## Ibn Ezra on Genesis Chapter 49

###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:1:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:1:1)

**את אשר יקרא אתכם.** דבר הנביא לעתיד, ותעו האומרים שהם ברכות בעבור שמצאו בסוף "ויברך אותם" (בראשית מט כח), ואיה ברכות ראובן שמעון ולוי, ועל דרך הנבואה אמר "וזאת אשר דבר להם אביהם ואחר כן ברך אותם, ולא הזכיר הכתוב הברכות:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THAT WHICH SHALL BEFALL YOU. Prophecies foretelling that which shall befall you in the future. Those who base themselves on Scripture’s closing remark, *and this is that their father spoke unto them and blessed them* (v. 28), and conclude that they (Jacob’s words) are blessings, err.¹ (v. 28), it implies that what precedes are blessings. For if it were so, where are the blessings of Reuben, Simeon and Levi?² The way to understand *and this is that their father spoke unto them and blessed them* is as follows: and this (v. 3-27) is what their father spoke unto them by way of prophecy after which he blessed them. Scripture omits the blessings.

footnotes:
¹ Since Scripture concludes with and this is that their father spoke unto them and blessed them
² These three sons were castigated, not blessed.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:3:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:3:1)

**ראובן בכורי אתה כחי.** בך נראה בתחלה כחי והבכור יקרא ראשית און, וכמוהו "ראשית אונים" (תהלים עט נא):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
REUBEN, THOU ART MY FIRST-BORN, MY MIGHT, AND THE FIRST-FRUITS OF MY STRENGTH. My might was first seen in thee. The first-born is called the first of one’s strength. We find an identical expression in *And smote all the first-born in Egypt, The first-fruits of their strength in the tents of Ham* (Ps. 78:51).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:3:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:3:2)

**יתר שאת.** ראוי היית ליתרון על הכל שתהיה נשא

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THE EXCELLENCY OF DIGNITY. You were suited by virtue of being first-born for the advantage of being exalted above all your brothers.³ (the excellency of dignity) as the advantage (*yeter*) of rank (*se’et*) and interprets accordingly. It should be noted that *se’et* comes from the root *nun, sin, alef*, meaning raised up or exalted.

footnotes:
³ I.E. translates yeter se’et


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:3:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:3:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:3:3)

ויתר עז כפול בטעם כדרך כל הנבואות, ופי' עָז תקיף:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND THE EXCELLENCY OF POWER. This means the same as *The excellency of dignity*. It is prophetic style to repeat the same idea in different words.⁴ The meaning of *oz* is power.

footnotes:
⁴ I.E. translates our line: The advantage of rank / the advantage of power. The first in rank has dominion over those below him, hence power is parallel to rank and the advantage of power means the same as the advantage of rank. Modem scholars refer to this as synonymous parallelism. The latter is a feature of Biblical poetry.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:4:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:4:1)

**פחז,** בעבור שפחזת כמים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
UNSTABLE. Because you acted unstably as water does.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:4:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:4:2)

**אל תותר.** לא יהיה לך יתרון, והיה ראוי להיות אַל תּוּתַר בשורק הוי"ו, ואחרים אמרו רק אתה פחזת כמים הנשפכים ולא הותרת כלום רק על דעתי שלא תמצא מלת אל רק במקום צווי, ואעפ"י שנמצא ודרך נתיבה אל-מות (משלי יב כח) ואיננו צווי, ופי' אל תבקש יתרון אפילו פחז כמים, ויהיה משקל תותר זכור מלחמה אל תוסף (איוב מ לב), והגאון אמר אפילו דבר רק כמים לא יהיה לך יתרון, ופחז מגזרת אנשים רקים ופוחזים (שופ' ט ד), ואין פוחזים הפוך:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
HAVE NOT THOU THE EXCELLENCY. (Some say) that *al totar* (have not thou the excellency) means, you will not have the advantage.⁵ However, if this were the case then our text should have read *al tutar* rather than *al totar*; i.e., the *vav* of *totar* should have been vocalized with a *shuruk*.⁶ is vocalized with a *cholam*. If *al totar* means you will not have the advantage then *totar* is a passive, i.e., a *hofal*, and should be written *tutar* and not *totar* which is a *hifil* and a causative. Cf. Filwarg. Others say that our clause should be interpreted thus: you acted unstably as water that is poured out of a vessel and you gained nothing thereby (*al totar*).⁷ is not irregularly vocalized. *Al totar* is a *hifil* imperfect with the meaning of a perfect It literally means you will not gain. Here it means you did not gain anything; that is, you gained nothing by acting rashly. For an alternate interpretation see Krinsky. However, I disagree with this interpretation. The term *al* is always used in Scripture as an imperative.⁸ cannot be translated as you gained nothing because *al* is an imperative meaning don’t This comment also negates the first interpretation quoted by I.E. since there, too, *al* is not used as an imperative (Filwarg). The latter fact is not negated by the fact that we find *al* used once in a non-imperative sense in *In the way of righteousness is life, And in the pathway thereof there is no* (al) *death* (Prov. 12:28).⁹ does not disprove his contention that *al* is always used as an imperative. The correct translation of our clause is: do not seek any advantage (*al totar*) even one as insignificant as water.¹⁰ means do not seek any advantage. This comment presents a problem. I.E. reads, “even one as insignificant as water (*afilu pachaz ka-mayim*).” This reading is extremely difficult since up to now I.E. explains *pachaz ka-mayim* as referring to Reuben’s action, not to Reuben’s punishment. Filwarg suggests deleting these words. Krinsky and Cherez emend *afilu* to *attah* (you). Weiser suggests that this comment has been misplaced and that its proper place is after Saadiah’s comment. In this case I.E. amplifies Saadiah’s explanation that *pachaz* means something insignificant. However, it appears that I.E. anticipated Saadiah’s interpretation of *pachaz ka-mayim*. Accordingly the *vav* of *totar* is properly vocalized with a *cholam*, and it follows the paradigm of *tosaf* (more) in *Think upon the battle, thou wilt do so no more* (al tosaf) (Job 40:32).¹¹ is a *hifil* and follows the paradigm of *tosaf* which is also a *hifil*. Since *tosaf* is a *hifil* the text should have read *tosef*. But as the word comes at the end of a verse the *tzere* changes to a *pattach*. Similarly *totar* should have been written *toter* but as it concludes a segment of a poetical line the *tzere* changes to a *pattach*. Cf. Rashi on Job 40:32 (Cherez). Thus *totar* is similar to *tosaf*. Rabbi Saadiah Gaon explains our line as follows: you will not have any advantage over your brothers even one as insignificant as water. According to Saadiah *pachaz* (unstable) comes from the same root as *pochazim* (light, insignificant) in *vain and light* (pochazim) *fellows* (Judges 9:4), and the root of the word *pachaz* does not have to be inverted. ¹² (unstable) comes from the root *chet, peh, zayin (chafaz*) which means to hurry. However, the root of *pachaz* is obviously *peh, chet, zayin*. By interpreting *pachaz* to mean unstable we are saying that we must invert the root *chet, peh, zayin* into *peh, chet, zayin*. However, according to Saadiah *pachaz* has its own root, *peh, chet, zayin*, and means light, insignificant.

footnotes:
⁵ According to this interpretation our line reads: Unstable as water / you will not have the advantage; i.e., because you acted unstably as water does, you will not have the advantage of rank and power.
⁶ Totar
⁷ The advantage of this interpretation is that totar
⁸ The point is al totar
⁹ I.E.’s point is that one irregular usage of al
¹⁰ In other words al totar
¹¹ Totar
¹² As it must be if we interpret the word to mean unstable. Pachaz


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:4:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:4:3)

**אז חללת.** מיום שחללת נסתלק יצועי, כאלו אמר עלה מעלי, גם תמצא מלת "עלה" כרת, כמו אומר "אלי אל תעלני בחצי ימי" (תהלים קב כה), וזאת הפרשה מפורשת בדברי הימים (דה"א ה' א) ובחללו יצועי אביו, ואמר על יהודה שהוא הנגיד והבכורה ליוסף, וי"מ ולא להתייחש לבכורה, שיהא תחלת המספר מראובן:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THEN DEFILEDST THOU IT. From the day that thou defiled my couch, my conjugal couch was removed.¹³, Jacob ceased cohabiting with his wives after Reuben defiled his couch. His reason was: Rachel was dead, Bilhah defiled, and he was angry at Leah because of what her son did and therefore slept neither with her nor her handmaiden Zilpah. “My couch went up” thus means, my conjugal bed ceased to function. Filwarg suggests that the reference may be only to Bilhah. *Yetzu’i alah* (he went up to my couch) is to be interpreted as if written *yetzu’i alah me’alai* (my conjugal couch went up from me). Furthermore, the word *alah* (went up) at times has the meaning of cut off,¹⁴ means my couch was cut off or destroyed. as in *O my God, take me not away* (al ta’aleni) *in the midst of my days* (Ps. 102:25). Our chapter is clearly explained in Chronicles where we read, *Reuben (was) the first-born of Israel…but, forasmuch as he defiled his father’s couch, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel, and he was not to be reckoned in the genealogy as first-born* (I Chron. 5:1). Chronicles then tells us that Joseph received the birthright and Judah the kingship (*Ibid*. v. 2). Some explain that *and he was not to be reckoned in the genealogy as first-born* means that the listing of the order of the twelve sons would start with Reuben.¹⁵ refers to Joseph, not to Reuben.

footnotes:
¹³ The part of the verse under discussion reads: Then defiledst thou / my couch went up. I.E. reads “my couch went up” as if written, my couch went up from me. He interprets it to mean, my couch was taken away from me. According to I.E., in Chapter 7 of his Yesod Mora
¹⁴ In this case yetzu’i alah
¹⁵ In other words, and he was not to be reckoned in the genealogy as first born


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:5:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:5:1)

**שמעון ולוי אחים.** בעבור מעשה שכם:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SIMEON AND LEVI ARE BRETHREN. He referred to them as brethren because of what they did to the city of Shechem.¹⁶ (Gen. 34:25). Simeon and Levi were thus brothers in council with regard to the destruction of Shechem (Weiser).

footnotes:
¹⁶ The point is all twelve sons were brethren, Why, then, does Jacob single out Simeon and Levi as brethren? Scripture tells us that at Shechem two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and Levi…took each man his sword, and came upon the city unawares, and slew all the males


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:5:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:5:2)

**מכרותיהם.** י"א מן הכרת פניהם (ישעי' ג ט), ואיננו נכון בדקדוק, וי"א קניניהם, כמו "תכרו מאתם" (דבר' ב, ו,), ואין תכרו כי אם מלשון חפירה, וי"א מלשון מכירה שמכרו עצמן כמו עם חרף נפשו למות (שופ' ה יח), והנכון בעיני שהוא מגזרת "מְכרֹותַיִךְ" (יחז' טז ג), והוא חסר בית כמו הנמצא בית ד' (מ"ב טז ח), "אשר צויתי מעון" (ש"א ב כט), והטעם על החמס שעשו, שאחר שהכניסו אנשי שכם בברית הרגום במרמה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THEIR KINSHIP. Some say that the word *mekherotehem* (their kinship) is similar in meaning to *ha-karat* (the show of) in *The show of* (ha-karat) *their countenance doth witness against them* (Is. 3:9).¹⁷ However, this interpretation is grammatically impossible.¹⁸ and *ha-karat* come from different roots (Weiser). Others say that *mekherotehem* is to be rendered their possessions¹⁹ and is to be compared to the word *tikhru* (ye shall buy) in *and ye shall also buy* (tikhru) *water of them for money* (Deut. 2:6). However, this, too, is incorrect for the word *tikhru* means to dig.²⁰ Others say that *mekherotehem* is related to the word *mekhirah* (sale) and the meaning of *mekherotehem* is they sold themselves,²¹ as in *a people that jeoparded* (cheref) *their lives unto the death* (Jud. 5:18).²² I believe that *mekherotehem* comes from the same root as *mekhorotayich* (thine origin) (Ezek. 16:3).²³ While the prepositional *bet* is missing from *mekherotehem*,²⁴ means in their land wherein they dwelt, Scripture should have read *bi-mekherotehem*. we find the same with the word *bet* (house) in *that was found in the house of* (bet)²⁵ rather than *bet*. We thus see that Scripture occasionally omits the prepositional *bet*. *the Lord* (II Kings 16:8) and with the word *ma’on* (habitation) in *which I have commanded in My habitation* (ma’on) (I Sam. 2:29).²⁶ rather than *ma’on*. See above note. Our text refers to the violence which Simeon and Levi committed in the land of their origin by deceitfully slaying the entire city of Shechem after making a covenant with them.²⁷ should thus be rendered: they employed weapons of violence in the land of their origin.

footnotes:
¹⁷ That is, one can tell by looking at them that they employ weapons of violence (Weiser).
¹⁸ Mekherotehem
¹⁹ Our text is thus to be rendered: weapons of violence are their possessions.
²⁰ Deut. 2:6 is thus to be rendered: ye shall dig water of them for money; that is, pay them so that they will give you permission to dig for water (Cherez).
²¹ That is, they sold themselves to weapons of destruction.
²² Cf. Kimchi in Jud. 5:18. Although different verbs are employed in our verse and in Jud. 5:18, the idea is the same. For an alternate interpretation see Krinsky.
²³ It means in the land of their origin.
²⁴ If mekherotehem
²⁵ Scripture should have read be-vet
²⁶ Scripture should have read be-ma’on
²⁷ Cf. Gen. 34. Weapons of violence their kinship


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:6:1)

**בסודם אל תבוא נפשי.** אמר רב אהרן שפי' אל תבוא נפשי, כמו "ובא השמש" (קהלת א ה) והטעם שלא ארצה להיות חוץ מעצתם, והנה פירושו הפך הדבר, כי מה טעם לכלי המס, והלא אמר לשניהם "עכרתם אותי" (בראשית לד, ל), ובאמת כי הסתכן יעקב וביתו על ידם, לולי חתת אלהים הי' מסבבים להשחית הכל, וכן פי' ארור אפם, וברצונם עקרו שור ארור כי אפם עז, ואלה פירושים קרים, בסודם אל תבא נפשי, אמר ר' משה הכהן ז"ל, כי כבודי כמו נפשי, ורבים בס' תהלות כמוהו, ויפה פי', כי הטעם הוא כפול כדרך הנבואות, שאל אביך (דבר' לב ז) "מה אקוב" (במדבר כג ח), והנה בסודם כמו בקהלם, ותבא כמו תחד, ונפשי כמו כבודי ויאמר רבי יהודה בן בַלעַם הספרדי שטעה ר' משה כי כבוד הנפש הוא הגוף כמו עדי בצואר כטעם המשביע בטוב עדיך (תהלים קג ה) וראייתו "וכבודי לעפר ישכן סלה" (שם ז ו), ואני אומר שר יהודה טעה כי הנה הכתוב אומר למען יזמרך כבוד (תהלים ל יג) לכן שמח לבי ויגל כבודי (שם טז ט) אף בשרי שהוא הגוף, וזה כבודי לעפר הוא על דרך משל, שיכניע נפשו עד העפר שאין למטה הימנו, והנה אתן לו עד נאמן, והוא "דבקה לעפר נפשי" (שם קיט כה):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
LET MY SOUL NOT COME INTO THEIR COUNCIL. Rabbi Aaron²⁸ explained the word *tavo* (come) in *Let my soul not come* (tavo) as having the meaning of set like the meaning of *ba* (goeth down, to set) in *and the sun goeth down* (ba) (Eccles. 1:5).²⁹ means to come. In Eccles. 1:5 the word *ba* means sets, i.e., when the sun goes down (sets) it is no longer in the sky. Similarly the word *tavo*, which comes from the same root, here means will set. Let my soul not set from their council means let my soul always be in their council. He interpreted *let my soul not come into their council* as meaning, I do not want to be outside of their council. However, Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation inverts the meaning of the verse.³⁰ to mean let my soul not set from their council. The verse means I do not want my soul to be in their council. Thus Rabbi Aaron’s interpretation is precisely the opposite of what the verse actually says. If Jacob praised Simeon and Levi, why did he mention weapons of violence? Furthermore, Jacob told his sons, *Ye have troubled me, to make me odious unto the inhabitants of the land* (Gen. 34:30).³¹ The truth of the matter is that Simeon and Levi placed Jacob and his household in great jeopardy by their actions in Shechem. Indeed, were it not for the *terror of God* that *was upon the cities that were round about them* (Gen. 35:5), they would have surrounded Jacob and his family and exterminated them all. He (Rabbi Aaron) similarly explained³²) and may they multiply in Israel (*va-afitzem bi’yisra’el*) (Filwarg). *Cursed be their anger* (v. 7) as meaning *and in their self will they uprooted a cursed wall*,³³ (they houghed oxen) as they uprooted a wall. *for their anger was fierce*. The above explanations are unpalatable.³⁴ Let my soul not come into their council.³⁵ Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen³⁶ says that *kevodi* (my glory) is synonymous with *nafshi* (my soul). He notes that we find the two often used synonymously in the book of Psalms. Rabbi Moses’ interpretation is correct since our text repeats itself in different words,³⁷, in the second *kevodi*. However, both mean one and the same. as is the style of prophetic statements. We thus find, *Ask thy father, and he will declare unto thee, Thine elders, and they will tell thee* (Deut. 32:7), and (in Num. 23:8) *How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? And how shall I execrate, whom the Lord hath not execrated*? Thus *into their council* means the same as *unto their assembly*, come (*tavoh*) the same as be united (*techad*), and *nafshi* the same as *kevodi*. However, Rabbi Judah ben Balam the Spaniard³⁸, p. 940). says that Rabbi Moses erred. He maintains that *kavod* (glory) refers to the body because the body is the glory (*kavod*) of the soul in the same way that a necklace is the ornament to the neck,³⁹ as we find in the verse *Who satisfieth thy body* (edyekh) *with good things* (Ps. 103:5).⁴⁰ ordinarily means your ornament. J.P.S. translates it as thine old age. Rabbi Judah Balam interprets *edyekh* as referring to the body. However, I.E. in Psalms interprets *edyekh* as referring to the soul. Rabbi Judah offers as a proof text,⁴¹ refers to the body. *Yea, let him lay my glory* (kevodi) *in the dust. Selah*. (Ps. 7:6).⁴² However, I say that Rabbi Judah errs, for we find Scripture saying, *So that my glory* (kevodi) *may sing praise to Thee* (Ps. 30:13),⁴³) may sing praise to thee. We thus see that *kavod* refers to the soul. Rabbi Judah might retort that Ps. 30:13 should be interpreted: so that my body may sing praise to thee, or all that have a human form (*kavod*) may sing praise to thee. and *Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory* (kevodi) *rejoiceth; My flesh* (i.e., my body) *also dwelleth in safety* (Ps. 16:9).⁴⁴ must refer to the soul for otherwise body is mentioned twice in our verse. I.E. in Psalms interprets *my heart* as referring to man’s intelligence, *my glory* (kevodi) to man’s soul, and *my flesh* to the body. As to the proof which Rabbi Judah offered from *Yea, let him lay my glory in the dust*, it is figurative. What the verse means is that my soul will be lowered as low as possible, i.e., to the dust. Positive proof that my interpretation is correct comes from *My soul* (nafshi) *cleaveth unto the dust* (Ps. 119:25).⁴⁵

footnotes:
²⁸ Gaon of the school of Pumbedita. The great Hai Gaon was among his students.
²⁹ The word ba
³⁰ Rabbi Aaron interpreted Let my soul not come in to their council
³¹ We thus see that Jacob was angry at what his sons did to the inhabitants of Shechem and on his deathbed would not praise them for this act.
³² That is, in a positive manner, not that Jacob castigated his sons but praised them for slaying the inhabitants of Shechem and destroying its wall. Rabbi Aaron interprets verses 6-7 as follows: Let my soul not set from their council, from their assembly let my glory not be excluded; For in their anger they slew men, and in their self-will they uprooted a cursed wall; For their anger was fierce, and their wrath it was cruel. Rabbi Aaron interprets verse 8 as follows: I will give them a good portion in Jacob (achallekem be-ya’akov
³³ Rabbi Aaron renders ikkeru shor
³⁴ Literally, cold, i.e., unpalatable as cold food (Krinsky).
³⁵ I reject them. I.E. takes Jacob’s words and gives them a new twist.
³⁶ Rabbi Moses ben Samuel Gikatilla, an 11th century Bible commentator. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 and the notes thereto.
³⁷ The point is that the second half of the line repeats what the first half said but in different words. In the first half it uses nafshi
³⁸ Bible commentator and grammarian who lived in the 10th and 11th centuries. “His commentaries (in Arabic) on most of the Bible are remarkable for their philosophical method and use of comparison with Arabic.” (Cecil Roth, Standard Jewish Encyclopedia
³⁹ The body is inferior to the soul, yet it is considered the soul’s glory in the same way that a necklace, although certainly less important than the neck, is nevertheless called the ornament of the neck (Cherez).
⁴⁰ The Hebrew edyekh
⁴¹ That kavod
⁴² Which proves that glory cannot refer to the soul for it is impossible to lay the soul in the dust.
⁴³ I.E. interprets this verse in his commentaries on Psalms as follows: So that all that have a soul (kavod
⁴⁴ Kavod
⁴⁵ This verse certainly must be taken figuratively. Similarly, Ps. 119:25.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:6:2)

**תחד.** מלשון יחד, ועל דעת ר' משה הכהן המדקדק ז"ל, שהנח הנעלם תחת אלף אחד, וכן אמר על "לא תֵשָם" (בראשית מז יט),

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BE UNITED. *Techad* (be united) is related to the word *yachad* (united).⁴⁶. However, according to Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen, the grammarian of blessed memory, the *tzere* beneath the *tav* of *techad* takes the place of the *alef* of *echad*.⁴⁷. He similarly explains the word *tesham* (be desolate) in *and that the land be not desolate* (tesham) (Gen. 47:19).⁴⁸ is *alef, shin, mem* and the *tav* is vocalized with a *tzere* to make up for the dropped *alef*. I.E. holds that it comes from the root *yod, shin, mem*. Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 47:19.

footnotes:
⁴⁶ Its root is yod, chet, dalet
⁴⁷ That is, its root is alef, chet, dalet
⁴⁸ Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that the root of tesham


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:6:3)

וטעם בסודם כמו "בהוסדם יחד עלי" (תהלים לא יד), אחר שכליהם הם חמס, אל תבא נפשי בסודם:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[INTO THEIR COUNCIL.] *Be-sodam* (into their council) is analogous to *be-hivvasedam* (while they took council) in *while they took council* (be-hivvasedam) *together against me* (Ps. 31:14).⁴⁹ (Krinsky) and mean secret council. The meaning of our verse is: since Simeon and Levi’s weapons are ones of violence (v. 5), *Let my soul not come into their council*.

footnotes:
⁴⁹ Both words come from the root samekh, vav, dalet


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:4
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:6:4)

הרגו איש. שם המין, כמו "שור וחמור" (בראשית לב, ו) והרמז על אנשי עיר שכם:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THEY SLEW MEN. Scripture employs the term *ish* (man) generically as it does *shor* (ox) and *chamor* (ass) for oxen and asses (Gen. 32:6). *They slew men* alludes to the inhabitants of the city of Shechem.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:5
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:6:5)

**שור.** חומה, וכן "צעדה עלי שור" (בראשית מט כב), וכבר ביארתי בס' מאזנים, כי החולם והשורק יתחלפו זה בזה,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
OXEN. *Shor* (oxen) is to be rendered as wall. We similarly read, *Its branches run over the wall* (shur) (v. 22). I have already explained in my work *Moznayim* that the *cholam* and *shuruk* interchange.⁵⁰ and verse 22 *shur* presents no problem.

footnotes:
⁵⁰ Therefore the fact that our verse reads shor


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:6
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:6:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:6:6)

ועקרו, כמו "סוסיהם תעקר" (יהושע יא, ו), וזה אות כי עיר שכם גדולה היתה כי היא מוקפת חומה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[HOUGHED.] *Ikkeru* (houghed) is similar to the word *te’akker* (hough) in *thou shalt hough* (te’akker) *their horses* (Josh. 11:6).⁵¹ is to be translated, they uprooted a wall. This verse shows that Shechem was a large city since it had a wall.

footnotes:
⁵¹ According to I.E. ikkeru shor


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:7:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:7:1)

**ארור אפם כי עז.** דרך נבואה או דרך תפלה, שיחסר אפם וטוב להם, כי ארור הפך ברוך, וכאשר הברכה תוספות, הארירה מגרעת:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
CURSED BE THEIR ANGER, FOR IT WAS FIERCE. Jacob either prophesied or offered a prayer that Simeon and Levi’s anger would (or should) diminish and that this would be for their very own good. For curse is the opposite of bless, and as a blessing means an increase, so a curse means a diminution.⁵² means may their anger be diminished or their anger will be diminished.

footnotes:
⁵² Thus Cursed be their anger


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:7:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:7:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:7:2)

**ועברתם.** כפול הטעם, וכן אחלקם ואפיצם, והטעם שהם אלה ראוים שיפרדו ולא יתחברו יחדיו, והנה מצאנו כי גורל שמעון נפל בתוך נחלת בני יהודה והנה הוא ברשות אחר, וגם עריו לא הי' דבקים זו לזו, רק מפוזרות בינות גורל יהודה, גם כן לוי שהי' לו שמונה וארבעים עיר, והן מפוזרות בינות השבטים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND THEIR WRATH. A repetition in different words of *their anger*. The same is true with *I will divide them* and *And scatter them*. The meaning of *I will divide them in Jacob, And scatter them in Israel* is, Simeon and Levi deserve to be separated and disunited. And so it was. For we find that the lot of the tribe of Simeon fell within the inheritance of the tribe of Judah.⁵³ Simeon was thus under Judah’s dominion. Furthermore, its cities were discontiguous and scattered throughout the boundary of Judah.⁵⁴ Similarly the forty-eight cities of the tribe of Levi were scattered among the other tribes.

footnotes:
⁵³ Cf. Josh. 19:1.
⁵⁴ In addition to having their inheritance within the tribe of Judah, their cities were also scattered within Judah’s boundaries (Weiser).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:8:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:8:1)

**יהודה אתה.** כשמך וכן יודוך אחיך, וכאשר יראו כי ידך בערף אויביך ישתחוו לך בני אביך כמו למלך וכן מצאנו

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
JUDAH. Thou art as thy name,⁵⁵ and thy brethren shall so praise thee.⁵⁶ When thy brothers shall see that *Thy hand shall be on the neck of thine enemies; Thy father’s sons shall bow down before thee* as to a king. This prophecy came to pass.

footnotes:
⁵⁵ That is, thy name Judah means praise.
⁵⁶ The verse literally reads: Judah thou, thy brethren shall praise thee. I.E interprets thus: Judah thou art as thy name and thy brethren shall so praise thee.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:9:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:9:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:9:1)

גור אריה המשילו לגור אריה הקטן שהוא במין אריה כאשר יגדל, ואין בו כ"ף הדמות כמו ועיר פרא (איוב יא יב):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
JUDAH IS A LION’S WHELP. Jacob compared Judah to a small lion’s whelp, to a type of whelp that grows into a lion.⁵⁷ (whelp) can be applied to any young animal. I.E. points out that *gur* (whelp) *aryeh* (lion) means a *gur* that grows up to be a lion, that is, a *gur* of the lion family (Cherez). The comparative *caf* (meaning like) has been omitted,⁵⁸). as it is in *When a wild ass’s colt* (ayir pere) *is born a man* (Job. 11:12).⁵⁹ should have been placed before *ayir pere* (a wild ass’s colt). We thus see that Scripture occasionally omits the comparative *caf*. However, it should be supplied by the reader.

footnotes:
⁵⁷ The Hebrew reads, gur aryeh. Gur
⁵⁸ Scripture reads: Judah is a lion’s whelp. It should have read: Judah is as a lion’s whelp (ke-gur
⁵⁹ There, too, a caf


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:9:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:9:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:9:2)

**מטרף בני עלית.** דמית לי בני לגור אריה כאשר עלית מהטרף, והטעם מטרף אחר, וזהו פשוטו, ואם נפרשנו על דבר יוסף היה ראוי שיהיה תחת עלית העלית, כי עלית פועל עומד, והנה הפסוק הבא אחריו לעד, והלא תראה "ותעל אחד מגוריה" (יחז', יט, ג),

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
FROM THE PREY, MY SON, THOU ART GONE UP. My son, you appear to me as a lion’s whelp when thou art gone up from the prey. *From the prey* means after tearing a prey apart.⁶⁰ This is its plain meaning. For us to interpret it as referring to the saving of Joseph,⁶¹ (Gen. 37:26). Scripture should have written *he’elita* (thou brought up)⁶². rather than *alita* (thou art come up) which is an intransitive verb. The rest of the verse⁶³, etc. (Cherez). According to Krinsky and Weiser: the next verse, which reads, *The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet*, is proof that our verse deals with Judah’s ability as a warrior and not with his saving Joseph. I.E. literally reads: “The following verse is proof.” Filwarg suggests that the word “following” is a scribal error. is proof that the first part of the verse deals with Judah’s tearing of a prey and not with Judah’s saving of Joseph from being a prey. Observe the verse *And she brought up* (va-ta’al) *one of her whelps* (Ezek. 19:3).⁶⁴. Cf. Kimchi on Ezek. 19:3. Also see Cherez.

footnotes:
⁶⁰ According to Weiser.
⁶¹ That it means: from the prey you brought up (saved) my son (Joseph). So Cherez. Judah saved Joseph by saying, What profit is it if we slay our brother and conceal his blood
⁶² The hifil
⁶³ Which reads, He stooped down, he couched as a lion
⁶⁴ And you will see that when Scripture wants to say brought up, it employs the hifil va-ta’al


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:9:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:9:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:9:3)

וטעם כרע רבץ כאריה, שמנהג האריה אחר שטרף ישב על כרעו וירבץ, ואילו היה עובר כל מין חיות לא יקום מפניהם שיברח:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[HE STOOPED DOWN, HE COUCHED AS A LION.] After a lion tears its prey it sits on its knees and couches in security and no other passing animal⁶⁵ will cause it to get up and flee.

footnotes:
⁶⁵ The lion is not afraid of any other species of animal.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:10:1)

**לא יסור שבט מיהודה.** לא יסור שבט גדולה מיהודה עד שבא דוד שהוא תחלת מלכות יהודה, וכן היה הלא תראה כי דגל יהודה נוסע בראשונה, גם אמר השם יהודה יעלה בתחלה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THE SCEPTRE SHALL NOT DEPART FROM JUDAH. The sceptre of greatness shall not depart from Judah until David, who inaugurated the Kingdom of Judah, comes.⁶⁶ The last part of the latter quote literally reads, until Shiloh cometh. I.E. interprets *shiloh* as referring to David, hence his interpretation: the scepter shall not depart from Judah…until David comes. Later in his commentary I.E. explains why Shiloh refers to David. And so it was. Observe that in Israel’s march toward the promised land, the standard of the tribe of Judah set forth in the first (Num. 10:14).⁶⁷ God also said, *Judah shall go up first* (Jud. 1:1, 2).⁶⁸ (Jud. 1:1, 2). I.E. reads, “Judah shall go up first.” Either I.E. quoted from memory and erred or he amplified the Biblical verse. According to Krinsky the reference is to Jud. 20:18. There we read, with regard to the war against Benjamin, that Israel asked of the Lord, “Who shall go up to fight Benjamin first?” Scripture tells us, *And the Lord said: Judah first*. According to Krinsky, I.E. combined Jud. 1:2 and 2:18.

footnotes:
⁶⁶ The verse reads, The scepter shall not depart from Judah…as long as men come to Shiloh
⁶⁷ We thus see that the tribe of Judah was pre-eminent.
⁶⁸ After the death of Joshua,…the children of Israel asked of the Lord saying: Who shall go up for us to fight against the Canaanites, to fight against them? And the Lord said: Judah shall go up


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:10:2)

**ופי' מחוקק.** סופר, שיחוק על הספר:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[NOR THE RULER’S STAFF.] A scribe (*mechokek*) who will write (*she-yachok*) in a book.⁶⁹ (ruler’s staff) as scribe. The root *chet, kof, kof* means to inscribe. Cf. Is. 30:8, *And inscribe* (chukkah) *it in a book*. Thus *mechokek* is an inscriber, i.e., a scribe.

footnotes:
⁶⁹ I.E. renders mechokek


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:10:3)

**וטעם מבין רגליו.** שכן דרך כל סופר להיות יושב בין רגלי הקצין:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[FROM BETWEEN HIS FEET.] Scribes sit at the feet of the ruler.⁷⁰

footnotes:
⁷⁰ According to Cohen.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:4
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:10:4)

**שילה.** יש אומרים כדרך המתרנם ארמית כטעם שלו, ויש אומרים, שהוא מגזרת "ובשליתה" (דבר' כח נז), ויש מי שהוציא מלשון קדמונינו ז"ל שליל, ויש מי שפי' אותו על עיר שילה, ויפרש "יבוא" כמו "ובא השמש" (ויקרא כב ז), או עד כי יבוא קץ שילה כי כן כתוב "ויטוש משכן שילה" (תהלים עח ס), ואחר כן ויבחר בדוד עבדו" (תהלים שם פ' ע), גם זה איננו רחוק, או יהיה שילה כמו בנו, והה"א תחת וי"ו כמו בתוך אהלה (בראשית ט כא) מגזרת לא תשלה אותי (מ"ב רכח) שפירושו לא תוליד:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SHILOH. Some interpret *Shiloh* as Onkelos does. They say that it means “his.”⁷¹ (literally, until shiloh cometh) as until the Messiah, to whom is the kingdom (shiloh meaning *shelo*, his) cometh. I.E. says that it is possible to so interpret the verse but to apply it to David rather than to the Messiah (Filwarg). Others say that *Shiloh* comes from the same root as *u-ve-shilyatah* (and against her afterbirth) (Deut. 28:57).⁷² means the afterbirth, or placenta and, by extension, the child which was in the placenta. The meaning of *ad ki yavo shiloh* thus is: until the child comes, the reference being until David from the house of Judah comes (Filwarg). Krinsky and Weiser apply it to the Messiah. Filwarg’s interpretation seems to be correct in view of the fact that I.E. explicitly states that this verse applies to David. Others connect it to the Rabbinic term *shalil* (embryo).⁷³ There is also a commentator who says that *shiloh* refers to the city Shilo. He would explain *yavo* to mean goeth down, as in *and the sun goeth down* (ba) (Eccles. 1:5).⁷⁴ means until Shilo goeth down (is destroyed). Or he would maintain that our verse is abridged and should read as if written *ad ki yavo ketz shilo* (until the end of Shiloh comes).⁷⁵ For it is written, *And he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh* (Ps. 78:60), and then, *He chose David also His servant* (Ps. 78:70). The latter interpretation is also not implausible. It is also possible that *Shiloh* means his son, with the *heh* taking the place of the *vav*,⁷⁶ means his son, then the word should end in a *vav* rather than in a *heh*, as the *vav* with a *cholem* suffixed to a noun is the sign of the pronoun his. I.E. here accepts the interpretation that *shiloh* means his son. However, he connects it to the words *tashleh* rather than to *shelil* or *shilyah* as was done above (Filwarg). as in the word *oholoh* (his tent) (Gen. 9:21), and that the word *shiloh* comes from the same root as *tashleh* (give birth) in *lo tashleh oti* (don’t cause me to give birth) (II Kings 4:28).⁷⁷

footnotes:
⁷¹ Onkelos renders ad ki yavo shiloh
⁷² That is, it means a child. Shilyah
⁷³ The interpretation being the same as in the note above.
⁷⁴ See note 29. And ad ki yavo shilo
⁷⁵ Cohen. That is, Judah’s pre-eminence will continue throughout the period of Shiloh and when that is destroyed, it will be superseded by the royal line of David.
⁷⁶ If shiloh
⁷⁷ Don’t pray to God that I should give birth (Weiser, Cherez).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:5
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:10:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:10:5)

**ומלת יקהת.** כמו "ליקהת אם" (משלי ל יז) והיו"ד משרת לעתיד וטעמו שיסורו נוים למשמעתו וכן הי' עמים רבים תחת יד דוד ושלמה בנו, ואין טעם עד כי יבוא שילה שיסור דשבט ממנו בבוא שילה רק טעמו כמו לא יחסר לפלוני לחם עד שיגיע עת שיהיה לו שדות וכרמים רבות, וכמוהו "כי לא אעזבך עד אשר אם עשיתי את אשר דברתי לך" (בראשית כח טו) שישיבהו אל הארץ:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[OBEDIENCE.] The word *yikkehat* (obedience of) is similar to the word *li-kehat* in *to obey* (li-kehat) *his mother* (Prov. 30:17).⁷⁸ meaning obedience. The *yod* of *yikkehat* is a third person imperfect prefix.⁷⁹ prefixed to a verb is the sign of the third person future. The meaning of *ve-lo yikkehat ammim* is that nations shall obey him. Jacob’s prophecy came true, for we find that many nations were subservient to David and his son Solomon. Our phrase (v. 10) does not mean that the sceptre shall depart from Judah when David comes.⁸⁰ Our verse may be compared to someone saying, so and so will not lack bread until the time that he will have many vineyards and fields. *For I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of*, viz., returning you to the land of Canaan (Gen. 28:15), is identical.⁸¹

footnotes:
⁷⁸ They both come from the root kof, heh, tov
⁷⁹ A yod
⁸⁰ According to I.E. our verse reads: the scepter shall not depart from Judah…until his son (David) comes. This implies that when David comes, the scepter shall depart from Judah.
⁸¹ Krinsky, Weiser.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:11:1)

**אסרי.** היו"ד נוסף כמו "היושבי" (תהלים קכג א) "לסוסתי" (שה"ש א ט):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BINDING. The *yod* of *oseri* (binding) is superfluous.⁸². It is similar to the superflous *yods* of *ha-yoshevi* (that are enthroned) (Ps. 123:1)⁸³. and *le-susati* (to a steed) (Cant. 1:9)⁸⁴. both of which are superfluous.

footnotes:
⁸² The usual form is oser
⁸³ The usual form is ha-yoshev
⁸⁴ The usual form is le-susah


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:11:2)

**עירה.** כמו "על שלשים עירים" (שופ' יו"ד ד),

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
HIS FOAL. *Iroh* (his foal) is similar to *ayarim* (ass colts) in *on thirty ass colts* (ayarim) (Jud. 10:4).⁸⁵ and it means a young and vigorous male ass. The *heh* of *iroh* is in place of a *vav* as is indicated by the *keri* (Krinsky).

footnotes:
⁸⁵ The singular is ayir


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:11:3)

ויו"ד בני אתונו נוסף, או יהיה פי', כי אסרי ישרת עצמו ואחר:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
The *yod* of *beni* (colt) in *beni atono* (his ass’s colt) is superfluous.⁸⁶ is a variation of *ben atono. Beni* thus does not mean my son. The meaning of our verse then is: Binding his foal unto the vine and binding his ass’s colt unto the choice vine, for the word binding is to be read as if written twice.⁸⁷ and to *his ass’s colt*. This translation follows *Vat. Ebr*. 38 which reads, “*ve-yehi perusho oseri la-gefen…ki…*, and its meaning is: Binding his foal…because *oseri* is to be read as if written twice.” The printed text reads, “*o yehiyeh pirusho ki*…or its meaning is because *oseri* is to be read as if written twice.” This reading is impossible. It implies that according to the first interpretation (that the *yod* of *oseri* is superfluous) *oseri* does not apply to the second part of the verse. However, according to the first interpretation *oseri* also refers to the second part of the verse as well, for how else can we interpret *And his ass’s colt unto the choice vine*, except by: And binding his ass’s colt unto the choice vine. Both Filwarg and Cherez note that I.E.’s comment as written in the printed text is incomprehensible. They suggest their own emendation. However, the reading in *Vat. Ebr*. 38 eliminates most of the difficulties. The reading in the printed texts probably arose because a scribe omitted *Binding his foal*, etc., and a latter scribe changed *ve-yehiyeh* to *o yehiyeh* in an attempt to make sense out of the remaining fragment. However, he failed to do so.

footnotes:
⁸⁶ Beni atono
⁸⁷ The text has “binding” once. I.E. notes that it applies both to his foal


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:4
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:11:4)

**ולשרקה.** כפול, כי היא כגפן, ועיר כאתון,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
UNTO THE CHOICE VINE. Scripture repeats the same idea in different words, for *sorekah* (vine) means the same as *gefen*, and *ayir* (foal) the same as *aton*.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:5
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:11:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:11:5)

ג"כ ובדם ענבים סותה, וי"א שהיא כמו כסותו והוא חסר כ"ף, והנכון בעיני שהוא מגזרת "מסוה" (שמות לד לג), והטעם שתרבה תבואת כרמיו עד שיסור עירה לגפן, ולא יחוש אם יאכל ענבים, ותחת מים יכבס ביין לבושו, ודמהו לדם בעבור שיתאדם, וזה על דרך משל, כמו "יטפו הרים עסיס" (יואל ד, יח) עד שיקרא חכלילי עינים מרוב היין שהוא שותה כי החכלילות יראה בעין משכרת היין ושניו לבנות מרוב אכלו חלב:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
Similarly, *And his vesture in the blood of grapes*.⁸⁸. Some say that *suto* (his vesture) is the word *kesuto* (his vesture) with the *kaf* missing.⁸⁹ comes from the root *caf, samekh, heh* which gives us the noun *kesut* (a covering, a vesture) (Cherez). However, I believe that *sutoh* comes from the same root as *masveh* (veil) (Ex. 34:33).⁹⁰ is *samekh, vav, heh*. Both opinions agree that *sutoh* means a vesture. They differ only in explaining the word’s origin. The meaning of our verse is that his vineyards will produce so many grapes that Judah will bind⁹¹ as in *Vat. Ebr*. 38. his foal to the vine and he will not care if the animal eats of the grapes; and he will have so much wine that he will wash his garments in wine rather than in water. Scripture terms wine *the blood of grapes* because wine is red.⁹². The Bible speaks figuratively here, as it does in *And it shall come to pass in that day, That the mountains shall drop down sweet wine, And the hills shall flow with milk* (Joel 4:18). The land will produce so much wine that Judah will be called “red eyes” because of the great amount of wine that he will drink. ⁹³ He will be so called because the eyes of one who drinks much wine look red.⁹⁴. Similarly Judah’s teeth will be white from the large amount of milk that he will drink.⁹⁵. 38. The printed texts have “from eating milk.” But milk is drunk not eaten. The verse literally reads: and his teeth white from milk. I.E. interprets accordingly.

footnotes:
⁸⁸ Which means the same as his garments in wine
⁸⁹ Thus sutoh
⁹⁰ In this case the root of sutoh
⁹¹ Reading ye’esor
⁹² Cf. Prov. 23:31, Look not thou upon the wine when it is red
⁹³ The verse literally reads: red eyes from wine. I.E. interprets accordingly.
⁹⁴ Cf. Prov. 23:29, 30, Who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine
⁹⁵ So Vat. Ebr


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:12:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:12:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:12:1)

**ולבן שנים.** שם התואר ונקרא שנים על שם מערכות שנים בעבור היותם שתי מערכות, ואמר הגאון ז"ל, חכלילי עינים יותר מהיין, וכן אמר מחלב ואחרים אומרים, כי לבן שינים שלא יאכל דבר טמא ולא יתור אחר עיניו וזה דרך דרש משובש

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND HIS TEETH WHITE. *U-leven* (white) is an adjective modifying *shinnayim* (teeth).⁹⁶ means white teeth not whiteness of teeth; hence he points out that *u-leven* is an adjective (Filwarg). *Shinnayim* is in the dual form because the teeth are arranged in two sets.⁹⁷ (ears), *yadayim* (hands). However, there is more than one tooth in the mouth. Hence the plural of *shen* (tooth) should not be in the dual form. I.E. thus explains that *shinayyim* is in the dual form because teeth come in two sets, an upper and a lower. Saadiah Gaon, of blessed memory, explains *His eyes shall based with wine* to mean that his eyes shall be redder than wine. He similarly explains *And his teeth white with milk* to mean that his teeth shall be whiter than milk.⁹⁸ (with wine), and *me-chalav* (with milk). The *mem* can have the meaning more than. Thus *mi-yayin* can mean more than wine, and *me-chalav*, more than milk. Others say that *And his teeth white with milk* means that he will not eat an unclean thing and will not follow what his eyes see.⁹⁹ The latter is a ridiculous homily.¹⁰⁰

footnotes:
⁹⁶ I.E.’s point is that u-leven shinnayim
⁹⁷ The dual form is usually limited to nouns that come in pairs, i.e., oznayim
⁹⁸ The Hebrew reads mi-yayin
⁹⁹ According to Krinsky the reference is to an oath that Judah took to be especially scrupulous in what he would eat and what he would look upon (women). Judah considered certain permitted foods as “unclean” and abstained from them. Judah took his oath of superpiety after the incident of Tamar (Gen. 39) as a form of penance and to ensure that henceforth he would act more saintly.
¹⁰⁰ It implies that the other brothers were not as saintly as Judah in that they did not take the same oath that Judah did (Krinsky). Or this interpretation is extremely far fetched because there is no allusion to it in the text.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:12:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:12:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:12:2)

והזכיר בתחלה השבטים כאשר נולדו רק הקדים זבולן על יששכר בעבור נפול נחלתו בין זבולן ובין דן:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
Jacob at first enumerated the tribes¹⁰¹. in the order of their birth. However, he listed Zebulun before Issachar because Issachar’s inheritance fell between Zebulun and Dan.¹⁰²

footnotes:
¹⁰¹ Jacob in prophesying about his children first prophesied about the sons of Leah, then about the sons of the handmaids, and finally concerning the sons of Rachel. In prophesying about the sons of Leah, Jacob followed the order of their birth. However, in prophesying concerning the sons of the handmaidens he did not follow the order of their birth. That is what I.E. means by Jacob at first listed the tribes in order of their birth
¹⁰² Hence Issachar is listed between Zebulun and Dan. Cf. Josh. 19.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:13:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:13:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:13:1)

**לחוף ימים.** גם זה לאות, כי זאת דרך נבואה, ופי' לחוף מחוז והוא מגזרת "חופף עליו כל היום" (דבר' לג יב) כי האניות לא תעמדנה במקום מגולה לרוח:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AT THE SHORE OF THE SEA. This, too, is proof that Jacob prophesied.¹⁰³ The meaning of *le-chof* (at the shore) is, at the border of. It comes from the same root as *chofef* (covereth) in *He covereth* (chofef) *him all the day* (Deut. 33:12). The border of the sea is called *chof* because it “covers” the boats as boats cannot be anchored in places that are open to the wind.¹⁰⁴) protects or covers (*chofef*) the ships. Weiser suggests that what I.E. means by border is an inlet where the ships are anchored for protection.

footnotes:
¹⁰³ This verse is obviously a prophecy that Zebulun would inherit a portion which borders on the sea shore in the land of Israel. This supports I.E.’s contention that Jacob’s final words to his children recorded in Chap. 49 are prophesies. Cf. I.E.’s comments on verse 1.
¹⁰⁴ Thus the border or shore (chof


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:13:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:13:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:13:2)

**וירכתו על צידון.** שיגיע ירכו על צידון:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND HIS FLANK SHALL BE UPON ZIDON. His flank shall extend to Zidon.¹⁰⁵

footnotes:
¹⁰⁵ His border shall extend to Zidon (Weiser)


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:14:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:14:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:14:1)

**חמר גרם.** דמהו לחמור שיש לו עצם כבד, והנה חמור סמוך על כן, רובץ:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
ISSACHAR IS A LARGE-BONED ASS. Jacob compared Issachar to an ass whose bones are heavy.¹⁰⁶ *Chamor* (ass) is in the construct with *garem* (bones).¹⁰⁷ thus means an ass (*chamor*) of heavy bones (*garem*), rather than a heavy-boned ass. I.E.’s point is that *garem* is not an adjective modifying *chamor* (Filwarg, Weiser). Due to the heaviness of his bones, he is wont to couch.¹⁰⁸

footnotes:
¹⁰⁶ That is, strong (Krinsky).
¹⁰⁷ Chamor garem
¹⁰⁸ According to Filwarg. The point is that this type of beast carries heavy loads and therefore often couches down to rest when burdened. It should be noted that I.E. is vague and that Weiser, Cherez and Krinsky offer other interpretations.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:14:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:14:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:14:2)

**בין המשפתים.** בין המערכות, ויתכן היותו מגזרת "ד' תשפות שלום לנו" (ישעי' כו יב):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BETWEEN THE SHEEPFOLDS. *Ben ha-mishpatayim* (between the sheepfolds) means between the arranged rows.¹⁰⁹ It is possible that *mishpatayim* comes from the same root as *tishpot* (arrange) in *Lord, Thou wilt arrange* (tishpot) *peace for us* (Is. 26:12).

footnotes:
¹⁰⁹ I.E. does not tell us what he means by “arranged rows.” The reference may be to the burdens borne by the ass which are arranged in two rows, one on the right side of the animal and one on the left (Krinsky), or to the rows of the sheep-folds (Weiser).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:15:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:15:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:15:1)

**וירא מנוחה.** כאשר ראה ארצו ומקום מנוחתו נעימים נטה שכמו לסבול כל משא כאשר ישא החמור, ושב כעבד נותן מס, וזה הטעם על יששכר שלא הי' גבורים, ולא ירצו לצאת למלחמה לעזוב מקומם, וכן אמר משה "ויששכר באהליך" (דבר' לג יח) והי' נותנים מס למלך ישראל שלא יצאו, או לגוים שלא יבואו להלחם עליהם

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
FOR HE SAW A RESTING-PLACE THAT IT WAS GOOD. When Issachar saw that his land and resting-place were pleasant, he, as an ass, bowed his shoulder to bear any and all burdens and became as a servant that pays levies. Scripture says this concerning Issachar because this tribe did not consist of warriors and its men did not want to leave their homes to go to war. Moses similarly said concerning Issachar, *Rejoice…Issachar, in thy tents* (Deut. 33:18). The levy mentioned in our verse may refer to Issachar’s payment of a money levy to the king in Israel in lieu of furnishing soldiers for his army, or it may refer to a payment of money to foreign nations that they should not attack them.¹¹⁰. 38 reads, “or to foreign nations who attacked them.” The point is that the tribe of Issachar were as servants (*mas oved*) because they paid a levy either to the king of Israel or to foreign nations.

footnotes:
¹¹⁰ Vat. Ebr


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:16:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:16:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:16:1)

**דן ידין עמו.** רמז שיהיה בעל דגל כאחד בני הגבירות, והנה היה כקצין על כל עם מהשפחות:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
DAN SHALL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE. Jacob hinted that Dan, although born of a handmaid, would have a standard just as the tribes born of the wives did.¹¹¹ Dan was thus a ruler over all the other tribes that were descended from the handmaids.¹¹², i.e., he shall be a ruler over the tribes descended from the handmaids.

footnotes:
¹¹¹ For the standards see Num. 2. The four tribes with standards were: Reuben, Judah, Ephraim and Dan. The first three were descended from Jacob’s wives, Dan was the son of Bilhah, Rachael’s handmaid.
¹¹² This explains Dan shall judge his people


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:17:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:17:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:17:1)

ודמהו ברוב גבורתו לנחש. גם יתכן להיות פי' שפיפון מגזרת הוא ישופך ראש (בראשית ג, טו), והטעם כפול:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[A SERPENT.] Jacob compared Dan in his strength to a serpent.¹¹³ It is also possible that *shefifon* (a horned snake) comes from the same root as *yeshufekha* (they shall bruise thy) in *they shall bruise thy* (yeshufekha) *head* (Gen. 3:15).¹¹⁴ means a snake. It is so called because it bruises (Krinsky). According to this interpretation *shefifon ale orach* (a horned snake in the path) means the same as *nachash ale derech* (a serpent in the way).

footnotes:
¹¹³ Scripture says that Dan shall be a serpent in the way. I.E. points out that Jacob compared Dan to a serpent only with regard to his ability to harm his enemies.
¹¹⁴ Hence shefifon


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:18:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:18:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:18:1)

**וטעם לישועתך קויתי ד'.** בעבור שהוא נושך עקבי סוס יפחד מרוכב הסוס שלא ישוף ראשו בחרבו, על כן אמר הנביא לישועתך קויתי ד', והכ"ף לנוכח דן, ופי' קויתי השם להיות ישועתך, או בא שם תחת שם הפעל, והטעם להושיעך, וכן "נרננה בישועתך" (תהלים כ, ו) אם הכ"ף לנכח דוד או המשיח בנו, ויאמר הנגיד כי תחסר מלת "ויאמר", וכן ראוי להיותו ויאמר לישועתך קויתי ד', ור' יצחק אמר כאשר ראה הנביא בנו דן בדמות נחש בדדך הנבואה, מיד פחד יעקב ואמר הושיעני ד':

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[I WAIT FOR THY SALVATION, O LORD.] When the serpent bites the horse’s heel, it is afraid that the rider will smash its head with his sword. Hence the prophet prayed, *I wait for Thy salvation, O Lord*.¹¹⁵), he is not out of danger. The rider can still kill him. Hence Jacob prayed that God be with Dan so that when he struck his enemy he would escape safely. The “thy” of *Thy salvation* refers to Dan.¹¹⁶ of *li-shu’atekha* (for thy salvation) does not refer to God but to Dan. I.E. interprets thus because he believes our verse to be a prayer to God on behalf of Dan. The meaning of our verse is: I trust to God for thy salvation. It is also possible that Scripture employs a noun (salvation) in place of an infinitive.¹¹⁷ (for thy salvation) as if written *le-hoshi’akha*. The latter is a verb, the former a noun. Our verse should thus be rendered: I trust that God will save thee. *Thy salvation* in *We will shout for joy in thy salvation* (Ps. 20:6) is similar.¹¹⁸ does not refer to God. The aforementioned is the case whether the “thy” of *thy salvation* (Ps. 20:6) refers to King David or to the anointed, his son.¹¹⁹ suffixed to *yeshu’ah* (salvation or victory) does not refer to God. The same holds true in our verse (Filwarg, Cherez). *Vat. Ebr*. 38 reads, “Thy salvation (thy victory) is similar in that “thy” refers either to David or to the anointed his son.” Rabbi Samuel Ha-Nagid says that the word *va-yomer* has been omitted from our clause and it should be read as if written: and he will say (*va-yomer*), I wait for Thy salvation, O Lord.¹²⁰ is Dan, i.e., Dan after biting the horse’s heel will say, *I wait for Thy salvation, O Lord* (Filwarg). According to this interpretation “thy” in *Thy salvation* refers to God. Rabbi Isaac¹²¹ explains our verse as follows: when the prophet Jacob prophetically saw his son Dan in the form of a serpent, he was overtaken by fright and exclaimed, “Save me, O Lord.”¹²². According to this interpretation also, “thy” in *Thy salvation* refers to God. The reason for Jacob’s fright was explained by I.E. at the beginning of his comment.

footnotes:
¹¹⁵ When the serpent strikes (that biteth the horse’s heels, so that his rider falleth backward
¹¹⁶ The caf
¹¹⁷ I.E. interprets li-shu’atekha
¹¹⁸ Here, too, the “thy” in thy salvation
¹¹⁹ The Messiah (Cherez). Any of the Judean kings descended from David (Weiser). The point is that the caf
¹²⁰ The subject of va-yomer
¹²¹ According to Weiser, the reference is to Rabbi Isaac, one of the early Gaonim of Sura.
¹²² “Save me, O Lord” is a paraphrase of, I wait for Thy salvation, O Lord


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:19:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:19:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:19:1)

**גד.** התנבא שיבא עליו גדוד, והוא ינצחנו באחרונה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
GAD. Jacob prophesied that a troop (an army) would attack Gad but that he would ultimately be victorious.¹²³, heel meaning in the end. Cf. I.E.’s comments on Gen. 3:15.

footnotes:
¹²³ This is the meaning of But he shall troop upon their heel


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:19:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:19:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:19:2)

**יגודנו.** כמו לעם יגודנו (חבקוק נ טז), גם יגוד מפעלי הכפל והשורק תחת הולם כמו יָרוּן וְשָמַח (משלי כט ו) ואנחנו לא נדע היום כל התלאות העוברות על אבותינו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
SHALL TROOP UPON HIM. *Yegudennu* (shall troop upon him) is similar to *yegudennu* (he invadeth) in *the people that he invadeth* (yegudennu) (Hab. 3:16).¹²⁴ (Gad, a troop shall troop upon him) means, Gad, a troop shall invade or attack him. *Yagud* (he shall troop), like *gedud* (a troop), comes from the root *gimel, dalet, dalet*.¹²⁵ (a troop), *yegudennu* (shall troop upon him) and *yagud* (he shall troop) all come from the same double root, *gimel, dalet, dalet*. That *gedud* comes from this root is obvious. That *yagud* and *yegudennu* (*yagud* plus the suffix *nu*) come from this root is not as apparent. Double root letters are vocalized with a *cholam* and *ayin vav* roots with a *shuruk* in the *kal* imperfect. It thus appears that *yagud* and *yegudennu* come from the root *gimel, vav, dalet*, hence I.E.’s comment. It is vocalized with a *shuruk* in place of a *cholam* like the word *yarun* (doth sing) in *But the righteous doth sing* (yarun) *and rejoice* (Prov. 29:6).¹²⁶ comes from the root *resh, nun, nun*, so it should have been vocalized *yaron*. We thus see that at times a double root is vocalized as an *ayin vav* (Cherez). We do not know exactly to what incident Jacob was referring because we don’t know all the tribulations that our ancestors endured.¹²⁷

footnotes:
¹²⁴ Hence Gad gedud yegudennu
¹²⁵ I. E.’s point is that gedud
¹²⁶ Yarun
¹²⁷ Cherez. We do not know when the tribe of Gad was attacked by an invading army.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:20:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:20:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:20:1)

**מאשר.** י"א כי המ"ם נוסף, והנכון בעיני שמארץ אשר יבא לחם ושמן, ופה לחם לשון נקבה וכן בית ומקום ויד ואש ועין ורוח וארץ וארון ועם,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AS FOR ASHER. Some say that the *mem* of *me-asher* (as for Asher) is superfluous.¹²⁸ prefixed to their names (Weiser). Our verse should thus be translated: Asher, his bread shall be fat. However, I believe that what our clause means is: from the land of Asher “fat bread” will come.¹²⁹. 38 which reads *lechem shamen*. Our texts have *lechem va-shemen* (bread and oil). However, this reading is incorrect in view of I.E.’s interpretation of *shemenah* as being an adjective of *lechem*. See next note. According to this interpretation the *mem* prefixed to Asher is a preposition meaning from. Bread in our verse is in the feminine.¹³⁰ (his bread shall be fat). *Shemenah* is a feminine, the masculine being *shamen*. In other places *lechem* is in the masculine, i.e., Num. 4:7; I Sam. 9:7. We find the same to be the case with the words house,¹³¹ (house) is masculine in Deut. 22:8 and feminine in II Kings 15:5. place,¹³² (place) is masculine in Gen. 1:9 and feminine in Job 20:9. hand,¹³³ (hand) is masculine in Ezek. 2:9 and feminine in Ex. 14:31. *Yad* is generally feminine. fire,¹³⁴ (fire) is masculine in Ps. 104:4 and feminine in Num. 16:35. eye,¹³⁵ (eye) is masculine in Prov. 4:25 and feminine in Gen. 3:7. *Ayin* is generally feminine. wind,¹³⁶ (wind) is masculine in Job 1:19 and feminine in Gen. 1:2. land,¹³⁷ is masculine in Is. 9:18 and feminine in Gen. 1:2. *Eretz* is generally feminine. chest¹³⁸ (chest) is masculine in Num. 10:33 and feminine in I Sam. 4:17. It is generally masculine. and people.¹³⁹ (people) is masculine in Gen. 11:6 and feminine in Ex. 5:16. *Am* is usually masculine.

footnotes:
¹²⁸ None of the other tribes have a mem
¹²⁹ Or fat food, following Vat. Ebr
¹³⁰ The text reads, shemenah lachmo
¹³¹ Bayit
¹³² Makom
¹³³ Yad
¹³⁴ Esh
¹³⁵ Ayin
¹³⁶ Ru’ach
¹³⁷ Eretz
¹³⁸ Aron
¹³⁹ Am


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:20:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:20:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:20:2)

וטעם מעדני מלך ידוע, וכן אמר משה "וטובל בשמן רגלו" (דבר' לג כד):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[ROYAL DAINTIES.] The meaning of *ma’adanne melekh* (royal dainties) is known.¹⁴⁰ (and he shall yield royal dainties) is that Asher will provide kings with food for their enjoyment. He will do so because his land is very fertile and produces the choicest foods (Cherez). Moses similarly said concerning Asher, *And let him dip his foot in oil* (Deut. 33:24).¹⁴¹

footnotes:
¹⁴⁰ The meaning of ve-hu yitten ma’adanne melekh
¹⁴¹ Moses similarly said that Asher’s land would be fertile, for the aforementioned is the meaning of Moses’ blessing (Deut. 33:24).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:21:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:21:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:21:1)

**נפתלי אילה שלוחה.** על דרך דורון, והמקבל הדורון נותן אמרי שפר, וי"א שאילה רמז לדבורה, הנותן אמרי שפר, רמז לשירת ברק עמה ואמר נפתלי בעבור נחלתו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
NAPHTALI IS A HIND LET LOOSE. The word *sheluchah* (let loose) means a gift,¹⁴² (shilluchim) *unto his daughter*. The meaning of *Naphtali is a hind let loose* thus is: Naphtali is as beloved and as beautiful as a hind given as a gift (Weiser). Filwarg suggests rendering: Naphtali has a land which is as precious as a hind given as a gift. and the one who receives such a gift responds with goodly words.¹⁴³ cannot refer to *ayyalah* (hind) which is feminine. Hence it must refer to the one receiving the gift. Others say that *hind* refers to Deborah and that *He giveth goodly words* alludes to Barak who joined her in a song to God.¹⁴⁴ Scripture mentions Naphtali¹⁴⁵ (Jud. 4:5). The latter indicates that Deborah was not a Naphtalite. The question arises, “If Deborah was not a Naphtalite why mention her in a prophecy which pertains to Naphtali?” I.E. answers that Barak, the general whom Deborah inspired to lead Israel to victory and who joined her in song to God, came from the tribe of Naphtali. Cf. Jud. 4:6, *Barak…out of Kedesh-naphtali*. because Barak came from the tribe of Naphtali.¹⁴⁶.

footnotes:
¹⁴² I Kings 9:16, and given it for a portion
¹⁴³ He giveth
¹⁴⁴ Cf. Jud. 5:1.
¹⁴⁵ Scripture tells us that Deborah sat…in the hill country of Ephraim
¹⁴⁶ Filwarg suggests rendering, “Scripture mentions Naphtali because the battle in which Deborah and Barak played a key role took place in the territory of Naphtali.” The literal reading of I.E. is, Scripture mentions Naphtali because of his inheritance


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:22:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:22:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:22:1)

**בן פורת יוסף.** בן כמו סעיף והוא לשון נקבה וכן על בן אמצת לך (תהלים פ טז), ודקדוק פורת פועלת, כי על שני דרכים ימצא הפועל, כמו אֹיבֶיהָ, אֹיַבְתִי וכן פורה ופורת, מלשון "פוריה" (תהלים קכח ג) ויש מי שפי' אותה מלשון "ותשלח פארות" (יחז' יז ו), והזכיר בן פורת פֲעַמַיִם. כדרך אנשי לשון הקדש, "כי הנה אויביך ד', כי הנה אויביך" (תהלים צב י) והטעם פעם אחר פעם תמיד, ועל הפי' השני יהיה התי"ו תדת ח"א כתי"ו ושבת לנשיא (יחז' מו יז):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
JOSEPH IS A FRUITFUL VINE. *Ben* means a branch¹⁴⁷ means a son. Metaphorically speaking, the branch is the son of the tree. Hence *ben* can also mean a branch (Cherez). and it is a feminine noun.¹⁴⁸ is usually masculine. However, *porat* is feminine. Thus *ben* in *ben porat yosef* (Joseph is a fruitful branch) has to be feminine. If *ben* was masculine our phrase would read *ben poreh yosef*. *Ben* in *And the branch* (ben) *that Thou madest strong for Thyself* (Ps. 80:16) has a similar meaning. Grammatically speaking *porat* (fruitful) is a *po’elet*. A feminine singular participle can come in two paradigms,¹⁴⁹ and *po’elet*, examples of which are *oyevah* and *oyevet*. A more common example would be *kotevah* and *kotevet*, or *shomerah* and *shomeret*. The translation follows *Vat. Ebr*. 38. Our texts have *oyeveha* and *oyavti*. The latter appears to be a scribal error (Weiser, Krinsky, Cherez). viz., *oyevah* and *oyevet*, and similarly *porah* and *porat*.¹⁵⁰ is a *po’alah* and *porat* is a *po’elet*. The word *porat* is related to the word *poriyyah* (fruitful) (Ps. 128:3). There is a commentator who connects *porat* to the word *porot* (branches) in *And brought forth branches* (porot) (Ezek. 17:6).¹⁵¹ means a plant and *porat* a branch. According to this interpretation *ben porat yosef* means Joseph is a plant containing branches (Krinsky). The Bible repeats the phrase *ben porot* twice in succession, for that is Hebrew style. Compare, *For, lo, Thine enemies, O Lord, For, lo, Thine enemies shall perish* (Ps. 92:10). The repetition of a phrase indicates permanence. According to the second quoted interpretation¹⁵² is related to *porot* (in Ezek. 17:6) a *tav* has been substituted for a *heh*¹⁵³. If *porat* means a branch then our verse should have read *ben porah*, since *porah* is the singular of *porot* (branches). Thus *porat* is a variation of *porah*. as in the case of the *tav* of *ve-shavat* (then it shall return) in *then it shall return* (ve-shavat) *to the prince* (Ezek. 46:17).¹⁵⁴ instead of *ve-shavat*. Thus we see that a *tav* has been substituted for a *heh*.

footnotes:
¹⁴⁷ Ben
¹⁴⁸ Ben
¹⁴⁹ The two paradigms being po’alah
¹⁵⁰ Porah
¹⁵¹ In this case ben
¹⁵² That porat
¹⁵³ In the word porat
¹⁵⁴ The verse should have read ve-shavah


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:22:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:22:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:22:2)

**וטעם "בנות צעדה עלי שור".** שיוסף היה כבן פרת, ועשה בנות, צעדה כל אחת ואחת מהן על החומה והטעם שגבהו מאוד על החומות הבצורות בנות צעדה, על דרך "זבובי מות יבאיש" (קהלת יו"ד א):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[ITS BRANCHES RUN OVER THE WALL.] Joseph was as a fruitful vine. He gave birth to branches, each one of which ran over the wall; i.e., the branches were so tall that they ran over fortified walls.¹⁵⁵ (wall) to mean a wall which serves a defensive purpose (Krinsky). Such walls are high and strong. I.E. is saying that the branches grew very high (Cohen) or that the branches were so tall that they needed a mighty wall to support them (Krinsky). Scripture here combines *banot* (branches) with *tza’adah* (run)¹⁵⁶ is a noun in the plural, while *tza’adah* is a verb in the singular. If consistent, the text should read, *banot tza’adu*. I.E. explains that the combination of plural and singular means each one of the branches will run over the wall. in a manner similar to *Dead flies* (zevuve) *make the ointment of the perfumer fetid* (yavish) (Eccles. 10:1). ¹⁵⁷ is in the plural and *yavish* is in the singular. The meaning of this verse is that each one of the dead flies makes the ointment of the perfumer fetid. Cf. I.E.’s comments on Eccles. 10:1.

footnotes:
¹⁵⁵ I.E. explains shur
¹⁵⁶ Banot
¹⁵⁷ Wherein zevuve


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:23:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:23:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:23:1)

**וימררוהו.** אמר הנגיד שפי' שמו מררתו כמו מטרה ואחר כך יורו בעלי חצים וככה "השמיעו אל בבל רבים" (ירמי' נ, כט)

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
HAVE DEALT BITTERLY WITH HIM. Rabbi Samuel Ha-Nagid explains this verse as meaning: they set his gall for a target (*va-yemareruhu*)¹⁵⁸ means gall, hence Rabbi Samuel Ha-Nagid’s interpretation. and then the archers shot at him (*va-robbu*).¹⁵⁹, as in *Vat. Ebr*. 38. The word *rabbim* (archers) in *Call together the archers* (rabbim) *against Babylon, All them that bend the bow* (Jer. 50:29) is similar to *va-robbu* in our verse. ¹⁶⁰ means archers. *Va-robbu* is its verbal form. The root of the word is *resh, bet, bet*. *His archers compass me round about…He poureth out my gall upon the ground* (Job 16:13) is similar to our verse.¹⁶¹

footnotes:
¹⁵⁸ Mererah
¹⁵⁹ Reading yaru
¹⁶⁰ We thus see that the word rabbim
¹⁶¹ In that it speaks of the gall as a target for archers (Cherez).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:23:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:23:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:23:2)

וכטעם וימררוהו"יסבו עָלַי רַבָיו" (איוב טז יג) בסוף "ישפוך לארץ מְרֵרָתִי":

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND HATED HIM. First they hated him and then they set up his gall as a target. We must thus explain *va-yistemuhu* to mean, and they had hated him.¹⁶² (and hated him) follows *va-robbu* (and they shot at him).

footnotes:
¹⁶² Va-yistemuhu


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:23:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:23:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:23:3)

**וישטמוהו.** מוקדם קודם וימררוהו כאילו אמר וכבד שטמוהו, וזה רמז על אחיו שמכרוהו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
Logically, *va-yistemuhu* should come first, i.e., the sequence should be they hated him, they set his gall as a target, and they shot at thim. Hence *va-yistemuhu* should be taken as a pluperfect (Weiser). This¹⁶³ alludes to Joseph’s brothers who sold him into slavery.

footnotes:
¹⁶³ The archers who hated and shot at Joseph.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:24:1)

**ותשב באיתן.** במקום איתן קשתו

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BUT HIS BOW ABODE FIRM. His bow abode in a firm place.¹⁶⁴ literally means in firm, which is short for *be-makom etan* (in a firm place) (Weiser).

footnotes:
¹⁶⁴ Be-etan


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:24:2)

ויפוזו, ויתחזקו והקרוב אלי "מפזז" (ש"ב, ו, טז), ויש מפרשים אותו מפז ואין טעם לו,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
WERE MADE SUPPLE. *Va-yafozzu* means, and they strengthened themselves. I believe that *va-yafozzu* comes from the same root as *mefazzez* (leaping) (II Sam. 6:16).¹⁶⁵ There are those who connect *va-yafozzu* to the word *paz* (pure gold).¹⁶⁶ (and the arms of his hand were made supple) to mean, and the arms of his hand were gilded, an allusion to the golden ring Pharaoh gave him. Cf. Rashi. However, their interpretation makes no sense.

footnotes:
¹⁶⁵ One who leaps gathers up strength (Filwarg). One who leaps strengthens (tightens) his girdle (Cherez quoting Kimchi).
¹⁶⁶ They explain va-yafozzu zero’e yadav


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:24:3)

והטעם ששטמוהו בעלי חצים, והתחברו לשפוך מררתו וקשתו היתה חזקה ופחדו ממנו לא יכלו לו, כי הי' ידיו חזקים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
The meaning of our text (v. 23 and 24) is that the archers hated Joseph and gathered together to spill his gall. However, his adversaries were afraid of him because his bow and hands were strong. They therefore could not overcome him.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:4
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:24:4)

**מידי אביר יעקב משם.** רמז אביר יעקב שהוא השם מאותו הכח יכול והיה רועה אבן ישראל וכן היה ויכלכל יוסף, וטעם אביר יעקב שהוא ידע אהבתו את יוסף,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BY THE HANDS OF THE MIGHTY ONE OF JACOB. FROM THENCE. *The Mighty One of Jacob* alludes to the Lord. From the power that Joseph received from *the Mighty One of Jacob* he was able to become, and indeed became, “the shepherd of the stone of Israel.”¹⁶⁷ refers to the children of Israel (Cherez). And so it was, for we read, *And Joseph sustained his father, and his brethren, and all his father’s household, with bread* (Gen. 47:12). Jacob employed the term *Mighty One of Jacob* for God¹⁶⁸ because God knew of his deep love for Joseph.¹⁶⁹. means: you became the shepherd of the stone (children) of Israel from the power that came to you from the God who knew of my deep love for you.

footnotes:
¹⁶⁷ The Stone of Israel
¹⁶⁸ Jacob could have employed the term, the Mighty One of Abraham or the Mighty One of Isaac (Krinsky).
¹⁶⁹ Joseph became “the shepherd of Israel” because of Jacob’s merit. God chose Joseph for this great honor and thereby elevated him above all his brothers because the Lord knew Jacob’s love for Joseph. Hence By the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob etc


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:5
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:24:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:24:5)

וטעם אבן כעצם הדבר וי"א כי "משם" כמו מאז וכזה לא מצאנוהו בכל המקרא, גם אבן ישראל שמת לבו והיה כאבן ושב לרעות והטעם לחיות באמכל וזאת דרך רחוקה:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
The meaning of *stone* is the very thing.¹⁷⁰ represents essence, the very thing. The reference is to Jacob and his family. Cf. Rashi. Some say¹⁷¹ that *mi-sham* (from thence) should be interpreted from that time. However, we never find the word *sham* (there) to have this meaning anywhere in Scripture. This commentator also interprets *the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel* as meaning: the one whose heart died and was as stone,¹⁷² but who revived to feed (*ro’eh*), i.e., to live by eating. However, this interpretation is farfetched.

footnotes:
¹⁷⁰ Stone
¹⁷¹ The reference is to Rabbi Isaac ibn Giat (Weiser, Cherez).
¹⁷² The reference is to Jacob whose heart died within him when he was told that Joseph was alive (Gen. 45:26,27). In I Sam. 25:37 such an experience is described as the heart turning to stone (Weiser, Cherez). According to Krinsky the reference is to Jacob and his family who would have died (their hearts would have turned to stone) had Joseph not fed them.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:25:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:25:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:25:1)

**מאל אביך.** על דעתי שהוא דבק עם הפסוק שהוא למעלה והטעם זה הכח שהיה בידך מאל אביך היה והוא יעזרך ומ"ם "מאל" משרת עצמו ואחר עמו, כמו "באל שדי ושמי ד'" (שמות ו, ג) והנה הטעם כפול ומאת שדי והוא יברך אותך, והגאון פי', אשאל מאל אביך, ויתכן היות ברכת שמים דבק עם מאל אביך, והטעם יתברר במלת תהיין,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
EVEN BY THE GOD OF THY FATHER. I believe that this verse is connected to the preceding one.¹⁷³ literally reads, from the God (*me’el*). This term presents a problem. What came from God? I.E.’s answer is that from God refers to Joseph’s power which is referred to in the previous verse. Its meaning is: the power which you possess came to you *from the God of thy father, who shall help thee*. The *mem* of *me-el* (even by God) is also to be prefixed to *ve-et* (and by).¹⁷⁴ is to be read as if written *u-me-et* (and from by). The *mem* of *me-el* is like the *bet* of *be-el* (as God) (Ex. 6:3) which is also to be prefixed to *u-ve-shemi* (but by my name).¹⁷⁵ (be-el shaddai) *but my name* (u-shemi) *YHVH I made Me not known to them*. According to I.E. we should read the aforementioned as if written: and I appeared…as God Almighty (*be-el shaddai*) but with My name (*u-ve-shemi*) YHVH I made Me not known to them. Thus *And from the Almighty, who shall bless thee* repeats the idea contained in *From the God of thy father, who shall help thee*. Saadiah Gaon explains the phrase *me-el avikha* to mean, I will ask of the God of thy fathers.¹⁷⁶. He explained *from the God* not as connected to the previous verse, but as a new thought; viz., I will ask of the God of thy fathers that he help thee and of the Almighty that he bless thee (Cherez). It is possible that *With blessings of heaven above* is connected to, *From the God of thy father*.¹⁷⁷. It similarly rejects the notion that verse 25 is connected to verse 24. It, too, sees in verse 25 a new thought. It explains *From the God* as relating to the blessings mentioned in the second half of the verse, which shall come to you *from the God of thy father*. The meaning of our text is explained by *They (the blessings) shall be on the head of Joseph, And on the crown of the prince among his brethren* (v. 26).¹⁷⁸

footnotes:
¹⁷³ Even by God
¹⁷⁴ That is, ve-et
¹⁷⁵ Our text is thus to be read as if written: From the God of thy father who shall help thee, and from the Almighty who shall bless thee. Ex. 6:3 literally reads: and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, as God Almighty
¹⁷⁶ Saadiah, too, was bothered by the term from the God
¹⁷⁷ This interpretation, like the previous one, deals with the problem of verse 25 opening with the words From the God
¹⁷⁸ Verse 26 seems to conclude the blessing started in verse 25. The sequence thus appears to be: From God shall come to you blessings of the heavens above, of the deep that coucheth beneath, blessings of the breasts and womb. The aforementioned blessings shall be added to my mighty blessings and to the blessings of my progenitors and shall be on the head of Joseph and on the crown of the head of the prince among his brethren (Krinsky).


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:25:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:25:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:25:2)

ברכת תהום כאשר אמר משה וממגד ארץ (דבר' לג טז) גם תהום לשון נקבה וכן "תהום רוממתחו" (יחז' לא ד), וכן טעמו שירדו גשמים ממעל בארצו, וירבו המעיינות והנחלים מתהום שהיא רובצת מתחת לארץ:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BLESSSINGS OF THE DEEP. Moses similarly said, *And for the precious things of the earth and the fullness thereof* (Deut. 33:13).¹⁷⁹ (Deut. 33:13). In this case I.E. is pointing out that Jacob and Moses’ blessings are identical. The word *tehom* (the deep) is feminine both in our verse and in Deut. (33:16). It is similarly feminine in *The deep* (tehom) *made it to grow* (Ezek. 31:4).¹⁸⁰ (the deep that coucheth). Deut. 33:13 reads, *u-mi-tehom rovetzet* (and for the deep that coucheth). *Rovetzet* (coucheth) is feminine, hence *tehom* (the deep) must be feminine. Ezek. 31:4 reads, *tehom romematehu* (the deep made it to grow). Since *romematehu* is feminine, *tehom*, too, must be feminine. I.E. makes this point because *tehom* is masculine in Ps. 42:8. Thus we see that *tehom* is both masculine and feminine. The meaning of *With blessings of heaven above, Blessings of the deep that coucheth beneath* is that rain will descend from the heavens above upon the land of Joseph and that the deep which coucheth beneath the earth will fill its rivers and springs with an abundance of water.

footnotes:
¹⁷⁹ So Cherez. The point is that the blessing of the deep means that the land will be well watered and fertile, as Moses blessed the tribe of Joseph with a fertile land. Krinsky suggests that our text is corrupt and that the proof text should read: For the precious things of heaven, for the dew, And for the deep that coucheth beneath
¹⁸⁰ Our verse reads, tehom rovetzet


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:25:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:25:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:25:3)

**ברכות שדים ורחם.** דמה השדים לשמים והרחם לתהום, והטעם שירבו בניו, והפך זה "רחם משכיל ושדים צומקים" (הושע ט יד):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BLESSINGS OF THE BREASTS, AND OF THE WOMB. Jacob likened the breasts to heaven and the womb to the earth,¹⁸¹. According to I.E. breast and womb are similar to heaven and earth in that they produce life-giving substance and bring forth fruit. Hence they are included in the same verse. its meaning being that Joseph will be blessed with many children.¹⁸² The opposite of this blessing is the curse, *Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts* (Hos. 9:14).

footnotes:
¹⁸¹ Our verse reads, With blessings of heaven…Blessings of the deep…Blessings of the breasts, and of the womb
¹⁸² For an alternate interpretation see Krinsky and Cherez.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:26:1)

**ברכות אביך.** אלה הברכות שברכתיך עצומים הם ויתחברו עם ברכות הורי שברכוני,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THE BLESSINGS OF THY FATHER. These blessings which I have blessed you with are mighty and are added to the blessing with which my progenitors blessed me.¹⁸³) plus the blessings with which my begetters blessed me (*al birkat horai*). Cherez explains that I.E. interprets *al* (beyond) as meaning *im* (with, plus).

footnotes:
¹⁸³ The point being, may you be blessed with the mighty blessings with which I bless you (birkat avikhah gaveru


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:26:2)

והורי כמו יולדי, וכן ותהר את מרים (דה"א ד יז) "הורה גבר" (איוב נ ג):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[PROGENITORS.] *Horai* is to be rendered my begetters.¹⁸⁴ is *heh, resh, heh* which means to be pregnant or to conceive. However, inasmuch as *horai* is in the plural it must refer to both Jacob’s mother and father. We obviously cannot explain *horai* as meaning the ones who bore me. Rather it must be interpreted to mean the ones who begot me (Cherez). *Va-tahar* (and she gave birth to) in *and she gave birth to* (va-tahar) *Miriam* (I Chron. 4:17)¹⁸⁵ does not means to conceive or be pregnant with, for Chronicles deals with births and not with pregnancies. Thus *va-tahar* in I Chron. 4:17 means she gave birth to. and *horah* (brought forth) in, *A man-child is brought forth* (horah) (Job 3:3)¹⁸⁶ does not mean to conceive but to bring forth, for its parallel reads *ivvaled* (I was born). are similar.

footnotes:
¹⁸⁴ The root of horai
¹⁸⁵ Here, too, the root heh, resh, heh
¹⁸⁶ Here, too, the root heh, resh, heh


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:26:3)

**תאות.** מגזרת "והתאויתם" (במדבר לד י) והטעם שתגבהנה הברכות:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
UNTO THE UTMOST BOUND. *Ta’avat* (utmost bound of) comes from the same root as *ve-hitavvitem* (and ye shall mark out your line) (Num. 34:10). The meaning of our verse is: these blessings will be as high as the line marked out by the everlasting hills.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:4
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:26:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:26:4)

**נזיר אחיו.** מגזרת נזר והוא סמוך, כמו נדיב לב (שמות לה כב):

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THE PRINCE AMONG HIS BRETHREN. *Nezir* (prince of) comes from the same root as *nezer* (crown).¹⁸⁷ (Nazirite).” This reading fits in very well with I.E.’s comparison of *nezir* to *nediv*, for *nazir* has the same vocalization as *nadiv*, both in the absolute and in the construct. Thus in the absolute we have *nazir* and *nadiv* and in the construct *nezir* and *nediv*. It is in the construct with *echav* (his brethren) and is therefore vocalized *nezir*. Compare, *nediv lev* (willing-hearted) (Ex. 35:22).

footnotes:
¹⁸⁷ It means crowned, the one who was crowned over his brethren (Krinsky, Weiser and Cherez). Filwarg suggests reading, “From the same root as nazir


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:27:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:27:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:27:1)

**בנימין.** דמהו לזאב כי גבור היה והאות אנשי הגבעה,

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
BENJAMIN. Jacob compared Benjamin to a wolf because Benjamin was mighty. The men of Gibeah are proof of this.¹⁸⁸

footnotes:
¹⁸⁸ At Gibeah 26,700 Benjamites defeated an army of 400,000 Israelites. Cf. Jud. 20.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:27:2
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:27:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:27:2)

עד, תרגום שלל וכן "אז חלק עד שלל", (ישעי לג כג), ליום קומי לעד (צפניה ג ח) "בגד עדים" (ישעי' סד ה),

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
THE PREY. *Ad* (the prey) has the same meaning as the Aramaic word for spoil (*ada*).¹⁸⁹ as in *Vat. Ebr*. 38 rather than *targum shalal* as in the printed manuscripts. Also cf. Kimchi’s commentary on Is. 33:23. Similarly, *ad* in *Then is the prey* (ad) *of a great spoil divided* (Is. 33:23) and in *Until the day that I rise up to the prey* (ad) (Zeph. 3:8); and *iddim* (a polluted garment) (Is. 64:5).¹⁹⁰ and *ed* are similar. I.E. interprets *ed* (prey) to mean spoil..

footnotes:
¹⁸⁹ Reading kemo targum shelal
¹⁹⁰ I.E. on Is. 64:5 notes that a garment taken in spoil is polluted by blood. He points out that iddim


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:27:3
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:27:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:27:3)

ולערב, יחלק הטרף ששלל לבניו, וישועה אמר רמז לשאול שנצח את עמלק, וטעם בבקר בתחלת המלכות ולערב בגלותם על דבר מרדכי וזהו דרך דרש, ודעת המתרגם ארמית ידוע:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
[AND AT EVEN HE DIVIDETH.] At even he divideth among his children the prey that he has taken as spoil. Joshua says¹⁹¹ that our verse alludes to King Saul who defeated the Amalekites.¹⁹² He explains *In the morning* as alluding to the beginning of Israel’s kingdom¹⁹³. and *at even* as referring to the period of Israel’s exile with regard to Mordecai. However, this interpretation is the way of the Midrash.¹⁹⁴ 99:3 and *Tanchuma* 1:14; 2:15. It is hard to understand why I.E. quotes this interpretation in the name of a Karaite when it is found in the Midrash. Onkelos’ interpretation of our verse is well known.¹⁹⁵

footnotes:
¹⁹¹ A Karaite scholar.
¹⁹² Thus Saul is likened to a wolf who takes spoil. Saul defeated the Amalekites and despoiled them. Cf. I Sam. 15.
¹⁹³ At the beginning of Israel’s kingdom Saul, who came from the tribe of Benjamin, despoiled Amalek. In exile, Mordecai the Benjamite despoiled Haman who was an Amalekite. Cf. Es. 8:1,2, On that day did king Ahasuerus give the house of Haman…unto Esther the queen…And Esther set Mordecai over the house of Haman
¹⁹⁴ Cf. Bereshit Rabbah
¹⁹⁵ Onkelos explains the “spoil” as referring to the portions which the priests received from sacrifices offered in the temple which was erected in the territory of Benjamin.


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:28:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:28:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:28:1)

**איש אשר כברכתו.** כאשר באה לכל אחד מהברכות כן ברך אותם כטעם "איש כפתרון חלומו":

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
EVERY ONE ACCORDING TO HIS BLESSING. The blessing which Jacob gave each one of his sons came to pass upon each one. The meaning of *every one according to his blessing* is similar in meaning to *each man according to the interpretation of his dream* (Gen. 41:11).¹⁹⁶. (Gen. 41:11).

footnotes:
¹⁹⁶ Joseph’s interpretation of the dreams came true for the butler and the baker, each man according to the interpretation of his dream


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:29:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:29:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:29:1)

**ויצו אותם.** שילכו כולם עם יוסף לקברו:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
AND HE CHARGED THEM. He (Jacob) charged that all should go along with Joseph to bury him.¹⁹⁷ refers to *bury me with my fathers*. In the text they are not directly connected, hence I.E.’s comment. Krinsky points out that Jacob had made Joseph take an oath to bury him in the cave of Machpelah (Gen. 47:30). He now commanded all of his sons to join Joseph in his burial. Therefore, according to Krinsky, I.E. notes that the charge in our verse was to all of Jacob’s sons.

footnotes:
¹⁹⁷ And he charged them


###### Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:33:1
[Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:33:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ibn%20Ezra%20on%20Genesis/r/49:33:1)

**ויאסף רגליו אל המטה.** כי בתחילה ישב על המטה, ורגליו תלויות כמנהג ארץ אדום היום, ולא כן מטות הישמעאלים:

**Ibn Ezra's commentary on the Pentateuch, tran. and annot. by H. Norman Strickman and Arthur M. Silver. Menorah Pub., 1988-2004:**
HE GATHERED UP HIS FEET INTO THE BED. Until then he had been sitting on the bed with his feet dangling over its edge as is contemporarily the custom in Christian communities. The beds in Moslem countries are constructed differently from the beds in Christian countries.¹⁹⁸

footnotes:
¹⁹⁸ I.E. explains that Egyptian beds were the same as the beds used in Christian countries; hence it was possible for Jacob’s feet to dangle from his bed. However, had his bed been like those used in Moslem countries, that is, a bed that lies flat on the ground, this would have been impossible. I.E. makes this point so that readers in Moslem countries could understand how Jacob could be in bed with his feet over its side.