## Tur HaArokh, Genesis

###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:2:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:2:1)

**ויתחזק ישראל.**כדי ליתן לו במתנת בריא:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ויתחזק ישראל, “Israel strengthened himself;” in order that the blessing he would bestow would be that of a healthy human being.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:4:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:4:1)

**ויאמר אליו הנני מפרך והרבתיך כו'.**פירש"י שהזכיר לו מה שאמר לו הקב"ה קהל גוים יהי' ממך ונתן זו הברכה ליוסף ולכך הזכיר לו ג"כ מיתת רחל לומר שמשנאמ' לו מתה עלי רחל מיד ולא הי' לי בנים אח"כ ולכן נתקיים בך. אי נמי לפי שנתן לו חלק בירושת הארץ שיהי' חלק אפרים ומנשה כחלק ראובן ושמעון לכך הזכיר לו תחלה הקב"ה נתנה לו ובידו להורישו למי שירצה מבניו:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ויאמר אליו הנני מפרך והרבתיך וכו', “He said to him: here I am about to fructify you and to multiply you, etc.” *Rashi* explains that Yaakov reminded Joseph that at the time when G’d had said to him that he would be the founder of nations and communities of nations (35,11), he had only had 11 sons, so that part of the blessing had not yet been fulfilled. He therefore directed that the as yet unfulfilled part of that blessing should be applied to Joseph and his sons. This is also the reason why he mentioned Rachel’s death at this juncture. Seeing that the missing part of the blessing could not have applied to any further children whom Rachel would have, it must apply to existing children, and he chose to channel this blessing to Joseph and his children.
 It is also possible that seeing he had allocated to the two sons of Joseph territory in the land of Israel on the same basis as that of Reuven and Shimon, i.e. as that of his actual sons, he mentioned that he had received the authority to make such allocations from G’d Himself.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:5:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:5:1)

**אפרים ומנשה כראובן ושמעון יהיה לי.**יראה כאן מפירש"י שארץ ישראל נתחלקה לפי גלגלותם לפיכך אין נפקותא במה שאמר להיות אפרים בחשבון שאר השבטים אלא לענין השם לבד לקרות שבט. והקשה הרמב"ן הרי הכתוב אומר על שם אחיהם יקראו בנחלתם אלמא שיש להם נפקותא לענין עיקר הנחלה וגם הארץ לא נתחלקה לענין גולגולתם אלא לי"ב חלקים שוים ונטל כל שבט ושבט חלק כחלק והא דכתיב לרב תרבו נחלתו ולמעט תמעיט נחלתו לענין בתי אבות נא' שכל שבט מחלק חלקו לבתי אבות של יוצאי מצרים ולבית אב מרובה נותנין חלק גדול ולקטן חלק קטן אבל לעולם י"ב חלקים היו שוים ונטל אפרים ומנשה כל אחד חלקו כמו ראובן ושמעון:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
אפרים ומנשה כראובן ושמעון יהיה לי,” Ephrayim and Menashe will be to me just as Reuven and Shimon.” It appears from *Rashi’s* commentary that the division of the land in the days of Joshua was not based on the actual claimants, the sons of Yaakov still being alive at the time, but it was based on a principle known as גלגול, re-incarnation. It did not matter therefore, that Yaakov appeared to have compared the younger son Ephrayim, to Yaakov’s eldest, Reuven. Ephrayim and Menashe were to be “tribes” in name only, they did not replace the concept of “the tribe of Joseph.” [the cut off point for being included in the original family of Yaakov was the date of their arrival in the land of Egypt. Seeing that both Ephrayim and Menashe had been born prior to Yaakov’s arrival, even though they had been born on the contaminated soil of Egypt, enabled Yaakov to confer the status on them that he is about to bestow. Ed.]
 Nachmanides questions the wordsעל שם אחיהם יקראו בנחלתם, “they will be included under the names of their brothers in their inheritance,” claiming that these very words indicate that the “name” is of the essence, not as *Rashi* suggests that they were “tribes” in name only. Besides, Nachmanides holds that the land division under Joshua was not based on the original Israelites who had left Egypt being considered as having been resurrected, and the size of the land holdings being based on the size of their families at that time, but that each tribe received the same size of territory in the Land of Israel, although the parcels were not of equal quality as farmland, etc. When the Torah had instructed that the more numerous tribes should receive larger portions of land, whereas the less numerous ones would receive a smaller share, (Numbers 26,4) this referred to the basic family units within the tribe, not to the tribes themselves. These family units were based on the state of affairs of the families when they left Egypt. [if, due to the sin of the spies and the death decreed on that whole generation, taking possession of the land had not been postponed by 40 years, a whole generation, there would not have been a problem in understanding the instructions of the Torah. Ed.] It is therefore quite easy to understand that the tribal portions allocated to Ephrayim and Menashe by Yoshua equaled those of Reuven and Shimon.]


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:6:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:6:1)

**אשר הולדת אחריהם.**איפשר כי בנים אחרים היו לו והפסו' לא הזכירם על שירשו עם אחיהם וכן יראה ממה שהוצרך להאריך ועתה שני בניך וגו' אפרים ומנשה ש"מ שהי' לו אחרים וכן משמע ממה דכתיב וליוסף יולד שני בנים בטרם תבוא שנת הרעב אבל אחר הרעב נולדו לו אחרים. אי נמי אשר הולדת כמו אשר תוליד שפעמים רבים עבר במקום עתיד ואף כי לא מצינו לו בנים אחרים איפשר שהיו לו והפסוק לא הזכירם כמו שפירשתי או שלא היו לו בנים אחרים ויעקב דבר אם יוליד עוד:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
אשר הולדת אחריהם, “whom you have sired after them;” according to the past tense used here, it is quite possible that Joseph had begotten more children after Menashe and Ephrayim. The reason why the Torah had not spelled this out is because they would inherit with their brothers, not separately. The fact that this is the likely explanation is supported by the fact that Yaakov continued at length with: “and now, your two sons who have been born before I came down to Egypt, etc.” This appears to support the theory that Joseph had indeed had other children, and that these were born to him after the famine had ceased.
 Alternately, the words אשר הולדת could be understood to mean אשר תוליד, “whom you will beget;” we have numerous examples of a past tense being used where we would have expected a future tense. The fact that we do not hear about other children does not prove that there were none. At any rate, Yaakov may have told Joseph what the status of such children would be in the event they would yet be born for him.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:7:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:7:1)

**ואקברה שם.**מה שפירש"י ולא הולכתיה אפי' לבית לחם להכניסה לארץ ע"ז הקשה הרמב"ן בודאי בארץ נקברה כדכתיב הכא בהדיא מתה עלי רחל בארץ כנען ופי' הוא שעל דרך הפשט הי' מתנצל מיוסף שלא קברה במערה ולכן אמר לו אף כי לא נקברה למערה מ"מ נקברה בארץ כנען ולא בחוצה לארץ כאשר תהי' קבורתו במצרים ועל כן אמר לו בדרך לומר כי מתה עלי בדרך פתאום ולא הי' לי פנאי להוליכה כי לא יכולתי לעזוב ביתי ולהוליכה ואף כי מערת המכפלה אינה משם רחוקה אלא מהלך חצי יום הי' יעקב כבד מאוד במקנה ולא הי' מגיע לשם אלא לימים רבים וכן עשה בדרך ההוא עוד ימים רבים עד הגיעו לאביו וכל זה לא הי' אלא התנצלות וגם יוסף ידע שנקברה בארץ ומתה בדרך אבל הכונה ליעקב שלא הוליכה למערה שלא יקבור בה שתי אחיות שלא ייבוש מאבותיו ולאה קבר בה שהיא נישאת לו ראשונה בהיתר ורחל באהבתו אותה לקחה והדרש שדרשו רבותינו שעל פי הדיבור קברתי' שתהא לעזרה לבני' כשיגלם נבוזראדן דרך שם סמכוה על מה שכתוב מתה עלי רחל בדרך ואקברה שם והיא לא מתה אלא ברמה ושם נקברה והיא מנחלת בנימין על כן דרשו בדרך אשר יעברו שם בני' ופי' בדרך של עתיד שעתידין בני' לעבור שה מתה וקברתיה באותו דרך עפ"הד. וי"מ שלכך אמר לו שקברה בדרך אפרת שידעתי שיגיע לאחד מבניה בחלקו ולא קברתי' במערה שאינה בחלק בניה ולא יהי' כבודה להיותה קבורה בשאינה שלה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ואקברה שם, “and I was forced to bury her there.” Nachmanides questioned what *Rashi* explains here, i.e. that Yaakov apologized to Joseph that he had not even been able to transport the remains of Rachel the short distance to Beyt Lechem so that she would be buried on holy soil. Nachmanides feels that the text does not only not support this, but supports the very reverse, that Rachel, though not buried in a cemetery, was indeed buried within the boundaries of Eretz Yisrael. Why else would Yaakov have said that Rachel had died suddenly, “in the land of Canaan?”
 Yaakov’s apology concerned the fact that he had not buried Rachel in the cave of Machpelah in Chevron, not that he had buried her outside the boundaries of the Holy Land. He emphasizes that although he had not been able to bury her in Machpelah, at least he had been able to bury her inside the Holy Land. He had not been able to abandon his entire family and carry the remains of Rachel all the way to the cave of Machpelah. He himself was likely to be buried outside of the Holy Land unless he could arrange before his death to have his remains transferred, as he was about to request from Joseph. If, at the time of Rachel’s death he would have moved his entire camp with him to the cave of Machpelah, a journey which takes a half a day for a single traveler would have consumed many days and would have been a great indignity for the remains of Rachel as he had no means to embalm her and to prevent her body from decomposing in the interval. Joseph had been fully aware of the circumstances of his mother’s death, as well as the fact that Yaakov could not have buried the remains of two sisters both of whom had been his wife, in the cave of Machpelah. The reason why he buried Leah in that cave was that he had, after all, married her first. Rachel died in “Ramah,” hence רמת רחל,” part of the territory of Binyamin after the distribution of the land by Joshua.
 Our sages who explain all this allegorically, say that Rachel had to die when she entered the Holy Land, in order that Yaakov not become guilty of being married to two sisters both of whom were alive, something that the Torah had forbidden. Yaakov received instructions from on high to bury Rachel where he did, so that her spirit, in due course, could petition G’d when her “children,” would be taken into captivity by the Babylonian general Nebuzaradan. Some commen-tators say that Yaakov explained to Joseph that the reason he had buried his mother on the way to Efrat was that this was within the tribal territory of one of her sons, whereas had she been buried in Machpelah, she would not have been interred in soil belonging to her offspring. Burying her in earth that would belong to the descendants of Leah would not have been something compatible with her dignity.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:8:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:8:1)

**ויאמר מי אלה.**לפי הפשט שראם ולא הכירם מי היו כי כבדו עיניו מזוקן אלא שראה דמות אנשים ולא הכירם מי היו כי כבדו ולכך שאל מי אלה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ויאמר מי אלה, He said: “who are these?” According to the plain meaning of the text, Yaakov’s eyesight was failing to the extent that he no longer recognised his grandchildren, especially those who did not live in Goshen.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:9:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:9:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:9:1)

**בני הם אשר נתן לי אלהים בזה.**לא הי' צריך יוסף לומר לאביו שנולדו לו במצרים כי הוא ידע וכבר אמר לו שני בניך הנולדים לך בארץ מצרים אלא פי' בזה בענין הזה שאמרת שנתנם לי השם קודם בואך אלי מצרימה והם שאמרת אליהם שהם שלך:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
בני אשר נתן לי אלוקים בדה, “they are my sons whom the Lord gave me here.” There had been no need for Joseph to tell his father that these children had been born in Egypt, for Yaakov was not only aware of this but had already referred to them in verse 5 as the two sons who had been born for him in Egypt. The whole point Joseph was making was that these were the sons who had been given to him by G’d even before his father had come to Egypt. Yaakov had said that he considered them as his own sons, (not only as his grandchildren)


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:10:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:10:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:10:1)

**וישק להם ויחבק להם.**שאין שכינה שורה אלא מתוך שמחה וכדרך שנעשה לו שאביו חבקו ונשקו כשברכו:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
וישק להם ויחבק להם, “he kissed and embraced them.” Man is not blessed with the presence of the Divine (spirit) unless he is in a state of joy, happiness. This is why being kissed and embraced by his father enabled the blessing to take hold on Joseph and his sons.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:11:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:11:1)

**לא פללתי.**פי' לא דנתי בלבי מלשון פלילים:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
לא פללתי, “I had not dared to expect.” I had not even entertained such a thought in my heart. The word is derived from פלילים, criminal judgments.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:15:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:15:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:15:1)

**ויברך את יוסף.**לא בירך ליוסף אלא לבניו וחשי' לי' ברכ' ליוסף כי לא הי' לו זרע אחר והיתה כל ברכתו בברכ' אלו הנערי' או אפי' הי' לו אחרי' מברכת אלו יתברכו האחרים:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ויברך את יוסף, “He blessed Joseph.” Although, literally speaking, as we can see, he blessed Joseph’s sons, when the sons are blessed this is a great blessing for their father. Seeing that Joseph had only these two sons, Yaakov invested all his blessings in these two sons, thereby blessing all of Joseph. Even if Joseph were to have more children in the future, their blessings would be derived through the blessing now given to Ephrayim and Menashe.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:16:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:16:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:16:1)

**המלאך הגואל אותי.**י"מ כמו במלאך פי' האלהים הרועה אותי מעודי עד היום הזה במלאך הגואל אותי שרועה אותי על ידי מלאך. אי נמי האלהים דלעיל פי' נמי מלאך שהי' לו מלאך מיוחד לשמרו לכך אמר האלהים הרועה אותי והוא המלאך הגואל אותי:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
המלאך הגואל אותי, “the angel that has redeemed me, etc. Some commentators understand this as a reference to G’d Who had shepherded Yaakov by means of an angel, seeing that no angel has independent powers such as attributed to him by Yaakov here. There is little doubt that the words המלאך and האלוקים which are used interchangeably (here 15 and 16) refer to the same Divine manifestation, but when viewed by the immediate recipient of the miraculous providence of G’d, appear as a more immediate Divine providence than when viewed by bystanders, who did not experience this on their own bodies. [my wording, but I trust the author’s meaning. Ed.]


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:16:2
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:16:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:16:2)

**ויקרא בהם שמי ושם אבותי.**פי' ר' אברהם שנקראו ישראל על שם אפרים כאשר הם נקראים זרע אברהם יצחק ויעקב. וכתב הרמב"ן ואינו נכון כי הכתוב אמר בהם על שניהם ואף אם נקראים על שם אפרי' לא מצינו שנקראי' על שם מנשה ואולי בעבו' שנקראי' בית יוסף. והנכון שבירכם שיעמוד זרעם ויהי' שם אברהם יצחק ויעקב נזכר בהם לעולם:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ויקרא בהם שמי ושם אבותי, “and may my name and the name of my forefathers be declared upon them.” Ibn Ezra explains that Yaakov wishes that the Jewish people be known as “the children of Ephrayim,” just as they are known as “the children of Avraham Yitzchok and Yisrael.”
 Nachmanides disagrees, seeing that the verse addresses itself to both Ephrayim and Menashe, even though Ephrayim may have been mentioned ahead of his senior brother. History shows that although traditionally, the Jewish people have been referred to as “Ephrayim,” by some prophets, Menashe has never been used as an alternative for “the seed of Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yisrael.” Perhaps what Yaakov meant was that the Jewish people appear collectively as “the house of Joseph” in a number of prophecies by our prophets. The plain meaning of the blessing appears to be that just as the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yisrael are blessed and assured of eternal continuity, so Yaakov wishes that the same may apply to the seed of both Ephrayim and Menashe, individually, as tribes.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:17:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:17:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:17:1)

**וירע בעיניו.**אולי הי' יוסף אוהב מנשה יותר מאפרים בשביל שהי' בכור ולכך חרה לו. אי נמי שחשב שטעה אביו בברכתו והוא בבלי דעת ולא תחול וכשאמ' לו שידע ובדעת עשה נתפייס:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
וירע בעיניו, “Joseph was displeased by his father having placed his right hand on Ephrayim;” perhaps Joseph loved Menashe better seeing that he was his eldest son, and that it bothered him that his father appeared to ignore this point. Perhaps he only thought that Yaakov had done what he did mistakenly; and as soon as he heard that his father had done so intentionally he was reconciled to the holy spirit which guided his father’s hands.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:18:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:18:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:18:1)

**לא כן.**י"מ שלא אמר יוסף לאביו שעשה שלא כדין אלא אמר לו לא כן פי' שלא כדין עשיתי לפי מה שראיתי שאתה משכל את ידיך ומ"מ כיון שזה הבכור שים ימינך על ראשו:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
לא כן, “not so,” some people claim that Joseph certainly did not say to his father outright that he had not acted correctly, but that the words meant that he, Joseph, had been mistaken when he had thought that his father had erred. Nonetheless, Joseph told his father that he preferred for him to place his right hand on the firstborn Menashe.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:20:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:20:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:20:1)

**ויברכם ביום ההוא.**פי' ביום ההוא כי יוסף הפציר בו לשום מנשה הראשון ואמר הכתוב לא רצה להסיר יד ימינו מעל ראש אפרים ולא עוד אלא שחזר ואמר בפי' במעמד ההוא בבני יוסף בברכו אותם כאפרים וכמנשה וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה בכל ברכותיו:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ויברכם ביום ההוא, “He blessed them both on that day;” the words “on that day,” are important, seeing that Joseph pressured his father to place his right hand on Menashe and to bless him first. The Torah clearly shows that Yaakov resisted this pressure and did not want to remove his right hand from the head of Ephrayim. Not only that, but when Yaakov eventually pronounced the blessing, he made a point of naming Ephrayim first in his blessing so that when the parents of Jewish children would bless their children in the future they would always mention Ephrayim first when wishing that their children model themselves after these two sons of Joseph.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:20:2
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:20:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:20:2)

**בך יברך ישראל.**שדיבר עם יוסף ואמר לו כל עם ישראל הבא לברך את בנו יברך אותו בזרעך שיאמר לו ישימך אלהים כאפרים וכמנשה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
בך יברך ישראל, ”when the Jewish people bless their children they will do so by referring to you, Joseph, to your well turned out children.” They will express the fervent hope that their own children would turn out as successfully.


###### Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:22:1
[Tur HaArokh, Genesis 48:22:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Genesis/r/48:22:1)

**ואני נתתי לך שכם אחד על אחיך.**פי' חלק אחד והוא הבכורה שנטלו בניו שני חלקים בארץ. פירש"י שכם אחד הבכורה אשר לקחתי מיד האמורי זה עשו. ואיני מבין דבריו כי בכורה שלקח מעשו לא נתן לו אלא הבכורה אשר העביר מראובן כדכתיב ובחללו יצועי אביו ניתנה בכורתו ליוסף גם לא שייך נתינה בבכורה שלקח מעשו שיתננה ליוסף ואף אם לקח בכורתו מעשו חלק הבכורה הית' לו בשלו ומה הוצרך לומר אשר לקחתי מיד האמורי יתן לו חלק בכורה הראוי ליטול מנכסיו. והרמב"ן פי' אשר לקחתי מיום שלקחתי שאמר לו נתתי לך הבכורה להיות בניך מעתה מתברכים כדי לעשות שני שבטים בדגלי המדבר וחנוכת הנשיאים וגם להיות לך ב' חלקים ליום שיקחוה במלחמה בארץ בחרב ובקשת והזכיר האמורי רמז לסיחון ולעוג שני מלכי האמורי וגם המלחמ' הגדול' שהיתה להם בכיבוש הארץ היתה לבני יוסף עם האמורי היא מלחמת יהושע עמם ביום תת ה' את האמורי ומיד האמורי היתה חלק ונחלה לבני יוסף שנ' וילכו בני מכיר בן מנשה גלעדה וילכדוה ויורש את האמורי אשר שם והזכיר קשתי וחרבי לרמוז כי לא תכבש הארץ רק במלחמה כדכתיב לא היתה עיר אשר השלימה את בני ישראל ואמר לקחתי כי זכותו הוא העושה עמהם מלחמה והוא הנלחם להם כענין שנ' כי לא בחרבם ירשו ארץ כי ימינך וזרועך ואור פניך כי רציתם וזהו זכות האבות וקרוב הדבר שעשה יעקב כדרך שעשו הנביאים נטה ידו בכידון בחרב וירה שם חצים להיות נכבשת לפניהם כדרך שעשה אלישע וישם ידו על יד המלך ויאמר אלישע ירה ויור אע"פ שלא סיפר זה הכתוב רמז הוא במה שאמר אשר לקחתי מיד האמורי בחרבי ובקשתי:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ואני נתתי לך שכם אחד על אחיך, “and I have allocated to you one additional portion in excess of that of your brothers;” this was a reference to the birthright. Joseph became the official firstborn of Yaakov, and that is why his two children each received a share of the holy Land, just as Yaakov’s own sons. According to *Rashi,* Yaakov referred to the birthright that he had purchased at the time from his brother Esau, as a result of which, he, Yaakov, was entitled to an extra share in the inheritance from his father Yitzchok.
 I must confess that I do not understand *Rashi’s* words here. Yaakov did not give Joseph the birthright he had taken away from Esau, but he gave him the birthright he had taken away from Reuven, as is spelled out when he blessed the other sons, and when referring to Reuven, (49,4) that Reuven had desecrated him when he entered his bed-chamber,.claiming it as his abode. The birthright had been transferred from Reuven to Joseph as penalty for the act of desecrating his father. Furthermore, how would the fact that Yaakov had personally taken the city of Shechem from the Emorite have any bearing on his deal with Esau that acquired Esau’s birthright for him? He had been forced to justify giving this extra portion of land to Joseph by making reference to the fact that it had not come to be his through inheritance passed on, but through personal acquisition when he had risked his life for it in war.
 Nachmanides explains the words אשר לקחתי מיד האמורי,in this paragraph as meaning that the words refer to the time when the land of Israel would be conquered by the sword. Yaakov, already now, tells Joseph that his sons, i.e. the tribes of Menashe and Ephrayim, who would be in the forefront, especially Machir ben Menashe, as we know from Numbers 32, 33-42. According to Nachmanides the promise of בקשתי ובחרבי would be fulfilled in the future when the tribe of Menashe would conquer distant parts of the east bank of the Jordan, such as Gilead, etc, as described at the end of *Parshat* Mattot. The reference to these weapons were only allusions to the fact that actual fighting would have to take place to secure the land of Canaan as the homeland of the Jewish people for all times. חרב and קשת, sword and bow, are presumed to be symbolical references to the battles against Sichon and Og, both kings of the Emorite tribe. These battles were the fiercest of the conquest of the land of Israel, although they were fought for land on the east bank of the river Jordan. Joshua 11,19 himself testified that not a single city in the land of Canaan made a peaceful surrender to the Jewish army in order to emigrate and save their lives. When Yaakov used the expression לקחתי, “I have taken,” he refers to his moral and legal right to engage in that battle against a people who -according to United Nations statutes- had been rightful owners of the land they dwelt on. Yaakov may very well have done what a number of prophets did when they wanted to make similar points regarding the legality of Israelite expansionary wars. They took arms symbolically, and shot them at imaginary targets, to explain to the king that what they had done symbolically, it was up to the king to do in practice.(compare Kings II 13,16-17).