Comentario citado sobre Génesis 46:29

The truth is that most of the time, "falling one another's neck" only is mentioned when there is a kiss, and therefore the text could have mentioned this, along with the weeping, without explicitly mentioning that they kissed; the kiss would have been understood implicitly like Ya'akov and Yosef in Gen. 46:29 ("And Yosef...went up to meet his father...and fell on his neck and wept on his neck a good while"). In the latter case, Yosef clearly kissed him without it having to be mentioned in the text. It's also possible that in a state of great emotional excitement one would be too wonderstruck and stunned to kiss the other person; perhaps this was the case with Yosef and Ya'akov. However, regarding Ya'akov and Esav there's no doubt that there was no great affection between them, certainly not the type of excitement that would lead to being wonderstruck and stunned.

Similarly, the comparative lack of pathos when Moshe and Aharon reunite after many years of separation (Shemot 4:27)¹¹⁵Shemot 4:27. reveals a calm and unambivalent relationship. Absent is the falling on the neck and crying that marks the reunion of brothers and of fathers and sons in the book of Bereshit.Bereshit 33:4; Bereshit 45:14 and Bereshit 46:29¹¹⁶Bereshit 33:4, 45:14 and 46:29. The crying and the carrying on that appear in the other stories are a response to feelings of loss and regret at what could have been. In all of those cases, mistakes had been made and opportunities had been missed. And, as is the way of such situations, the feelings of loss could be fully recognized only after the changes that had taken place in the other person had been observed. This, of course, could occur only at the point of reunion. Unlike the stories in Bereshit, the separation of Moshe and Aharon appears to have been preceded by harmony and a lack of complexity. Thus, whatever missed opportunities elapsed on account of their separation resulted from events outside their control. The outcome of all this was Moshe and Aharon’s emotionally uncomplicated reunion.¹¹⁷The lack of complexity revealed in Moshe and Aharon’s reunion could also be due to the lack of previous exposure to each other, Moshe having grown up largely out of his home. At the same time, that doesn’t negate the fact that their reunion also reflects a lack of earlier conflict in comparison to the other stories.

ויאמר ישראל, “Yisrael said.” As long as his prophetic spirit had not been restored to him, the Torah referred to him only as Yaakov. Now that he had regained this additional spiritual dimension he is once more referred to as Yisrael. We have 18 instances from here until the end of the Book of Genesis where Yaakov is referred to as ישראל, such as 46,1; 46,5; 46,8; 46,29; to name but a few. The reason that G’d called him “Yaakov” in 46,2 whereas the Torah (G’d Himself) had referred to him as ישראל in the same verse was because the journey to Egypt was a voluntary exile on the part of Yaakov and it was not appropriate that the name Yisrael which denotes authority, victory, etc., should be applied to someone who exiles himself and subordinates himself to a human ruler. Once G’d had called him by the name Yaakov, it is not surprising to see that the Torah reverts to use of that name (compare 46,5, 46,6, 46,8, 46,19, 46,26, 46,27, etc.).
When the Torah (46,5) nonetheless speaks of וישאו בני ישראל את יעקב אביהם, “the sons of Israel carried their father Yaakov, etc.,” the message of the Torah is that Yaakov’s descent to Egypt involved both his names, i.e. although at this stage he had become an exile, ultimately, -through the exile experience in Egypt- he (his people) would be redeemed there and would emerge as more deserving of the name בני ישראל than before. This is the reason that in the verse mentioned the sons of Yaakov are referred to as בני ישראל rather than as the בני יעקב. The Torah could have simply written that “Yaakov’s sons carried him, etc.” We have this concept repeated at the beginning of the Book of Exodus where the Torah speaks of: “these are the children of Israel who came down to Egypt.” The same verse goes on naming them as “Yaakov and his sons.” These are the very ones who in the future would be called “the children of Israel.”