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

Overview

In trying to uncover the meaning of Yaakov's address to Shimon and Levi, commentators mine the various episodes throughout Tanakh in which the two tribes play a part, searching for which stories best fit Yaakov's words. Ibn Ezra points to the slaughter of Shekhem, Or HaChayyim focuses on the sale of Yosef, and Rashi suggests a combination of the two.  In contrast, both R"Y Bekhor Shor and R. Yehuda HeChasid maintain that Yaakov is speaking not about a specific event but rather about the brothers' fiery temperament.

However, the greatest difference between the approaches relates not to which event provides the backdrop to our text, but rather to the tone which they attribute to Yaakov's speech. Thus, while Ibn Ezra asserts that Yaakov is rebuking Shimon and Levi for the deceitful slaughter of Shekhem, R"Y Kimchi assumes that he is praising them for the very same deed. Similarly, while R"Y Bekhor Shor condemns the brothers' violent nature, R"Y HeChasid lauds it as a necessary trait for the survival of the nation.

The Episode of Shekhem

Yaakov's words to Shimon and Levi reference the story of Shekhem. This position subdivides regarding whether Yaakov is rebuking or praising Shimon and Levi for their actions:

Rebuke

Yaakov chastises the brothers for their role in the slaughter of Shekhem, expressing his anger at their deeds.

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, R. Yosef ibn KaspiBereshit 49:5About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi, R. HirschBereshit 49:5-7About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch

Yaakov's evaluation of the slaughter – This approach suggests that Yaakov viewed the brothers' actions in Shekhem negatively, and that his 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.¹ Thus, Yaakov's assessment of the deed in both chapters is identical.

Hashem's evaluation of the slaughter – Ibn Ezra, R. Avraham b. HaRambam, and Radak all assert that Yaakov's words in our chapter were a prophetic communication.  As such, his rebuke regarding the massacre of Shekhem represents not merely his own opinion, but that of Hashem.² The Testament of Yaakov, in contrast, suggests that Yaakov's negative evaluation is his alone, and that Hashem was squarely on the brothers' side.

Yaakov's blessings: on the past or future? These sources read most of Yaakov's blessings as referring to future events. In the case of Shimon and Levi, it is possible that Yaakov mentions their past actions only in order to explain why their tribes are later dispersed³ and why the kingship bypassed them.⁴

"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).

• According to R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Ramban, Yaakov is saying that the brothers' whole life is rooted 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[בִּ‎]).  In other words, since they had made a covenant with the Shekhemites to live together peacefully and share the land,⁵ their actions were 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", all of which might relate to the destruction of Shekhem:

• Ox – Yaakov is referring to the oxen which were taken from Shekhem 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 "שׁוֹר" is a metaphor for a strong individual, and thus can refer to either Shekhem or Chamor, 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" – 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" – This position views this as a preventative measure.  If the brothers are separated, their excessive wrath is less likely to cause damage.

No mention of the 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.¹³  He likely thought that the brothers had truly believed that Yosef had been killed by a wild animal, and that they were completely surprised to find him alive.  As nothing would be gained by revealing the truth to their father, the brothers continued to keep him in the dark even after reuniting with Yosef.¹⁴

"אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר כְּבִרְכָתוֹ בֵּרַךְ אֹתָם" – Verse 28, which suggests that Yaakov blessed each of his sons, is difficult for this position which sees no blessing in Yaakov's words to Shimon and Levi. Ibn Ezra responds that the narrator is referring not to Yaakov's words in verses 3-26, but rather to a separate blessing, whose content is not shared in the verses, and which was relayed only following the last will and testament.

Praise

Yaakov's words constitute a blessing to the brothers for their zealotry in defending Dinah.

Sources:R. Yosef KimchiLong Commentary Bereshit 49:3-4Long Commentary Bereshit 49:5-7About R. Yaakov b. Asher

Praise or rebuke – R"Y Kimchi is among the minority of commentators who understand Yaakov's words to Shimon and Levi as praise rather than criticism.¹⁵  His reading is explicitly motivated by verse 29: "וַיְבָרֶךְ אוֹתָם אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר כְּבִרְכָתוֹ בֵּרַךְ אֹתָם," which implies that all of Yaakov's sons were blessed.¹⁶ As such, he attempts to find a blessing even in Yaakov's apparent censure of Shimon and Levi (as well as Reuven.)¹⁷

Evaluation of the slaughter – This approach finds Shimon and Levi's anger and slaughter of Shekhem not only justified but even praiseworthy.  It would likely suggest that Yaakov's condemnation of the brothers immediately after the attack had nothing to do with the morality and justice of their actions and only with their lack of prudence in not thinking through its potential repercussions. The fact that in Bereshit 34 the Torah gives the last word to the brothers ("הַכְזוֹנָה יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת אֲחוֹתֵנוּ") might suggest that Hashem agrees with the brothers' position that severe crimes call for extreme reactions.¹⁸

"שִׁמְעוֹן וְלֵוִי אַחִים" – According to R. Yosef Kimchi, Yaakov emphasizes the fact that Shimon and Levi were "brothers" ("אַחִים") in order to praise how they demonstrated their brotherhood vis a vis Dinah by standing up for her honor.

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – R. Yosef Kimchi understands "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" to refer to weapons,¹⁹ but he subtly avoids the negative connotation of the broader phrase by suggesting that the word "חָמָס" does not describe Shimon and Levi's weapons, but rather the actions of Shekhem.  In other words, Yaakov is not condemning the brothers' weapons as being tools of violence, but rather praising Shimon and Levi for using them to fight against the "חָמָס" and wickedness of Shekhem.

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – This refers to the righteous and well placed anger of the brothers in their decimation of Shekhem and plundering of the city.²⁰

"אָרוּר אַפָּם... אֲחַלְּקֵם בְּיַעֲקֹב" – R"Y Kimchi reads this as a blessing, that the brothers' wrath should be diminished,²¹ in the sense that it should be disseminated throughout the tribes. Anger, when used correctly, can be a positive trait, and so Yaakov blesses the brothers that their anger should spread throughout Israel.

"בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי" – This verse is difficult for this approach, for if Yaakov is proud if his sons, why would he say that he wants no part in their council?

Attempt to Kill Yosef

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

Sources:R. Moshe AlshikhBereshit 49:5About R. Moshe Alshikh, Or HaChayyimBereshit 49:5-7About R. Chayyim b. Atar²²

Yaakov's blessings: on the past or future? According to the Or HaChayyim, in many of Yaakov's blessings he speaks of both the past and future, showing how the brothers' past actions will affect their future tribes' status.²³ In his address to Shimon and Levi, Yaakov does similarly.

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – Or HaChayyim suggests that "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" comes from the root "מכר", to sell. Yaakov condemned the brothers by saying that the sale of Yosef was unjust and marked by "חָמָס".‎²⁴

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ" – These sources assert that the phrase refers to the attempt to kill Yosef. They assume that (though unstated) Shimon and Levi were the ones who suggested, "וְעַתָּה לְכוּ וְנַהַרְגֵהוּ", and thus, they were the most culpable.‎²⁵ Though the brothers did not end up killing Yosef, the verse attributes this action to them because they desired to kill him and attempted to do so when they threw him into the pit.

"וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – These sources suggest that the word "שׁוֹר" refers to Yosef, who is so called by Moshe in his blessing in Devarim, ("בְּכוֹר שׁוֹרוֹ הָדָר לוֹ").‎²⁶  Thus, these words are parallel to "כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ" and similarly allude to Yosef's being thrown into the pit to die.²⁷

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. Though nowhere in Sefer Bereshit do we read of anyone revealing the secret to Yaakov, Bereshit 50:17 might suggest that he nonetheless found out, or perhaps simply guessed. The brothers tell Yosef that before his death, Yaakov had said to tell Yosef, "שָׂא נָא פֶּשַׁע אַחֶיךָ וְחַטָּאתָם כִּי רָעָה גְמָלוּךָ". While it is possible that the brothers are simply telling a white lie, this verse could easily indicate that Yaakov was indeed aware of the brothers' sin against Yosef.‎

"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. At first glance, this protestation seems superfluous, for, after all, the brothers were well aware of Yaakov's lack of involvement It is possible, though, that these words are aimed more at Yosef than at Shimon and Levi.²⁸ Yosef may have always wondered whether, when Yaakov had sent him to check on his brothers so many years before, he had done so knowing what might happen.²⁹

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז" – According to this approach, Yaakov hoped to reduce the danger associated with the brothers' anger by separating and dispersing them in Israel.

No mention of Shekhem – It is likely that even though the role of Shimon and Levi in the slaughter of Shekhem is much more explicit in the text than their role in the sale of Yosef, Or HaChayyim prefers to present Yaakov as focusing on the latter, because he views the brothers as being fundamentally justified for the slaughter (and assumes that Yaakov felt the same).³⁰  For more, see Sin and Slaughter of Shekhem.  As such, Or HaChayyim was forced to search for an alternative crime of Shimon and Levi to be the subject of Yaakov's ire.

Fiery Temperament

Yaakov is speaking not 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

Yaakov's 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 explaining to Shimon and Levi why they did not merit to inherit the kingship, but were instead dispersed among the tribes.

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" is related to the word "מַכׇּר", meaning acquaintance. Yaakov tells the brothers that their relationship is a tool 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 inclined to lead to violence due to the 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 to the brothers' general  tendency to kill in their anger, and to hamstring oxen even when not angry (בִרְצֹנָם).

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז" – R"Y Bekhor Shor reads Yaakov's words as a condemnation of the brothers' anger, which led them to lose out on the 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 had the episode of Shekhem in mind as he spoke, but chose not to bring it as an example since, of all their wrathful deeds, it might have been the most justified.

No mention of Yosef – R"Y Bekhor Shor might maintain that Shimon and Levi's role in the sale of Yosef (and original plan to kill him) was no different than that of the rest of their 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 will ensure that there will always be someone to fight Israel's battles and instill fear in her enemies.

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

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – R. Yehuda HeChasid raises two possible understandings of the word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם". One possibility is that it could mean weapons, being related to the Greek word for knife or sword, "מכיר".‎³¹ 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, these words form part of the speech of Israel's enemies (or their mercenaries) who lie in fear of Shimon and Levi and do not wish to wage war against them.

"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 demonstrate their focus.  This purposefulness caused the surrounding nations to fear them.

"אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז וְעֶבְרָתָם כִּי קָשָׁתָה" – This sentence, too, constitutes 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.³²  They will be divided among Israel as they spread out to aid each tribe in their battles.³³

No mention of Shekhem – This approach might assume that the incident in Shekhem was one of the reasons that the brothers received their reputation. If so, in Chapter 34, Yaakov was not upset about the extremity of the the brothers' actions, but only concerned about the possible repercussions of the deed.

No mention of sale – According to R. Yehuda HeChasidBereshit 37:28About R. Yehuda HeChasid, though the brothers planned to sell Yosef, they never succeeded in doing so, as the Midianites beat them to it. Shadal's cousinBereshit 37:28Bereshit 49:5-7About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto goes a step further to suggest that the brothers themselves were unaware of this, and upon finding the pit empty, concluded that Yosef had indeed been killed by a wild animal (as they told their father).  If so, it is clear why Yaakov does not rebuke Shimon and Levi for the sale, and it is very possible that Yaakov also never learned of the original plotting.³⁴ See Who Sold Yosef for elaboration.

Motivation – R. Yehuda HeChasid's casting of Yaakov's words in a positive light is likely influenced by the events of his own time.³⁵ Living in 12th century Germany, after the Crusaders had massacred entire communities, he sees a need for Jews, like Shimon and Levi, who can stand up to and kill their enemies. From his perspective, perhaps if there had been a few more Shimon and Levi's in their own time, the Jewish communities might have been able to defend themselves.

Combination

Yaakov's words to Yosef touch 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 Yerushalmi (Yonatan)Bereshit 49:5-7About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan), Targum Yerushalmi (Fragmentary)Bereshit 49:5-7About Targum Yerushalmi (Fragmentary), RashiBereshit 49:5-7About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, Abarbanel

Yaakov's blessings: on the 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 Shimon and Levi fits this pattern, as Yaakov speaks of both past and future crimes, and the nature of the brothers' 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.

"כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" – According to most of these sources, this verse refers to the brothers' generally violent behavior and does not allude to any specific incident. The word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" is understood either as "weapons" (Tanchuma) or "thoughts" of violence (Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) and Abarbanel).³⁶

"כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" – According to Rashi, the first phrase, "כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ", refers to the slaughter of the people of Shekhem,³⁷ while "וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר" refers to the attempt to kill Yosef,³⁸ 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 associated³⁹ with either Zimri's consorting with Kazbi (בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי),⁴⁰ or with Korach's congregating against Moshe (בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי).⁴¹

"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, but not them personally.

Knowledge of Yosef's sale – These sources all assume that Yaakov knew not only of the sale but also of the fact 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. However, the fact that these sources do not limit Yaakov's words here to Shekhem, but add other crimes as well, might suggest that they do not feel that for the slaughter of Shekhem alone the brothers should have deserved such a sharp rebuke. It is only the combination of factors which causes them to merit their curse.⁴²

¹ The various commentators do not completely agree on the extent of the brothers' wrongdoing or regarding which of 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 nonetheless 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 repent. For elaboration, see Sin and Slaughter of Shekhem.

² Even if one disagrees and posits that Yaakov is expressing only his own feelings (and not prophesying), one might still suggest that in giving the last word to Yaakov, the Torah thereby expresses its negative evaluation of the deed and its agreement with Yaakov's rebuke. See R. D"Z Hoffmann who writes, "בגזר דינו של יעקב גוזרת התורה את דינה על מעשה זה".

³ R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Radak explain that most of Yaakov's blessings refer to the era of the Yehoshua's 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.

⁴ 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".

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 "כְּלֵי חָמָס" and their desire for battle.  R. Hirsch, too, reaches a similar understanding of the verse.  He suggests that the word "מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם" refers to an attempt to achieve or acquire something.  Shimon and Levi's methods in so doing were "כְּלֵי חָמָס", 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 one possibility brought by each of Radak, R. Avraham b. HaRambam and Ramban.

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

¹⁰ See Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan), Ibn Ezra, and Radak.

¹¹ See Radak in the name of R. Yaakov b. Elazar, R. Avraham b. HaRambam, and Ramban.  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 (וּבִרְצֹנָם), the brothers managed to uproot the power (עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר) of Shekhem and Chamor and kill them.

¹² They point out that if a blessing means abundance or additional good, then a curse is a lessening of something. However, if one looks at the root's usage throughout Tanakh, it is not easy to find a case in which it clearly means "to diminish". Radak brings one possible prooftext, the phrase "וְאָרוֹתִי אֶת בִּרְכוֹתֵיכֶם"  in Malakhi 2:2.  As it is hard to understand what it would mean to "curse a blessing," the verse might indeed mean that Hashem will diminish the people's blessings.

¹³ In contrast to R"Y HeChasid (see below), these sources assume that the brothers did sell Yosef, and as such, this was a crime that Yaakov might have chosen to address, had he known about it. See Who Sold Yosef? for more.

¹⁴ It is also possible that these sources simply do not view Shimon and Levi as being any more culpable than anyone else. After all, there is no verse which explicitly states that they were the plot's initiators. As such, even if Yaakov was aware of the sale, he might not have chastised Shimon and Levi for it.

¹⁵ Cf. Jubilees30About Jubilees which regards the zeal of the brothers in Shekhem to be praiseworthy and even says that brothers were "written for a blessing" for their act.  Although Jubilees does not speak about Yaakov's blessing to the brothers, it might agree with R"Y Kimchi's overall interpretation.

¹⁶ Cf. Ibn Ezra who asserts that this verse is referring not to Yaakov's address in 49:2-27, but to separate blessings given immediately afterwards.

¹⁷ See his commentsLong Commentary Bereshit 49:3-4Long Commentary Bereshit 49:5-7About R. Yaakov b. Asher to Bereshit 49:3-4 where he suggests that Yaakov is blessing Reuven that he be forgiven for his deed.

¹⁸ It is also possible that, after Shimon and Levi's retort, Yaakov himself was swayed that they were justified in their actions.

¹⁹ See TanchumaVayechi 9-10About the Tanchuma and Bereshit Rabbah.

²⁰ We do not have R. Yosef Kimchi's interpretation of this verse, but he may have adopted any of the explanations given above for the word "שור".

²¹ See Radak and Ibn Ezra's similar explanation of the word above, and the discussion there regarding whether such a definition stands up to scrutiny.

²² The Or HaChayyim explains almost all of the verses as relating to the attempt to kill and sell Yosef, leading to his placement in this category. However, in his comments on the opening of verse 5 he makes a passing reference to the slaughter of Shekhem as well.

²³ See his explanations of Yaakov's parting words to Reuven, Shimon and Levi, Yehuda, Yissachar, and Yosef.

²⁴ 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.

²⁵ These sources are likely following TanchumaVayechi 9-10About the Tanchuma which arrives at Shimon and Levi's role through a process of elimination. Since Reuven and Yehuda acted to prevent Yosef from being killed, it is unlikely that they were the ones to initially suggest the murder.  This leaves the next two oldest brothers, Shimon and Levi, as the most likely candidates. The Midrash brings further proof from the fact that Yosef later decides to imprison specifically Shimon (Bereshit 42:24).  [It also further identifies the brother who opened his sack to find the returned monies as Levi, suggesting that Yosef intentionally planted it in his bag to cause him worry and punish him for his role in the sale.  However, Levi is not named explicitly in this verse.]

²⁶ Neither R. Moshe Alshikh nor the Or HaChayyim reference the verse in Devarim, but see Rashi who does.

²⁷ R. Moshe Alshikh understands 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.

²⁸ 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.]

²⁹ 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.

³⁰ If so, when Yaakov 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, but never questioned the morality of the brothers' deed.

³¹ See Bereshit Rabbah and Tanchuma.

³² 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.

³³ 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. However, the prooftext is somewhat weak, since Yehuda's proposal is that they will help each other (וְהָלַכְתִּי גַם אֲנִי אִתְּךָ בְּגוֹרָלֶךָ), and not merely that Shimon will be enlisted to help Yehuda.

³⁴ 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.

³⁵ In this he differs from R"Y Kimchi above, whose motivations were textual.  R. Yehdua HeChasid is apparently not bothered by the later verse's statement that all the brothers were blessed, as he makes no attempt to mitigate the criticism implied in the "blessing" to Reuven.

³⁶ This position could have alternatively explained (like Or HaChayyim above) that the verse alludes to the unjust selling of Yosef.

³⁷ Rashi likely prefers to read "איש" as referring to people rather than the individuals, Shekhem or Chamor, because the problematic action was precisely the collective nature of the massacre.  Had there only been a targeted killing, Yaakov might not have been upset.

³⁸ The verse states "וּבִרְצֹנָם" because they wanted to kill Yosef but did not succeed.

³⁹ 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".  Thus, Hashem granted Yaakov's request.

⁴⁰ See also the Testament of ShimonShimon 5About Testaments of the Patriarchs where Shimon alludes to this later sin as well, warning his descendants against such prostitution.

⁴¹ Korach's rebellion is referred to as "their congregation" ("בִּקְהָלָם") since the verse states, "וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן" (Bemidbar 16:1).  It is less clear why Zimri's action should have been referred to as "their secret" ("בְּסֹדָם").  Even though normally sexual violations are unseen and private, Zimri's act was done publicly, and it was specifically its public nature which was so problematic.

⁴² In addition, the repeat offenses highlighted how ingrained the brothers' negative traits were, and made each individual crime all the more heinous.