Komentarz do Rodzaju 49:10

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.