Midrash su I Cronache 5:44

Another comment on These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph, etc. (Gen. 37:2). Was not Reuben actually the firstborn? He was, but since he defiled his father’s couch (I Chron. 5:1), his birthright was given to the descendants of Joseph, the descendants of Israel. However, they are not actually accounted as the firstborn in the genealogy of the people. Another explanation. These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph. You find that Joseph resembled his father in every way, and that everything that happened to Jacob also happened to Joseph. Jacob’s brother was envious of him, and Joseph’s brothers were envious of him; Jacob was exiled to Haran, and Joseph was exiled to Egypt; Jacob said: Whether stolen by day or stolen by night (Gen. 31:39), and Joseph said: For indeed, I was stolen away (ibid. 40:15).

(Ib. b) R. Jochauan in the name of R. Simon b. Jochai said: "Since the day the Holy One, praised be He! created the world there was no man who called the Holy One, praised be He! 'Lord' (Adon) until Abraham came and called him 'Lord,' for it is said (Gen. 15, 8.) And he said Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?" Rab said "Daniel also would not have been answered were it not for the sake of Abraham, for it is said (Dan. 9, 17.) And now listen, O our God! to the prayer of thy servant, for the sake of the Lord; — 'for Thy sake' he [Daniel] ought to have said? But [he prayed] for the sake of Abraham, who called you Lord." Again said R. Jochanan in the name of R. Simon b. Jochai: "Since the day when the Holy One, praised be He! created the world, there was no man who thanked the Holy One, praised be He! until Leah came and thanked Him, as it is said (Gen. 29, 35.) This lime will I thank the Lord." What is the meaning of being called Reuben? R. Elazar said: "Leah said, 'See the difference between my son and the son of my father-in-law (Esau); whereas my father-in-law's son sold his birthright to Jacob of his own accord, as it is written (Gen. 25, 33.) And he sold his right of first-horn unto Jacob, yet what happened? As it is written (Ib. 27, 41.) And Esau hated Jacob, and it is also written (Ib. ib. 36.) And he said, hath he been therefore named Jacob, because he hath supplanted me these two times; but my son, although it was against his will that Joseph took from him the birthright, as it is written (I Chr. 5, 1.) But when he defiled his father's bed was his birth-right given unto the sons of Joseph; yet he never envied him, for it is written (Gen. 37, 21.) And when Reuben heard it he delivered him out of their hands.'" Why was she named Ruth? R. Jochanan said "Be cause she merited that from her shall come forth David, who satisfied the Holy One, praised be He! with songs and praises." And whence do we derive that the name is the cause? R. Elazar said: "It is said (Ps. 46, 9.) Come, look at the deeds of the Lord, who hath made desolation on the earth. Do not read it Shamoth (desolation), but read Shemoth (names)."

1) (Vayikra 5:15) ("A soul, if it profanes, and sins unwittingly of the sanctified things of the L–rd, then he shall bring his guilt-offering to the L–rd"): "a soul": to include the anointed (high-) priest as subject to profanation (me'ilah). (For I would think: It is written (Shemoth 30:33): "If a man compounds its (the anointing oil's) like and places of it upon a stranger," but not upon the anointed priest, who is no stranger to it, (it is, therefore, written, to negate this, "a soul," i.e., any soul). "if it profanes (timol ma'al). "Meilah" is a change (from the sacred to the profane), viz. (Chronicles 5:25): "And they profaned (vayimalu) the G d of their fathers, and went astray after the ba'alim," and (Bamidbar 5:12): "A man, if his wife goes astray and profanes him."

(Bamidbar 5:5-6) "And the L-rd spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the children of Israel: A man or a woman, if they do of all the sins of man": Why is this section mentioned? (i.e., it has already been mentioned elsewhere.) — It is written (Vayikra 5:20-22) "If a soul sin and commit a profanation against the L-rd … or if he find a lost object and swear falsely, etc." But the stolen property of a proselyte is not mentioned. It is, therefore, written (here) "Speak to the children of Israel: A man or a woman, if they do all of the sins of man." Scripture comes to teach us about the stolen property of a proselyte that if one swore to him falsely (that he did not steal it) and the proselyte died, he pays the principal and the fifth to the Cohanim and the guilt-offering to the altar, (a proselyte, halachically, not having any heirs). This is a rule in the Torah: Any section stated in one place in the Torah, missing one thing, and repeated in a different place is repeated only for the sake of the thing that is originated. R. Akiva says: Everything stated therein must be expounded. R. Yoshiyah (in explication of R. Akiva) says: Why is "a man or a woman" stated? From (Shemot 21:3) "And if a man open a pit or if a man dig a pit," I would know only of a man. Whence would I derive (the same for) a woman? From "a man or a woman," to liken a woman to a man in respect to all transgressions and damages in the Torah. R. Yonathan says: (The above derivation) is not needed, for it is already written (Ibid. 34) "The owner (whether man or woman) of the pit shall pay," and (Ibid. 22:5) "Pay shall pay the kindler (whether man or woman) of the fire." Why, then, is it stated "a man or a woman"? For its (own) teaching, (i.e., that the law of theft of the proselyte" obtains both with men and with women.) "if they do all of the sins of man to commit a profanation against the L-rd": Why is this stated? (i.e., it is already written [Vayikra 5:21] "If a soul sin and commit a profanation, etc.") Because it is written "If a soul sin and commit a profanation… (22) or find a lost object, etc.", I might think that only one who lies in respect to what is mentioned therein is regarded as one who lies against the L-rd Himself. Whence do I derive (the same for) one who lies in respect to all other things? It is, therefore, written "if they do all of the sins of man to commit a profanation against the L-rd." "to commit a profanation" ("limol ma'al"). "me'ilah" in all places is "lying." And thus is it written (I Chronicles 5:25) "Vayimalu ('and they lied') against the G-d of their fathers," and (Joshua 7:1) "And the children of Israel yimalu ma'al ('falsified') in respect to the ban," and (I Chronicles 10:13) "And Saul died because of his falsification ('bima'alo ma'al') against the L-rd." And, in respect to Uzziyahu (II Chronicles 26:18), "Leave the sanctuary, for you have acted falsely (ma'alta')," and (Bamidbar 5:12) "… and she be false (uma'ala) to him" — whence we see that "me'ilah" is "lying." (Ibid. 6) "and that soul shall be guilty": Why is this stated? (i.e., it seems redundant.) "a man or a woman" would seem to indicate specifically these. Whence would I derive (the same for) one whose sex is unknown or a hermaphrodite? From "and that soul shall be guilty" — All are included, even proselytes and servants. — But this would seem to include all, both the above and minors! — Would you say this? If a minor is exempt from (punishment for) the grave sin of idolatry, how much more so (is he exempt from punishment for) all the mitzvoth of the Torah! Whence is it derived that if one stole and swore (falsely) and went to bring the money (to repay) and the guilt-offering and could not manage to bring them before he died, that his heirs are exempt? From "and that soul shall be guilty." — But perhaps just as they are exempt from the guilt-offering, so, they are exempt from the principal. — It is, therefore, written (Ibid. 7) "and he shall give it (the principal) to the one to whom he is liable (for payment)." "and that soul shall be guilty": Why is this stated? Whence do you derive that if one burned his neighbor's grain sack on the Sabbath that beth-din does not exact payment from him because he is liable to the death penalty? From "and that soul shall be guilty" (i.e., in the aforementioned instance, the life alone is taken.) (Ibid. 7) "and they confess their sin which they have done": This tells me that a sin-offering requires confession. Whence do I derive (the same for) a guilt-offering? From "and that soul be guilty and they confess." R. Nathan says: This is a paradigm (binyan av) for all that are put to death that they require confession.

Rabbi Huna interpreted the verse regarding the Jordan. “Your hair is like a flock of goats” (Song of Songs 4:1) – the flocks that crossed the Jordan crossed only due to the merit of Jacob our patriarch. That is what is written: “You shall inform your children, saying: Israel crossed [this Jordan] on dry land” (Joshua 4:22). Rabbi Huna said: Israel the patriarch.³⁵The fact that the verse mentions Israel instead of the more common term for the nation, “children of Israel,” is meant to hint to the fact that they crossed in the merit of Israel, i.e., Jacob. Rabbi Yudan [said] in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: We find in three places, in the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Writings, that Israel crossed the Jordan due only to the merit of Jacob our patriarch. In the Torah: “For with my staff I crossed this Jordan” (Genesis 32:11); in the Prophets: “You shall inform your children, saying: Israel crossed this Jordan on dry land” (Joshua 4:22) – Israel the patriarch; in the Writings: “What is it, sea, that makes you flee? The Jordan, [that you turn back?]” (Psalms 114:5). [It retreats] “from before the God of Jacob” (Psalms 114:7).
“That streams down [shegaleshu] from Mount Gilad” (Song of Songs 4:1) – the mountain from whose midst you took away [shegelashten], I rendered it a memorial for the nations of the world. Which is this? This is the Jordan. What is it that you took away from its midst? “Your teeth are like a flock of ordered ewes” (Song of Songs 4:2) – the plunder of Siḥon and Og.³⁶The midrash understands the reference to ordered ewes as referring to the rows of soldiers who fought against Siḥon and Og (Etz Yosef). This occurred before the Israelites crossed the Jordan.
“That have come up from bathing” (Song of Songs 4:2) – Rabbi Elazar said: The land of Canaan was conquered with sixty thousand.³⁷Commentaries struggle to explain how this is derived from the phrase of the verse cited here. Some suggest that the text should read “like a flock of ordered ewes” (Song of Songs 4:2). Rabbi Elazar then states that if this is an allusion to the army that conquered Canaan, they must have been sixty thousand, because if there were more they would not have been “ordered” and organized (Yefei Kol). This is the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar said: Every war that involves more than sixty thousand is a war of pandemonium. Rabbi Yehuda said in the name of Ḥizkiya: Wherever it states about ten, about twenty, about thirty, about forty, it is saying either more or less. There it is stated: “About forty thousand, the vanguard of the army” (Joshua 4:13), and here it is stated: “Forty-four thousand seven hundred and sixty” (I Chronicles 5:18). Rabbi Aḥa said: They were complete thousands, and the rest perished on the way.³⁸Forty-five thousand soldiers actually went out to battle, but forty-four thousand seven hundred and sixty returned. The verse in Joshua refers to this number as forty thousand. Those fifteen thousand, where are they?³⁹The total number that went out to battle was forty-five thousand, whereas Rabbi Elazar said they would go out with sixty thousand. [Rabbi Elazar] said to them: They were guards of the equipment, and the verse did not include them in the tally. “That are all paired [matimot]” (Song of Songs 4:2) – as they were in the middle [metuamim] between the vanguard and the rearguard. That is what is written: “And the vanguard goes […and the rearguard goes]” (Joshua 6:9). “And there is none missing among them” (Song of Songs 4:2) – that not one of them was harmed.
“Your lips are like a scarlet thread” (Song of Songs 4:3) – when they said to Joshua: “Everything that you commanded us we will perform…” (Joshua 1:16). “Your speech is lovely” (Song of Songs 4:3) – as they said to him: “Anyone who will defy your word…will die” (Joshua 1:18). At that moment, Joshua began praising them: “Your temple [rakatekh] is like a pomegranate slice” (Song of Songs 4:3) – even the empty [hareikan] among you is packed with Torahs like this pomegranate. It goes without saying: “Behind your braid [letzamatekh]” (Song of Songs 4:3) – regarding the modest and the fervent [metzumatin] among you.
“Your neck is like the tower of [kemigdal] David” – how did David elevate [gidel] you in his book: “Who smote great kings” (Psalms 136:17)! “Built magnificently [letalpiyot]” – a book that was stated by many mouths [piyot].
“One thousand bucklers” – all those thousands and tens of thousands who crossed the Jordan and I defended them. I defended them only because of the merit of the one who came after one thousand generations.⁴⁰Moses You relied not only upon him, but rather, “all the shields of the mighty” – anyone who arises and controls and overcomes his inclination, like Moses in his time, David in his time, Ezra in his time; their entire generation depends upon them. Due to whom did Israel cross the Jordan? It was due to “your two breasts” (Song of Songs 4:5) – these are Joshua and Elazar.

(Numb. 32:1:) “Now the Children of Reuben and the Children of Gad] had much livestock.” Let our master instruct us: How many good gifts were created in the world?¹⁴Numb. R. 22:7. Thus have our masters taught: The Holy One, blessed be He, created three gifts in the world: wisdom, strength, and wealth. A person meriting one of them receives what is most desirable in the whole world. A person meriting wisdom has merited everything. A person meriting strength has merited everything. A person meriting wealth has merited everything. When? When they are gifts of the Heavens and come from the power of the strength of the Holy One, blessed be He. But human strength and wealth are nothing; for thus has Solomon stated (in Eccl. 9:11), “Again I saw that under the sun [the race does not belong to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor even wealth to the discerning, nor even favor to the knowledgeable].” Thus also has Jeremiah stated (in Jer. 9:22), “Thus says the Lord, ‘Let not the wise boast in their wisdom, [nor the strong boast in their strength, nor the wealthy boast in their wealth].’” So these gifts, when they do not come from the Holy One, blessed be He, will finally be cut off from them. The sages taught, “Two wise men arose in the world, one from Israel and one from the nations of the world. Ahitophel was from Israel, while Balaam was from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from this world and from the world to come. Two strong men arose in the world, one was from Israel and one from the nations of the world. Samson was from Israel, while Goliath was from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from the world. Two wealthy men arose in the world, Korah from Israel and Haman from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from the world. Why? Because their gift was not from the Holy One, blessed be He. Rather they grabbed it up for themselves. So also do you find with the Children of Gad and the Children of Reuben that they were very wealthy and had a lot of livestock. But they loved their money and resided outside the Land [of Israel as a result]. For that reason they were the first of the tribes to go into exile, as stated (in I Chron. 5:26), ‘and he carried them into exile, i.e., the Reubenites and the Gadites […].’ Who brought [the exile] upon them? [It happened] because they had separated themselves from their siblings for the sake of their livestock. And where is it shown? From what they read on the subject (in Numb. 32:1), ‘Now the Children of Reuben and the Children of Gad had much livestock.’”

(Gen. 44:18, cont.:) FOR YOU ARE LIKE PHARAOH. He said to him: Just as Pharaoh is the greatest here, and you are second to him; so Daddy is the greatest in the land of Canaan, and I am second to him. He said: I swear: If I should draw my sword from its scabbard, I am beginning with you, and I am winding up with Pharaoh. Thus it is stated (in Prov. 27:17): IRON SHARPENS IRON. It is fitting for the both of them to stand facing each other; it is fitting for a king to boast facing a king. Judah is a king, about whom it is written (in I Chron. 5:2): JUDAH PREVAILED AMONG HIS BROTHERS. Joseph is a king, about whom it is written (in Gen. 41:43): HE LET HIM RIDE IN THE CHARIOT OF HIS DEPUTY. Therefore, both of them were goring each other. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 44:18): PRAY (bi),¹⁴Bi can also mean AT ME, and the midrash may have this meaning in mind. MY LORD.

(Fol. 68) What is the meaning of the passage (Is. 5, 17) Then shall the sheep feed according to their wont, and the ruins of the fat ones shall sojourners eat? R. Menasha b. Jeremiah, in the name of Rab, said Kedabram (according to their wont), means Kimdubar Bam (as they were spoken of). What was spoken concerning them? Abaye said: "It refers to the end of the verse, And the ruins of the fat ones shall sojourners eat, which was explained by R. Joseph, 'The wealth of the wicked will be inherited by the just.' Raba then said to him: "This interpretation would have been correct had it been written Kharboth [in a coordinate way], but now that it is written V'charboth [as a compound], it must be different in meaning. Raba therefore said the passage is intended to mean what R. Chananel, in the name of Rab, said, for R. Chananel, in the name of Rab, said: "in the future, the righteous will have the power to revive the dead; for it is written here, Then shall the sheep feed according to their wont, and it is written there (Micha 7, 14) Let them feed in Bashan and Giggal, as in the days of old; i.e., Bashan refers to Elisha, the man of Bashan, as it is written (I Chr. 5, 12) Yanai and Shaphat in Bashan, and it is also written (II Kings 3, 11) Elisha, the son of shaphat, who poured water on the hands of Elijah; Gilead refers to Elijah, as it is said (I Kings 17, 1) And Elisha, the Tishbite, who was of the inhabitants of Gilead, said."

(Bamidbar 5:12) "Speak to the children of Israel and say to them: A man, a man, if his wife go astray, and she be faithless to him": What is the intent of this section? From (Devarim 24:1) "If a man take a woman and he cohabit with her, etc.", we hear only that if he had two witnesses (to her adultery) and she had not been forewarned, that she leaves him by divorce. But if she were adulterous in the presence of only one witness or it is in doubt whether she had or had not been adulterous after having been secreted (with the one she had been forewarned against), we did not hear what is to be done with her. It is, therefore, written "Speak to the children of Israel and say to them: "A man, a man, if his wife go astray, etc.", that (in the above instance) she must drink the bitter waters. This is the intent of this section. "A man, a man": to include the wife of a deaf mute, an imbecile, one who has gone abroad or been incarcerated, or a dullard — that beth-din forewarns her (if she is deporting herself immodestly) to the end of invalidating her kethubah (her marriage contract). I might think, even to the end of making her drink (the bitter waters); it is, therefore, written (to negate this) (Ibid. 11) "Then the man shall bring his wife." R. Yossi b. Yehudah says: also to the end of making her drink when her husband is released from incarceration. Variantly: "A man, a man": to include a woman awaiting levirate marriage (yibum). "if his wife go astray": Scripture speaks of those who are fit to be "wives" — to exclude a widow married to a high-priest, a divorcée or a chalutzah (one who has performed the chaliztah ceremony to break a levirate connection), who are married to a regular priest, a mamzereth or a Nethinah (a descendent of the Geveonites) married to an Israelite, and a daughter of an Israelite married to a Nathin or a mamzer. And, according to Akavya b. Mehallalel, (to exclude) a woman who is a proselyte or a freed slave. They (the sages) said to him (Akavya): But there was a freed slave, Charkemis, in Jerusalem, and Shemaya and Avtalyon had her drink (the bitter waters)! He replied: They dissimulated their doing so — whereupon they excommunicated him and he died in his state of excommunication, and beth-din stoned his coffin. ("if his wife go astray,) and she is guilty of ma'al against him": ("ma'al") In the area of illicit relations or in the area of monetary (fraudulence)? (Ibid. 5:13) "And a man lie with her a lying of seed" indicates that ma'al here is in the area of illicit relations, and not in that of monetary (fraudulence). "and she is guilty of ma'al against him": "me'ilah" in all places is "lying." And thus is it written (I Chronicles 5:25) "Vayimalu ('and they lied') against the G-d of their fathers," and (Joshua 7:1) "And the children of Israel yimalu ma'al ('falsified') in respect to the ban," and (I Chronicles 10:13) "And Saul died because of his falsification ('bema'alo ma'al') against the L-rd." And, in respect to Uzziyahu, king of Judah, (II Chronicles 26:18) "Leave the sanctuary, for you have acted falsely (ma'alta)," and (Vayikra 5:21) "and he (the denier) ma'ala ma'al against the L-rd" — whence we see that "me'ilah" in all places is "lying."

The sages (literally: the wise) have taught: Two wise men arose in the world, one from Israel and one from the nations of the world. Balaam was from the nations of the world, while Ahitophel was from Israel; but both of them were lost from this world and from the world to come. [Two strong men arose in the world, one was from Israel and one from the nations of the world. Samson was from Israel, while Goliath was from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from the world.] Two wealthy men arose in the world, Korah from Israel and Haman from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from the world. Why? Because their gift was not from Heaven. So also you find among the children of Gad and the children of Reuben that they were very wealthy and had a lot of livestock, but they loved the livestock and resided outside the land of Israel. For that reason they were the first of the tribes to go into exile, as stated (in I Chron. 5:26): AND HE CARRIED THEM INTO EXILE, i.e., THE REUBENITES AND THE GADITES. [Who brought <the exile> on them? <It happened> because they had separated themselves from their siblings for the sake of their livestock. And where is it shown? From what they read on the subject (in Numb. 32:1): NOW THE CHILDREN OF REUBEN AND THE CHILDREN OF GAD HAD MUCH LIVESTOCK.]

It was taught in the name of R. Pepiyas: Indeed it is a disgrace for Hezekiah and his associates not to have recited any song until the earth opened its mouth and sang, as it is said, (Is. 24) From the edge of the earth we heard songs, Glory be to the righteous. Similar to this we find a passage (Ex. 18, 10) Blessed be the Lord who hath delivered you. It was taught in the name of Pepiyas: It is indeed a shame for Moses and the six hundred thousand Israelites with him who didn't say this benediction till Jethro came and said Blessed be the Lord (Ib. ib. 9) Vayichad (rejoiced) Jethro. Rab and Samuel both explain this word. Rab said: "It means that he passed a sharp razor upon his body." [He performed the ceremony of circumcision]. And Samuel said "It means that his whole body pained as if struck with sharp needles." Rab said: "This is what people say: "A proselyte, even until the tenth generation, do not despise in his presence a heathen." (Is. 10, 15) Therefore will the Lord, the Eternal of hosts, send forth among his bmashmanov (fat ones) leanness. What is meant by the term bmashmanov? The Lord said: "Let Hezekiah who has eight names come and take revenge on Sennacherib who has also eight names." Hezekiah had eight names, as it is written (Ib. 9, 5) For a child is born unto us, a son hath been given unto us, and the government is placed on his shoulders and his name is Pete, Yoez, El, Gibor, Abbi, Ad, Sar, Shalom. And what about the name Hezekiah? This means that the Lord strengthened him; according to others, it means, that he caused the strengthening of Israel unto their Heavenly Father. And concerning Sennacherib, it is written (II Kings, 15, 9) Thiglath-pilesser (I Chron. 5, 20) Pilnesser, (II Kings, 17, 3) Shalmanesser, (Ib. ib. 17) Pul, (Isa. 20, 1) Sargon, and (Ezra 4, 70) Assnaper, Rabha, V'yaquira. And what about the name Sennacherib? This means that he said vile words against Heaven. R. Jochanan said: "Why did that wicked one deserve to be called the honored and the great? Because he did not speak evil of the land of Israel, as it is said (II Kings, 18, 32) Until I come and take you away to a land like your own, etc." Rab and Samuel differ in the following: One says he was a clever king, and the other, he was a foolish king. According to the one, he was a clever king, because if he would have said that he would take them to a better land than theirs they would have considered him a liar. And according to the other he was a fool, for what use could it be for them to go to a land which was not better than their own? Whereto did he exile the ten tribes of Israel? Mar Zutra said, to Africa, and R. Chanina said, to the mountains of Slug. However, the ten tribes of Israel slandered the land of Israel, for when they reached the city of Sus they said that it was like their own land. And when they came to the city of Elmin they said that it is like our Elmin (Jerusalem), and when they reached the second Sus they said that it was much better than their own land.

(Numb. 32:1) “Now the Children of Reuben and the Children of Gad] had much livestock”: A legal teaching: Three gifts were created in the world. A person meriting one of them receives what is most desirable in the whole world. A person meriting wisdom has merited everything. A person meriting strength has merited everything. A person meriting wealth has merited everything. When? When they are gifts of the Heavens and come from the power of Torah. But human strength and wealth are nothing; for thus has Solomon stated (in Eccl. 9:11), “Again I saw that under the sun the race does not belong to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor even wealth to the discerning, nor even favor to the knowledgeable […].” Thus also has Jeremiah stated (in Jer. 9:22), “Thus says the Lord, ‘Let not the wise boast in their wisdom, nor the strong boast in their strength, nor the wealthy boast in their wealth.’” So these gifts, when they do not come from the Holy One, blessed be He, will finally be cut off from them. Our masters taught, “Two wise men arose in the world, one from Israel and one from the nations of the world. Ahitophel was from Israel, while Balaam was from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from the world. Two strong men arose in the world, one was from Israel and one from the nations of the world. Samson was from Israel, while Goliath was from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from the world. Two wealthy men arose in the world, Korah from Israel and Haman from the nations of the world; but both of them were lost from the world. Why? Because their gift was not from the Holy One, blessed be He. Rather they grabbed it up for themselves. So also do you find with the Children of Gad and the Children of Reuben that they were very wealthy and had a lot of livestock. But they loved their money and resided outside the Land of Israel [as a result]. For that reason they were the first of the tribes to go into exile, as stated (in I Chron. 5:26), ‘and he carried them into exile, i.e., the Reubenites and the Gadites […].’ Who brought [the exile] upon them? [It happened] because they had separated themselves from their siblings for the sake of their livestock. And where is it shown? From what is written in the Torah (in Numb. 32:1), ‘Now the Children of Reuben [and the Children of Gad] had much livestock.’”

Another interpretation (of Gen. 27:33): Why did he tremble? Because he had blessed the younger before the elder; for he had intended to bless both of them. So he called Esau in order to bless him first, since he was the elder. Then afterwards, < he would call > Jacob. So he intended. Why? Because before the Holy One it is difficult to supplant a genealogical chain, to replace primogeniture. So note that he only called Esau. On what basis do you say that he wished to bless Jacob? On the basis of what Jacob said, {and he said} [to his mother] (in Gen. 27:12): THEN I WILL BRING UPON MYSELF A CURSE INSTEAD OF A BLESSING. He said to her: Even the blessing which he was going to give me, in the end he will not give me. Isaac only trembled when he said: What sin is on my hands that the genealogical chain should be ruined at my hands, for me to bless the younger < first > and the elder afterwards? And so you find: In every place Moses comes before Aaron;⁹²Cf. Mekhilta de Rabbi Ishmael, Pisha, 1. but when it comes to genealogy, Aaron is before Moses. Thus it is stated (in Numb. 3:1): NOW THESE ARE THE DESCENDANTS OF AARON AND MOSES. R. Abba said in the name of R. Johanan of the Bet Guvrin: In the case of Reuben also, when that event (the selling of Joseph) happened at his hands, his father gave his birthright to Joseph. Thus it is stated (in I Chron. 5:1): AND THE SONS OF REUBEN, THE FIRST-BORN OF ISRAEL. NOW HE IS FIRST-BORN; BUT, WHEN HE HAD DEFILED HIS FATHER'S BED, HIS BIRTHRIGHT WAS GIVEN TO (JOSEPH) [THE SONS JOSEPH BEN ISRAEL]. Hence the birthright belonged to Joseph. In the genealogy, however, he was not able to keep his birthright away from him, as stated (in Exod. 6:14): THE SONS OF REUBEN THE FIRST-BORN OF ISRAEL. "Now he was the first-born" is not written here (in I Chron. 5:1), but: NOW HE IS THE FIRST-BORN. So also in the case of the sons of Noah, Japheth was the oldest: but because Shem was more righteous, < Scripture > counts him first in every place.⁹³See above, 2:19. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 9:18): AND THE CHILDREN OF NOAH WHO WENT FORTH FROM THE ARK WERE SHEM, HAM, AND JAPHETH. In regard to genealogy, however, < Scripture > mentions Japheth as being the eldest. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 10:21): AND UNTO SHEM THERE WERE CHILDREN BORN. HE WAS ALSO FATHER TO ALL THE CHILDREN OF EBER < AND > THE BROTHER OF JAPHETH, WHO WAS THE OLDEST.⁹⁴The last eight words can be, and commonly are, translated: THE ELDER BROTHER OF JAPHETH. See Gen. R. 37:7. R. Tanhuma said: But you also have to learn < through > greater insight, that Shem was second to Japheth. Therefore, you find that Noah sired a son at < an age of > five hundred years. It is written (in Gen. 5:32): AND NOAH WAS FIVE HUNDRED YEARS OLD; < AND NOAH BEGOT SHEM, HAM, AND JAPHETH >. Now the flood took place (according to Gen. 7:11): IN THE SIX HUNDREDTH YEAR OF NOAH'S LIFE…. {Since} it is also written of Shem that he sired a son at < the age of > a hundred years, {he was lacking two} [two years after the flood). It is so stated (in Gen. 11:10): THESE ARE THE DESCENDANTS OF SHEM: SHEM WAS A HUNDRED YEARS OLD WHEN HE BEGOT ARPACHSHAD, TWO YEARS AFTER THE FLOOD. If he had been the eldest, it would have been necessary to say only: HE BEGOT ARPACHSHAD, TWO YEARS AFTER THE FLOOD. You also learn from here that Japheth was two years older than Shem according to the reckoning of my calculation. Here also (in Gen. 27:33), Isaac only trembled when he said: What sin is there on my hands that I have blessed the younger before the elder and have changed the order? Jacob went out and Esau came in, as stated (in Gen. 27:30): AND JACOB HAD JUST GONE OUT…. He (Esau) said to his father (in vs. 32): I AM [YOUR SON], YOUR FIRST-BORN, ESAU. His father began saying: Who is this one who entered and received the blessings? The Holy Spirit said to him: It was Jacob. He said to him (in vs. 33): AND I HAVE EATEN OF EVERYTHING. R. Isaac said: In that dish Isaac had a taste OF EVERYTHING that the Holy One had created during the six days of creation.⁹⁵Tanh., Gen. 6:11; Gen. R. 67:2. Also R. Judah b. R. Shallum said in the name of R. Ayyevu: In that dish Isaac had a taste of whatever is stored up for the righteous in the days to come. [Isaac said to him: In that dish I tasted everything that the Holy One has created]. Esau said to him: Daddy, [tell me:] What is that dish? Isaac said to him: < Whatever I ask for >. I asked for pheasant;⁹⁶Gk.: phasianos. I tasted it. Esau said to him: Daddy, tell me the basic < ingredient >. He said to him: It was meat. R. Hananyah b. R. Isaac said: When Esau heard this, he began striking his face. He said: Woe to that man, as stated (in Gen. 27:34): AND HE LET OUT A GREAT AND BITTER CRY…. Esau said: He fed me pottage of lentils, and I gave him my birthright. Now he has fed Daddy meat. You must know with what blessings he blessed him! HE BEGAN TO CRY AND SAY: IS HE NOT RIGHTLY NAMED JACOB (rt.: 'QB)? [FOR HE HAS CHEATED (rt.: 'QB) ME THESE TWO TIMES. HE TOOK MY BIRTHRIGHT; AND, SEE, NOW HE HAS TAKEN MY BLESSING.] His father said to him: So what should I do for you? He said to him: He has already taken my birthright. Isaac said to him: Over this matter I was sorry. He also said: Perhaps I transgressed a commandment of the Law in blessing the younger before the elder. Now that I have already blessed him, (according to Gen. 27:33:) HE SHALL ALSO BE BLESSED.

... Teach us o teacher: toward where should one who prays orient his heart? This is what our Rabbis taught: one should orient his heart toward the place of the Holy of Holies (Berachot 4:5). R’ Eliezer ben Yaakov says: if one is praying outside of the land, he should orient his heart to the land of Israel. If one is praying within the land of Israel, he should orient his heart to Jerusalem. If one is praying in Jerusalem, he should orient his heart to the Holy Temple. If one is praying in the Holy Temple, he should orient his heart to the Holy of Holies. R’ Avin the Levi said: “our neck is like the Tower of David, built as a model (talpiyot)…” (Song of Songs 4:4) What does talpiyot mean? The hill (tel) toward which all turns (peniyot) are directed. And after all this praise, it is written “Open your doors, O Lebanon, and let the fire consume your cedars.” (Zechariah 11:1) And so too they said “He has hurled fire into my bones…” (Lamentations 1:13) Israel said to Him: Master of the World! How long will it be like this? Did You not write in Your Torah “…the one who ignited the fire shall surely pay” (Exodus 22:5)? And You are the one who ignited the fire, as it says “From above He has hurled fire into my bones…” (Lamentations 1:13) You need to rebuild it and to console us, not at the hands of an angel but You in Your glory. The Holy One said to them: by your life, so I will do! As it says “The Lord is the builder of Jerusalem; He will gather the outcasts of Israel.” (Psalms 147:2) And I am the one who consoles you. From where do we learn this? From that which they read in the prophets “I, yea I am He Who consoles you…” (Isaiah 51:12)

And all his sons and all his daughters rose (Genesis 37:35) - How many daughters did he have? Only one, and probably she was buried. Rather, this teaches that a person never stops calling their son-in-law "my son" and their daughter-in-law "my daughter". Rabbi Yehudah says: the brothers married [twin] sisters [that were born with them], as it is written "And all his sons and all his daughters rose to console him". "But he refused to be consoled" - a Roman matron asked Rabbi Yosi: it is written "Yehuda became more powerful than his brothers" (II Chron. 5:2) and it is written "when Yehuda was comforted he went to shear his sheep" (Genesis 38:12) and this father, of all of them, refuses to be comforted!? He answered: it is possible to be comforted for those who died, but it is not possible to be comforted for those alive. "And his father cried over him" - this is Itzchak. Both Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Simon say: he would cry at his father's house, and once he left he went and bathed and oiled his skin, and ate and drank. And why did not Itzchak reveal this [that he was alive] to him? Itzchak said: if the Holy One of Blessing did not reveal, I am not revealing. Rabbi Simon said: this is because everyone who one mourns for, one mourns with.

After we learn that inheritance to sons is to be emphasized, we perforce must follow the first approach, viz.: Since he inherits with one (son) and he inherits with five, then just as when he inherits with one, he receives a double portion of one, so, when he inherits with five, he receives a double portion of one. And it is written (I Chronicles 5:1) "And the sons of Reuven, the first-born of Israel (i.e., Jacob). For he was the bechor, but when he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph." And it is written (Ibid. 2) "For Judah prevailed over his brothers (to inherit the kingship) and the ruler was to come from him, and the bechorah (the status of first-born) was given to Joseph." And it is written (Bereshith 48:22) "And I (Jacob) have given to you (Joseph) an additional portion over your brothers."

(Devarim, Ibid.) "And his men will be counted": "heroic" in strength; "heroic" in Torah. "heroic in strength": viz. (Isaiah 3:25): "Your men will fall by the sword, and your strong ones in the war." "heroic" in Torah: viz. (Psalms 103:20) "heroic" in strength, doing His word (Torah)." And (I Chronicles 5:6) "Be'erah was his son, who was exiled by Tiglath-Pilneser, king of Asher. He was the leader of the Reuvenites." Thus, Reuven shall live and he shall not die."