Yaakov's Parting Words to Shimon and Levi/2

Yaakov's Parting Words to Shimon and Levi

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

The Episode of Shekhem

Yaakov's words to Shimon and Levi reference the story of Shekhem. This position splits regarding whether it assumes that Yaakov is rebuking or praising Shimon and Levi for their role:

Rebuke

Yaakov chastised the brothers for their excessive violence in the slaughter of Shekhem, expressing his anger at the deed.

Sources:Testament of LeviLevi 6About Testaments of the Patriarchs,  Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 49:5-7Bereshit Third Commentary 49:5-7About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, RadakBereshit 49:5-7About R. David Kimchi, R. Avraham b. HaRambamBereshit 49:5-8About R. Avraham Maimonides, RambanBereshit 49:5About R. Moshe b. Nachman,¹ R. HirschBereshit 49:5-7About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch

Yaakov's blessings: on the past or future? These sources read Yaakov's blessings as a whole as referring to future events and being directed at the tribes rather than at Yaakov's individual sons. Nonetheless, with regards to this blessing, they assume that Yaakov is addressing Shimon and Levi specifically, and referencing a past event (the episode in Shekhem), rather than foretelling the future.  It is possible, though, that Yaakov does so only in order to explain why the brothers' future tribes are later dispersed² and neither is granted kingship.³

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – According to most of these commentators, the word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" means "their dwelling" (מגורותיהם) or "origins".  As evidence, Ibn Ezra points to the root's usage in the phrase "מְכֹרֹתַיִךְ וּמֹלְדֹתַיִךְ" (Yechezkel 16:3).⁴

• According to R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Ramban, Yaakov is saying that the brothers' origins (and, thus, the whole fabric of their lives) lie in acts of violence (as demonstrated in Shekhem).
• Ibn Ezra and Radak, in contrast, assert that Yaakov tells the brothers that their attack was unjust (חָמָס) specifically because the Shekhemites were living with them in the land (מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם[ב‎]).  In other words, since they had made a covenant with the Shekhemites to live together peacefully and share the land,⁵ their later slaughter was deceitful and wicked.⁶

"בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי" – These sources divide regarding whether Yaakov's words refer to the past or future:

• Past - Most of these sources read this verse as if it were written in the past tense. Yaakov makes clear that he had not been part of either the brothers' secret scheme or its execution.⁷
• Future - R. Hirsch, in contrast, asserts that Yaakov is saying that due to the extremity of their deeds, Shimon and Levi's plots and gatherings will never represent or determine the will and honor of the nation.  [R. Hirsch reads "נַפְשִׁי" and "כְּבֹדִי" to refer to the soul and honor of Israel, the nation, and not Yaakov, the individual.]

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ" – The word "אִישׁ" can refer either to the individual Shekhem, or to the people of the city as a whole.

"וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – These sources offer three possible explanations of the word "שׁוֹר":

• Ox – Yaakov is referring to the oxen which were taken from Shekehem as booty and hamstrung.⁸
• Wall – The word "שׁוֹר"  is understood as if written "שׁוּר", and means wall.⁹ Yaakov is speaking of the walls of the city which the brothers destroyed.¹⁰
• Leader – The word is a metaphor for a strong individual, and thus can refer to either Shekhem or Hamor, whom the brothers killed.¹¹ If so, the two clauses, "כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ" and "וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר", are parallel and refer to the same action.

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז" – Blessing or curse? Most of these sources suggest that Yaakov stopped short of actually cursing the brothers:

• R. Avraham b. HaRambam and R. Hirsch stress that Yaakov cursed the brothers' extreme anger and violence, but not the brothers themselves.
• According to Radak and Ibn Ezra, in contrast, Yaakov's words "אָרוּר אַפָּם" constitute a prayer that Shimon and Levi's anger be diminished.¹²

אֲחַלְּקֵם בְּיַעֲקֹב וַאֲפִיצֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל

Yaakov's evaluation of the slaughter – This approach suggests that Yaakov's words here are proof that when he rebuked the brothers after the killing, "עֲכַרְתֶּם אֹתִי לְהַבְאִישֵׁנִי בְּיֹשֵׁב הָאָרֶץ" (Bereshit 34:30), he was upset not only about the repercussions of their deeds but also about the immorality of their actions.¹³

Hashem's evaluation of the slaughter – Ibn Ezra, R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Radak all assert that Yaakov's words in Chapter 49 were said via prophecy. As such, his rebuke does not represent his own opinion, but that of Hashem.¹⁴  The Testament of Yaakov, in contrast, suggests that Yaakov's negative evaluation is his alone, and that Hashem was on the brothers' side.

No mention of sale of Yosef – This position might suggest that Yaakov made no allusion to Shimon and Levi's role in the sale of Yosef because Yaakov was totally unaware of the sale.  He likely thought that the brothers had truly believed that Yosef had been killed by a wild animal and that they were just as surprised to find him alive as he was.  As nothing would be gained by revealing the truth to their father, the brothers kept him in the dark even after reuniting with Yosef.¹⁵

Attempt to Kill Yosef

Yaakov's rebuke revolves around Shimon and Levi's role in the plots to kill and sell Yosef.

Sources:R. Moshe AlshikhBereshit 49:5About R. Moshe Alshikh, Or HaChayyimBereshit 49:5-7About R. Chayyim b. Atar¹⁶

Yaakov's blessings: on the past or future? According to Or HaChayyim, in many of Yaakov's blessings he speaks of both the past and future, showing how the brother's past actions will affect their future tribes' status.¹⁷

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – Or HaChayyim suggests that "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" comes from the root "מכר", to sell, and that Yaakov rebuked the brothers that the sale of Yosef was unjust and marked by "חמס".‎¹⁸

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ" – These sources assert that the phrase refers to the attempt to kill Yosef. They assume that (though not stated) Shimon and Levi were the ones who suggested, "וְעַתָּה לְכוּ וְנַהַרְגֵהוּ" and thus most culpable.‎¹⁹ Though the brothers did not end up killing Yosef, the verse attributes the action to them because they desired to kill him and even acted upon it when they threw him into the pit.

"וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – These sources suggest that the word "שׁוֹר" refers to Yosef, as later, in Moshe's blessing in Devarim, he is referred to as "בְּכוֹר שׁוֹרוֹ הָדָר לוֹ".‎²⁰  Thus, in these words, too, Yaakov alludes to Yosef's being thrown into the pit to die.²¹

Awareness of the story of the sale – This approach assumes that Yaakov was aware not only of the sale but also the initial plot to kill Yosef. Bereshit 50:17 might provide evidence that Yaakov was indeed aware of the plot, for the brothers tell Yosef that before his death, Yaakov had said to tell Yosef, "שָׂא נָא פֶּשַׁע אַחֶיךָ וְחַטָּאתָם כִּי רָעָה גְמָלוּךָ".‎²²

"בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי" – Or HaChayyim understands this verse as if it were written in the past tense. Yaakov is emphasizing that he played no role in either the brothers' secret hatred or in their gathering together to plot against Yosef. However, considering that the brothers knew that Yaakov played no part, such a declaration would seem unnecessary. It is possible, though, that these words are aimed more at Yosef than Shimon and Levi,²³ who might have always wondered whether, when Yaakov had sent him to check on his brothers so many years before, he had done so knowing what would happen.²⁴

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז" – Blessing or curse?

No mention of Shekhem – According to this approach, Yaakov's rebuke did not focus on the slaughter of Shekhem, because he did not find the brothers morally at fault for the killings. When he said "עֲכַרְתֶּם אֹתִי לְהַבְאִישֵׁנִי בְּיֹשֵׁב הָאָרֶץ" after the city's decimation, he was worried only about the potential reaction of surrounding nations to the deed, not whether it was justified. [See how Or HaChayyim defends and justifies Shimon and Levi's role in the massacre in Sin and Slaughter of Shekhem.]

Fiery Temperament

Yaakov does not speak of any specific event, but rather about the brothers' fiery  temperament and nature. This position subdivides regarding whether it views this trait as worthy of praise or censure:

Worthy of Censure

Yaakov views the brothers' wrath negatively, and points to it as the reason that neither Shimon nor Levi merit kingship.

Sources:R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBereshit 49:5-7About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor

Blessings - on the past or future – According to R"Y Bekhor Shor, much of Yaakov's final address to his sons relates to their roles during the Monarchic period. Thus, he opens his words, by telling Shimon and Levi why they did not merit to inherit the monarchy and right to rule, but were instead dispersed throughout the tribes.

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" is related to the root "מכר", meaning acquaintance. Yaakov tells the brothers that their relationship is a weapon of violence. It is not clear what R"Y Bekhor Shor means by this.  He might be suggesting that the common denominator between the brothers is their quick temper. Alternatively he is suggesting that the friendship between the brothers was prone to lead to violence due to the hot-hotheadedness of each.

"בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי" – According to R"Y Bekhor Shor, when Yaakov says "נַפְשִׁי" and "כְּבֹדִי" he is not referring to himself, but to his descendants,  Yaakov expresses that he has no desire that his other sons be a part of Shimon and Levi's secret machinations, or be led by them at all, since their wrath is likely to lead to evil.

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – This verse is not referring to any specific deed, but the brothers' general  tendency to kill in their anger, and to hamstring oxen even when not angry (בִרְצֹנָם).

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז" – Blessing or curse? R"Y Bekhor Shor understand Yaakov's words as a condemnation of the brothers anger, which led them to lose out on kingship.  They are dispersed among Israel so as to be separated from one another, preventing them from consulting together in their anger.

No mention of Shekhem – According to this approach, Yaakov might have the episode of Shekhem in mind as he spoke but chose not to bring it as an example because, of all their wrathful deeds, it might have been the most justified.

No mention of Yosef – R"Y Bekhor Shor might not think that Shimon and Levi's role in the sale of Yosef (and original plan to kill him) was any different than that of the rest of the brothers.  If so, even if Yaakov was aware of the episode, he had no reason to chastise them more than anyone else.

Worthy of Praise

Yaakov praises the brothers' anger and willingness to kill, recognizing it as a necessary trait for the survival of the nation. The brothers' fiery temperament would ensure that there was always someone who could fight Israel's battles and provoke fear in her enemies.

Sources:R. Yehuda HeChasidBereshit 49:5About R. Yehuda HeChasid

Praise or rebuke – R. Yehuda HeChasid is somewhat unique in understanding Yaakov to be praising rather than rebuking Shimon and Levi, seeing in their anger and readiness to kill a necessary and meritorious quality.²⁵

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – R. Yehuda HeChasid raises two possible understandings of the word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם". It might mean weapon, being related to the Greek word for knife or sword, "מכיר".‎²⁶ Alternatively,  it could refer to a "dwelling," in which case Yaakov is saying that the brothers will employ violence against their enemies in the land of their dwelling.  Either way, Yaakov is praising Shimon and Levi's readiness to fight.

"בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי" – According to R. Yehuda HeChasid this represents the speech of Israel's enemies (or their mercenaries) who lie in fear of Shimon and Levi and have no desire to take part in a war in which they will be present.

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – Yaakov points out how quick the brothers are to kill, sharing how they do not even take booty, but instead kill the animals to show how capable they are.  This attitude led to the fear of surrounding nations.

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז וְעֶבְרָתָם כִּי קָשָׁתָה" – This sentence, too, represents the words of enemy nations, who recognize the harsh wrath of Shimon and Levi and fear them as a result.

"אֲחַלְּקֵם בְּיַעֲקֹב וַאֲפִיצֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל" – R. Yehuda HeChasid asserts that Yaakov is referring to the fact that all the other tribes will desire to hire Shimon and Levi to fight for them.²⁷  They will be divided among Israel as they spread out to aid each tribe in their battles.²⁸

No mention of Shekhem – This approach might assume that the incident in Shekhem was one of the reasons that the brothers had the reputation that they did. If so, in Chapter 34 Yaakov had  not been upset about the extremity of the the brothers' actions, only worried about the prudence of the deed. The fact that the Torah gives the last word to the brothers there (their cry, "הַכְזוֹנָה יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת אֲחוֹתֵנוּ") might suggest that Hashem, too, had no issue with the brothers' deed, recognizing that certain crimes call for extreme reactions.

No mention of sale – According to R. Yehuda HeChasid, though the brothers planned to sell Yosef, they never did so as the Midianites beat them to it.  Shadal's cousin goes a step further to suggest that the brothers themselves were unaware of the sale and astonished when Reuven found the pit empty, leading them to conclude that Yosef had indeed been killed by a wild animal (as they told their father). [See Who Sold Yosef for details.]  If so, it is clear why Yaakov does not rebuke Shimon and Levi for the sale²⁹ and very likely that Yaakov never learned of the original plotting either.)³⁰

Motivation

Combination

Yaakov's words to Yosef touched on multiple events, both the past crimes of selling Yosef and slaughtering Shekhem, and the future sins of Zimri and Korach.

Sources:TanchumaVayechi 9-10About the Tanchuma, Tanchuma (Buber)Vayechi 12About the Tanchuma, Targum Pseudo-JonathanBereshit 49:5-7About Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Targum YerushalmiBereshit 49:5-7About Targum Yerushalmi, RashiBereshit 49:5-7About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, Abarbanel

Blessings - on past or future? According to Abarbanel, Yaakov's final words to his children were intended to be a mixture of rebuke for past deeds and foretelling of the future. The testament to Simon and Levi fits this pattern, and Yaakov speaks of both past and future crimes, an the nature of their future inheritance.

Omnisignificance – This approach assumes that every word in Tanakh must have significance and that Tanakh does not normally repeat a concept just for emphasis or for literary beauty.  As such, it tends to take each phrase in Yaakov's blessing as referring to its own distinct event, rather than understanding them as being simply parallel couplets.

" שִׁמְעוֹן וְלֵוִי אַחִים"

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – According to Rashi, the first phrase, "כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ", refers to the slaughter of Shekhem, while "וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" refers to the attempt to sell Yosef, who is compared to an ox in Moshe's blessings in Devarim 33:17.

"בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי" – Tanchuma (and Rashi in its wake) read this verse as referring to future events.  Yaakov says that he wants his name and honor not to be associated³¹ with either Zimri's later prostitution with Kazbi (בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי), or with Korach's congregating on Moshe (בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי).³²

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז" – Blessing or curse? Though all these sources view Yaakov's words as a rebuke, they attempt to mitigate their harshness. Thus, the Targumim suggest that the word "cursed" refers not to the brothers being cursed on account of their wrath, but to Shekhem being cursed when Shimon and Levi went to destroy it in their anger. Tanchuma and Rashi, instead, point out that Yaakov cursed only the brothers' anger, not them personally.

Knowledge of Yosef's sale – These sources all assume that Yaakov knew not only of the sale but also that Shimon and Levi were the initial plotters.

Yaakov's evaluation of the slaughter in Shekhem – This approach assumes that Yaakov's rebuke of the brothers both here and in Chapter 34 reflects a discomfort with the extremity of the brothers' reaction to the rape.

¹

² R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Radak explain that most of Yaakov's blessings refer to the Era of the Conquest and the inheritance of the land and that Yaakov's statement to Shimon and Levi, "אֲחַלְּקֵם בְּיַעֲקֹב וַאֲפִיצֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל" refers to this era as well.  Yaakov simply prefaces the prophecy by explaining why they are to inherit in such a manner.

³ See R. Hirsch who makes this last point, and see R"Y Bekhor Shor who says so even more explicitly, "{עד} עתה פירש למה לא הייתה הממשלה לראובן, ועתה מפרש למה לא נתנה ללוי או לשמעון שהיו גדולים אחריו".

⁴ R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Ramban raise this as one possibility as well, but explain that the phrase means that the brothers' entire life was predicated on blood and war.

⁵ See Shekhem's offer, "וְאִתָּנוּ תֵּשֵׁבוּ וְהָאָרֶץ תִּהְיֶה לִפְנֵיכֶם שְׁבוּ וּסְחָרוּהָ וְהֵאָחֲזוּ בָּהּ".

⁶ In one of the possibilities brought by R. Avraham b. HaRambam, he offers a similar understanding of the verse as a whole, but works off a different definition of the word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם".  He suggests that the word means "negotiations" (perhaps from the root "מכר" to sell) and that Yaakov is saying that the brothers' covenant and negotiations with Shekhem were all based on "כלי חמס" and their desire for battle.  R. Hirsch, too, reaches a similar understanding of the verse.  He suggests that the root "מכר" refers to an attempt to achieve or acquire something.  Shimon and Levi's methods in so doing were "כלי חמס", as they pretended to negotiate a dowry and reach a friendly agreement, when really plotting a violent slaughter.

⁷ RashbamBereshit 49:5-7About R. Shemuel b. Meir questions this reading, pointing out that the word "אל" is never used in reference to a past action, and always refers to the future, either expressing a request, command or curse.

⁸ See the first possibility in each of Radak and R. Avraham b. HaRambam.

⁹ See the word's usage in Bereshit 49:22, "בָּנוֹת צָעֲדָה עֲלֵי שׁוּר".

¹⁰ See Targum pseudo-Jonathon, Ibn Ezra and Radak.

¹¹ See Radak in the name of R. Yaakov b. Elazar and the second possibility in R. Avraham b. HaRambam.  One might compares this to the elite of Shomeron being referred to as "פָּרוֹת הַבָּשָׁן" (Amos 4:1) or the heads of Moav being labelled "אֵילֵי מוֹאָב " (Shemot 15:15). R. Hirsch similarly explains that the word שור means "power."  According to him, the verse is saying that by pretending to act with good will (ברצונם), the brothers managed to uproot the power (עקרו שור) of Shekehm and Hamor, enabling them, in their anger, to kill the two.

¹² They point out that if a blessing means abundance or additional good, then a curse is a lessening of something.

¹³ The various commentators don't agree totally on the extent of the brothers' wrong-doing, nor regarding which if their deeds were most problematic (the trickery or the extent of the slaughter). Radak claims that Yaakov felt that the brothers were unjustified in killing the entire city, as Shekhem alone had sinned. R. Hirsch agrees, but simultaneously emphasizes that Shimon and Levi's motives were pure and positive. Ramban adds that the brothers should not have broken their promise after the Shekhemites kept their side of the bargain, for it was possible that they were sincere and would return to Hashem. For elaboration, see Sin and Slaughter of Shekhem.

¹⁴ However, even if one posits that Yaakov is expressing only his own feelings, one might still suggest that in giving the last say to Yaakov, the Torah expresses its negative evaluation of the deed and agreement with Yaakov's rebuke. See R. D"Z Hoffmann who writes, "בגזר דינו של יעקב גוזרת התורה את דינה על מעשה זה".

¹⁵ It is also possible that these sources assume that even if Yaakov knew of the sale, he might not have though Shimon and Levi were any more culpable than anyone else, as there is no evidence in the verses that they played a significant role in the plotting.

¹⁶ The Or HaChayyim explains most of the verses as relating to the attempt to kill and sell Yosef, though in his comments on the opening of verse 5 he alludes to the slaughter of Shekhem as well.

¹⁷ See his explanations of Yaakov's parting words to Reuven, Shimon and Levi, Yehuda, Yissachar and Yosef.

¹⁸ Though Shimon and Levi did not play a bigger role in the sale than anyone else, see below that these sources maintain that they were the ones to initially plot Yosef's murder, and as such, were responsible for everything that followed.

¹⁹ TanchumaVayechi 9-10About the Tanchuma explains that since Reuven and Yehuda acted to prevent Yosef from being killed, they could not have been the ones to suggest the murder initially, leaving the next two oldest brothers, Shimon and Levi, as the most likely candidates. The Midrash brings further proof from the fact that later, Yosef decides to imprison Shimon specifically (Bereshit 42:24).

²⁰ Neither R. Moshe Alshikh nor the Or HaChayyim reference the verse in Devarim, but see Rashi who does.

²¹ R. Moshe Alshikh understand that "עקר" means to cut off an animal's feet so it can't move; thus, too, the brothers hoped that Yosef would remain in the pit forever, unable to move from there.

²² It is not clear, though, who would have revealed the story to Yaakov, as it would not seem to be in anyone's interest to do so.

²³ Alternatively, Yaakov is telling Shimon and Levi that they cannot blame their actions on his show of favoritism; ultimately they are responsible for their own actions. [This might be Or HaChayyim's understanding of Yaakov's words.]

²⁴ See Yosef's Treatment of his Family for an opinion that Yosef originally thought his father had a hand in the sale and wanted to punish him for his dreams of grandeur.

²⁵ Cf. Jubilees30About Jubilees which does not speak about Yaakov's blessing to the brothers but, as it regards the zeal of the brothers in Shekhem to be praiseworthy and even says that brothers were "written for a blessing" for their act, might agree with R. Yehuda HeChasid's interpretation.
See also R. Yosef KimchiLong Commentary Bereshit 49:5-7About R. Yaakov b. Asher's positive reading of the blessing discussed at the end of this approach.

²⁶ See Bereshit Rabbah and Tanchuma.

²⁷ This interpretation stands in contrast to the accepted understanding that Yaakov is referring to the brothers' inheritance in Canaan, where they will be dispersed among the tribes.

²⁸ R. Yehuda HeChasid attempts to bring proof from Yehuda's proposal to Shimon in Shofetim 1:3 "עֲלֵה אִתִּי בְגֹרָלִי וְנִלָּחֲמָה בַּכְּנַעֲנִי", where he asks Shimon to join him in fighting the Canaanites. The prooftext, however, is somewhat weak, since Yehuda's proposal is that each will help the other (וְהָלַכְתִּי גַם אֲנִי אִתְּךָ בְּגוֹרָלֶךָ), and not that Shimon alone will help Yehuda.

²⁹ It is also possible that R. Yehuda HeChasid was motivated to read Yaakov's words as a blessing, to fit the tone of Yaakov's speech to all the other brothers. If he was looking to read the verses in a positive  rather than a negative manner, this would exclude suggesting that the verses refer to the sale.  [However, considering that R. Yehuda HeChasid reads Yaakov's words to Reuven as chastisement, it is difficult to say that he would have been greatly bothered to read the "blessing" to Shimon and Levi, too, as rebuke.]

³⁰ Interestingly Shadal himself in the later printed editions of his commentary, nonetheless contends that Yaakov assumed (incorrectly) that the brothers had been directly responsible for the sale.

³¹ The Midrash points out that in both cases, when the verses identify the sinner, they do not refer to him as "the son of Yaakov".

³² Korach's rebellion is referred to as their congregating ("בִּקְהָלָם") since the verse states, "וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹןי" (Bemidbar 16:1).  It is less clear why Zimri's action should have been referred to as a secret ("בְּסֹדָם"); even though normally sexual violations are unseen and private, Zimri's act was done publicly.