Yaakov's Parting Words to Shimon and Levi/2

Shimon and Levi – Blessed or Cursed?

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Slaughter of Shekhem

Yaakov's words to Shimon and Levi reference their slaughter of Shekhem and express  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, R. Yosef Kimchi,  RadakBereshit 49:5-7About R. David Kimchi, R. Avraham b. HaRambamBereshit 49:5-8About R. Avraham Maimonides, RambanBereshit 49:5About R. Moshe b. Nachman, 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 future tribes rather than Yaakov's individual sons. Nonetheless, in Yaakov's words to Shimon and Levi he addresses them specifically and references the past event of the slaughter of Shekhem.  It is possible, though, that he does so only in order to explain why their future tribes are later dispersed¹ and neither is granted kingship.²

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

• 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), since 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,⁴ their later slaughter was deceitful and wicked.⁵

"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.
• 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 tot he soul and honor of Israel, the nation, and not Yaakov personally.]

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ" – The word "איש" 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" and the phrase as a whole:

• Ox – Yaakov is referring to the oxen which were taken in booty and hamstrung.
• Wall – The word "שׁוֹר"  is understood as if written "שׁוּר", and means wall.⁶ Yaakov is speaking of the walls of the city which the brothers destroyed. (Ibn Ezra)⁷
• Leader – The word is a metaphor for a strong individual, and thus can refer to either Shekhem or Hamor., whom the brothers killed.⁸

Blessing or curse?

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.⁹

Hashem's evaluation of the slaughter – Ibn Ezra, R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Radak all assert that Yaakov's words were said via prophecy. As such, his rebuke does not represent his own opinion, but that of Hashem.¹⁰  The Testament of Yaakov, in contrast, suggests that Yaakov's negative evaluation is his alone, and that Hashem was on the brother's 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.¹¹

Sale of Yosef

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

Angry & Violent Nature

Worthy of Censure

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

Worthy of Praise

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

Combination

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

¹ 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.  Yaakov's statement to Shimon and Levi, "אֲחַלְּקֵם בְּיַעֲקֹב וַאֲפִיצֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל" reefers to this era as well.  Yaakov simply prefaces the prophecy by explaining why they are to inherit in such a manner.

² 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".

³ 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.

⁴ See Shekehm's offer, "וְאִתָּנוּ תֵּשֵׁבוּ וְהָאָרֶץ תִּהְיֶה לִפְנֵיכֶם שְׁבוּ וּסְחָרוּהָ וְהֵאָחֲזוּ בָּהּ".

⁵ 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.

⁶ See the word's usage in Bereshit 49:22, "בָּנוֹת צָעֲדָה עֲלֵי שׁוּר".

⁷ See Ibn Ezra,

⁸ See Radak in the name of R. Yaakov b. Elazar and the second possibility in R. Avraham b. HaRambam, who compares this to similar metaphors, such as 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).

⁹ 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.

¹⁰ 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".

¹¹ 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.