Torah study the greater the ultimate sense of serenity, מנוחה, constructive peace of mind one will experience. All the expressions used here such as וירא מנוחה כי טוב ואת הארץ כי נעמה ויט שכמו לסבול ויהי למס עובד, describe, step by step the immersion in Torah study, the difficulties in mastering that discipline, and the eventual satisfaction it yields the person who stays the course. As proof that Yaakov’s blessing for Issachar did indeed come true, consider that the tribe of Issachar sent only 200 representatives to attend the crowning of David as King, whereas all the other tribes sent delegations numbering between 10,000 and 120,000. The 200 men from Issachar however, are described as יודעי בינה לעתים, “knowing how to interpret the signs of the times.” They were all Torah scholars. (compare Chronicles I 12,24-38)

וירא מנוחה כי טוב, "He observed that repose is good, etc." The reference is to the repose experienced in the Hereafter. The words כי טוב, refer to what happens after a person considers that all the pleasures available for the body in this world, such as eating fine food and drinking good wine, are all sensations which are devoid of an inherent value. They are meaningful only because the body, an empty vessel, needs to be filled up with food and drink as the Creator has decreed that it is incapable of existing without input of food and drink. As a result, once the body has absorbed enough food an drink, the very food and drink which provided these pleasurable sensations become revolting. This fact demonstrates that food and drink are not in themselves something desirable. Solomon makes that point in Proverbs 23,8 when he said: "once you have eaten your bread, you will vomit it;" he meant that when you have consumed all the bread of this world, the time will come when you vomit it as it will become repugnant for you to fill your mouth with it. The same applies to all the other pleasures this world has to offer, things which man is attracted to by his eyes. Once he examines these phenomena more thoroughly he will realise that they are only make believe, that they lack substance, and eventually he will develop a distaste for everything connected with the human body and its attractions. He will conclude that the real good can be found only in the Hereafter, the world which is all spirit. Jacob blessed Issachar by saying that he has realised that true repose is only in those regions. Issachar correctly evaluates the repose in the Hereafter as well as the relative pleasantness on earth, i.e. והארץ כי נעמה.

When Jacob added ויט שכמו לסבול, "he bent his shoulder to bear (a burden)", this is a reference to the pain which is part of our earthly existence; ויהי למס עובד, "he turned himself into someone who serves the Lord as a form of paying tribute."

Another meaning of these last words may be that in return for becoming a willing servant of the Lord, the rest of the population is obligated to pay מס some kind of tax to assure the Torah scholar of his livelihood. In the case of Issachar that would be Zevulun who was a seafarer putting much of his wealth at the disposal of Issachar. (compare previous verse).

וירא מנחה כי טוב AND HE SAW THAT REPOSE WAS GOOD — He chose (ראה) as his portion a land that was blessed and well-fitted to produce fruits (cf. Onkelos; so that he need not engage overmuch in business.

וירא יששכר, he realised that to stay home and toil the soil leisurely was preferable, i.e.

וירא מנוחה כי טוב, by pursuing his twin objectives he found true מנוחה, i.e. a kind of being at peace with oneself knowing one has done what is expected of one. The prophet Jeremiah 6,16 describes such a state of mind as ומצאו מרגוע לנפשותיכם, “find tranquility for yourselves.” [He advised people of his time to travel ancient paths, i.e. the path of Torah as it used to be practiced. Ed.]

ויט שכמו לסבול, “so he inclined its shoulder to bear the burden.” The burden referred to is the task of teaching the Israelites the Torah. At the same time for the Israelites on their part, the tribe of Yissachar became a tax burden, מס עובד, as they had to look after these Torah teachers financially while coming to Yissachar’s territory to study Torah. Some commentators understand the words ויהי למס עובד as meaning that these Torah teachers were relieved of the duty of actively doing army duty during wars, paying a tax instead, so as not to appear as freeloaders. Alternatively, it describes a tendency by these members of Yissachar of paying off potential invaders rather than to engage in physical confrontation with them.

וירא מנוחה כי טוב, “He saw that tranquility was good;” Issachar realised that warfare and military activity was far inferior to Torah study, a quiet way of life. Torah study can flourish only when the body is physically as inactive as possible as the mental strain of studying drains the body of its strength. Torah study engages the opposite energies of the pursuit of vocations involving activity of one’s physique. The latter engage the body fully while leaving one’s mental faculties relatively uninvolved. The former makes great demands on one’s mental faculties while leaving the body relatively at rest. It is quite impossible for true Torah study to be successfully carried on by someone whose body has been worn out by physical labour or even by mental anguish and the like. This is one of the reasons that our sages included the request השיבה שופטנו כבראשונה ויועצינו כבתחילה, “restore to us our judges as in former times and our advisors as originally,” in our daily prayers. They added the words והסר ממנו יגון ואנחה, “and remove from us sorrow and anxiety,” as these factors are so inhibiting to anyone who wants to dedicate himself to Torah study. The purpose of this prayer is not that G’d should give us advisors to show us how to escape the burden of taxation, etc. This was not what the prophet Isaiah 1,26 had in mind when he promised that: “I will restore to you your judges as of old and your erstwhile advisors.” The prophet first and foremost had in mind the kind of advisors who had been able to calculate the occurrence of the new moon and other astronomical dates with precision. The judges who were able to do this were the ones who sat in the offices adjoining the Holy Temple. Once these types of judges will be restored to us the entire people would be able to upgrade the level of their Torah study. At that time the prophet’s promise that “the whole earth would possess a knowledge of G’d as the waters which cover the seas” (Isaiah 11,9) would be fulfilled. This is why the sages followed the request to restore these judges to us with the request to remove sorrow and sighing. They hinted that it would be impossible to pursue intensive Torah studies until the requisite conditions had been met with the help of G’d. These conditions include absence of sorrow and physical rest for the body. This benediction was suitably arranged by our sages as the next step following our return to the Holy Land i.e. תקע בשופר גדול לחרותנו, “sound the great horn heralding our freedom!”

In Issachar ist jene Richtung gezeichnet, die gerne arbeitet, aber nur in solcher Weise und in jenem Sinne, wie sie im echten jüdischen Volke Wert hat. Während in Juda der Herrscher- und in Sebulun der Handelsstamm dasteht, erscheint in Issachar der eigentliche Kern des jüdischen Volkes, der jüdische Landmann. Er arbeitet nicht, um unablässig zu arbeiten und zu gewinnen; der jüdische Mann aus dem Volke geht nicht auf in die Last der Arbeit, er arbeitet, um sich מנוחה, um sich Muße zu gewinnen. Er lässt mit seinen Produkten Sebulun Millionen verdienen, bleibt lieber selbst zu Hause und sieht, dass die so gewonnene, die selbständig erarbeitete Muße das höchste Gut ist, das der Mensch mit seiner Arbeit erarbeiten soll; denn in der Muße richtet der Mensch sich auf, hat der Mensch sich selber gewonnen. Darum neigt er seine Schulter zu tragen, lässt Juda den Herrscherstab, Sebulun die Kaufmannsflagge, ihn reizt nicht Kriegerruhm, nicht Handelsgewinn, er kennt andere Eroberungen und anbere Schätze, die nur in Muße errungen und gepflegt werden können. Gerade dieser Stamm wurde dadurch Pfleger der geistigen Schätze der Nation. Als nach Sauls Falle alle Stämme sich um David sammelten, da kamen von allen Tausende und Hunderttausende. Issachar schickte nur Zweihundert, ראשים, die Häupter, — die andern blieben zu Hause und arbeiteten — aber diese waren יודעי בינה לעתים sie brachten בינה mit, eigentlich: Zwischensicht, Erkenntnis der Beziehungen der Dinge und Menschen zu einander und der Resultate ihrer etwaigen Aufeinanderwirkung. Diesen Blick hatte sich Issachar in der erarbeiteten Muße gewonnen, und zwar יודע בינה, konkretes Erkennen, keinen sophistischen Scharfsinn, sondern jenes praktische Verständnis der wirklichen Verhältnisse der Personen und Sachen, welches die wahre הכמת התורה gewährt, und zwar לעתים: in gerechter Würdigung eines Zeitmomentes in seiner Besonderheit. Das waren die: וכל אחיהם על פיהם ,,von deren Munde alle ihre Brüder lebten". Diese Er- kenntnis der תורה und deren Übung in steter praktischer Anwendung auf die konkreten Verhältnisse wird nicht gewonnen bei steter Arbeit im Dienste des Geschäftes, wird nur in den Stunden der Muße gewonnen, die man sich mit der Arbeit erarbeitet, wird daher nur von einem Volke gewonnen, das zu diesem Zwecke וירא מנוחה כי טוב, die Muße als den reinen wirklichen Gewinnst der Arbeit betrachtet, um, wie dies die Weisen ausdrücken, לעשות תורתם קבע ומלאכתם עראי, die Thorawissenschaft als das wesentliche Ziel, die Arbeit als das zufällige Mittel zu schätzen. Und als reinstes, sicherstes und entsprechendstes Mittel zu diesem Ziele erschien Issachar הארץ: der Landbau. Mit Begeisterung gab er sich daher den Lasten des Ackerbaues hin: ויהי למס עובד

וירא מנוחה כי טוב, “he realised that reposing is good;” [Compared to the stormy seas that his brother Zevulun had constantly to contend with? Ed.] Our author sees in this expression a parallel to Proverbs 23,31, אל תרא יין כי יתאדם, which he translates as “do not praise wine though it is red,” i.e. it has hidden features which are far less appealing. Yissachar is conscious of the advantages of residing peacefully on his land, as opposed to his brother Zevulun, who, though in search of great riches, faces many stormy seas and potential pirates before bringing home his spoils. Moses reflects the same thoughts when blessing the two tribes in his parting address to the nation, saying: “rejoice Zevulun at the beginning of your quest, but you, Yissachar באהלך, are content in your tent.”

ויט שכמו לסבול AND HE INCLINED THE SHOULDER TO RECEIVE THE BURDEN namely the burden of tracking the Torah.

ואת הארץ כי נעמה he found that the land he inhabited provided his livelihood without strenuous effort on the part of its inhabitants.

Die Bezeichnung eines Idioten durch "עם הארץ" datiert aus einer späteren Zeit, in welcher längst der ruhige, Muße gewährende Bodenbesitz für den Juden bereits verloren war, in welcher die Wissenschaft und die Geisteskultur sich in den Städten konzentrierte, der Jude auf dem "Lande" sporadisch wohnte und, fern von den Herden der Bildung, unter der Last seiner Arbeit geistig und sehr häufig auch sittlich verkümmerte. In תנ"ך ist עם הארץ stets die "Volksgemeine" in edelster Bedeutung.

ויט שכמו לסבול, “he (Yissachar) willingly bent his shoulder to become a tributepayer.” (agricultural work is deemed the same as paying a tax). The words bracketed refer to the farmer having to fork over a tenth of his hard worked for harvest to the Royal treasury. (Compare Samuel I 8,14-15, where the prophet warns the people that they will have to pay taxes to the king that they so dearly wish to be ruled by.) An alternate exegesis on the line: ויט שכמו לסבול: Yissachar puts up with any of his brethren that pass through his territory on the way elsewhere. This is an exceptional virtue. The result of his tolerance of these inconveniences turns him into a tax paying servant.

ויהי AND BECAME unto all Israel his brethren.

מנוחה כי טוב ואת הארץ כי נעמה, and how such pursuits were very rewarding, (an expression also used in Deuteronomy 12,9 אל המנוחה ואל הנחלה)

ויט שכמו לסבול, he accepted two kinds of burdens, the yoke of Torah and the yoke of public service. This reflects what our sages have said in Moed Katan 6 that young Torah scholars have to accept the burdens of their entire town upon themselves.

למס עובד A SERVANT UNTO TRIBUTE — deciding for them points of Law and the rules with regard to the fixing of leap-years, as it is said (1 Chronicles 12:32) “And of the children of Issachar, men that had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do; the heads of them were two hundred” — two hundred heads of the Sanhedrin he provided — “and all their brethren were at their commandment” (Genesis Rabbah 99:10).

ויט שכמו לסבול, he accepted the tax burdens etc , imposed by the kings of Israel

ויהי למס עובד, the general population which carries out the day-to-day mundane tasks involved in a civilised existence will be at the disposal of Issachar who is busy with Torah study instead. The word מס refers to the ordinary working man doing the chores of Issachar being viewed as the tax being paid on behalf of Issachar, seeing that he himself cannot be taxed on non-earned income. In halachah, (Yumah 72) this is described as the ordinary citizen having to perform public service duties from which the Torah scholars are excused.

ויט שכמו AND HE INCLINED HIS SHOULDER — he lowered his shoulder; similar are, (2 Samuel 22:10) “He bowed (ויט) the heavens” and (Psalms 78:1) “Incline (הטו) your ear”. Onkelos, however, explains it differently: HE BOWED HIS SHOULDER to wage wars and to conquer new districts — for he (Issachar) dwelt on the marches — AND the enemy BECAME subject to him AS A SERVANT TO PAY TRIBUTE.

ויהי למס עובד, he dutifully gave part of his harvests to the King’s tax collectors, as predicted by the prophet Samuel when the people demanded to be ruled by a king (Samuel I 8,14-15). This is the plain meaning of the above verse. It contains a promise of material wealth to both tribes, though each tribe’s wealth originates from the pursuit of separate vocations..

דן ידין עמו means DAN WILL TAKE VENGEANCE FOR HIS PEOPLE from the Philistines, the phrase having the same meaning as in (Deuteronomy 32:30) “For the Lord will avenge (ידין) his people”.

DAN SHALL JUDGE ‘YADIN’ HIS PEOPLE. This has the same meaning as in the verse, For the Eternal ‘yadin’ His people,¹⁷⁷Deuteronomy 32:36. which Onkelos translates as, “For the Eternal will judge the judgment of His people,”¹⁷⁸Here also, the sense of the verse is: “Dan will judge the judgment of his people.” just as in the expressions: Be thou my judge, O G-d, and plead my cause against an ungodly nation;¹⁷⁹Psalms 43:1. The cause of the widow.¹⁸⁰Isaiah 1:23. The reference should rather be to Verse 17 there: rivu almanah (plead for the widow), which means rivu riv almanah (plead the plea of the widow). Here, likewise, the sense of the verse is: “Dan will judge the judgment of his people.” (T’chelet Mordechai. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 270, Note 39.) The verse is thus stating that Dan will avenge the cause of his people, all the tribes of Israel, as one.¹⁸¹As explained further in the text, it is clear that Ramban is transposing the words of the verse and interpreting it in the following way: “Dan will judge his people,” that is, Samson, a descendant of the tribe of Dan, will avenge the cause of his people from the hands of the Philistines. And who are “his people?” All “the tribes of Israel.” And how will that help affect them? “As one,” that is, as one whole nation, for when, at the time of Samson’s death, the Philistines’ temple collapsed, all the lords of the Philistines (Judges 16:27) died, and thus all “the tribes of Israel as one” were delivered from their hands. And the purport of it is as follows: The Philistines wronged all Israel many times. In the days of Shamgar the son of Anath¹⁸²Judges 3:31. they began their oppression of Israel, and in the days of Jephthah it is written, And He gave them over into the hand of the Philistines,¹⁸³Ibid., 10:7. and after the days of Abdon the son of Hillel,¹⁸⁴Ibid., 12:13. it is also written, And the Eternal delivered them into the hand of the Philistines forty years.¹⁸⁵Ibid., 13:1. There was none among the Judges who subdued them or had any victory at all over them. Now although it is written concerning Shamgar, And he smote the Philistines six hundred men with an ox-goad,¹⁸²Judges 3:31. this was not “vengeance,” relatively speaking, as it was not a great slaughter.¹⁸⁶II Chronicles 13:17. This is why it is written concerning Samson, And he shall begin to save Israel out of the hand of the Philistines,¹⁸⁷Judges 13:5. and he avenged the cause of Israel from them for he slew many people and killed all the lords of the Philistines.¹⁸⁸See ibid., 16:27 and 30. Scripture mentions yadin (he will judge), since this avenger was a judge, not a king. It is possible that this interpretation coincides with the opinion of Onkelos, who translated: “In his days his people will be delivered.”¹⁸⁹Thus it is clear that Onkelos also explained the word yadin as meaning “will avenge.” See also my Hebrew commentary, p. 270.
It is possible that the expression, as one of the tribes of Israel, means “as the outstanding one of the tribes,” namely, Judah, concerning whom it is said, Thy hand shall be on the neck of thine enemies,¹⁹⁰Above, Verse 8. thus implying that this one also¹⁹¹The judge from the tribe of Dan, namely, Samson. will be victorious over his enemies and subdue them.

דן ידין עמו, those who explained this as a reference to Shimshon, one of the judges of Israel, have read the text only superficially. Did they really think that Yaakov, on his deathbed, would prophesy concerning a single specific individual who, moreover, fell into the hands of the Philistines and ended his life as their victim? Far be it from Yaakov to focus on such events at a time like this, even if he foresaw it! Yaakov relates to the tribe of Dan who is described as the rearguard of the Jewish armies in the desert both in Numbers 10,25 and in the Book of Joshua 6,9 where this tribe is described in identical terms. The fact that the rearguard is the most exposed section of the army which has to beat off any attacks from the rear, means that it needs extra protection by G’d. Yaakov says that he will enjoy success in avenging any unprovoked attacks on the Jewish people, i.e. their army. The words

As one of the tribes. See Rashi’s alternate explanation. Although in the desert the tribe of Yehudah traveled first and Dan last, they were equal in that both produced leaders (David and Shimshon) who eliminated the wicked from their midst.

דן ידין עמו, "Dan will judge his people, etc.". Jacob may have wanted to exonerate Samson who had disgraced himself as a leader by consorting with Delilah. Perhaps Jacob considered Samson's end when he asked G'd to die together with the Philistines (Judges 16,30) he was about to kill as a redeeming conclusion of his life; this is why he compared him כאחד שבטי ישראל, like the unique personalities each of the tribes produced at one time or another.

דן ידין עמו, Yaakov predicts that a judge will emerge from among the Danites as, or equal to, any of the other tribes of Israel. The reason why Yaakov had to make such a strange sounding comment was that Dan was a son of Rachel’s maid, Bilhah, and the status of the descendants of the maidservants of the matriarchs might have been questioned. Yaakov wants it understood that there is not going to be such a relationship between his sons. To emphasise this, Moses appointed the tribe of Dan as one of the four tribes who were leaders of their respective army corps comprising three tribes each. (compare Numbers 2,25) The judge from the tribe of Dan who presided over the court was Shimshon, of whom we are told in Judges 16,31 that he judged the people for 20 years.

דן ידין עמו, “Dan will avenge his people.” The word ידין is understood here as “taking up the quarrel on someone’s behalf.”

All the tribes of Israel will be as one with him... I.e., this phrase [should be understood] as if it is backwards. It means: “Dan will avenge his people, all of Israel together (כאחד).” For Shimshon avenged all of Israel together. ידין cannot mean “will judge,” because we do not find anywhere [that Dan judged all of Israel].

Mit Issachar waren die sechs Söhne Leas erschöpft, von ihr stammt der ganze Kern des Volkes. Dan ist der erste Sohn der שפחות, den eine der früheren Dienerinnen dem Jakob geboren. Es begreifen sich die Worte, mit denen Jakob ihn einführt. War ja die Heirat aus dem edlen Wunsche seiner Frau hervorgegangen, möglichst viele Söhne zum Bau des Gottesvolkes zu stellen. Dan war der erste Sohn der Dienerin Rachels, die den Schmerz nicht verwinden konnte, für den Bau des verheißenen Volkes, wie es schien, ganz unfruchtbar zu bleiben. Jakob spricht daher: Dan wird sein Volk vertreten, wie nur einer aus Israels Stämmen. Er steht durchaus nicht zurück, gehört ebenso zum Wesen, wie die andern (obgleich die Verbindung mit Bilha und Silpa von Jakob gar nicht beabsichtigt, und diese Mütter ursprünglich eine untergeordnete Stellung hatten), ist den andern völlig ebenbürtig und hat ebenso seinerseits einen eigentümlichen Beitrag zum Nationalganzen zu spenden. Es folgen nun vier Söhne der שפחות. Während Juda, Sebulun, Issachar wesentliche und dauernde Grundzüge bieten, bringen die Söhne der Dienerinnen Seiten, die nicht gerade dauernde Grundzüge bilden, sich jedoch zu Zeiten nützlich und hilfreich bewährten.

דן ידין עמו, “Dan will judge his people.” This tribe had always marched in the rear of the camp in the days of Moses as well as of Joshua as testified to in Joshua 6,9: והמאסף הולך אחרי הארון, “and the rearguard walked behind the Holy Ark.” It was this tribe’s task to ward off any attacks from the rear. They had been assigned this task as they were considered exceptionally brave. The word ידין, may therefore best be translated as: “he will avenge.” Compare Deuteronomy 32,36: כי ידין ה' עמו, “for the Lord will avenge His people.”

כאחד שבטי ישראל means ALL THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL WILL BE AT ONE with him and he will take vengeance for all of them. This prophecy alludes to Samson (Genesis Rabbah 99:11). One might also explain כאחד שבטי ישראל thus: “[Dan will take vengeance for his people as did] the most distinguished tribe (המיוחד) among the tribes of Israel” — alluding to David who was of the tribe of Judah (Genesis Rabbah 99:11).

כאחד, “similar to the “one,” i.e. the tribe of Yehudah who normally played the role of saviour of his people. The meaning could also be that Shimshon, from the tribe of Dan, would be the only judge who would rule over the entire people, something that otherwise would be the prerogative of the tribe of Yehudah. Yaakov likened Shimshon the Danite to a snake, as just like a snake he acted on his own, without the support of an army. He acted aggressively just as certain types of snakes who attack unsuspecting travelers without warning.

כאחד שבטי ישראל, describe this tribe’s warding off such attacks, similar to what Moses said in Deuteronomy 32,36 כי ידון ה' עמו, or in Deut. 32,43 דם עבדיו יקום ונקם ישיב לצריו. “He will avenge the blood of His people, for He will wreak vengeance on his foes.” David expresses similar feelings in Psalms 110,6 when he says:ידיו בגויים מחץ גוויות מחץ ראשו על ארץ רבה, ”He works judgment on the nations, heaping up bodies, crushing heads far and wide.”

שפיפן is another name for a נחש. I am of opinion that it is thus called because it hisses (נושף) when biting. Similarly we have, (Genesis 3:15) “and thou shalt bite (תשיפנו) at their heel” (cf. Rashi thereon).

SH’PHIPHON (SERPENT)¹⁹²Verse 17 here: Dan shall be a serpent by the way, a ‘sh’phiphon’ on the path, that biteth the horse in the heels, so that his rider falleth backward. is the name of a snake which bites at the heel, with the second root-letter¹⁹³Namely, the pei. being doubled.¹⁹⁴Ramban is suggesting that the root of sh’phipon is shapha which means “hissing while biting,” except that the letter pei is here doubled. In the Jerusalem Talmud, Tractate Terumoth¹⁹⁵8:3. the Rabbis said, “It is a small kind of serpent, its name is sh’phiphon, and it is as thin as a hair,” with the earth being permitted to crack before it. Samson is compared to a snake because Samson did not wage war against his enemies as did the other judges and kings. Rather he alone went out against them, just as the viper which leaves his hole to attack travellers on the road, or the small species of serpent of which the traveller is not at all aware.

יהי דן נחש, a reference to a poisonous snake, one commonly called tzifoni, in Biblical literature. Arab physicians usually call such venomous snakes chorman. The name for such snakes implies that a single snake can kill numerous people at once, using both its stare, and it voice (hiss) which is heard and seen by many people. It is a fitting comparison to Shimshon who, all on his own, killed many people almost simultaneously.

יהי דן, Yaakov compared Dan to different kinds of serpents which do not travel (hunt) in packs, but rely on their wits, killing many. Shimshon, the most prominent warrior of the tribe of Dan, was a loner, never involving others when he faced danger. Compare Judges 15,8 ויך אותם שוק על ירך וכלחי חמור הכה אלף איש, “he struck them leg as well as thigh, and with the jawbone of a donkey he killed one thousand men.” He saved the Israelites from the constant incursions of the Philistines before he engaged in his acts of daring. This is what prompted Yaakov to wish him success with the words: 'לישועתך קויתי ה, “your type of salvation for Israel, orchestrated by a single individual, is something that normally, only G’d Himself can orchestrate.” Some commentators (Rashi) view these words of Yaakov as his reaction when he foresaw with prophetic vision how Shimshon had his eyes blinded by the Philistines. The words לישועתך וגו' then are Yaakov’s prayer that G’d Himself would avenge what was done to Shimshon. This prophecy/prayer was also fulfilled, as we are told in Judges 16,30 that Shimshon killed more Philistines in dying than he had killed cumulatively while alive.

ויפול רוכבו אחור, “and its rider falls backwards.” When the snake bites the heel of the horse, it rears up with its head , throwing off its rider in the process.

It is so named because it hisses... נושף is a sort of whistling. So did Rashi explain before on 3:15.

Es heißt nicht: דן נחש וגוי, wie נפתלי אילה וגוי, sondern: יהי דן נחש וגו׳: iwerden wird Dan eine Schlange am Wege. דרך: die offene große Heerstraße, auf der man offen einander entgegenzieht, im Gegensatz zu ארח, das auch den Privatweg bezeichnet, der von einem Menschen zum andern führt. שפיפון, von שפף, gleichbedeutend mit שוף, von der Stelle schlüpfen (שף מדוכתי). Dan wird keine furchtgebietende Macht entfalten, sondern die Kraft des Schwachen: die Klugheit, und zwar עלי דרך und עלי אורח. Wenn Israel von Heeresmacht angegriffen ist, wird er es verteidigen, allein nicht durch Juda gleiche Löwenmacht, sondern durch Schlauheit. Kann Israel im menschengesellschaftlichen Verkehr — אורח — sich vor fanatischer Feindseligkeit nicht retten, so ist Dan die schlüpfende Natter am Pfade, die dem Rosse in die Ferse beißt, so dass sofort der Reiter rückwärts fällt. Es heißt, wie bemerkt, nicht דן נחש עלי דרך — bewahre Gott, dass dies je dauernder Charakterzug eines jüdischen Stammes seil — יהי דן werden wird Dan etc. d. h. sich nicht anders zu helfen wissen, als durch Schlangenklugheit, und darum denn auch wahrscheinlich:

יהי דן נחש, “may Dan be like a snake lying in ambush on the way” to kill potential attackers of the gentile nations; his bravery will use the most unlikely weapons, such as when Samson used a jawbone to kill 1000 Philistines (Judges 15,16.)

הנשך עקבי סוס THAT BITETH THE HORSE’S HEELS — this is the manner of the serpent. Scripture compares him to a serpent that bites the horse’s heels ויפל רכבו אחור THAT HIS RIDER FALLETH BACKWARD without it (the serpent) having touched him at all. We find the analogy to this in the case of Samson with reference to whom this prophecy was made (Judges 16:29): “And Samson look fast hold of the two middle pillars etc.” — and those on the roof died though not directly attacked. Onkelos translates נחש by כחיוי חורמן, like the serpent “Churman”, which is the name of a kind of serpent the bite of which is incurable. It is the serpent which in Hebrew is called צפעוני. It is called a חורמן because it destroys (חרם) everything. The word וכפיתנא in the Targum means “and like a פתן” (like an asp). יכמון in the Targum means יארוב “he lies in wait”.

THAT BITETH THE HORSE’s HEEL.¹⁹²Verse 17 here: Dan shall be a serpent by the way, a ‘sh’phiphon’ on the path, that biteth the horse in the heels, so that his rider falleth backward. This alludes to the two pillars¹⁹⁶Judges 16:29. upon which the house of Dagan, the Philistine god, rested, whereas the three thousand people who were upon its roof¹⁹⁷Ibid., Verse 27. are “the rider that falleth backward,”¹⁹⁸See Note 192. for when the snake bites the horse’s heels, the horse lifts its head and his forefeet, causing the rider to fall backward.

יהי, may the domain of Dan act like a snake barring the way, i.e. may he be the one killing nations hostile to the Jewish people

שפיפון, name of a slim snake; our sages use this when wanting to illustrate something extremely thin, “as the width of a hair.” Physicians claim that these types of snakes hide in the trees, their sting being felt as if one had been shot by an arrow. Shimshon’s mode of operation, an individual lying in wait, in ambush, is compared by Yaakov to this snake.

שפיפון, “a viper;” closely related to the expression: in Genesis 3,15: הוא ישופך ראש, “man will crush the serpent’s head;” (in response to the serpent attacking his heel)ויפול רכבו אחור, “so that its rider will fall off backwards.”

ויפול רוכבו אחור, may his enemies fall before him (off their horses.)

'לישועתך קויתי ה I HOPE FOR THY AID, O ETERNAL — He prophesied that the Philistines would put out his (Samson’s) eyes, and that he would have to say (Judges 16:28) “Remember me, I pray Thee, and strengthen me, I pray Thee, only this once etc.”

I HOPE FOR THY AID, O ETERNAL. Among all the judges of Israel there was none who fell into the hands of his enemies except Samson, who is this “snake” [referred to in Jacob’s prophecy], just as it is written, Then the Eternal was with the judge, and saved them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge,¹⁹⁹Ibid., 2:18. and Samson was the last of the judges since his successor Samuel was a prophet and he did not conduct war on the people’s behalf, and in his days the kings [Saul and David] reigned. Now when the prophet Jacob saw that the deliverance which was to come through Samson ceased [when he died together with the Philistines], he said, “I hope for Thy aid, O Eternal, not for the aid of ‘the snake’ or ‘the serpent,’ for it is by Thee that I will be helped, not by a judge, as Thy salvation is ‘an everlasting salvation.’”²⁰⁰See Isaiah 45:17.

לישועתך

לישועתך קויתי ה', “I hope for Your salvation, Hashem.” The attacker, having bitten the victim’s heel, is afraid of the sword of the horse’s rider, and therefore implores G’d to save him from retribution. Another explanation of why Yaakov added this line at this point; is that he foresaw that Shimshon would eventually be at the mercy of the Philistines. He prayed on his behalf while blessing his tribe Dan. Another reason for the insertion of this line at this point could be that although the prophet Samuel in the Book of Samuel describes G’d as being supportive of the respective judges in their time, Yaakov foresaw that history would prove that Shimshon would be the exception. He therefore prayed that he would be proven wrong, and that G’d would remain at his side. The fact is that Shimshon would be the last of a string of judges, Samuel, his successor as the leader of the people fulfilling primarily a role as the “Seer.” In fact, before the death of Samuel the Jewish nation would for the first time be ruled by a King (Sha-ul), someone specifically crowned for the position and meant to be the founder of a dynasty, a ruler by merit of his ancestry. Some commentators feel that when Yaakov foresaw his descendant Dan as embodying the character of a serpent, he became so frightened by this image that he spontaneously protested by crying out: “may the Lord help me!” Rash’bam explains the exclamation as pertaining not just to Shimshon but to the entire tribe of Dan, whose task in the desert was to be the rearguard of the Israelites’ army, the tribe most exposed to attack from the rear. He, Rash’bam, does not like to apply this outcry to Shimshon, as Yaakov did not prophesy his eventual defeat and capture.[a very nice interpretation, but not found in our editions of the Rash’bam. Ed.]

לישועתך קויתי ד׳! Indem Jakob hier Dan genötigt sieht, zur Klugheit seine Zuflucht zu nehmen, mochte er wohl der Zeit gedenken, wo er selbst einem Laban gegenüber in gleicher Notwendigkeit sich befunden, und hofft nun zu Gott, dass sowie es ihm gelungen, inmitten dieser Klugheitsprüfung איש תם zu bleiben und seinen geraden rechtlichen Charakter zu bewahren, es so auch seinen Kindern gelingen möge, unter Druck und Kampf, der sie zur Klugheit zu greifen nötigt, doch nie Schlauheit einen Grundzug ihres Charakters werden zu lassen, eine Hoffnung, die die Galuthgeschichte seiner Kinder glänzend gerechtfertigt.

'לישועתך קויתי ה, “I hope for Your salvation Hashem!” When Yaakov in his prophetic vision of future events saw Shimshon the mighty warrior and what he accomplished, he felt forced to exclaim that Israel’s future would not be in the hands of human warriors but would be secured only by Hashem. In the Book of Judges 15,16, where Shimshon is related as having killed one thousand Philistines with the bone of a donkey as his only weapon, that immediately afterwards he threw that bone to the ground and acknowledged G–d as the source of his success. (verse 18 there). This is also hinted at in his blessing of Dan where the point is made that though Dan will be successful in attacking his adversaries like a snake lying in ambush, he will do so confident of G–d’s salvation.

'לישועתך קויתי ה, “I have always hoped for Your salvation, Hashem” Yaakov addresses the tribe of Dan when saying this; in other words: Yaakov prayed that Dan will be successful in his defense of the Jewish people. An alternate explanation: “I have hoped to G-d that your (Dan’s) efforts at saving his people will succeed.” (as predicted by the angel who told the wife on Manoach of the forthcoming birth of Samson, and that he would be the first to save the people from the Philistines. (Judges 13,5)

לישועתך קויתי ה', I pray to the Lord that He may save you and elevate you over the gentile nations.

גד גדוד יגודנו GAD, AN ASSAILING TROOP SHALL ASSAIL HIM — all the words in this verse which have, the letters גד are connected in meaning with the word גדוד and so also did Menachem ben Seruk classify them. Should you say, however, that גדוד has always two ד’s and these words have only one, the answer is: The word גדוד is a noun and therefore requires two ד’s, for it is the way of a biliteral root to have the second letter doubled when used as a noun; the root proper, however, consists only of two letters. Thus it says, (Proverbs 26:2) כצפור לנוד “the wandering sparrow”, (לנוד a verb, infinitive) of the same derivation as נדודים in (Job 7:4) “I am full of גדודים wanderings” (a noun); (Judges 5:27) ‘‘there he fell down (שדוד) dead”, a noun in meaning, which is of the same derivation as the verb in (Psalms 41:6) “that wasteth (ישוד) at moon-day”. So, also, יגודנו ,יגוד and גדוד have the same derivation. When, also, one uses such biliteral roots in the future tense Kal, it (the second letter) is not doubled. For example: יגוד he will troop, ינוד he will wander, ירום he will be high, ישוד he will devastate, ישוב he will come back. When, however, such a root is used in a reflexive sense (Hithpael) or in a causative-transitive sense the second letter is doubled Examples are: יתעודד ,יתרומם ,יתבולל ,יתגודד. Examples of the causative-transitive sense are: (Psalms 146:9) “He strengtheneth (יעודד) the fatherless and the widow”; (Isaiah 49:5) “To bring Jacob back (לשובב) to Him”; (Isaiah 48:12) “The restorer (משובב) of paths”. The form יגודנו which is used here has not the force that others will make him do something (i.e. it has not this causative-transitive sense with the direct accusative suffix נוּ) but it means “a troop will troop out from him”, exactly the same as (Jeremiah 10:20) בני יצאוני which means “my children have gone forth from me”, (as we might say “have left me”). (Cf. Rashi on Genesis דברו לשלום 37:4, and on תמלאמו Exodus 15:9.). גד גדוד יגודנו accordingly means, “troops will troop out of him” signifying that they (the Gadites) will cross the Jordan with their brethren, all armed, and remain with them until the land will have been conquered.

‘GAD G’DUD Y’GUDENU.’ Rashi, in accordance with Onkelos, explained it as follows: A troop will troop out of him, and that troop will troop back upon its footsteps, meaning it will return in its own track back to its territory in peace [and not one of them will be missing].²⁰¹Reference here, according to Rashi and Onkelos, is to the time when the armed Gadites will cross the Jordan with their brethren, and they will remain with them until the land will have been conquered. When they will return to their land on the east side of the Jordan not one of them will be missing.
The correct interpretation [appears to be that the word y’gudenu here] is as in the verse: When he cometh up against the people that he invadeth (‘y’gudenu’).²⁰²Habakkuk 3:16. Thus, “the troop” mentioned in the prophecy of Jacob is not a friendly troop, as Rashi and Onkelos would have it, but the enemy, as explained further. The verse is thus stating that a troop will always assail Gad, that he will have many wars, with enemy troops spreading out over his land, and that he will follow the enemy in his track and be victorious over him and pursue him, returning on the heel of those who shame them. Jacob thus praised the Gadites for their valor and for their victory over all those who enter into battle against them. This is similar to the blessing which Moses our teacher gave them, as it is said, Blessed be He that enlargeth Gad; he dwelleth as a lioness.²⁰³Deuteronomy 33:20. Since Gad inherited a very wide and large land which was across the Jordan, bands from Ammon and Moab, his evil neighbors, would always descend upon him, claiming the land and invading it. Yet Gad lurked like a lioness over its prey, fearing not their noise, nor showing any dismay at their shouting.
This fitting interpretation I learned from the Jerusalem Talmud, where in Tractate Sotah²⁰⁴8:10. they say: “Gad g’dud y’gudenu, a troop will come trooping upon him, but he shall troop upon it;” that is to say, bands will come to gather wealth and assail him, but he shall troop upon them and bring his troops into their land.
Perhaps the prophet Jacob was alluding to the war of Jephthah the Gileadite against the children of Ammon, as the children of Gad inherited all the cities of Gilead, and half of the land of the children of Ammon. The children of Ammon were always warring against the men of Gilead, and Jephthah scarcely passed over them and he smote them and their cities [with] a very great slaughter.²⁰⁵Judges 11:33. This event was indeed a great miracle, and so the prophet Jacob mentioned it, even as he mentioned the matter of Samson.

גד גדוד, the troops of the entire nation of Israel will follow Gad who is the vanguard in the wars of conquest as we know from Deuteronomy 3,18 where Moses charged them with this task. On the return from battle, this tribe, instead of being in the vanguard, will be the rearguard, again the most exposed to enemy action. They will thus form a buffer for the Jewish armies at all times.

גד גדוד יגודנו, after having said that Dan fights like a snake felling horse and rider, Yaakov now contrasts Gad’s mode of operation with that of Dan by saying that the Gadites act in groups. Moses also repeats this theme in Deut. 33,20 when he said וטרף זרועו קדקוד, “he tore off arm and scalp.”

גד גדוד יגודנו, "Gad, a troop shall troop upon him, etc." Jacob links his blessing to his name, interpreting his name as meaning "a troop, a camp," as well as גדיה. The author refers the reader to the Sefer Ha-aruch which describes the word גד also as meaning "to draw," "to lead," and "to surround." Accordingly, the meaning is that Gad will surround his enemies. When Jacob continued: והוא יגוד עקב, this means that he will utterly destroy them to the heel, i.e. the lowest extremity. Gad will surround the entire camp of Israel and fight on their behalf. עקב may also refer to the fact that he would help them to receive their reward, their inheritance, [all this is a reference to when the two and a half tribes led by Gad undertook to form the vanguard in the conquest of the land of Canaan in Numbers 32,32. Ed.]

גד גדוד יגודנו, if a troop, battalion attacks him he will overpower that troop. This is the meaning of the last words in the verse והוא יגד עקב, in the end (עקב) he will prevail. This is a specific reference by Yaakov to what we have been told in Chronicles I 5,18-22 in which this tribe (together with Reuven and half the tribe of Menashe) is described as waging a successful war against the Hagrites. Their victory, -apparently they had been attacked,- is credited to the fact that they implored G’d to help them, and had faith that He would help them. Their trust was justified as is evident from the amount of loot they captured after that battle, Subsequent to that battle they remained undisturbed until their exile, about 150 years before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.

גד גדוד יגודנו, “Gad will experience having to face troops from time to time;” seeing that the territory of this tribe will be on the east bank of the river Jordan, and hence more exposed to hostile forces, military exercises will be a common experience in this tribe’s history.

Dan bildet die Grenzhut gegen die Philister im Westen, und die Weisen sehen in Simson den vollendeten Typus des im vorigen Verse geschilderten Kampfes der vereinzelten Klugheit einer immensen feindlichen Ubermacht gegenüber. גדר: einschneiden, plötzlich in etwas einfahren. גדור: ein detachierter Truppenkörper, der wie ein Keil plötzlich in ein Gebiet einfährt. Gad sitzt ruhig an seiner Grenze, beunruhigt die Nachbaren nicht, allein, wenn angegriffen, schlägt er sie mutig zurück und verfolgt sie über die Grenze, עקב. Er bewahrt somit den frischen, kecken Mut, der, wenn gereizt, voll das Seinige thut. Das Entgegengesetzte von Dan.

גד גדוד יגודנו, “Troops will be called up from Gad;” if you were to question how this tribe would secure its livelihood, seeing its men of military age will be conscripted as soldiers? The tribe would obviously have to be blessed with independent wealth in order to succeed. This is why in the next verse we hear about the fertile fields of the tribe of Asher which would supply also the needs of the neighbouring tribe of Gad. The soldiers’ physical needs would be supplied by that tribe, i.e. he would supply the King’s needs, the King having to pay the soldiers.There is an interesting story related in the Talmud, tractate Menachot folio 85, about the people of Laodicea being in need of oil. They appointed an agent and instructed him: “go and purchase for us one hundred measures of oil.” The agent first came to Jerusalem and was told “go to Tyre.” He came to Tyre, and was told: “go to Gush halab.” When he came to Gush Halab, he was told to go to a certain farmer on a certain field. He went there and found the farmer breaking up the earth around his olive trees. When he asked the farmer if he had a hundred measures of oil, he was told that the farmer did have it. He was asked, however, to wait until the farmer had completed the work he was engaged in. After the farmer had finished his work, he threw down his tools and went on his way, removing any stones that were in his way. The agent thought to himself: “has this man really the quantity of oil that I wish to purchase?” He thought that the Jews had tried to make a fool of him. As soon as he reached his hometown, that man’s maidservant brought out a bowl of hot water and he washed his hands and feet. She then brought out to him a golden bowl of oil, and he dipped in it his hands and feet, thus fulfilling the verse “and let him dip his feet in oil.” (Deuteronomy 33,24, Moses’ blessing of Asher) After they had eaten and drunk, the man measured out to the agent a hundred measures of oil, and he asked the agent, if per chance he could use more than that. The agent replied in the affirmative, but added that he had not brought enough money with him for the extra amount. The man said that he would give it to him and would accompany him to his home where he could pay him. He proceeded to measure out for the agent another eighteen thousand measures of oil. It is reported that he hired every horse, mule, camel and ass in the land of Israel. When he reached his hometown, all the people came out and applauded him.” Do not applaud me,” he said; applaud this man, my companion, who measured out for me a hundred measures worth of oil, and to whom I still owe for eighteen thousand measures of oil. This illustrates the meaning of the verse in Proverbs 13,7: “some make themselves rich, yet have nought; another impoverishes himself, but has great wealth.”

גד גדוד יגודנו, “Gad’s soldiers will troop after the armies of Israel when they go out to war (to conquer their ancestral heritage) during the battles under Joshua; they will be in the forefront as we know from Deuteronomy 3,18, where Moses commanded them to march as the vanguard of the Israelite army.

Gad will be an assailing troop. They were the advanced force in the conquest of the land.

והוא יגד עקב means all his troops will return in their own tracks back to their territory which they will receive on the other side of the Jordan and not one of them will be missing.

והוא יגוד עקב, when he fells horse and rider he will cut off their heels.. This is because they will try to flee from his pursuit. Compare Exodus 23,27 ונתתי את כל אויביך אליך עורף, “I will make all your enemies flee from before you.”

והוא יגד עקב, “and he will troop back in their tracks.” Another way of saying that the Gadites will cut down their enemies while the latter are retreating. The Talmud uses this expression for cutting down trees. Alternately, Yaakov referred to the military courage of the members of this tribe who would wage battle both at the head of the army as well as at its rear.

והוא יגד, “he shall raid at the heels of their enemies.” (When returning from battle) (They will not only be the vanguard at the beginning of the battle, but also the mopping up operation at the tail end of the battle.) Another exegesis for the line: והוא יגוד עקב: this tribe will always be in pursuit of enemies remaining, thus finding himself at the heel of their enemies. Compare: 49,8: ידך בעורף אויביך, “your hand will be around the neck of your enemies (Yehudah)”

עקב This means: By the same roads and paths upon which they had traveled shall they return. The word עקב has the same meaning as in (Psalms 128:20) “And thy foot-steps (עקבותיך) were not known”; (Song of Songs 1:8) “by the footsteps (עקבות) of the flock”. In old French traces; English, tracks.

מאשר שמנה לחמו OUT OF ASHER COMETH HIS FAT BREAD —The food that will come from the territory of Asher will be fat, for there will be numerous olive-trees in his territory so that it will flow with oil like a fountain. Moses blessed him in a like manner: (Deuteronomy 33:24) “and he will dip his foot in oil”. So we learn in the Treatise of Menachot 85b: once the people of Laodicia were in need of oil. Their agent was able to obtain the very large quantity they required only at a city in Asher, having failed at Jerusalem and other cities.

מאשר שמנה לחמו, a reference to the olive oil pressed from olives grown on his territory, oil used to fry, bake, etc., and generally to improve the taste of the food consumed by the nation. Moses paraphrases Yaakov’s blessing when he says in Deuteronomy 33,24 טובל בשמן רגלו, “that he will dip his foot in oil.”

From Asher will come rich food. Asher provided oil for the Temple service, upon which all prosperity depended, thus it was through Asher that the world enjoyed rich food. Delicacies for (or “of”) the king. Through the provisioning of the Temple Asher indirectly provided for the entire world, just as a king provides for his people. Alternatively, Asher was generous in the giving of charity.

מאשר שמנה לחמו, "Asher's food will be rich, etc." Perhaps the emphasis is on the letter מ preceding the name אשר, and Jacob meant that Asher would be a "self-made" individual, i.e. tribe, producing all his wealth from within himself, either through his efforts or through his merit.

מאשר שמנה לחמו, the introductory letter מ appears to indicate that the bounty described in the verse following applied to only part of the territory in which Asher dwelled. The word לחמו is a euphemism for the whole ancestral land of the tribe of Asher, as it is what produces the bread of this tribe. The word לחם here as well as in many other examples, is a collective term including all the food these people grew and consumed. There were many olive trees on the territory of Asher, something confirmed by Moses in Deut. 33,24 where the tribe is described as immersing its feet in that oil. Also all the other fruit grown on its soil was especially good in quality. This is why the verse concludes with the words: והוא יתן מעדני מלך, that the dignitaries of that tribe would send gifts of these fruit to be served at the king’s table.

מאשר שמנה לחמו, “the food emanating from the territory of Asher will be rich in fats.” The letter מ at the beginning of the word מאשר is an addition, (not absolutely necessary) Alternately, it was used to make plain that the territory of Asher is meant, and not the people of the tribe. Yet another possibility is that this letter מ refers back to the blessing of Gad, as if to say that seeing that Gad will be preoccupied fighting wars and would therefore not have sufficient time to plant his crops and to harvest them, his brother tribe Asher would compensate him and provide him with royal delicacies.

Moshe, too, blessed him thus... [You might ask: Why does Rashi need this proof?] The answer is: Rashi cites the proof from Moshe Rabbeinu so we will not object: How does Rashi know that here, שמנה means oil? Perhaps it means Asher’s food will be good and rich. Thus he brings a proof from Moshe. For it is evident that Moshe blessed them the same way Yaakov blessed them, and there it is clearly written, “He will dip his foot in oil.”

Gad und Dans Bedeutung wird in Recht vertretender Verteidigung nach außen gezeichnet, Ascher und Nastali haben ihre Eigentümlichkeit im Innern. Durch Ascher, d. h. Ascher bewirkt es, dass er fette, gesunde, treffliche Speise hat, indem er königliche Delikatessen liefert. Es scheint, dass Aschers Land mehr geeignet war, Delikatessen, als die notwendigen Lebensmittel zu produzieren. Indem aber Ascher Lurusfrüchte produzierte und zu Markte brachte, schaffte er sich reichliche und treffliche Nahrung.

מאשר, שמנה לחמו, as to Asher: “the food (Gad) he will produce will be richer than that of Asher.” Seeing that Yaakov had not blessed Gad with material blessings, when turning to Asher by saying that its food would be richer than that of Asher, since the soil of its ancestral portion is excellent grazing land.

והוא יתן מעדני מלך, the kings of Israel were in the habit of taxing this tribe by requiring them to hand over part of their oil harvest. Instead of using this oil in preparing food, they used it to anoint their bodies, as a skin lotion. The purpose of this was depilatory, to remove hair from the skin where it was not wanted. This function of oil is described in Menachot 86 as effective when the olives had not yet ripened beyond a third of their eventual size. Not only would this preparation remove hair at the root, but it would also improve the texture of the skin surrounding such hair. When Sarah, in Genesis 18,12 refers to her experiencing once again עדנה, this is the same word, and she referred to a youthful appearance of her skin.

והוא יתן מעדני מלך, “and he will provide royal delicacies.” Yaakov does not imply that the land that Asher resides on will be inferior; but he says that Gad too will provide royal delicacies seeing that its soil is better than Asher’s. An alternate exegesis: the richest food in the land will originate from the soil of the tribe of Asher. It will be even richer that that provided by the tribe of Gad, which was well known for its quality. Cooking oil used to be provided primarily from the olive trees on the territory of Asher. This is also reflected in Moses’ blessings in Deuteronomy 33,24: ברוך מבנים אשר, “the Jewish people will bless Asher thanking him for providing such abundant and high quality oil.”

והוא יתן מעדני מלך, “and he will provide the king with taxes in the form of oil.” It was this oil that was used to anoint Jewish kings from the tribe of Yedudah. [As this was not necessary after David had been crowned, and his dynasty was inherited automatically by his successors who did not need to be anointed, this editor does not understand this interpretation, as the quantity of oil required was minute and used only a single time. Ed.] According the Talmud in Menachot 86, and the commentary there by Rash’bam, the function of that oil was to act as a body hair remover and as a skin lotion.

אילה שלחה is symbolical of the valley of Gennesareth which ripens its fruits very quickly, just as a hind runs rapidly (Genesis Rabbah 99:12). אילה שלחה means A HIND LET LOOSE that it may run where it pleases.

NAPHTALI IS A HIND SENT FORTH. It was a custom among the rulers of countries to send hinds to one another, and this was the manner in which it was done: Hinds which were born in the territory of the king of the north country would be raised in the palaces of the king of the south country. They would attach a written message to its horns, and it would run speedily and return to its original habitat, and in this way the king of the north country would be apprised of the news. This is the meaning of the phrase, He giveth goodly words, meaning that he is a dispatched hind sent who bears good tidings.
This practice is known, and it is mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud, in Tractate Shevi’ith:²⁰⁶9:2. “They said,²⁰⁷In our Jerusalem Talmud the text reads: “The officers said to him.” The story told there is about Diocletian, the emperor who oppressed the people of a certain city with heavy taxes. When the people threatened to leave the place the officers said to Diocletian: “If they go they will return, for it is in the nature of people to return to their birthplace. And if you wish to prove it, etc.” ‘If they go they will return, and if you wish to prove it, bring deer and send them to a land far away, and in the end they will return.’ He did so. He brought deer and covered their horns with silver²⁰⁸So that they would be recognized upon their return. and sent them to Africa, and at the end of thirteen years they returned to their place.” That is, they freed them after thirteen years, and they returned at once. The analogy is that Naphtali is satisfied with favor, and full²⁰⁹Deuteronomy 33:23. with all good things, and from him tidings will come forth to all Israel that his land has produced fruits abundantly, even as our Rabbis have mentioned concerning the fruits of Genothar.²¹⁰Berachoth 44a. The fruits of Genessar (a district around the Sea of Kinnereth) were considered more nourishing than bread, so that if one eats them together with bread he recites the Benediction over the fruits, as they are the main food.

אילה שלוחה, his soldiers were as fleet-footed as gazelles. In Chronicles I 12,9 this is described as Naftali being כצבאים על ההרים למהר , “as speedy as the deer on the mountains.”

נפתלי אילה שלוחה, Yaakov prophesied regarding the extraordinary salvation which would accrue to Israel thanks to a single man from the tribe of Naftali, Barak, the commander of the forces who defeated Siserah at the river Kishon, putting to flight an army boasting 900 armoured vehicles. Seeing that he would be assisted by the prophetess Devorah, his being fleet-footed is not credited only to him, and the word describing this is in the feminine gender, ayalah, instead of ayal. Barak had refused to attack unless Devorah would be with him. This is also why Yaakov said שלוחה, again in the feminine mode, to allude to Devorah’s role in the battle. It sounds as if Devorah had been dispatched by G’d to hasten Barak’s coming to a decision, seeing he had been so hesitant to join battle with Siserah. Concerning the song of thanksgiving composed by Devorah after that battle (Judges chapter 5), Yaakov describes that song as אמרי שפר,”words of beautiful poetry.”

נפתלי אילה שלוחה, “Naftali’s territory will be as productive as a free-running doe. It was a custom among kings to send one another does as gifts, seeing that the does raised in the Northern kingdom would be looked after in the Royal Palace of the Kings in the south who would tie messages to their horns after which they would return to their habitat. [they were used as fast mail couriers. Ed.] The meaning of the words אמרי שפר, is that Yaakov wishes that they be bearers of good tidings. Yaakov hints that there would be ample reason to send good tidings from the territory of Naftali.

Due to them, Devorah and Barak sang... Rashi is answering the question: It is written אילה שלוחה, in the feminine form. Why then is it written הנותן, in the masculine form? Therefore Rashi explains, “Devorah and Barak sang...” [and due to Barak, הנותןis in the masculine form].

Wenn man ein Reh als Bote gebrauchen könnte, so erzielte man damit gewiss die schnellste Ausführung. Also: was man Naftali aufträgt, das wird rasch ausgeführt werden. Naftali geht nicht seine eigenen Wege, wirkt nur als Vote der andern, er ist nicht selbstschöpferisch; was aber andere zum Wohl der Gesamtheit beschlossen haben, das eignet er sich rasch an und führt es sicher aus. Dabei ist er zugleich נותן וגו׳. Es kann dies נותן nicht Attribut zu אילה sein. אילה ist kemin. שפר: schön, wovon auch שופר: das natürlich hohle Horn, ונטה את שפרורו ,שפרור Pavillon :(Jirm. 43, 10), ein rundes Gewölbe. Also שפר: nicht sowohl äußere sinnliche Schönheit, als vielmehr: harmonische Gestaltung der einzelnen Teile eines Gegenstandes, während הoי, verwandt mit יפח יפע strahlen, hauchen, die Schönheit nach dem Hauch und Reiz der Anmut bezeichnet, den sie auf den Beschauer übt. שפר ist demgemäß: Wölbung, Kreisbogen, die harmonische Bildung, wo sich das Ganze von einem leitenden Mittelpunkte aus gestaltet. Auch das verwandte ספר, zählen, ist das Zusammenbringen einer Vielheit unter eine Einheit, sowie das ebenfalls verwandte סור in סהר die Kreislinie ausdrückt. Einheit in der Mannigfaltigkeit ist aber der Begriff der Harmonie. Auf Reden angewandt ist also שפר die elegante schöne Gliederung, die schöne Form der Rede. Naftali ist weder für die That noch für die Wissenschaft selbstschöpferisch. Allein er weiß die Gedanken anderer sich sowohl für die That als für die Rede glücklich anzueignen, weiß sie rasch auszuführen und schön darzustellen. Ist unsere Auffassung nicht irrig, so ordnen sich Gad und Dan Juda, Ascher Sebulun, Naftali Jissachar ergänzend unter.

נפתלי אילה שלוחה, “Naftali (its territory) is (like) a free running doe;” its territory produces fruit that ripens easily and quickly, as if it had been chased and tries to escape the net it has fallen into.(B‘reshit Rabbah 99,12)

נפתלי אילה שלוחה, “Naftaly is like a free running doe,” Members of that tribe being fast long distance runners, used to be dispatched to inform the civilian population of whether a battle had been won [or lost, so that they would be prepared for what would follow. Ed.] This is the meaning of the words following: הנותן אמרי שפר, “bearer of good news.” Compare Judges 5,18 ונפתלי על מאומי שדה, “Naftaly running swiftly across the open heights.”There is an opinion according to which the word: אילה does not refer to a doe, but means: “the plain,” as in Genesis 14 6; yet another opinion relates the word to אילן as in אילי הצדק in Isaiah 61,3: “oaks of righteousness.”

הנותן אמרי שפר Understand this as the Targum does: They (the people of Naphtali) will give thanks to and will praise God for them (for the fruits). Another explanation of the verse is: He prophesied about the war with Sisera, with regard to which Scripture says, (Judges 4:6) “and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naphtali etc.” — and they marched thither most rapidly. There, too, is the expression שלח used: (v.15) “into the valley they rushed (שלח) at his feet”.

הנותן אמרי שפר. When they would return from battle, they would be the bearers of happy tidings, being the first to announce the victory won by the Jewish armies. The word שפר, is a derivative of שופר, the ram’s horn; they would announce the good news by means of the appropriate blasts of the shofar. We have some proof of this in Judges 5,18 where Devorah in her victory song speaks of זבלון עם חרף נפשו למות, ונפתלי על מרומי שדה, “Zevulun is a people that mocked at death, and Naftali-on the open heights.” [they were the only two tribes that heeded Barak’s and Devorah’s call to do battle against Siserah, the commander of the Canaanite armies of King Yavin whose army was equipped with 900 armoured vehicles. Ed.]

Onkelos translates: “His lot will fall”... Rashi is saying that this is how Onkelos actually translates this verse. According to Onkelos, הנותן אמרי שפר means that Naftali will give thanks with beautiful words for his lot. But when Rashi wrote above, “‘He delivers pleasant sayings,’ as Onkelos translates it,” it means as follows: The first explanation holds that אילה שלוחה refers to the fruits of Ginosar, according to which אמרי שפר means as Onkelos said. [I.e., he will give thanks with beautiful words. But this will be interpreted differently:] the people of Naftali will [give thanks by] reciting the appropriate blessing over the fruits.

הנותן אמרי שפר, “he conveyed pleasant messages.” It thanked the Lord for having saved it from death after being hunted. Yaakov now refers to him in the masculine mode, perhaps because the doe is usually referred to in the masculine mode in other languages. Another interpretation: the subject here is Naftali himself, and refers to Naftali giving thanks to his Creator for having been given the chance to escape the net. Still another interpretation: the territory of Naftali can be compared to that of a doe after it had been skinned, its skin not having stuck to its flesh so that it could be put to good use while still intact. (Compare Leviticus 1,6) The word שלוחה, may refer what the Talmud describes as the reason why the land of Israel is known as ארץ צבי, “the land of the antelope,” namely produces fruit in such large quantities that it cannot be hidden. (Talmud tractate Ketuvot folio 112, i.e. “its flesh cannot be hidden completely once its skin had been flayed). The word שלוחה may be understood as in Song of Songs 4,14, “your arid areas”) i.e. even the relatively arid areas in its territory are extremely fruitful. The word אמרי in this verse may be understood as in Isaiah 17,6: שנים, שלושה גרגרים בראש אמיר , “two even three berries on the topmost branch.”

The word שלוחה is best rendered as נטועה, “planted.” An example of this use of the word is found in Isaiah 16,8: שלוחותיה נטשו עברו ים, “their shoots spread and crossed the sea.”

הנתן אמרי שפר HE GIVETH SAYINGS OF PLEASANTNESS — Due to them (to the ten thousand men of Naphtali) Deborah and Barak sang the song of praise (Judges ch. 5). Our Teachers explained the verse as an allusion to what happened on the day when Jacob was buried, when Esau claimed the cave of Machpelah. They were compelled to delay the burial whilst Naphtali ran rapidly back to Egypt and brought the title-deed of the cave etc. as is related in Treatise Sotah 13a. The words in the Targum יתרמי עדביה mean “his lot shall fall”, so that the second half of the verse would mean according to the Targum, “he will give thanks for his lot with pleasing words and with praise”.

אמרי שפר, “words of praise.” This is an allusion to branches, ענפים, as in שנים, שלושה גרגרים בראש אמיר, “two or three berries on the topmost branch.” (Isaiah 17,6). The meaning of the verse then is: “the highest plains of his land will be planted with branches that bear beautiful fruit.”

בן פרת means a graceful son. It is an expression used in Aramaic: אפרין נמטיה “Let us treat gracefully (literally, let us make a triumphal procession for) R. Simeon”, and may be found at the end of Bava Metzia 119a.

‘BEIN PORATH YOSEPH.’ A graceful son. It is an expression used in Aramaic: “Apiryon namtai (Let us gracefully treat) Rabbi Shimon.”²¹¹Baba Metzia 119a. Bein porath alei ayin. His gracefulness attracts the eye that sees him. This is the language of Rashi.
Now it is farfetched to base the interpretation of the word porath upon this Aramaic expression, for such expressions in the Talmud — be they Greek, Persian, or other languages — have no kinship with the Sacred Language. Moreover, each example found of this word is only an expression of blessing and praise, not grace, and the letter nun [in the word apiryon] is a root letter.²¹²Whereas the Hebrew porath has no nun. How then can Rashi explain the word porath as being similar to apiryon in which the nun is a root letter? It is so mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah:²¹³60:13. “And they blessed Rebekah.²¹⁴Above, 24:60. They were depressed and mean. They were m’pharnin (blessing) only with their mouth.”
It appears to me that the meaning of porath is as in the expression, “Purna belongs to the orphans,”²¹⁵Kethuboth 54a. where purna means the improvement in the value [of the orphans’ portion of the dowry which] belongs to the orphans. The Rabbis further called the kethubah (the written marriage-contract) purna, saying, “A woman collects the purna from them,”²¹⁶Ibid., 67a. meaning the kethubah which constitutes the benefit from her father’s house. They similarly said that “mohar²¹⁷Exodus 22:16. (dowry) means pranun.”²¹⁸It is so rendered there in Targum Jonathan.
But bein porath in the present verse is to be interpreted either as Onkelos has it as being an expression of fruitfulness and abundance, or as the grammarians²¹⁹Rabbi Yonah and Rabbi Yehudah, mentioned by R’dak in his Book of Roots, under the root banah. — who derived the word porath from the phrase, And its branches (‘p’orothav’) became long²²⁰Ezekiel 31:5. — would have it. They further said that the word bein is similar in meaning to “a plant” or “branch”, and they bring a similar verse as proof: And of the stock which Thy right hand hath planted, and the branch (‘bein’) that Thou madest strong for Thyself.²²¹Psalms 80:16. Thus the purport of the verse is as if Jacob had said: “Joseph is a planting containing many branches.”
In my opinion, the word bein is to be understood in its ordinary sense, namely, “son,” with the verse stating that Joseph is a son who is similar to a many branched tree, planted beside a spring whose waters fail not, and whose branches in turn gave forth offspring, [i.e., other boughs]. [On account of their heaviness] these tread upon the sky-high walls.²²²For lacking such support they would break under the weight of their abundant fruit. He called the boughs which come forth from the branches as banoth (daughters), for they are “the daughters” of the great branches. This is stylistic elegance for the expression, bein porath. The word bein, accordingly, is not in the conjunctive mode to the word porath, but instead is like: The Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon;²²³Ezekiel 31:3. Naphtali is a hind sent forth;²²⁴Above, Verse 21. Benjamin is a wolf.²²⁵Further, Verse 27. It is for this reason that it is vowelled with a tzeirei — [bein] — for if its interpretation were “a plant of boughs,”²²⁶As “the grammarians,” whose interpretation was discussed previously, would have it. See text above. According to their interpretation, since the two words bein porath are in the constructive mode (“a plant of…”), the word should have been ben and not bein, as is the rule. the word bein should have been vowelled with a segol, [thus rendering it ben rather than bein]. The reason he uses the term bein (son) is to show affection, just as: From the prey, my son, thou art gone up.²²⁷Above, Verse 9.
In general it is proper to interpret Joseph’s blessing as alluding to the two tribes which came from him, and this could be based upon the words porath (branches) and banoth (boughs). However, since he mentioned Levi, and the tribes of Israel number only twelve, he did not treat them as two separate tribes in his blessing, but he does allude to them. Moses our teacher, likewise, in his blessing, compared Joseph to the bullock and the wild-ox, and mentioned “the horns”²²⁸Deuteronomy 33:17. in connection with him as each one constitutes a distinct body from which two horns branch out. There, however, because Moses our teacher did not mention Simeon by name, he explicitly said, And they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Menasheh.²²⁸Deuteronomy 33:17.

בן פורת יוסף בן פורת עלי עין, the first half of this verse is not to be understood until we have read the second half. The only reason it is written in this manner is in order to help us identify immediately who is the subject in our verse. We have a similar verse in Exodus 15,6 where in the first half of the verse G’d’s attribute of employing His right hand is extolled before we are tolled how this is manifest, i.e. by the manner in which He destroyed the enemy. A very familiar similar construction occurs in Psalms 93,3 a psalm we recite each Friday night, when the psalmist speaks of נשאו נהרות ה' נשאו נהרות קולם, and only afterwards we are told that the rivers raise their voices in response toכי הנה אויביך ה', כי הנה אויביך יאבדו. The verse means: ”The river raise ther “voices” (sounds), O Lord, the oceans sound their thunder and their pounding.” All of this is in response to verse 10 in the previous psalm where G’d’s enemies are described as perishing.” In fact the psalmist in 94,3 asks almost despairingly: “how long are the wicked going to be allowed to carry on successfully before the Just can rejoice when they observe their downfall?” Here too, the words בן פורת יוסף describe an attribute, referring to the tall and handsome person Joseph, before telling us that all the maidens of Egypt were craning their necks to catch a glimpse of him, each one trying to admire his features, trying to do so from a suitable vantage point. He, whose exterior had appealed to the wife of Potiphar at the time, now became a household word in Egypt so that all the women allowed out of their houses tried to catch a glimpse of him. [I paraphrased the author’s words in this paragraph. Ed.] Joseph’s handsome appearance had already inflamed the libido of Potiphar’s wife,

בן פורת יוסף, Joseph is considered the product of a proliferating grapevine. It spreads its protective shade for the benefit of many. In Psalms 80,11 we are told of this function of the grapevine in the words כסו הרים צלה, “the mountains were covered by its shade.” The simile means that Yaakov and his family lived under the protective cover of Joseph, i.e. in his shade.

בן פורת יוסף, בן פורת עלי עין, "Joseph is a fruiful son, fruitful to the eye, etc." The reason Jacob repeated the word פורת, fruitful, may have to do with Joseph's fertility being twofold We have already explained (Sotah 36) that Joseph had originally been intended to father twelve tribes; the second reason was that he resisted the temptation to sleep with Potiphar's wife, i.e. עלי עין, he overcame the temptation to follow his eyes, proved superior to visual allure.

בן פרת יוסף בן פרת עלי עין, the branch סעיף, is referred to as בן, as it is an offshoot of the tree. Seeing that it is called בן in the masculine mode, he word פרת, the adjective modifying it, ought to be in the masculine mode also, but it is not. Suddenly, the Torah changes grammar in mid-stream and speaks of בנות צעדה עלי עין instead of בנים צעדו עלי עין, “his branches spilling (running) over the wall.” The reason is that the word סעיף also occurs as a feminine noun, as in Ezekiel 31,6 בסעפתיו קננו, “in its boughs they made their nest.” Such nouns in a dual role are not that rare, as for instance we find the חמור, male donkey, treated as if it were an אתון, the she-ass in Samuel II 19,27 אחבשה לי החמור וארכב עליה, “I will saddle my donkey and ride on her.” The donkey is both a beast, בהמה, a feminine noun, and a male of its species. We are therefore free to use either gender when referring to it. A similar example is found in Exodus 22,25 where the Torah describes the word שלמה, dress, as masculine although generally we always use it as feminine. The fact is that the specific garment “dress, שלמה,” is at the same time a garment, בגד, a noun describing all garments, a masculine noun. While a bough, פארה, is indeed a feminine noun, referring to a specific type of branch, the word סעיף includes many types of branches and is a masculine noun. There are quite a few examples of this grammatical phenomenon. As to the addition of the letter ת in פרת, it substitutes for the letter ה as it does on many occasions. Look at Deuteronomy 31,29 for instance, where we have וקראת instead of וקראה.

בן פורת יוסף, “Joseph is a charming son;” all other sons of Yaakov are named before any description of their virtues or otherwise is mentioned. Here we find at least one of Joseph’s attributes preceding the mention of his name. The reason why Joseph was not first mentioned by name was that he was as if still a son living at home, so that he did not need any introduction.

Many daughters climbed — each one... Rashi is answering the question: [Why does it say] בנות, implying there were many, and also say צעדה, implying there was but one? Thus Rashi explains, “Many daughters climbed — each one...”

בן פרת kann nicht heißen: ein blühendes Reis, פרת kann überhaupt hier nicht von פרה sein, wo dann das ת Feminalbezeichnung wäre, da כן entschieden mascul. ist. צעדה kann nicht Prädikat von בנות sein; denn jenes ist Singular und dieses Plural. Der Wortlaut des Textes dürfte vielmehr die folgende Auffassung rechtfertigen. Die Wurzel פרת findet sich rabbinisch geradezu als trennen, sondern z. B. die ja alle eine Trennung ,ברת ,ברד ,פרט ,פרד und ist verwandt mit ,אוכלא דאפרת und Sonderung bedeuten. Dazu kommt das Wort אפרתי, das keineswegs die Abstammung aus Efrajim bezeichnet, so דוד בן איש אפרתי (Sam. I. 16, 12) vielmehr: ,hoffähig, durch Sitte geadelt, somit überhaupt: vornehm ,מוכתר בנימוס ,פלטיאני adlig bedeutet, wie es ריב"ל und ׳ר׳ יהודה ב׳ נחמי erläutern (ילקוט Sam. I. 1, 77).20 Es ist dies ganz der Grundbedeutung: sondern gemäß, "durch Charakter oder Stellung ausgezeichnet, von der gewöhnlichen Welt gesondert". Vielleicht ist selbst der Titel :wäre בן פרת wäre somit adjektivische Pualform, und פ֗רָת .davon gebildet אפרתמים ein edler, für sich stehender, edel hervorragender, durch seine Charaktereigentümlichkeit edel von seinen Brüdern gesonderter Sohn, בן פרת עלי עין, und zwar nicht erst jetzt als Minister durch seine äußere Stellung geadelt, schon als בן, er war schon ein durch Gesinnungs- und Geistesadel geadelter Mensch, als er noch nicht in der Fremde, als er noch als Sohn an dem "heimischen Quell" stand. Dieser Quell, an welchem und aus welchem Josef den Adel der Gesinnung sog, war wohl kein anderer, als seine Mutter Rahel, deren Gedächtnis, wie wir oben gesehen, ja Jakob in seinen letzten Tagen besonders erfüllte: aus der Mutter hat er diesen Adel, schon als Kind und Knabe, gewonnen. בנות, "Töchter!" — oder: Frauen! wie Leas Wort: אשרוני בנות: "auch sie, die der Quell Josefs gewesen, auch sie war über die Mauer geschritten", oder: "auch sie schritt über die Mauer" d. h. auch sie war kein gewöhnliches Weib.

בן פורת יוסף, “the land allocated to the tribe of Joseph is fruitful as a tree planted near a well of water.”

בן פורת יוסף, also a variant of the word ענפים, “branches.” Joseph is viewed as the son whose branches grow profusely as if planted along abundant waters.

בן פרת עלי עין means his gracefulness attacks the eye that looks at him.

The word פורת derivative of פוריה, fruitful, implies the proximity of a spring, a well of water. בנות, branches. The grapevine brings forth many branches.

בן פרת עלי עין, its leaves will not wilt and it will prove to be very fruitful as per Psalms 1,3 והיה כעץ שמול על פלגי מים, “he will be as a tree planted by springs of water, etc.” The reason for this apparent duplication is that Joseph would be split into two of the twelve tribes, hence the blessing had to be twofold.

בן פורת, Rash’bam comments that we find a similar construction to that in our verse in Psalms 93,3 נשאו נהרות ה' נשאו נהרות קולם , the rivers raise their voice, etc,” and only afterwards are we told in response to what these rivers raised their voice, i.e. in response to כי הנה אוביך ה', etc, “here G’d’s enemies are described as perishing.” A similar construction is found in Moses’ song after the splitting of the sea of reeds, i.e. ימינך ה' בכח ימינך ה' תרעץ אויב, instead of ה' ימינך תרעץ אויב, “Lord You smash the enemy with Your right hand.” (Exodus 15,6) The expression בן פורת parallels the expression in Ezekiel 19,10 פוריה וענפה, where it describes being fruitful. Some commentators view the word פורת as related to פארות as in ותעש פארות, in Ezekiel 17,6 where it means “it brought forth branches.” (Additional verses are quoted to show that this is not so far-fetched).

The letter ת is added for stylistic purposes. I.e., it is not the ת of the feminine form, as it is speaking of a masculine subject.

Jacob continued with בנות צעדה. According to Tanchuma the wife of Potiphar called all the wives of the Egyptian elite and had Joseph perform personal valet services for them. Being surrounded by all these ladies was equivalent to this אצעדה, bracelet, Jacob describes here. עלי שור, the point of the exercise was to ogle Joseph. The Torah testifies that in spite of all this Joseph refrained from looking at all these provocative women. Seeing that Joseph did not make improper use of his eyesight he and his descendants in turn were rewarded by remaining immune to the evil eye.

שור. Mauer, von שור: schauen, was andere nicht schauen: geistiges in die Ferne schauen, daher auch שיר, das schauende Wort, der begeisterte Gesang, insbesondere das Schauen der unsichtbaren Waltung Gottes in den konkreten Erscheinungen. Daher שור: Mauer, die das sieht, was durch sie den Blicken anderer entzogen ist, die den häuslichen Kreis einschließt und abschließt. Dass dies kein spitzfindiges Spiel ist, beweist der andere Name für Mauer: חמא ;חומה ist chald. sehen.

בנות צעדה עלי שור, (normal translation) “girls stepped atop the wall.” Our author prefers to understand the word בנות here as being derived from the root בנה, “to build,” i.e. the land of Joseph is so fruitful that it extends right up to the built up areas of the cities. (Compare Joshua15,45 עקרון, ובנותיה וחצריה, “Ekron with its dependencies and villages.”) [Yaakov used such flowery metaphors that it is easy to understand that our sages had difficulty in being certain of their meanings. Ed.] (Attributed to a Rabbi R. David.)

עלי עין, “by a fountain; it is the custom of poetry in the Holy Tongue to engage in such (apparent) repetitions of similar sounding words. Examples are Psalms 93,3 נשאו נהרות ה', נשאו נהרות קולם, “the oceans sound, o Lord; the oceans; sound their thunder.” Or, Judges 5,3: אנכי לה', אנכי 1“ ;אשירה will sing; I will sing to the Lord;” (Victory hymn by Devorah). There are many more such examples in the Bible.

בנות צעדה עלי שור DAUGHTERS TREAD ON THE WALL — The daughters of Egypt used to climb up to gaze at his beauty בנות is plural — many daughters, whilst צעדה is singular, but the words should be translated thus: many daughters climbed, each of them to any place from which she could best obtain a glimpse of him.

צעדה עלי שור, describing how these branches even grow beyond the wall surrounding the orchard. Alternatively, what is meant is that the branches extend beyond the fence surrounding the well. Prior to its prolific growth it could not be seen from the far side of the wall. People living on that side of the wall did not even have an idea that something was growing there. Once the branches had topped the wall, its presence suddenly became noticeable and provoked reactions on the other side. The other side of the parable, are, of course, Yaakov on the one hand, and Joseph and his sons, who had developed in Egypt without their father even being aware that they were alive. Suddenly, what had been hidden from him for 22 years had become revealed. This is what he meant when he said on meeting him: ראה פניך לא פללתי והנה הראה אותי אלוקים גם את זרעך, I did not even expect ever to see your face again, and now G’d has shown me not only you but also your offspring. (48,11)

בנות צעדה עלי שור, these two branches (from the בן above) would grow and branch out so much until they would spillover the protective wall around the orchard, just as grapevines are in the habit of doing when they require trellises to support them..

עלי עין, “when it is planted near a spring of water.”

פרת meaning, being fruitful and multiplying... Rashi is answering the question: How did Onkelos know that it should be translated so? Thus Rashi explains, “פרת meaning, being fruitful and multiplying.”

Das Walten der Frauen ist den Blicken entzogen, überschreitet gewöhnlich nicht die Grenzen des heimischen Kreises, — כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה ,אשתך וגוי בירכתי ביתך — eine ungewöhnliche Frau zieht, ohne dass sie es will, die Blicke der Welt auf sich, oder strebt mit ihrem Geist über den beschränkten Kreis der gewöhnlichen Häuslichkeit hinüber.

בנות, the branches growing out of the trunks of trees. Yaakov is saying that they grow beyond the highest points of the walls surrounding them, i.e. צעדה עי שור, “girls stepped up to the wall” (to get a glimpse of him).

עלי שור means for the purpose of looking at him, similar to (Numbers 24:17) I behold him (אשורנו) but not nigh”. There are many Midrashic explanations but this inclines nearest to the literal sense of the verse פרת — The ת in this word is added for elegance of style (i.e. it is not a sign of the feminine), as the ת in דברת which is instead of דבר in (Ecclesiastes 3:18) “It is because of (על דברת) the sons of men”.

בנות צעדה עלי שור, “girls stepped atop the wall.” Here Yaakov compares the leaves sprouting forth from the afore-mentioned branches to the daughters who are offspring of mature women, describing them as the rich fruit of these branches, all having deep roots from which to draw nourishment. They require walls to support them and to ensure them against being trampled and broken, seeing they are so heavy with fruit; hence the mention of עלי שור, “along the wall.” Nachmanides writes that Yaakov mentioned daughters, thereby alluding indirectly to the two tribes Joseph would become. He could not do so directly, seeing that there could not be more than twelve tribes altogether, and he had already blessed Levi. Moses, when he blessed the Israelites at the end of his life, did something similar when instead בנות he employed the simile of שור, ox, and the simile of קרנים, horns, horns, as being projections emanating from the same body, but suggesting through this smile that each is a body in its own right. Seeing that Moses did not extend a blessing to the tribe of Shimon at all, he could name Ephrayim and Menashe separately, without upsetting the total number of twelve tribes. He therefore referred to the “tens of thousands of Ephrayim, and the thousands of Menashe,” describing how fruitful Joseph would become.

צעדה, plural form of the feminine mode of the verb צעדו in the parallel masculine version. Another example of a similar construction can be found in Isaiah 59,12: וחטאתינו ענתה בנו, “and our sins testify against us;” or in Exodus 17,12: ויהי ידיו אמונה, “His hands remained steady.” A third such example would be in Exodus 9,31: והפשתה והשעורה נוכתה, “but the flax and the barley had been struck” (by the hail.) The parable here deals with Joseph increasing more so than his brothers, seeing that both his sons became recognised as fully fledged tribes. The sons of Joseph are quoted as saying to Joshua: “And I have become a numerous people as the Lord has blessed me that much” (Joshua 17,14.)

שור is an infinitive the same as לשור, to look.

In accordance with this Midrash the words בנות צעדה עלי שור mean they climbed up to get a good view of you when you went forth in the procession as Viceroy over Egypt. They (the Rabbis) gave a further interpretation of it, taking עלי עין as עוּלֵי עין ,“raised above the eye”, in the sense that the Evil Eye would have no effect on his children (Berakhot 20a). So, too, when he blessed Manasseh and Ephraim he blessed them, praying that they should become as fishes on which the Evil Eye has no effect.

עלי שור consequently means in order to look (i.e. עלי, a poetical form of על, means “for the purpose of”). The translation of Onkelos of בנות צעדה עלי שור is: two tribes will come out of his sons etc., and according to this Scripture writes בנות (though one would expect בנים) with reference to the women of Manasseh — the daughters of Zelophehad — who received a portion of land on both sides of the Jordan (Midrash Tanchuma, Pinchas 9). And in accordance with this paraphrase the Targum translated the preceding words בן פרת by ברי דיסגי יוסף, Joseph is a son who shall increase and become, two tribes connecting פרת with the expression [פריה [ורביה “fruitfulness and increase”. There are Midrashim (Genesis Rabbah 78:9) that fit in with the text: When Esau came to meet Jacob all the other matriarchs walked in front of their children to prostrate themselves but of Rachel it states (33:7) “[and afterwards] came Joseph near and Rachel (i.e. Joseph before Rachel) and they bowed down”. Joseph said, “This wicked man has a haughty look (is bold and impudent) he may set his fancy upon my mother”. He therefore stepped in front of her, drawing himself up to his full height, in order to hide her from Esau’s eyes. It was in reference to this that his father when blessing him called him a בן פורת, a son who grew in size: You, Joseph, stretched yourself to a great height to protect your mother against Esau’s glance, therefore you deserved to become great. (This has reference to the distinguished position he attained in Egypt.).

וימררהו ורבו AND THEY EMBITTERED HIM — His brothers dealt bitterly with him; Potiphar and his wife dealt bitterly with him, putting him into the dungeon. וימררהו is the same metaphor as וימררו 'וגו in (Exodus 1:14) “They made their lives bitter (וימררו )” (Genesis Rabbah 98:19).

וימררוהו ורבו, they threw him into jail,

49,23. וישטמוהו בעלי חצים, The expression בעלי חצים means: “the slanderers.” The word חץ, usually meaning “arrow,” is used as a simile for slander in Jeremiah 9,7חץ שחוט לשונם, “their tongues are like a sharp arrow.” One of these slanderers was the chief of the cup bearers when he referred to Joseph as נער עברי עבד, three words which are each a derogatory term. (41,12). Also some of Pharaoh’s servants are included in the list of those who slandered Joseph. They are reported as commenting with disdain that “Pharaoh has appointed a slave who had been sold for 20 pieces of silver as our ruler.” (Sotah 36).

וימררהו ורבו וישטמהו בעלי חצים. "They made life bitter for him, they quarrelled, and arrow-tongued men hated him." This is a reference to the time when the brothers first planned to kill Joseph (37,20). It is also possible that Jacob describes what we find in the Sefer Hayashar that the brothers wounded Joseph in many parts of his body before they threw him into the pit. The torture they subjected him to is described by וימררהו. Afterwards, when the brothers took counsel and discussed throwing him into the pit and then to sell him as a slave, they had differences of opinions, i.e. ורבו, they quarrelled.

וימררו ורובו, if Yaakov spoke of the past in this verse we must understand his remarks as pertaining to Potiphar and his wife, as well as to the members of his household, but not to Joseph’s brothers. It is quite impossible to conceive of our patriarch Yaakov speaking of the brothers’ shame at the same as he was blessing them. Even though Yaakov had spoken of Reuven’s having disgraced himself, Yaakov had to do this in order to justify why he had deprived him of the privileges of the birthright. The same reasoning applies to his having recalled Shimon and Levi’s acts of violence, for which Yaakov made appropriate precautions for the future by dividing them up so that they could not pose a threat again.

וימררוהו ורובו, “they made life bitter for him and became his adversaries.” Compare Job 16,13 יסבו עליו רביו, “his adversaries ganged up on him with their arrows.” Yaakov employs the brothers’ conduct versus Joseph as similar to that described in the verse we quoted from Job, so that the simile of בעלי חצים, and ותשב באיתן קשתו, that Joseph when he had the opportunity to exact retribution from his brothers when he had many arrows at his disposal, refrained from doing so by keeping his arrows safely tucked in his quiver and his bow inactive, is most appropriate.

His brothers made him bitter. [Rashi knows it means his brothers] because at the end of the verse it is written בעלי חצים, similar to ותהי המחצה (Bamidbar 31:36), referring to those who are fit to share the inheritance with him, [as Rashi explains].

(23-24) וימררוהו, wie וימררו את חייהם (zw. B. M. 1, 14). רבו eine grammatisch schwierige Form. Eine Ableitung von רבה in der Bedeutung von Bogenschützen ist der Form nach nicht zulässig, und ja auch die Bedeutung Schütze in רבה קַשָת keineswegs begründet, da קַשָת selbst Schütze heißt, und רבה קשת vielmehr ein Heranbilden von Schützen bedeuten dürfte. Von רבב, vermehren, wäre es eine Imperativform, die hier ganz ungehörig wäre, und passt auch der Begriff Vermehren nicht in den Zusammenhang. Nach Raschi wäre es als Pualform von רוב, streiten, aufzufassen, wie רומו von רום, und hieße es dann, da רוב, streiten, intransitiv ist: sie haben sich in den Hader hineingelebt. Es war ihnen von außen keine gerechte Veranlassung gegeben, sie haben sich vielmehr selbst durch irrige Voraussetzungen über Josefs Absichten und Pläne in eine solche Feindseligkeit gegen ihn hineingebracht. שטם, verwandt mit סתם, zustopfen, sperren, daher שטם: einen heimlichen Groll, einen tiefversteckten Hass hegen, wie נטר: bewahren und Groll nachtragen. Es ist jedoch von נטר — und daher auch von שטם — nicht das erlittene Unrecht das Objekt, sondern die beleidigende Person, לא תטור את בני עמיך. Ist ja auch מטרה, von נטר, das Ziel, das Augenmerk, der ferne Zielpunkt, nach dem man seine Pfeile schießt. לא תטור את heißt daher, du sollst nicht im Stillen auf deinen Nächsten zielen, ihn nicht still im Herzen mit herumtragen, um ihn gelegentlich mit dem Pfeil der Rache zu treffen. שטם ist der noch verstecktere Hass. בעלי חצים wird gewöhnlich für Umschreibung von Schützen genommen, und werden die Brüder also genannt, weil sie ihn mit den Pfeilen ihres Verrates getroffen hatten. Wir möchten es anders verstehen. Zu diesen Pfeilen bekommen wir sofort einen Bogen: ותשב באיתן קשתו — und der befindet sich in Josefs Hand. Wir finden auch sonst nirgends בעל also mit einer Waffe verbunden, etwa בעל חרב. usw., dass es den mit der Waffe Gerüsteten bedeuten würde. Vielmehr wären בעלי חצים diejenigen, die die Pfeile haben, zu welchen der Bogen sich in der Hand Josefs befindet. Josef hat den Bogen, und aus ihren Händen selbst hätte er die Pfeile erhalten, die er, wenn er es gewollt, auf sie losgedrückt hätte. —

וימררוהו ורבו, “they embittered him and they quarreled. This was the result of the arrow tongued brothers hating him already.

ורבו means his brothers became his adversaries (literally, men of strife). This verb is not a Kal form meaning they strove (with him) for were it so it should have been punctuated וְרָבוּ (from the root ריב), as in (Numbers 20:13) “These are the waters of Meribah, where the children of Israel strove (רָבוּ)”. And even if its meaning were “shooting arrows” (from the root רבה) it would have been punctuated in exactly the same way. It really has a passive force like (Jeremiah 2:12) שֹׁׁמּוּ שמים “Be astonished, O ye heavens” which is as much as הושמו; and likewise (Job 24:24) “They are exalted (רֹמּוּ) for a little while” which has the same meaning as הורמו except that הורמו and הושמו mean they are made to be exalted and astonished by others, whilst שמו and רמו and רבו denote that the actions arise out of the persons themselves: they make themselves to be astonished, they are exalted of their own accord, רבו means they became men of strife. A similar form is (Isaiah 23:2) “Be still (דֹּמּוּ) ye inhabitants of the isle” where דמו has the same meaning as the Nipal of נִדְמוּ ,דום. In this sense does Onkelos also translate it: ונקמהו “and they avenged themselves on him”.

ורובו, and they harassed him. The thought is repeated to lend it emphasis, as is the reference to the בעלי חצים, his enemies. We find the expression רביו and חציו used in Job 16,13 as almost interchangeable. The dagesh in the letter צ of the word חצים confirms that the whole word is used for emphasis, reinforcing the thought already expressed in the word ורבו which also has such a dagesh. If the word ורבו were derived from the root מריבה, quarrel, it would not have a dagesh¸ just as קמו from קום, or שבו from שוב do not have a dagesh. The word רב in the sense in which it is used here also occurs in Judges 11,25 as emphasised by means of repetition, i.e. הרב רב, when Yiphtach refers to the extreme hostility to the Jewish people displayed by the Moabites. There was no need for the dagesh on that occasion as the word has already been repeated to show the emphasis Yiphtach had in mind. The Torah, i.e. Yaakov, calls the evil fabrication that the wife of Potiphar used to indict Joseph חצים, arrows, a word used in the same sense by Jeremiah 9,7 when he says (of his own people, alas) חץ שחוט לשונם, מרמה דבר, בפיו שלום את רעהו ידבר וגו': “Their tongue is a sharpened arrow, they use their mouths to deceive; one speaks of his fellow peacefully, while laying an ambush for him, etc.”

וימררוהו, they embittered his life throwing him into jail for at least two years, as we know from Psalms 105,18 ענו בכבל רגלו ברזל באה נפשו, “his feet were subjected to fetters, an iron collar was put on his neck.”

Potiphar and his wife made him bitter... [Rashi knows] that it cannot refer to his brothers alone. For then it should say, “They quarreled with him and made him bitter” — as it cannot be that they first embittered his life and then became his antagonists. Perforce, it refers also to Potiphar and his wife.

The hatred of the "arrow tongued men" are a reference to the wife of Potiphar and her companions all of whom wanted to sleep with Joseph, i.e. they demanded "his arrows." [Our sages often refer to ejaculation of semen as equivalent to the shooting of an arrow. Ed.]

Allein: איתן .ותשב באיתן קשתו: dasjenige, was sich aus alter Zeit als kräftig bewährt hat, worauf die Gegenwart ruht. Verwandt ist אדן, Säulenfuß, der Träger, worauf etwas ruht. Daher auch אתון, die Eselin, das Tier, das vorzüglich zum Reiten gebraucht wurde, Tragetier, Reittier, während חמור, von חומר, die Last, mehr als Lasttier diente. Also: da blieb doch in seiner alten festen Ruhe, unerschütterlich, sein Bogen, er nahm nicht den Bogen von der Schulter, sie mit den von ihnen selbst gereichten Pfeilen zu verderben, selbst nicht in der Zeit, wo schon

בעלי חצים THE ARCHERS (literally, men who have arrows) — they were so called because their tongues were as arrows (Genesis Rabbah 98:19) (cf. Psalms 120:4). Onkelos translates it (חצים) by פלגותא taking it to be of the same root as המחצה in (Numbers 31:36) “And the half (המחצה) was” thus he takes בעלי חצים to mean “those who were destined to share with him the inheritance”.

ורבו, from the root רבב, similar to the relationship between סבו and סבב, or רוני from רנן (compare Isaiah 12,6) צהלי ורוני יושבת ציון, “Oh shout for joy you who dwell in Zion.” The word רוני is a repetition of the thought expressed in the word צהלי, designed to reinforce that thought.

ורבו, they shot arrows at him. The root of the verb רבו is of the type in which two root letters appear רבב repeated. Yaakov repeats the thought expressed by the word וימררוהו, also a root with a double consonant. The word רומו in Job 24,24 is a parallel construction to our word here.

On the other hand, the word וימררהו may be an allusion to Satan, i.e. the evil urge, who seduces one to commit a sin. This may have been the cause of ויפזו זרעי ידיו, "that his virility was channelled through his hands." The power of the evil urge is illustrated by a story involving the pious Rabbi Amram in Kidushin 81. That story ends with the evil urge escaping from the body of Rabbi Amram in a fiery column after Rabbi Amram had almost succumbed.

פזז .ויפוו זרועי ידיו: einerseits מפַנֵן ומכרכר (Sam. II. 6, 16) eine außerordentliche Kraftäußerung, andererseits: כלי פז ,עטרת פז, sehr wertvolles Gold; die Verwandtschaft dieser Bedeutungen ist dunkel.

וישטמהו בעלי חצים, they hated him for no cause, slandering him to his employer. Yaakov summarises all these wicked words with the word חצים, arrows. We find the word חץ used in the same sense in Psalms 120,4 חצי גבור שנונים עם גחלי רתמים, “a warrior’s sharp arrows with hot coals, etc.” [the previous verse speaks of the deceitful tongue, so that this verse is a simile for such deceitful tongues. Ed.]

The forces of the קליפה may be termed מרה, bitter. This is perhaps what the Torah wanted to allude to when it described Joseph's life as having been made bitter. When we follow this approach the word ורבו describes the constantly increasing pressure of the evil urge, and the reference to the hatred expressed by the owners of the arrows are to the forces urging man to sin. Their promise to reward him with the pleasures of the flesh are expressions of their hatred for him. They hate every manifestation of holiness. In spite of all these temptations Joseph remained steadfast like a lion and did not "shoot his arrows."

זרוע יד: der Arm der Hand (זרה‎, זרע, streuen, werfen), das Organ, durch welches die Hand kräftig in Bewegung gesetzt wird, in welchem eigentlich die Stärke der Hand beruht; also: selbst nicht, als schon die Arme seiner Hände die höchste Kraft zu äußern im Stande, oder: schon fürstlich geschmückt waren, durch die allmächtige Gottesfügung etc.

When Jacob speaks about מידי אביר יעקב, this means that the same G'd who has proven Jacob's Mighty One also saved Joseph from succumbing.

Also: Sie hatten ihm das Bitterste bereitet, hatten sich gewaltsam in Feindseligkeit hineingelebt, hatten sich ihn versteckt zum Ziele ihres Verderben brütenden Hasses gesetzt, die Eigner der Pfeile, die ihm für seinen Bogen da lagen — sie hatten ihn selbst, um ihn zu verderben, nach Mizrajim verkauft, und dies von ihnen selbst bereitete Verhältnis hatte ihn zum Herrn ihres Geschickes gemacht und sie völlig in seine Hand gegeben. — Er aber nahm nicht den Bogen von der Schulter, die Brüder mit ihren eigenen Pfeilen zu verderben, selbst nicht, als er bereits durch Gottes Hand zu so fürstlicher Macht gelangt war — das ist sein Adel, der Gesinnungsadel, durch Geburt und mütterlichen Einfluss ihm eigen, der ihn zum פרת עלי עין gemacht, ihn von Geburt an so hoch über alle und alles hinaushob.

Jacob concludes: משם רעה אבן ישראל, a reference to Psalms 118,22 where we are told that "the stone that the builders rejected became the chief cornerstone." This appears to be an allusion to Joseph who had also been rejected at first by his brothers. Joseph's righteousness made him the chief cornerstone also known as the רעה אבן ישראל, the cornerstone who is Israel's shepherd Proverbs 10,25 that "the righteous is an enduring foundation" expresses the same idea.

Die göttliche Allmacht, die Josefs Geschick so wundervoll gestaltet, nennt Jakob אביר יעקב וגו׳. Er erkennt in Josefs Geschick die Wiederholung seines eigenen. Wie Jakob aus väterlichem Hause arm hinauswanderte und durch אביר יעקב zu dem reich gesegneten Familienleben gelangte, ganz so, und in noch erhöhtem Maße ergings Josef. "Dieselbe Schwungkraft, die mich aus der Armut auf der Haide zum gesegneten Familienvater gemacht, hat dich aus der Sklaverei, in die dich die eigenen Brüder verkauft, zur fürstlichen Macht erhoben", es ist dies derselbe Gott, "der von damals — von Bethel an — weidet, d. i. überwacht und weiterführt, den Stein, den Jakob in jener Nacht aufgestellt" — Von damals an waltet er und segnet das Unscheinbare, segnet nicht das Große, sondern das Kleine, zeigt seine Größe nicht an dem Verfolger, sondern an dem Verfolgten. —

ותשב באיתן קשתו means his power (i.e. his rule as viceroy) was strongly (באיתן) established.

BY THE HANDS OF THE MIGHTY ONE OF JACOB. This befell him from the Holy One, blessed be He, Who is the Mighty One of Jacob. And from there [from his position as viceroy], he became worthy to be the feeder of the foundation stone of Israel, that is, the source of the tribes of Israel. The word “even” (stone) has the same meaning here as the word “even” in the expression, the chief stone,²²⁹Zechariah 4:7. [where it means high position]. This is the language of Rashi. “From the G-d of thy father did this befall you, and He will help you. [And with the Almighty, i.e.,] and your heart was with the Holy One, blessed be He, when you did not hearken to the words of your mistress, and He will bless you.” This is also the language of Rashi.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the letter mem in the expression, mei’e-il avicha (‘from’ the G-d of thy father), is also to apply to the expression, ve’eith Sha-dai, [as if it read, umei’eith Sha-dai (and ‘from’ the Almighty)], and He will bless thee.…

ותשב באיתן קשתו, there is a certain heavy and strong bow called arbalatra which is seated on a strong wooden frame called purka, and which, if the archer pulls with all his might bringing his arms all the way back to his body, enables him to shoot the arrow over a longer distance. A weak individual cannot operate such a bow. We have to understand the verse as describing a scenario describing Egyptians shooting their arrows of hate at Joseph until he was imprisoned, bound hand and foot. Nonetheless, the same Joseph afterwards emerged and became king over his former tormentors. This was because his קשת, bow, was stronger than that of his adversaries. He proceeded to imprison his enemies, as we know from Psalms 105,22 לאסור שריו בנפשו “to imprison (discipline) those who had previously demonstrated their hostility against him.

ותשב באיתן קשתו. The reply to such accusations was given by Pharaoh himself when he challenged his servants with the words: “where else can we find such an individual endowed with the spirit of G’d?” (41,39) As a result, Joseph did not have to use his own ammunition. In other words, he could keep his arrows in his quiver, unused.

ותשב באיתן קשתו, the bow from which they aimed their arrows at him broke, whereas the supposed victim, Joseph, remained unhurt, not only that, but advanced to ever higher positions.

"Yet his bow stayed taut" ... As much as a bow is powerfully bent, it is able to shoot further, so too the bow of Joseph was straining to shoot an evil reward to his brothers. However,

ותשב באיתן קשתו, Joseph’s ability to restrain his natural desire to punish his brothers was due to his attitude towards the One Who had also been the G’d of his father, Who had guided matters in a manner that eventually transformed Joseph to become the shepherd of Israel, i.e. making him the essence of Israel, the true תולדה, “offspring” of his father. Some commentators understand the expression רועה אבן ישראל, as Yaakov describing his reaction when being reunited with Joseph. Whereas his (Israel’s) heart had already been dead like stone, he had been almost literally resurrected and began to live after being reunited with his beloved son Joseph. This was also the meaning of the words ותחי רוח יעקב אביהם, “their father Yaakov’s spirit was resurrected.” ()

Because he secretly kept the Torah. This is an addition... I.e., Onkelos added [an explanation] to the verse.

ותשב באיתן קשתו, “Yet his bow stayed in its original position;” Yaakov illustrates how Joseph restrained himself not taking revenge on his brothers when he had the opportunity to do so.

קשתו means his power.

ויפוזו זרועי ידיו, he contracted his arms quickly remaining steadfast when he pulled the string of the bow and flung his arrows against them seeing that he was a powerfully built man, able to pull the bow all the way back. We do find the word זרוע used in connection with archery in Psalms 18,35 ונחתה קשת-נחושה זרועותי, “my arms can bend a bow of bronze.” The wording describes the tensing of a bow. A similar expression occurs in Psalms 38,3 כי חציך נחתו בי ותנחת עלי ידך, “for Your arrows have struck me; Your blows have fallen upon me.” [the reference is to G’d’s “arrows.” Ed.]

ויפוזו זרעי ידיו, his arms were immeasurably strengthened when Pharaoh transferred his ring with the Royal seal to him.

"and his arms were made firm" - he showed the beauty of his hands to do good to them by giving them plenty and wealth... The next verse explains that Joseph gained these characteristics because they came...

ויפוזו זרעי ידיו, his hands and arms kept getting stronger, i.e. he acquired the means to punish those who had slandered him. We encounter the expression מפזז in Samuel II 6,16 as a description of strength. It appears there next to the word מכרכר, a variation of the root פזז having a similar meaning, when applied to the legs. What was the source of Joseph’s strength?

Father and son, אבהן ובנין... Rashi is saying that Onkelos translated אבן as “father and son.” And how did Onkelos know it means this? Therefore Rashi explains that “אבן is a contraction of אב ובן.”

ויפוזו זרועי, “the arms of his hands were ornamented with fine gold by the hands of the Mighty One of Yaakov;” when pulling at the strings of his bow, his arms would display these ornaments. The word: ויפוזו is a synonym for רקוד, “dance;’ According to Rash’bam, it denotes movements by the arms, whereas כרכור describes the parallel movements with one’s legs. An alternate explanation: the words: ותשב באיתן קשתו, mean that he did not respond to his enemies in kind, but restrained himself and, on the contrary, spoke to them in a friendly manner. According to that interpretation, the words ויפוזו זרועי ידיו mean that although being a powerful king and having at his disposal many means of avenging himself for wrongs done to him, he did not display this characteristic. If you were to ask whence he had learned such self control and forbearance, the answer is: from none other than his father Yaakov, אביר יעקב, who served as his model.

ויפזו זרעי ידיו — This refers to the placing of the king’s signet-ring on his hand, יפזו being connected in meaning with the expression (1 Kings 10:18) זהב מופז “the finest gold”, so that the translation would be “his hands were made golden”. This happened to him from the hands of (i.e. through the instrumentality of) the Holy One, blessed be He, who is the Mighty One (אביר) of Jacob. From here (from his position as Viceroy) he rose to become the Feeder of the Foundation Stone of the Israelites, i.e. of the Originator of the tribes of Israel (Jacob). The word אבן, stone, has here the same sense as in (Zechariah 4:7) אבן הראשה, “the chief stone”, where it denotes high position. Onkelos also translates it in this manner: His translation of the verse is as follows: ותשב he translates by “and the prophecy returned upon (was fulfilled in) them (the brethren) i.e. the prophecy contained in the dreams which he dreamed regarding them was fulfilled, “because he observed the Law in secret” — this is an addition made by Onkelos, having no words in the Hebrew text to correspond to it. “And he put in “The Might his trust” is the translation of the Hebrew words באיתן קשתו. The following is how the wording of the Targum fits in with the Hebrew text: “His prophecy was fulfilled (וַתָּשָׁב) because the might (איתן) of the Holy One, blessed be He, served him as his bow (קשתו) and trusty weapon; therefore gold was placed on his arms” — the last words being the Targum of לכך] ויפזו זרועי ידיו], taking ויפזו as connected in meaning with פז, fine gold.

ויפוזו, leaping in a wild dance, as in Samuel II 6,16. Here the expression is applied to Joseph’s hand, arms. In Samuel the word כרכר describes parallel motions with the legs. The image conveyed by the word is that of twirling one’s limbs.

מידי אביר יעקב, however, the real salvation emanated from the G’d Who had proven Himself by doing the same for Yaakov. It is He Who enables Yaakov’s descendants to survive among the hostile nations, so that in the end only they will survive. The very name “Yaakov” suggests that in the end there will be only he. In the meantime, He is the One Who kept you alive and saved you from the slanderers who took aim at you.

"From the hands of the mighty Yaakov" ~ according to the simple meaning, his father Yaakov had huge strength in terms of his ability to create peace, as has been explained previously... Yosef receives this from his father... However, others have claimed that the expression אביר יעקב actually is a name for the Holy One of Blessing as we find in other places.... and making an oath by Avr Yaakov can be explained by the verse in Devarim 32:9 "Yaakov His allotment" (allotment = chevel = rope) we explained there that the Jewish people are compared to a rope which is twisted together from many strands, and at the top it is thick and at the bottom, it is separated into different strands. So too the Holy One of Blessing is the ultimate soul of all souls which comprise the Jewish people, as we find in Sanhedrin 64a: "if a Jewish person is suffering, what does the Shechinah say? My head hurts, etc.". If a thread is pulled at the bottom of the rope, the top of the thick rope feels it as well. This is the great strength of Joseph. It is because of this that it is forbidden to take revenge against one another, as it is written in Vayikra 19:18, and this is the reason of Yosef.

מידי אביר יעקב, the G’d Who had manifested Himself many times as the Power that stood by his father and lent him strength, not allowing him to collapse in spite of all the troubles that had dogged him for many years.

משם, from this model he also learned to look after the economic needs of the different families of the numerous family of Yisrael. (his cousins and second cousins)

אבן ישראל Onkelos takes אבן as an abbreviation of אב ובן and therefore renders it by אבהן ובנין the fathers and children meaning Jacob and his sons. And our rabbis expounded, AND HE BROUGHT BACK HIS BOW WITH STRENGTH, as being about the suppressing of his impulse with the wife of his master. And it calls it a bow, because the seed shoots out like an arrow.

מידי אביר יעקב, Joseph’s victory was due to the assistance of G’d, the One Who proved Himself as the Mighty one to Yaakov, Who grants dominion to kings and princes. The expression אביר יעקב is a duplicate of what follows i.e. רועה אבן ישראל. We find the expression אביר also in connection with King Sha-ul in Samuel I 21,8 i.e. “Doeg the Edomite, Shaul’s chief herdsman, אביר הרועים. The reason why the shepherds are called אבירים is because their cattle, the oxen, are called אבירים both in Psalms 68,31 and 22,13....

משם, from then on the

משם רועה אבן ישראל, Joseph’s great honour originated from there, משם, from the Shepherd of Israel. Seeing that a stone represents something solid, unshakable, permanent, all of Israel is compared to a stone, אבן. Alternately, seeing that Yaakov/Israel was the founding father of the nation, Yaakov refers to himself in that manner, i.e. the corner stone of the nation. Rabbeinu Saadyah gaon translates it into Arabic as עצם, the essence. This conforms to what we said.

ויפזו זרעי ידיו AND HIS FOREARMS WERE GILDED (VAYAFOZU) — (is read) like, 'and they were spread' (vayafotsu), since his seed went out from between the fingers of his hands.

רועה אבן ישראל, He will continue to act as the Shepherd of Israel preserving His people who will endure like אבן, a stone. It does not matter whether this stone is intrinsically precious or not, being a “stone” it will endure. The enduring nature of a stone is best illustrated in Daniel 2,34: “As you watched, a stone was hewn forth without hands and struck the image on its feet of iron and earthenware and crumbled them.” [Daniel telling the king who had forgotten his dream which he had dreamt. The stone in the dream represented Israel, the image, the nations of the world. Ed.] The reason Israel would survive is because they keep their faith with G’d and man. Sanhedrin 104 explains that the reason why Jews, even when defeated, exiled, etc.’ rose to high positions in their host country was because the rulers valued their loyalty.

אבן, a word related to אב, father, in the sense of family; the letter ן at the end is not an integral part of the word. We have other examples of such apparently unnecessary letters ן in שגעון or רצון, חרון, רעבון, ,עורן and ערבון. (Based on Rash’bam)

מידי אביר יעקב FROM THE HANDS OF THE STRENGTH OF JACOB — As an image of the replica of his father was shown to him, etc., as it is found in Sotah 36b.

מידי אביר יעקב, Yaakov is reminding Joseph of who it was that is responsible for his exalted position in the world, none other than the רועה אבן ישראל, the Shepherd Who has provided generously for the entire family of Israel.

אבן, Yaakov uses the word as meaning אב, “father, provider.” The letter נון at the end is extraneous, just as it is extraneous in such words as שגעון and עוררן in Deuteronomy 28,28, and just as the letter ם at the end of such words as ריקם in Genesis 31,42 and ותהי הכנם in Exodus 8,13 is superfluous.

מאל אביך means FROM THE GOD OF THY FATHER did this happen to you AND HE WILL HELP YOU also in the future (Genesis Rabbah 87:7).

מאל אביך, all your bounty originates with the G’d of your father, and it is He Who

מאל אביך, all of this (assistance) originated from the G’d of your father who had told me that the ascendancy of the Jewish people would manifest itself only after a period of mental suffering and physical debasement. This is what is meant when G’d said to Yaakov in 28,14 והיה זרעך כעפר הארץ, “your seed will be like the dust of the earth,” before he went on to say ופרצת ימה וקדמה, “you will spread out in all directions of the globe.”

מאל אביך ויעזרך, "From the G'd of your father who will continue to help you, etc." Jacob tells Joseph that his accomplishments are due to the G'd of Jacob; he even hints that Joseph drew on his father's merit so that he could have accomplished all that he did. Jacob prays that G'd should continue to help Joseph, ויעזרך. He adds ואת שדי, saying that yet another attribute (dimension) of G'd has assisted Joseph, the attribute that is particularly suited to the soul of Joseph, a mystical dimension familiar to students of the Kabbalah. It was this attribute which blessed and helped Joseph maintain his purity in a foreign land in the house of a pagan dignitary such as Potiphar.

מאל אביך, your glory stems from the G’d of your father, and He will assist you, ואת שדי, and your blessing will be confirmed by Shaddai. The letter מ in the word מאל also serves as an unwritten preposition for the expression ואת שדי, i.e. it really means ומאת שדי, “and from Shaddai.”

מאל אביך, “From your father Almighty, etc.” According to Ibn Ezra the letter מ at the beginning of this verse refers forward to the words ואת שדי in our verse. Yaakov explains that Joseph’s strength of character was assisted by these two attributes of G’d. It is the G’d of his father Who will truly bless him.

So, too, the word שדים here... Rashi is explaining how the word שדים means father.

Nicht ברכת רחם ושדים, wie man der natürlichen Zeitfolge nach hätte erwarten sollen, sondern ברכת שדים ורחם: dir wird nie ein Kind geboren werden, dem nicht bereits bei der Geburt die Mutter mit der Kraft gesegnet ist, es zu nähren.

ברכות שדים, “blessings of the breast;” Joseph’s descendants were to be blessed with having ample supplies of milk to nurse their infants. Their wombs should also be blessed, so that they will have many children. The blessing also implies that none of his offspring should be bereft by the death of young children or by having children that are unable to conceive.

ברכות שדים ורחם, “the blessings of the breasts and the womb.” Yaakov paraphrases the blessings emanating from a celestial source, i.e. שמים, and emanating from earth, i.e. ארץ. An alternate explanation: the “blessings of the breasts,” are a simile for stilling thirst, whereas “the blessings of the womb,” are that the fetus will not be stillborn. (Based on Rash’bam) In this instance, the breasts appear first before the womb, although they are not needed until after the baby has been born, seeing that a mother begins to feel that she has a supply of milk even before the baby has been born. On the other hand, the prophet Hoseah, in Hoseah 9,14, says: תן להם רחם משכיל ושדים צוצקים, “give to them a womb that miscarries and shriveled breasts, in that order. (When he lambasts his countrymen for their disloyalty to G-d, and prays to G-d not to allow such people to develop normally.)

ואת שדי means AND WITH THE ALMIGHTY was your heart when you did not hearken to the words of your mistress AND therefore HE WILL BLESS YOU.

יעזרך, will assist you. ברכות תהום, refers to the subterranean sources of irrigation rising and watering the crops that are in need of such irrigation.

ויעזרך, so that you will not again descend to the depths.

What will Shaddai’s blessing consist of? מברכת שמים מעל, the dew which comes from above and the rain which arrives at its proper time.

When Jacob spoke about ויעזרך..ויברכך, he may also have wanted to stress that G'd's help notwithstanding, Joseph deserved credit for his own efforts in resisting this temptation. G'd blessed him as if Joseph had accomplished all this by himself. The author refers to his commentary in this context on Psalms 37,33 where he elaborated on this theme.

ברכת שדים ורחם Onkelos renders this by: blessings for father(s) and mother(s) i.e. may the men and the women be blessed in that they may not prove sterile and barren.

ברכות שדים, that the breasts will not be dry and the babies will not die due to insufficient milk supply.

ואת שדי, same as if the Torah had written ומאת א-ל שדי, “from the G’d whose attribute is Shaddai.” Yaakov mentions this attribute specifically as it had been this attribute of G’d which had appeared to him in 35,11 promising that he would develop into a community of nations. Joseph’s greatness would be orchestrated with the help of this attribute of G’d.

ברכות תהום רובצת תחת. The subterranean blessing from below. Moses uses similar words when he blesses the tribe of Joseph in Deuteronomy 33,13 saying: מברכת ה' ארצו ממגד שמים מטל ומתהום רובצת תחת. He only reversed the order in which he recited these blessings. He says of the water which reposes in the belly of the earth that it is perceived as lying down, as if in preparation for the time when it is expected to rise and to irrigate the crops. Alternately, it awaits man to draw it to perform irrigation. A third possibility would be that irrigation will be performed by the rain from heaven. The gist of the blessing is that the soil in the part of the land on which the tribe of Joseph dwells is so amply irrigated from underneath that even if there should be a drought, and no rain would fall, there is enough moisture to support the herbs in the fields.

Jacob may also have based his blessing on the well known statement by our sages in Berachot 10 that when someone credits someone else with his own accomplishment, G'd may credit him with it instead, whereas if one claims that one's own merit accounts for one's good fortune, then G'd will teach one that it was only someone else's merit that resulted in that person's blessings. Jacob said that because Joseph credited his father's merit with assisting him at a critical juncture, G'd would credit Joseph himself with having mastered his temptation.

שדים BREASTS (SHADAYIM) — "He will surely be cast down" (Exodus 19:13), we translate (in Onkelos) as eeshtedaah yishtedi. Also shadayim here is [to be understood that way,] because the seed shoots out like an arrow.

ורחם. Also while inside the mother’s womb the fetus would not die prematurely. When the Bible speaks of curses, it uses the same wording in reverse. (compare Hoseah 9,14) תן להם רחם משכיל, “give them a womb that miscarries and shriveled breasts! Even if the fetus survived the pregnancy, make the infant die from lack of milk supply!”

ויברכך, He, Himself, without intermediary. This would be different from the blessing extended to Ephrayim and Menashe in which Yaakov promised that “the angel,” i.e. the intermediary, who has looked after me would look after these children of Joseph. (48,16). This blessing was also different in character from the blessings of Yitzchok for Esau, and that from Moses for the people crossing into the Holy Land. In all those instances, except in the blessing Moses referred to in Deuteronomy 1,11 which was given by him prior to the sin of the spies, the initiators of the blessing were human beings, i.e. Yitzckok or Moses. G’d would be asked to honour promises made by humans as a blessing. In our situation here, Yaakov commands the blessing to originate with the attribute of G’d known as Shaddai.

ברכת שדים ורחם, Onkelos, who understands this as the blessing of father and mother, is familiar to most readers. Other commentators understand these words as referring to blessing emanating both from heaven and earth, although if we were to accept this, Yaakov would have repeated himself. The fact is that he wanted to reinforce the power of the blessing. “The heavens” are a euphemism for the breasts, and the drops of rain they yield are being compared to the drops of milk from the breasts, whereas the earth is a simile for the womb, seeing it produces fruit, as does the womb. My late father of blessed memory explained the word שדים as referring to the wet nurse, (when the mother herself cannot nurse her baby) and the word רחם as referring to the actual mother. Yaakov follows this blessing with the blessing of אביך “your father,” seeing that the baby requires a blessing from three sources. They are: father, mother, and the wet nurse who feeds the baby with her own milk. Personally, I feel that the blessing refers to the children that are being born to the tribe of Joseph, the opposite of a רחם משכיל ושדים צומקות, which we already referred to as a curse (Hoseah 9,14).

Jacob may have expressed another message in his blessing of Joseph. Baba Batra 58 teaches that G'd does not perform miracles for people who will not remain righteous. Jacob therefore said that up to that point Joseph enjoyed G'd's blessings מאל אביך, because of his father's merit, whereas from now on ויעזרך G'd would assist him not to succumb to temptation in order to justify the miracles He had already performed for him. [I have not been able to find the source of this statement. Ed.]

ברכות שמים מעל, in the sense that the days of your life would be completed as planned before you were born. (compare Exodus 23,27)

ברכות תהום רובצת תחת, material blessings, adequate food and money to buy necessities.

ברכות שדים ורחם. This is a blessing concerning having healthy and numerous children, in contrast with the expression רחם משכיל ושדים צומקים, “a womb that miscarries and shriveled breasts” (Hosea 9,14)

'ברכת אביך גברו וגו THE BLESSING OF THY FATHER HAVE PREVAILED etc. — The blessings which the Holy One, blessed be He, bestowed upon me are mighty beyond the blessings wherewith He blessed my progenitors

ברכות אביך גברו על ברכות הורי, the blessings of your father Yaakov who has been blessed by G’d on the occasion of the dream with the ladder (Genesis 28,13), are more comprehensive than the blessings my own parents had received at the time. G’d blessed me with unlimited boundaries “you will branch out to the east, the west, etc.”

The blessings, etc. Alternatively, “The blessings that your father [gave you] are stronger than the blessings my forebears [gave me]” — Yaakov received the right of the firstborn through deceit, but he transferred it to Yoseif openly. Even to the boundaries. Therefore he was able to glory in it wherever he went.

ברכות אביך, may He also grant you the blessing which has been bestowed on your father when the same G’d promised me that I would spread out in all directions of the globe. (28,14) This meant that my heritage would be boundless. This was only an extension of the original blessing given to Avraham at the beginning of Genesis 12 that ונברכו בך כל משפחות האדמה ובזרעך, “through you will be blessed all the families of the earth and through your descendants.” This verse is also a promise to the moral elite of the gentiles who in the words of Bileam in Numbers 23,23 will be numbered among the people loyal to G’d and who will receive their reward. Bileam speaks of כעת יאמר ליעקב ולישראל מה פעל ה', (Israel will be told by G’d directly what G’d does, not relying on astrologers and the like) The prophet Yoel 3,5 promises that all those who refer in their conversation to Hashem, will survive the wars preceding the coming of the Messiah, their mention of G’d being considered as proof of their believing in Him. [If I understand the author correctly, he feels that unless the promise given to Avraham at the beginning of Lech Lecha will help those חסידי אומות העולם, the righteous among the gentiles who are deserving, to survive the cataclysmic events preceding the coming of the Messiah, they are of too transient a nature to be taken seriously. Ed.] The distinction of the Jewish people lies in the fact that they do not turn to soothsayers, and all kinds of charlatans, astrologers or palm readers to divine the future. If they want to know something about the future they turn to G’d directly or to a prophet, or they are content to let G’d do what He considers to be right. Hence, by proclaiming the name of the Lord one is presumed to belong to this elite. Verses quoted by the author, such as Isaiah 61,6 as well as Zecharyah 8,23 are an assurance that when the time comes, having been steadfast in one’s loyalty to G’d, one will share in the ultimate salvation. The Jews at that time will finally be recognised as deserving a position of leadership amongst mankind.

ברכת אביך גברו, although Yaakov uses the past tenses in the word גברו, what he means is the future, that the blessing will prove to be what he says. The anomaly of using the past tense to describe matters that are yet to occur is no anomaly; it occurs again and again in Scripture. The word הורי, normally translated as “my parents,” refer to Avraham and Yitzchok, Yaakov’s father and grandfather respectively, his mentors. The very expression הורה, horeh, and הורה, horah, respectively, apply to father and mother, depending on the vowel under the letterר . This is so as both are involved in bringing about the pregnancy leading to the eventual birth of the child. The father is the active partner, whereas the mother is considered the passive partner seeing that she is the recipient of the male’s sperm.

ולקדקוד נזיר אחיו, “on the head of the one who was separate from his brothers.” The word נזיר here may be understood in the sense of נזר, “crown” i.e. the most superior, of his brothers. Another way of looking at this expression is that seeing that the head is the highest, most valuable of all our organs, by blessing the head one automatically blesses the entire body, i.e. all twelve tribes.

הריון ... i.e., “The one who made my mother conceive me”... Rashi is explaining how the word הורי means father. ויפוזו זרועי ידיו as ויפוצו... Rashi is saying that ז and צ often interchange, as in זעקת which is like צעקת.

ברכת אביך גברו וגו׳. Die gewöhnliche Auffassung: die Segnungen deines Vaters übertreffen die Segnungen meiner Eltern, ist sprachlich nicht begründet, und dem Sinne nach, als ein ungeheures Selbstgefühl ausdrückend, widerstrebend. גבר על braucht durchaus nicht: etwas an Kraft übertreffen zu heißen, z. B. גבר עלינו חסדו (P1. 117, 2), wo על den Boden, den Ort bezeichnet, auf welchem die Liebe sich hoch empor hebt, wo sie sich stark zeigt. Ebenso: ויגברו המים על הארץ (erst. B. M. 7, 24). Die Wasser stiegen auf der Erde, nicht: über die Erde. Ebenso hier: die Segnungen, die dein Vater jetzt zu erteilen hat, sind auch nur auf den Segnungen gewachsen, die meine Erzeuger mir erteilt haben. Diese sind der Grund und Boden, auf welchem sich nun meine Segnungen emporheben können. Lasset den Segen, den Eltern bei ihrem Scheiden über Kinder aussprechen, euch nicht gleichgültig sein; dass ich euch jetzt im hohen Greisenalter segnen kann, dies זכות wurzelt in der Reinheit der Eltern, in dem Augenblick, wo der Greis ihnen einst sein Dasein verdankte: nicht אבתי, sondern הורי. —

עד תאות גבעות עולם, “as far as the hills at the end of the world;” according to Rashi, Yaakov was able to extend such blessings as a reward for having fed his father with the delicacies that he used to enjoy. G–d had already enlarged the scope of his blessings to him when He told him that his descendants would spread in all directions of the globe. (Genesis 28,14)

נזיר אחיו, “the one who had been separated from his brothers.” Our author understands the word נזיר here as “the prince among his brothers.” He uses Lamentations 4,7, זכו נזיריה משלג, “her elect were purer than snow, ”as the source where the word is used in that context.

עד תאות גבעות עולם EVEN TO THE BOUNDARIES OF THE EVERLASTING HILLS — Because my blessings have prevailed, extending to the very ends of the bounds of the everlasting hills, for He gave me a blessing that bursts all bounds, one that has no limits, that reaches even unto the four corners of the world, as it is stated, (Genesis 28:14) “[God said to Jacob] and thou shalt spread abroad to the West and to the East [and to the North and to the South]”, an unqualified promise that was made neither to Abraham nor to Isaac. For to Abraham He said, (Genesis 13:14) “Lift up thine eyes and look northwards etc. … for all the land which thou seest to thee will I give it”, and He showed him only the Land of Israel. To Isaac He said, (Genesis 26:3) “for unto thee and unto thy seed will I give all these lands, and I will establish the oath [which I swore unto Abraham thy father]”. It is to this that Isaiah alludes when he said, (Isaiah 58:14) “And I will feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father” (Shabbat 118b), and he did not say, “with the heritage promised to Abraham”.

גברו על ברכות הורי, and the reason that I said ברכות אביך is because they are more powerful than the ones which my parents, הורי, received.

עד תאות גבעת עולם, these blessings should in turn be transferred to your offspring in an unending chain. We know the word תאוה as describing a limit, boundary, from Numbers 34,10 והתאויתם לכם, “you will draw for yourselves (boundaries).” Yaakov simply means that as long the universe will continue to exist “my blessing to you shall remain in force.” Hills and mountains, as opposed to rivers, are symbols of something that endures. The prophet Isaiah echoes this thought when he said (Isaiah 54,10)כי ההרים ימושו והגבעות תמוטינה “for even if the mountains were to move and the hills to collapse, etc.” [just as the former is unlikely, so G’d’s loyalty shall remain steadfast towards Israel. Ed.]

תאות עולם from the same meaning as desire and longing... Accordingly, עד תאות גבעות עולם means as follows: the blessings my father gave me were stronger — better — than the blessings Hashem gave my father. This is so, since the great ones [i.e., “the pillars”] of the earth longed for my blessings. And Rashi then explains who longed for them: it was Yaakov’s mother. (source unknown)

גבעות עולם: nicht konkrete Hügel, sondern wie in Habakuk (3, 6): שחו גבעות -wenn niedersinken die Hügel der Zeiten" das Niedersinken derjenigen Größen be" ,עולם תאות גבעות עולם .deutet, die sich in der Zeit als Träger der Verhältnisse emporheben ist somit das letzte Ziel, wohin alle Größen der Zeiten streben. Und in der Tat hatte ja Jakob in den ihn umstehenden Kindern nicht bloß die Anfänge der Entwicklung seines Volkes, sondern eben damit die Anfänge der allerletzten Vollendung der Entwicklung des gesamten Menschengeschlechts um sich — ולו יקהת עמים — also: bis zu den allerletzten Zielen, wohin sich überhaupt die ganze Entwicklung der Menschheit bewegt. —

הורי is from a root meaning to conceive. The singular denotes “my father”, the one who made my mother conceive me. We find a similar use of the verb in (Job 3:3) “A man is causing a woman to conceive (הוֹרָה).”

עד תאות גבעות עולם, as far as the furthest hills of the world. The expression תאוה occurs in connection with the Israelites’ demand for a meat diet in the desert, in preference to or in addition to the manna. (Numbers 34,10) The term is also used to describe far off places such as לבא חמת in Numbers 34,8. Accordingly, the expression הורי may be a duplication of the expressionגבעות עולם , used here as well as elsewhere to underline a point the Torah makes. A similar duplication occurs in Deuteronomy 33,15 of the expression מראש הררי קדם and the expression ממגד גבעות עולם in Moses’ blessing “with the best from the ancient mountains, and the bounty of hills immemorial.” Both Yaakov and Moses employ practically the same wording in describing the vastness of Joseph’s blessing....

עד תאות גבעות עולם for my blessings extend to the end of the globe, both extremes of the sun’s orbit which spans the continents. They are so called as they represent the end of “time”. etc. [there is no point in completing the author’s words as the astronomy since Copernicus is viewed completely differently than during the author’s time, Ed.]

תהיינה לראש יוסף, in all the blessings which have been mentioned in this chapter Joseph should be the first and principal beneficiary. The words וקדקד נזיר אחיו are again a duplication, repetition, in order to emphasise how strongly Yaakov feels about the matter.

And וגבעות ... for which his mother longed... Rashi is answering the question: Onkelos explained תאות as longing. And before that, it is written ברכות אביך גברו וגו', which Rashi previously explained as, “The blessings that Hashem blessed me surpassed the blessings that He blessed my forebears.” If so, according to Onkelos, how does the phrase following עד תאות גבעות עולם fit in? Therefore Rashi explains, “His mother longed for them.” Rashi is saying that according to Onkelos, תאות גבעות עולם refers to Rivkah, Yaakov’s mother. She desired those blessings and made Yaakov receive them. Therefore she dressed Yaakov in Eisov’s garments that were desired (החמודות), in order that Yaakov should receive the blessings.

נזיר אחיו, nicht wahrscheinlich der "Gekrönte" seiner Brüder. Denn נזיר heißt sonst nie der gekrönte, sozial geadelte Mensch, sondern stets der sittlich geadelte. Denn dass נזר ein paarmal Krone heißt, ist auch nur von dem Grundbegriff נזר, absondern, abgrenzen, insofern נזר, die Krone, ein den Gekrönten symbolisch von andern abgrenzendes, absonderndes Zeichen ist, wie זֵר, der Reif, von הִנָזֵר .זור: sich von allem Ungeweihten fern halten. נָזיר: der die Selbstbeherrschung übt, sich von allem Unedlen fern zu halten, ein Charakter, den ja Josef in seiner ganzen Geschichte so glorreich bewährt hat.

עד תאות means UNTO THE ENDS — The word is connected with the verbs in (Numbers 36:10) “And ye shall mark out the ends (והתאויתם) for the east border”, and (Numbers 5:8) “you shall mark out the ends (תתאו) unto the entrance of Hamath”.

נזיר אחיו, the king over his brothers, the one wearing the crown, נזר.

תהיינה לראש יוסף, these words are understood as emanating from G’d Who will send His blessings onto the head of Joseph directly, without the services of any intermediary. Moses parallels Yaakov’s syntax when he said in Deuteronomy 33,16 in his blessing to Joseph תאנה לראש יוסף, ורצון שכני סנה.

נזיר, an expression applied to leading people as in Nachum 3,17 מנזריך כארבה.”your guards were like locusts.”

Juda und Josef sind augenscheinlich die beiden Centra, auf welchen Jakobs in die Zukunft schauender Blick ruhen bleibt, und zwar bis יקהת עמים, bis תאות גבעות עולם, bis in die allerfernste Zukunft. Und in der That sehen wir auch Josef stets Juda zur Seite. בית יוסף und בית יהודה umfasst im Munde der Propheten die ganze Nation. Und selbst für jene ferne Zukunft feiert die Überlieferung einen Sprößling aus dem Hause Josefs, dem Sprössling aus dem Hause Judas als Vorgänger und Genossen zur Seite: משיח בן יוסף und משיח בן דור. Das Verhältnis ist nicht klar, weil nicht offenbart. Aber grundlos ist es gewiss nicht, wenn hier Jakob hervorhebt, dass die Hoffnungen und Segnungen jener fernen Zukunft wie auf Judas Haupt, so auch auf Josefs Scheitel ruhen.

תאות means in old French émoulis. Thus (i.e. with these words) did Menachem ben Seruk classify it (תאות). Onkelos translates (תאות (גבעת עולם in the sense of desire (תאוה) and longing and takes גבעת as a figurative expression for “the great ones”, like (1 Samuel 2:8) “the pillars of the earth”, meaning the righteous of the earth — viz., he renders it by “the blessings for which the great ones of the earth longed”, referring to the blessings which his mother so much desired that she forced him to take steps to obtain them

ולקדקד נזיר אחיו, seeing that he had remained pure, resisted temptation, he became crowned with the crown of royalty among his brothers (alternate meaning of נזר). He had proved by his very actions that he was worthy of such distinction, so that he is the recipient of direct blessings from G’d. Also Joseph’s descendants remained on a moral level close to that of his illustrious ancestor, so that the first of the Judges, Moses’ successor, was the leader of the people, being in effect the “king” of his nation. Compare Hoseah 13,1 כדבר אפרים אתת נשא בישראל, “when Ephrayim spoke piety he was exalted in Israel.” [a reference to Joshua’s contradicting the spies’ majority report. Ed.]

נזיר אחיו means what the Targum has: פרישא דאחוהי. i.e. the one who was separated from his brothers. The word נזיר is of a root signifying separation, as in (Leviticus 22:2) “that they separate themselves (וינזרו) from the holy things of the children of Israel”; (Isaiah 1:4) “they have separated themselves from God (נזרו) turning backward”.

תהיין THEY — all — SHALL BE ON THE HEAD OF JOSEPH.

בנימן זאב יטרף means BENJAMIN IS A WOLF THAT TEARETH (i.e. “wolf” is not the object of the sentence but the word אשר must be supplied before יטרף). He prophesied that they (Benjamin’s descendants) will be “rapacious” in the time to come; thus the Benjamites were told (Judges 21:21) “and catch you every man his wife”, as you will find in the story of the concubine of Gibeah. Further he was prophesying concerning Saul (who was of this tribe) who vanquished his enemies on all sides, as it is said (1 Samuel 14:47) “So Saul took the kingdom… and fought on every side… against Moab… and against Edom… and whithersoever he turned himself he put them to the worse”.

בנימין זאב יטרף, Yaakov prophesies concerning the first crowned Jewish King, Sha-ul, member of the tribe of Binyamin. He would successfully deal with the enemies surrounding Israel as documented in Samuel I 14,47בכל אשר יפנה ירשיע, “wherever he turned he defeated them.” The tribe of Binyamin also remained loyal to the dynasty of David when the ten tribes split under Jerobam. When King Assa conducted wars against surrounding enemy states, Binyamin supported him. The same held true under the reign of the kings Yehoshaphat and Chizkiyah, both Kings of the Davidic dynasty.

זאב יטרוף, it is the custom of wolves to attack either early in the morning or in the evening, both periods when there is not much light. We find support for this in Chabakuk 1,8. Binyamin’s rise to power also occurred at the dawn of Jewish monarchies in the person of King Sha-ul, and once more near the end of Jewish one man rule under Mordechai. Subsequently, there was never again a true Jewish political independence, and the religious leadership was in the hands of the אנשי כנסת הגדולה, a college of 120 elders.

בנימין זאב יטרוף, "Benjamin is a wolf that devours its prey, etc." Jacob referred to King Saul who acted like a wolf. It is the nature of the wolf not to remain at the site where he tears its prey. Saul was in a hurry when he failed to wait for the time Samuel had said he should wait (Samuel I 13,8). This became the reason that Saul only ate on the morning (the early part of his reign) and he did not serve out his term.

בנימין זאב יטרף, he will be comparable to a ravenous wolf which tears apart its victims whether domestic animals or predators. The wolf is more courageous than other wild animals, not being afraid to invade human habitations. The members of the tribe of Binyamin demonstrated this quality of fearlessness on many occasions during their long history. In Judges chapter 20 they took on single-handedly the armies of all the other tribes in a tragic civil war. Also in Chronicles I 12,2 they joined the persecuted David who commanded only a small number of men, in what must have appeared as a hopeless undertaking. In verse 19 there we read that David placed these Binyaminites at the head of his small band.

בנימין זאב יטרף, “Binyamin is a wolf garnering prey.” The kingdom of Sha-ul, the first king of Israel, a descendant of Binyamin, has been compared to that of a wolf. One of the characteristics of a wolf is that it flees from the place where it killed its prey, and does not wait around like a lion. King Sha-ul’s kingdom endured for no more than two and a half years, whereas his successor’s David’s kingdom, endured for 40 years. Yaakov therefore likens his domain to that of a lion, which, after killing its prey does not flee in fear of pursuit.

He is a wolf, for he preys... [Rashi is saying that] יטרף does not apply to זאב, for [this would not need to be stated since] every wolf preys. Rather, יטרף applies to Binyamin. It is saying that Binyamin is a wolf because he preys like one. But Maharshal explains that [Rashi is answering the objection:] The verse seems to say that Binyamin will prey on the wolf. However, “preying” cannot be said about a person. Thus Rashi explains, “He is a wolf, for he preys.”

Es hätte etwas Herbes, wenn er hier den jüngsten Sohn, mit dem er scheidet, nur als einen reißenden Wolf zu schildern gewusst. Es heißt ja aber auch nicht: זאב טורף ,זאב ערב, sondern: זאב יטרף, und kann daher זאב sehr wohl Objekt sein. Wenn Jakob aber hier zuletzt an einen Wolf denkt, so ist es ja der letzte Blick den er auf seine "Herde" wirft. Er hat ja zwanzig Jahre lang den konkreten Wolf für seine konkrete Herde zu fürchten gehabt — und sieht nun jetzt seine Kinder, hat sie gesegnet, hat sie in ihrer Eigentümlichkeit für den ganzen Lauf der Zeiten erkannt und gezeichnet, und sein letzter Blick hat so eben auf dem Ende der Zeiten, auf der Überwindung der letzten Weltmacht, מלכות רביעית geruht; er sieht das Galuth und die Galuthmacht, gegen welche seine Kinder den Kampf zu bestehen haben werden, und spricht: der Allerkleinste, der Allerjüngste, der wird es sein, der den "Wolf (das ewige Amalek) von der Jakobsherde scheucht; schon am frühen Morgen, am Anfange der Nationalgeschichte, wird er dem Wolf schon "ein Tüchtiges versetzen", am Abend der Zeiten aber wird er ihn vollständig vernichten. Ist es ja Überlieferung, מסורת אגרה, dass der Erzfeind, Amalek, nicht durch Juda, sondern durch bie schwächste Macht der Söhne Rahels überwunden werden wird. אם לא יסחבום צעירי הצאן (Jirm. 49, 20) "die Jüngsten der Herde" werden sie als Beute dahinschleifen. — עד von עדר, verwandt mit חתת, zerbrechen, ein abgerissenes Stück.

בנימין זאב, “Binyamin is like wolf;” a metaphor implying that the kingdom of Shaul, a descendant of Binyamin, would not endure, just as a wolf does not spend time with his prey. On the other hand, the Kingdom of David is compared to that of a lion, which does spend time with its prey, not being afraid of anyone challenging it. (Compare Torah Shleymah on this verse)

בבקר יאכל עד IN THE MORNING HE EATETH HIS PREY — עד is an Aramaic word synonymous with the Hebrew words בזה and שלל, prey, which are rendered in the Targum by עדאה; and there is another example of its use in the Hebrew text of the Bible: (Isaiah 33:23) “Then is the prey of great spoil (עד שלל) divided”. He (Jacob) says this (“in the morning eateth his prey”) with reference to Saul who rose as Israel’s champion in the period when Israel began to flourish and shine (i.e. in the morning of his history; indeed some editions have “בקרן”, at the morning-dawn of Israel, instead of פריחתן) (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 14).

ולערב יחלק שלל. It is customary for wolves (who raid in packs) to wait with distributing their spoils until evening. Jeremiah 5,6 and Tzefaniah 3,3 confirm this.

בבוקר יאכל עד ולערב יחלק שלל. He will outdo the wolves, which have to wait until evening to eat any part of their prey. Binyamin will consume the foe in the morning and the loot in the evening following. Compare Tzefaniah 3,3 for confirmation of this. The word עד is equivalent to the word שלל, loot, booty. The Aramaic term for the word שלל is עדאה. This also contains an allusion to the war of Sha-ul, of the tribe of Binyamin against the Amelekites as well as against other nations as we know from Samuel I 14,47. Also Mordechai, who was descended from Binyamin , won against all the Antisemites including Haman and thus brought a great salvation to his people. The reason why the wars of Sha-ul are referred to by Yaakov as בוקר, morning, is because they occurred at the very beginning of the years during which the Jews had a crowned head as their leader. Mordechai’s “war,” by comparison was called ערב, evening, seeing that during his time the Jews were in exile, something compared to evening.

When Jacob spoke about ובערב, he referred to the evening of Saul's reign (Samuel I 18,7) when Saul was described as having killed thousands whereas David was credited with having killed tens of thousands. It is also possible that Jacob referred to the division of David's kingdom, which the Talmud Yuma 22 attributes to David having believed Tzivah's accusation against Mefiboshet and disinheriting him partially without checking out the story (Samuel II 19,30). According to the Talmud a heavenly voice proclaimed at that time that Rechavam and Yerovam would divide David's kingdom. This was the beginning of the setting of the sun for Israel (loss of grandeur), because of its sins.

זאב יטרף, “a wolf that will attack and kill most domesticated animals.” The wolf consumes in the morning sufficient parts of his prey to last him until evening, after which he distributes the remains to its young. The blessing has been worded as a parable. The letter ו at the beginning of the word: ולערב, is unnecessary; there are many such unnecessary letters in the Torah, and especially when the text is not prose but poetry. There is no point in arguing that from the cantillation mark etnachta under the word עד that it is divisive; I have already explained this in Genesis 47,6 in connection with the words: במיטב הארץ, under the word אחיך where I listed a number of examples that the etnachta is not always a divisive cantillation mark, or rather, that it does not always override the plain meaning of the verse.

ולערב יחלק שלל AND AT EVEN HE DIVIDETH THE SPOIL— even after the sun of Israel will have set through Nebuchadnezzar who will exile them to Babel, יחלק שלל HE WILL DIVIDE THE SPOIL, viz., Mordecai and Esther who will be of the tribe of Benjamin will divide the spoil of Haman, as it is said, (Ester 3:7) “Behold, I have given Esther the house of Haman” (Cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 14). Onkelos translates it as having a reference to the portions which the priests received of the holy sacrifices in the Temple which was situated in the territory of Benjamin.

יחלק שלל, you may ask that we read in the Book of Esther 9,15 that the Jews did not pocket any of the loot. The meaning of that line was that seeing the King had given to Mordechai all that had belonged to Haman, such belongings could not longer be described as “loot.”

ולערב יחלק שלל, “and at night he divides the plunder.” I have already mentioned that this is the habit of wolves as per Tzefaniah 3,3: זאבי ערב לא גרמו לבקר, “wolves of the evening; they leave no bone until morning.”

וזאת אשר דבר להם אביהם ויברך אתם AND THIS IS IT THAT THEIR FATHER SPOKE UNTO THEM WHEN (literally, and) HE BLESSED THEM — But were there not some of his sons whom he did not bless but whom, on the contrary, he reproached? But this is the explanation of these words: and this is it that their father spake unto them, viz., all that has been said above in this chapter, whether it be blessing or reproach. You might therefore think that he did not bless Reuben, Simeon and Levi at all — Scripture therefore states, “and he blessed them” (i.e. the 12 tribes alluded to at the beginning of the verse) which implies all of them. (Pesikta Rabbati 7).

אשר כברכתו, of what would be their fate in the future, as already mentioned with the words אשר יקרה אתכם “which will happen to you,” in verse 1 of our chapter.

כל אלה שבטי ישראל, the ones Yaakov mentioned here were the true twelve tribes of Israel, the names inscribed on the breastplate of the High Priest as commended to G’d’s special attention. They are also the ones who were mentioned as such at the covenant on Mount Gerizim and Mount Eyval. The twelve stones which Moses erected also symbolised these twelve tribes. Again. Joshua erected 12 stones at the Jordan as well as at Gilgal, and Elijah erected 12 stones at the altar. In none of these instances are Ephrayim and Menashe treated as separate tribes. They only figured as separate tribes when it came to the land distribution, seeing that the tribe of Levi did not share in that.

כל אלה שבטי ישראל שנים עשר, All of these comprise the twelve tribes of Israel. How exactly is the number twelve made up? Is Levi included? If so, the Torah did not include Joseph as more than one tribe, though Jacob had said to him (48,5): "Ephrayim and Menashe shall be to me like Reuben and Shimon." If Levi is not included in the number twelve, as we find for instance when the Israelites were being counted at the beginning of the Book of Numbers when the flags and positions around the Tabernacle were assigned, why was Levi denied his father's blessing? If the reason was that Jacob criticised him and only those who had received blessings were included in the count, why were Reuben and Shimon included seeing they too had been criticised?

כל אלה שבטי ישראל שנים עשר, he had to mention this seeing that Joseph amounted to two tribes, which otherwise would have made us believe that Yaakov envisioned 13 tribes. When it came to the distribution of the land of Canaan there were only 12 tribes, seeing that the tribe of Levi did not share in that land distribution but was allocated only cities in which the Levites were to reside, scattered among all the other tribes.

וזאת אשר דבר להם אבותם, “and this is what their father told them.” This is how he concluded his blessings with the word זאת. Moses in his turn, commenced his blessings with the word זאת, as we know from Deuteronomy

“And this is what their father spoke to them”... referring to everything that was said above. [Rashi is saying] that if not for, “And this is what their father spoke to them,” we would think Yaakov altogether regretted what he had said, and took back his reproach. For it says, “He blessed them,” implying they all [received blessings and not reproaches]. Thus Rashi says, “And this is...” to teach that whatever Yaakov had said remained in force, but he then included them all [in the blessings]. (R. Noson)

Alle diese Stämme Jisraels; es sind zwölf, nicht mehr, nicht weniger, nicht dreizehn, dass etwa Josef für zwei gezählt werde, auch nicht elf, dass etwa Reuben ausfiele; und sie sind alle: שבטי ישראל, gehören alle zum Ganzen, sind alle "Grundstöcke" Jisraels, zwölf Pfeiler, die Gott in den Schoß der Zeiten eingegraben hat, auf welchen sich das Gebäude der Nation entwickeln soll. Und dieses — ist nicht der Segen, den Jakob seinen Söhnen erteilt hat, denn es ist ja zum Teil nur Charakterschilderung — sondern dies ist, was ihr Vater über sie ausgesprochen hatte, d. i, wie er jeden in seiner Eigentümlichkeit gezeichnet hatte, als er sie segnete. Jeden aber,, nach dem seiner Eigentümlichkeit entsprechenden Segen", hat er darauf sie gesegnet. Nachdem er eines jeden Eigentümlichkeit ausgesprochen hatte, segnete er einen jeden demgemäß, segnete einen jeden, dass jeder in seiner Eigentümlichkeit, mit derselben und durch sie, zum Segen gelange. Selbst die hier schon bei ihrer Zeichnung Gesegneten, und diese vielleicht am allermeisten, bedurften noch des besonderen Segens, damit die ihnen gewordene, äußerlich gesegnete Stellung, ihnen auch wirklich zum Segen gereiche. Denn wider seinen Willen und ohne sein Zutun kann Gott keinen Menschen glücklich machen; und so auch umgekehrt, um wandelt der wahrhafte Jude sich selbst die tränenreichste Lage zu einem Quell des reichsten Segens, עוברי בעמק הבכא מעין ישיתוהו. — "Nicht", lautet ein Wort der Weisen, "weil er Löwenmacht dem Juda, Wolfskühnheit dem Benjamin, Rehes Raschheit dem Naftali etc. erteilt, dürftest du meinen, er habe sie nun nicht alle gleich in den Segnungen umfasst, darum heißt es: jeden nach seinem Segen hat er — nicht ihn, אותו, — sondern אותם, sie alle gesegnet" — der Gesamtsegen kam jedem einzelnen zu Teil und jeder spezielle Segen der Gesamtheit zu Gute. —

אשר כברכתו, “in accordance with the individual blessing that each tribe.” will experience in the future.

EVERY MAN ACCORDING TO HIS BLESSING — according to the blessing that was to come in future to each and every one. (Cf. Rashi on Genesis 40:5, איש כפתרון חלמו.)

ויברך אותם, in addition to blessings bestowed individually rather than collectively, earlier.

וזאת אשר דבר להם, this is the future of which he spoke to them.

“He blessed them,” which implies all of them. I did not find this explanation in any Midrash. Furthermore, it seems odd, for where does it state what Yaakov blessed Reuvein, Shimon and Leivi? If it is because he included them all in one blessing, that was learned from ברך אותם [at the end of the verse]. If so, why is ויברך אותם necessary?

Perhaps Ephrayim and Menashe were not counted as two separate tribes until after the Exodus from Egypt, whereas here the Torah counts Joseph. I believe this is a rather forced explanation. I prefer to think that the words איש אשר כברכתו ברך אותם, "he blessed them each according to his special blessing," contains the answer to our problem. We note that Jacob included Shimon and Levi in a single blessing. Hence we have Joseph as two tribes and Shimon and Levi as one tribe together making up the number twelve.

ברך אתם HE BLESSED THEM — It should have said, “every man according to his blessing he blessed him”; why, then does it say “he blessed them”? But since in the blessings he ascribed to Judah personally “the strength of a lion”, to Benjamin “the rapacity of a wolf” and to Naphtali “the swiftness of a hind”, one might think that he did not include all of them in all the blessings, Scripture therefore states “he blessed them” (i.e. each of them personally and all of them together — extending all the personal blessings to each of them) (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 16; cf. Rashi on Exodus 1:19).

איש אשר כברכתו ברך אותם, he gave an individual blessing to each one in accordance with what he perceived to be the son’s need in view of his eventual destiny. Yehudah needed to have a blessing that his dynasty would endure, etc. Levi needed to be blessed that his function of serving G’d as representative of the people would endure, etc.

ויברך אותם, these were the words with which he blessed them,

אשר דבר אליהם אביהם ויברך אותם, what their father told them when he blessed them. Although we note that Jacob bestowed no blessing on either Reuben, Shimon or Levi, the Torah makes the point that the very harsh comments Jacob made to these three sons were their blessings. This is why the Torah employs the expression דבר, an expression reserved for harsh words or a harsh tone. The Torah adds ויברך אותם, he blessed them, to make certain we do not misunderstand. When we look at the way Jacob censured Reuben, we are reminded of the Sifri in Behaalotcha according to which the privileges of the firstborn will be restored to them in the future. Inasmuch as Jacob called Reuben his firstborn this was an encouragement for all the firstborn to look forward to the future when they would again be allowed to function as priests. It was on account of that future that Jacob was so intent to acquire the birthright from Esau at the time. The idea that there would come a time when Esau would perform the service in the Holy Temple was anathema to Jacob. This does not mean that in the future these privileges will be denied to the Levites. At the time envisaged both the firstborn and the Levites will share equally in those functions that were performed by the Levites when the Temple was standing. Jacob also blessed Simon and Levi when he cursed their anger. His blessing consisted in that he cursed their excess amount of anger. By reducing their natural tendency to anger he bestowed a veritable blessing upon them. The fact that he decreed that when the land of Canaan would be distributed they should be split up and scattered throughout the land was also a blessing as it would help to blunt any harmful results whenever they would have occasion to display their anger.

איש אשר כברכתו ברך אותם, each of these tribes according to the specific blessing Yaakov had bestowed on them. The blessings would all become effective in the future.

אשר כברכתו according to his blessing, etc. Each person received a blessing in keeping with his individual personality and achievements. You must not forget that different souls possess different potentials. Some souls are able to rise to the level of being priests, others to the level of being kings, etc. Still others have the potential to achieve greatness in Torah knowledge, or temporal successes such as wealth, or personal heroism. Jacob endeavoured to match his blessings to what he perceived to be the nature of each of his sons' special attributes.

ברך אותם, he blessed them. The Torah uses the word אותם them, (plural) to stress that each and every blessing to each individual son was also meant to be beneficial to the brothers as a whole. When Jacob predicted that Yehudah's hand would be on the neck of his enemies, this automatically meant that Yehudah's brothers would also benefit from his military prowess, etc.

נאסף אל עמי [I AM] TO BE GATHERED UNTO MY PEOPLE — The expression נאסף “gathered” is used here because the souls are taken into a place in heaven where they are to be laid by. אסף in the Hebrew language has sometimes the meaning of “bringing something in to a place where it is to be kept” as e.g., (Judges 19:15) “For there was no man that took them into his house (אסף) [to lodge]”; (Deuteronomy 22:2) “then thou shalt bring it home (ואספתו) into thy house”; (Leviticus 23:39) “when you have taken in (באספכם) the fruit of the land” — which means bringing them in to the barn on account of the rain; (Exodus 23:16) “when thou hast taken in (באספך) thy labours”. So, too, the verb אסף used in connection with death always means “bringing in to the place where the souls are to be laid by”.

BURY ME ‘EL AVOTHAI.’ With my fathers. This is the language of Rashi. However, Rashi did not explain the expression el hame’arah as meaning ‘with’ the cave.²³⁰Ramban’s intent is to point out that the word el in the second expression could not mean “with,” which confronts us with the difficulty of having the same word assume different meanings in the same verse. Ramban will suggest various ways of resolving this difficulty.
It is possible that the expression of this verse is concise [and should be understood as if it said], “Bury me and carry me to my fathers to the cave,” for so Jacob said, And thou shalt carry me out from Egypt,²³¹Above, 47:30. and it further says, And his sons carried him.²³²50:13.
It is possible that the word el serves here to indicate many meanings:²³³Since Ramban cites Scriptural references to justify each usage, he finds no difficulty in the fact that the word is used differently in the same verse. Bury me ‘with’ my fathers, just as in the verse, And thou shalt not take a woman ‘el’ her sister,²³⁴Leviticus 18:18. meaning “with her sister.” El hame’arah means “in the cave,” just as in the verses: ‘Ve’el’ (And in) the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee;²³⁵Exodus 25:21. Behold, he hath hidden himself ‘el’ (among) the baggage.²³⁶I Samuel 10:22. Of similar usage is the expression, And after this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife ‘el’ (in) the cave.²³⁷Above, 23:19.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the meaning of the expression, Bury me²³⁸Kivru (bury me) is in the plural form. with my fathers, is that the brothers should go with Joseph.
Now Jacob really did not need to do that. However, he now commanded all of them to bury him in the cave, just as he had sworn Joseph, because he feared that Pharaoh might not give Joseph permission to leave the land lest he remain in his land [Canaan].²³⁹Abarbanel comments that the reason Pharaoh sent a group of Egyptians to accompany the burial party was that he feared lest Joseph and his brothers be influenced by the attachment to Canaan demonstrated by their father in both life and death and decide to stay there. Do you not see that it was necessary for Joseph to plead with the house of Pharaoh²⁴⁰Further, 50:4-5. that they should request Pharaoh to let him go, and he answered, Go up, and bury thy father, as he made thee swear,²⁴¹Ibid., Verse 6. as he agreed to it only on account of the oath!

ויצו אותם, He commanded them, etc. Seeing that Jacob had earlier called in Joseph to instruct him concerning where and when he was to be buried, he now made sure that the brothers should not think that all this was exclusively Joseph's duty and not theirs. He did not have to make the brothers take an oath, however, for reasons which I have explained in my commentary on 47,30.

ויצו אותם, after he had completed his blessing, he instructed them that they should bury him in the family plot; even though he had already commanded Joseph concerning this, he also commanded his other sons. He wanted them all to be prompt in carrying out his wishes.

ויצו אותם, “He commanded them;” Ibn Ezra understands this command as being the order to follow Joseph in every respect. Nachmanides writes that there had been no need for Yaakov to command his other sons to be obedient to Joseph, but the “command” Yaakov issued to the brothers was to bury him in the cave of Machpelah, as he had commanded Joseph already on a previous occasion. He remained afraid that perhaps Pharaoh would not give Joseph permission to personally leave the country. Yaakov was proven correct, seeing that Pharaoh consented to Joseph leaving only in order to enable him to honour the oath to his father.

I shall be gathered. When the souls of the righteous are released from their physical bodies they enter the company of other righteous souls to be connected with the source of eternal life. Bring me … to my fathers. Since his soul was to be united with the righteous, it was fitting that his body be buried with them as well, in anticipation of the time of the revival.

אני נאסף וגו׳, die Weisen erläutern: אם זכיתם ונטפלתם בי ואם לאו אני נאסף אל עמי, ob ihr mich begrabet oder nicht und wo ihr mich auch begrabet, mich, mein eigentliches Ich, berührt dies nicht, אני ich werde hinweggehoben zu den Kreisen der Meinigen, mein eigentliches Ich ist dann ja längst hinaufgehoben zu jener Höhe, wohin keine menschliche Hilfe die scheidende Seele zu geleiten hat. Aber ihr, euch wird es Bedürfnis und Verdienst sein, euch auch meiner zurückgelassenen Hülle anzunehmen; traget sie dann zu dem Lande und dem Orte hin, wo die Väter ruhen und leget sie zu ihnen.

ויצו אותם, “He commanded them;” that they should all accompany Joseph in the funeral cortege all the way to the cave of Machpelah.

אל אבתי means with my fathers.

אל אבותי, same as ‘“with” my fathers.’ We find the word אל meaning “with” also in Leviticus 18,17 אשה אל אחותה לא תקח, “you must not marry the wife together with her sister.”

אל אבותי, same as if it had said: עם אבותי, “with my forefathers.”

אל המערה, same as במערה, “in the cave.” We have the same construction in Exodus 25,21 ואל הארון תתן את העדות, “you are to place the tablets inside the ark,” not: “you shall give the tablets to the ark.”

לאחוזת קבר, they will not be able to challenge my right to be buried there.

אשר קנה אברהם, seeing that they had already spent many years in a foreign land, he felt it necessary to remind them that that burial plot was legally theirs. Seeing that already two generations of the patriarchs had been buried there, there was no legal way anyone could now challenge the ownership of this cave.

במערה, we have explained on Genesis 25,10 why this mention of the cave of Machpelah as the patriarchs’ burial site is mentioned so many times in the Torah as if we did not know already.

במערה וגו'...אשר קנה אברהם, “in the cave of Machpelah which Avraham had acquired, etc.” According to Nachmanides the reason why Yaakov recalled the details of the cave and who had been buried inside it, was to add distinction to that site in order to give his sons additional incentive to bury their father in that cave also. He added the words: “which Avraham had acquired as an inalienable ancestral plot,” in order to make them aware that Avraham had already designated this cave as an ancestral burial plot, so that they would have a legal basis for disputing anyone among the Hittites who might challenge their right to bury Yaakov there. The reason why the Torah repeats this once more in 50,13, is to indicate that with the burial of Yaakov in that cave Avraham’s intention at the time he purchased that cave had been carried out completely. He had purchased the cave for three pairs of human beings to be buried inside it, and not more. This is the reason that when the time came, Joseph did not ask the brothers to bury him there also.

Die Gegend, wo Abraham so lange gelebt und gewirkt und dann auch für sein Weib die Grabstätte erworben.

במערה, “in the cave;” according to the plain meaning of the word, Yaakov requested to be buried in the cave of Machpelah. [The question is why he had to repeat this, having just requested it in the previous verse. Ed.] If you were to answer that there were many caves and many fields, and he wanted to specify which one he had in mind, and his son might not know which one he referred to, he spelled out the name of the cave and the field, In the event that people would object to his being buried there, Yaakov gave him details of the transaction that had taken place between Avraham, Efron and the townspeople at the time, and he presumably handed him the document that testified to the sale of both the field and the cave at the time. (Genesis 23,16-18) He left out no detail that could be considered pertinent to ensure that there could be no legal impediment that Joseph would have to face.

לאחוזת קבר, “as a burial property.” Yaakov reminds Joseph that there is no legal way to dispute that he is entitled to be buried there.

THERE THEY BURIED ISAAC AND REBEKAH. The reason for saying this rather than saying, “I buried,” was that Esau was with him at the burial of their father,²⁴²Above, 35:29. and he did not wish to mention him now. Furthermore, [he did not mention Esau’s name] as he would have been forced to extend the account, saying, “there we buried Isaac, and there they buried his wife Rebekah,” since Jacob was not present at the burial of his mother.
Now in his testament, Jacob mentioned the cave and those who were buried in it to his children on account of the eminence of the place so that they make a zealous effort to bury him there.
Which Abraham bought with the field… for a possession of a burying-place.²⁴³Verse 30 here. To emphasize his thought on the eminence of the place, Ramban reverts to explain the preceding verse in the same light. He said this in order to let it be known that Abraham commanded that that place be their burial ground as an everlasting possession. However, further on, when it says, And they buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a burying-place,²⁴⁴Further, 50:13. the intent of the verse is to allude that the intention of the righteous one [Abraham] was completed with Jacob’s being buried there as he had bought it for the three of them, and no other person was to be buried there. It is for this reason that Joseph did not command that they bury him in the cave with his fathers.
Now I have seen in the Mechilta of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai²⁴⁵Beshalach 19. See also Midrash Hagadol, ed. Shechter, end of Vayechi 25, and Notes. — The Mechilta is a Midrash on the Book of Exodus, the standard Mechilta is that of Rabbi Yishmael. Ramban here refers to another Mechilta, namely, that of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai. That is why he specifies it by name. that Joseph said to them: “And when you bring me up to the land of Canaan bury me anywhere you wish. I have received a tradition that I will not be buried with my fathers for no one is permitted there for burial except the three patriarchs and the three matriarchs, as it is said, There they buried Abraham, etc., and it further says, In my burying-place which I digged for me,²⁴⁶Further 50:5. as he [Jacob] terminates [the group of people who are to be buried there].
It is possible that by saying, And there I buried Leah, Jacob hinted to them that he had already taken possession of the cave. This he said with respect to Esau, lest he and his children protest his [Jacob’s] being buried there by claiming that the cave is his as he was the firstborn and he is deserving of being buried with his ancestors. Now even though Esau had already left for another country,²⁴⁷Above, 36:6. his sons might transport him from there, just as Jacob’s sons carried him. Jacob longed to be buried with his sacred ancestors and to be united with them in burial, and if Esau were to be buried there, Jacob could not be buried there for one burial-place does not serve two families. This is also the purport of his words, In my burying-place which I digged for me,²⁴⁶Further 50:5. meaning that he had already dug the grave in order to take possession of it. This is also the reason that it says, And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen,²⁴⁸Further, 50:9. as Joseph knew the presumptuousness of Esau and his sons.
This is actually what occurred. We find in the Book of Chronicles of Joseph ben Gorion²⁴⁹The book is known as Josippon. This was an anonymous popular Hebrew medieval work containing the ancient history of the Jews. It was based in part upon the work of the historian Josephus. The story related here is told at length in Chapter 2. and in other books of ancient history that Zepho the son of Eliphaz the son of Esau²⁵⁰Above, 36:11. came and quarrelled with the children of Jacob concerning this burial, with the result that they waged war. But the power of Joseph prevailed, and they captured him together with his choice army, and they brought them to Egypt. There, Zepho remained in prison all the days of Joseph, but upon his death he escaped from there and went to the land of Compagna [in Italy] and there he ruled over the Caetheans in Rome, and ultimately was crowned [ruler] over the land of Italy. It was he who first reigned over Rome, and it was he who built the first and largest palace ever built in Rome.
Our Rabbis also mentioned this matter of the quarrel²⁵¹Sotah 13a. with Esau at the cave. The verse which states here, And Joseph returned into Egypt, he and his brethren, and all that went up with him to bury his father, after he had buried his father,²⁵²Further, 50:14. It would appear that Ramban wishes to finish his commentary on the entire book of Genesis with the death of Jacob (for reasons made clear further). Hence Ramban explains first the oath of Joseph, although it is not mentioned in Scripture till further on (at the end of Chapter 50), and then he reverts to Verse 33, (of the present Chapter 49), in order to explain the nature of the demise of the patriarch which mirrors as well the life of the hereafter, thus confirming the statement of the Sages: “Jacob our father did not die.” The Commentary thus ends on the high note of the deathlessness of the righteous. alludes to the fact that not one of them died in the war or on the way, as the merit of the prophet Jacob and the merit of Joseph stood by those who went up with him.
Joseph did not command that he be carried and buried now in the Land as his father had commanded, for the house of Pharaoh would not permit it since he was a source of honor to them. Furthermore, if his brothers and his father’s house were to accompany him, the people of the Land would rob and steal whatever they had, and it would not be respectful behavior for others to transport him there.

שמה קברו את יצחק, there they buried Isaac, etc. Inasmuch as the cave of Machpelah used to belong to Efron the Hittite before Abraham had bought it, the Torah says here: "there they buried Abraham and Sarah." This means that the original owners did no longer use that cave to bury their own dead but that it had become the burial ground for Abraham's heirs, Isaac and Ishmael. When the Torah continues that "there they buried Isaac and Rebeccah," this is a reminder that the cave had become the property of Isaac's heirs Jacob and Esau, excluding Ishmael and his family. When Jacob added that he had buried Leah there, he wanted to exclude Esau's right to be buried there. Sotah 13 quotes Genesis 50,5 which has Joseph telling Pharaoh that Jacob had spoken about the grave he had dug for himself in the land of Canaan as proof for denying Esau a share in that cave.

There they buried. The dead feel more at ease in the company of their forebears.

שמה קברו, Yitzchok and Ishmael.

שמה קברו את יצחק, “this was where they had buried Yitzchok.” The reason why Yaakov phrased it thus, instead of saying: “there I buried Yitzchok,” is that at the time he had to share that duty (honour) with his brother Esau. He had no wish to even mention Esau at this time. Furthermore, he wanted to avoid the fact that his mother Rivkah had also been buried there, but that he had not taken part in her burial at the time.

(31-32) Ganz genau wiederholt Jakob seinen Söhnen die Örtlichkeit und den Rechtstitel. Es waren ja seitdem bereits 200 Jahre verstrichen. Wir sehen, wie bereits in jener "altersgrauen" Zeit die Verhältnisse geordnet waren und ein ganz gesicherter Rechtszustand vorhanden war.

There I buried Leah. The dead are also more at ease in the company of those who were their helpmates in this world

קברו את יצחק, the reason why Yaakov did not say “we buried,” but “they buried,” although the Torah had testified that he and Esau had buried their father, was that he did not want to even be mentioned in the same breath as his brother who was a wicked person.

ושמה קברתי את לאה, ”and I also buried Leah there.” Although, no doubt, his sons knew this, he used mention of the fact to establish his right to be buried there as her husband, in the event that anyone would dispute this. There was the chance that Esau, being the firstborn, might claim the right to be buried there with father and grandfather. Seeing that he had not disputed Leah’s right to be buried there, he should not dispute Yaakov’s right either. The reason why he considered it necessary to add (compare 50,5) the words אשר כריתי לי, “which I dug out for myself,” was to reinforce his claim to be buried there. The reason that Joseph took a whole army with him in order to fulfill his oath and to bury his father in the location he had chosen, was precisely because he anticipated that the wicked Esau might use the occasion to dispute Yaakov’s right to burial there. According to our tradition, Esau and his clan did indeed try and prevent Yaakov being buried there. In fact, the Torah does allude to this obliquely when writing in 50,14 that Joseph and his brothers and all those who had participated in this burial returned to Egypt. This was recorded only in order to inform us that during the armed dispute which preceded Yaakov’s burial, his side did not suffer any casualties. Yaakov’s merit was great enough to protect all those participating in his burial.

AND JOSEPH SAID TO HIS BRETHREN, I DIE.²⁵³Further, 50:24. Ramban here attempts to remove this difficulty: Why did Joseph address himself first to his brothers, and then made the children of Israel swear to bring his remains to the land of his ancestors (as stated in the following verse.) All of his brothers were still alive for they all survived him, as you see in the case of Levi.²⁵⁴Seder Olam, Chapter 3: “None among the tribes lived less than Joseph, and none among them lived longer than Levi.” And Joseph made the children of Israel swear.²⁵⁵Further, 50:25. Upon seeing that his brothers were old, he made their children and all his father’s household swear that they too would command their children’s children [to take up his bones with them] at the moment of redemption, as they all knew of the impending exile.

מקנה השדה והמערה אשר בו, The purchase of the field and the cave which is in it, etc. After Jacob had alluded to the acquisition of the cave as something that was his exclusively, he repeated a particular detail which could possibly form the basis of a claim by the Hittites in the future. This was the law known in the Talmud as בר מצרא, that when a field is up for sale a person owning an adjoining field enjoys a privileged status as a potential buyer. This status is so strong that such a neighbour can force a deal which had been concluded already to be reversed in his favour.

מאת בני חת, “from the Hittites.” Yaakov repeats this although he had already spelled out that the individual from whom his grandfather purchased this field was Efron the Hittite, as Efron himself was no longer alive to confirm his claim. Seeing that Joseph also had not been present at the time when this transaction had taken place, he went into great detail so that he would know how to answer anyone of Efron’s heirs if he would dare to dispute his father’s claim.

Even though this law applies only when said field has been purchased by a Jew- as explained in Baba Metzia 108,- and the reason is that the Jewish purchaser can argue that his neighbour should be happy that he no longer has a Gentile as a neighbour, the reason given is not true. Were it true, the Gentiles could argue the same in reverse and use this law as a pretext to dispossess their Jewish neighbours, in this case the sons of Jacob.

The consideration of the law of בר מצרא is strong enough to override the fact that three generations of Jews had already been buried in that cave. Their argument would be the one described in Maimonides Hilchot Shecheynim chapter 13 that regardless of whether the new owner had dug a hole or built a superstructure on such ground, when the law of בר מצרא is invoked the neighbour who is now being dispossessed must be compensated for any expenses he had incurred while in possession of that field. On the other hand, if the interim owner had caused damage, he has to compensate the neighbour to whom this field should have been sold in the first place.

Jacob therefore made a point of reiterating מקנה השדה, the purchase of the field within which the cave is situated, from the sons of Chet, to make it quite clear that no such considerations as בר מצרא applied. The author refers the reader to what he wrote on this subject in connection with Genesis 23,9.

The reason that the Torah did not mention this detail at the time Abraham purchased the field from Efron is that a purchase from the Hittites is not in the same category as a purchase from Efron the individual from whom Abraham had purchased the field. The only possible connection the בני חת still had with that field was the fact that some of their properties may have been adjoining Abraham's. Inasmuch as any eventual protest by them would not be raised till a later stage, the Torah also reported Jacob's answer to such possible protest only at this time.

ויאסף רגליו means HE BROUGHT HIS FEET into the bed. (Rashi tells us that ויאסף signifies הכניס, he brought in).

AND HE EXPIRED, AND WAS GATHERED TO HIS PEOPLE. But the word “death” is not mentioned in his case. Our Rabbis therefore said, “Jacob, our father, did not die.” This is the language of Rashi.
Now according to this opinion of our Rabbis, the difficulty arises: Now Jacob applied the term “death” to himself, as it is written, Behold, I die, but G-d shall be with you!²⁵⁶Above, 48:21. Now perhaps he did not know it himself, or it may be that he did not wish to pay honor to himself. Similarly, with respect to the verse, And when Joseph’s brethren saw that their father was dead,²⁵⁷50:15. we must say that to them he was dead, or it may be that they did not at all know of this. Now the purport of this Midrash [which states that “Jacob, our father, did not die],” is that the souls of the righteous are bound in the bind of life with the Eternal,²⁵⁸I Samuel 25:29. and his soul covereth him all the day,²⁵⁹Deuteronomy 33:12. “wearing a scarlet garment”²⁶⁰A Cabalistic term indicating “the garment” which the soul dons after the death of the physical body. so that she not be stripped naked, as Jacob’s [soul was privileged to do continually], or which she dons at certain occasions [as do the souls of lesser righteous individuals]. This matter will be understood in the light of what is told in Tractate Shabbath²⁶¹There (152 b) the story is told of certain grave-diggers who were digging in the ground when they heard the voice of Rabbi Acho’ie the son of Yoshiyahu, who had been buried there previously, rebuking them. He was yet alive in the sense which the Rabbis refer to when they say Jacob did not die. and Tractate Kethuboth.²⁶²There (103 b) the story is told of Rabbeinu Hakadosh who, after his demise, would come home every Sabbath eve and pronounce the Kiddush.

ויאסוף רגליו, he drew his legs back into the bed, seeing that all the while he had pronounced the blessings he had been sitting on the edge of the bed as we know from 48,2 וישב על המטה, “he sat up on the bed.” Also while blessing Joseph’s sons he had remained sitting upright, as we know from 48,12 where Joseph is described as pulling back his sons from between Yaakov’s knees. G’d‘s fondness for Yaakov is emphasised by the Torah when it reports that Yaakov possessed this strength until he had completed the last words of his blessings and his instructions.

ויכל יעקב לצוות, Jacob finished commanding his sons, etc. This verse teaches that Jacob was an exception to the rule proclaimed by Solomon in Kohelet 8,8 that on the day someone dies he is no longer master over his spirit. Jacob was in full control of all his senses when he made all these arrangements. Only after having concluded all he wanted to say, ויאסוף דגליו, he gathered his feet into the bed, etc. Here is the source of the statement in Taanit 5 that "our father Jacob did not die." If death had taken possession of him, he would not have retained control long enough to be able to put his feet back into his bed. Midrash on Kohelet 8,8 explains that on the day of death a man cannot say to the angel of death: "wait for me until I have concluded my business and then I will come."

ויאסוף את רגליו. As long as he had still been speaking to his sons he felt strong enough to carry on sitting on the bed with his feet on the floor. As soon as he had finished, he pulled up his feet to the bed and lay down.

ויגוע ויאסף, “he passed away painlessly and was gathered to join his people.” Our sages use this phraseology to comment that “Yaakov did not die,” seeing that the Torah avoided the word וימת, “he died,” in spite of the fact that he himself had announced that he was going “to die.” (compare 48,21). Possibly, he himself did not know that he would not die in the accepted meaning of the word, or he did not want to make a statement which sounded arrogant, bombastic. We also have the report of the Torah in 50,15 ויראו אחי יוסף כי מת אביהם, “Joseph’s brothers saw that their father had died.” This is no contradiction. As far as the brothers were concerned their father had ”died.” Or, they too, had remained ignorant of what has been revealed to us by our tradition and the allusion in the text, something the brothers did not know as the Torah had not been written and revealed as yet.

Our father Yaakov did not die. The Gemora in Taanis 5b objects, “Did not the doctors embalm Yaakov (Bereishis 50:2)? And does it not say that his sons carried him from Egypt and buried him in Eretz Yisrael (ibid v. 13)? The answer is: It means he did not taste death, i.e., he did not feel the pain of death. Much more has been said on this subject.

ויאסוף רגליו אל המיטה, “he gathered his feet into the bed;” he had previously gotten up in bed in order to give a blessing to Joseph’s sons as we know from Genesis 48,2, where he was described as summoning his strength and sitting upright on his bed. As soon as he had completed his blessings he made ready to die.

ויאסוף רגליו אל המטה, “he retracted his feet into the bed.” Originally, he had been sitting on the edge of the bed as mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph his feet having been in contact with the floor.

ויגוע AND HE EXPIRED — but the word death is not mentioned in his case, and our Teachers therefore said: (Taanit 5b) “Jacob, our father, is not dead”.

Thus concludes the book Bereshith, containing the story of the accounts of the patriarchs. It tells of what has occurred and of new things that will occur²⁶³Here we have Ramban’s recurrent theme that the book of Genesis alludes to the future events in the story of Israel. even before they spring up in the hearts of people.
And to the Creator of all beginnings,
Him that rideth the skies,²⁶⁴Psalms 68:5.
Many praises and myriads of thanksgivings.
By Him actions and causes are weighed;²⁶⁵I Samuel 2:3.
He uncovereth deep things²⁶⁶Job 12:22. and lofty opinions,
And brings the thoughts to light.
It is He Who leadeth me in the path of righteousness,
In the midst of the path of justice,²⁶⁷See Proverbs 8:20.
Who vouchsafest benefits unto the undeserving.”²⁶⁸From the benediction upon deliverance from peril or recovery from sickness (Berachoth 54 b).

ויגוע, an expression used with the righteous, describing a painless death. Some (Taanit 5) explain the fact that the Torah did not add the word וימת, “he died,” which is customary, as a hint that Yaakov did not actually die in the accepted sense of the word. Although the Torah specifically mentioned that Moses died, i.e. וימת משה, (Deut. 34,5) the fact is that he did not die. (Sotah 13). The fact is that the righteous do not die in the accepted sense of the word.

ויאסף אל עמיו, I have explained the meaning of this expression on 25,8.