ויתחזק ישראל, “Israel summoned his strength.” Reflecting on this exertion by Yaakov, our sages asked themselves why he subjected himself to the obvious pain of sitting up in bed? They say that Yaakov reasoned that if a mere general were to send him some clothing would he not go out of his way to show honor to such a general? How could he shame his own son by showing him less honor?

כראובן ושמעון יהיו לי, “they will be for me just like Reuven and Shimon.” This verse shows that Yaakov transferred the birthright to Joseph. As to the verse in Chronicles I 5,1 “Reuven the first-born of Israel, but when he defiled his father’s bed his birthright was given to he sons of Joseph son of Israel but he is not to be reckoned as the first-born in genealogy.”

Rashi holds that the transfer of the birthright did not include transfer of the right to inherit an extra portion of his father’s estate, but that only the honour due to the first-born was taken away from Reuven.

Nachmanides rejects Rashi’s approach arguing that it is impossible to say that Joseph was given only part of the birthright, i.e. that he would be two of the twelve tribes without inheriting accordingly in the land of Israel. He quotes 49,22 as proof that Joseph became two tribes and uses the plural in the words יקראו בנחלתם, “they will be called such in their respective inheritances” as proof that Joseph’s birthright included the extra share of the inheritance. This is also in accordance with the translation of Onkelos who renders the words בנות צעדה עלי שור in 49,22 as תרין שבטין יפקון מבנוהי יקבלון חול'קא ואחסנתא as “two tribes from my sons will receive חולקא and אחסנתא” (different categories of land shares respectively).

ואני בבואי מפדן, “as to my own situation, when I was on the way from Padan, etc.,” seeing that Yaakov was about to request from Joseph that he bury him in the cave of Machpelah he first had to apologise to him for not having brought Joseph’s mother Rachel to be buried there; this is why he said: “Rachel died on me on the journey in the land of Canaan.” He emphasised that Rachel too had been buried in the Holy Land and not outside its boundaries. The fact that she was not buried in the cave of Machpelah was due only to her sudden and unexpected death which did not afford Yaakov an opportunity to carry her all the way to Chevron seeing he had so many children and cattle with him. Had he buried her there she would have started to decompose on the journey to that cave which would have taken several days at least. According to our best estimates today such a journey should not have taken longer than half a day. This is why he emphasised that although she died “on the way,” she was not buried on the way, but on a hill, a distinctive place.

ואקברה שם בדרך אפרת, “and I buried her there on the way to Efrat.” The words “I buried her there” would have sufficed. Why did he add the words: “on the way to Efrat?” We have already seen told that Rachel died only a tract of land away from Efrat, another name for Bethlehem. Yaakov hinted what our sages told us in Bereshit Rabbah 82,10 that Yaakov buried Rachel where he did as he foresaw that in the future Jews going into exile would pass her grave and she would offer prayers on their behalf. This is what the prophet (Jeremiah 31,15) referred to when he wrote: “Thus said the Lord: ‘a voice is heard in Ramah- wailing bitter weeping- Rachel weeping for her children.’” All of these details Yaakov revealed now so that Joseph would not become angry at what might appear an unreasonable request by his father who himself had not shown such concern about Joseph’s mother. This is what Nachmanides wrote on our verse.

וירא ישראל את בני יוסף “Yisrael saw the sons of Joseph, etc.” The word “he saw” in this verse is to be understood as a vision; he did not see them physically. We have already been told כי לא יכול לראות, “for he was unable to see.” (verse 10) מי אלה, “who are these? How can they qualify for a blessing?” He foresaw at that moment that Jerobam, a future descendant of Ephrayim, would erect two golden calves of whom it was said: “these are your gods O Israel” (Exodus 32,8). He also foresaw that Yehu and his sons would be descendants of Menashe. To this question Joseph replied: בני הם אשר נתן לי אלוקים בזה, “they are my sons whom G’d has given me here.” Joseph mentioned the name of the Lord who had performed miracles for him and had raised him to the position of king so that he had been given this woman as a wife by Pharaoh. This wife had born these children for him. Targum Yonatan explains the word בזה to mean that he showed his father his marriage certificate, כתובה.

ויקח יוסף את שניהם, “Joseph took both of them, etc.” He presented them to his father in the proper order, Menashe the older one on his father’s right, and Ephrayim the younger one on his father’s left.

Yaakov realised that this was the order in which Joseph would place his sons before him. This is why he crossed his arms in order to place his right hand on the head of Ephrayim on the left hand on the head of Menashe. He possessed sufficient divine inspiration to foresee that historically Ephrayim would be of greater significance than his senior brother Menashe. This is why he said of Menashe (verse 19) “he too will become a nation, however his younger brother will be greater than he.” According to Rabbeinu Chananel, Yaakov did not actually cross his arms but he placed his hands one on top of the other. What the Rabbi meant was that Yaakov did not rearrange the position of the boys but the position of his hands. This does not seem right. We do not need Rabbeinu Chananel to tell us this as the Torah had already made it plain that the lads remained in their respective positions but that Yaakov crossed his hands!

The correct interpretation of Rabbeinu Chananel appears to be that the words שכל את ידיו, “he rearranged his hands” mean that relative to Joseph he rearranged his hands. When the Torah said: “he placed his right hand on the head of Ephrayim,” the meaning is that he rearranged the boys and placed them so that Ephrayim was opposite his right hand, etc. He also rearranged the position of Menashe so that he stood opposite Yaakov’s left hand. He did not rearrange his own hands at all. All he did was to rearrange the position of the boys. This is the correct meaning of the words שכל את ידיו, i.e. he rearranged them differently from the way Joseph had arranged them. The blessing took effect as a result of Yaakov placing his hands firmly on the heads of the lads. We find something similar in Numbers 27,23 where Moses placed his hands on Joshua and proceeded to bless him, making him his successor. The act of placing one’s hands on the person one blesses is designed to facilitate the transfer of the holy spirit possessed by the one conferring the blessing to the recipient of said blessing. When the sages of old ordained someone they also literally placed their hands on the head of the person so ordained. In the case of the priests blessing the people this was physically impossible. Instead the priest spread his hands heavenwards in a gesture commanding G’d’s blessing on all those present. This is the deeper meaning of the words שכל את ידיו, the word שכל being derived from שכל,חכמה, “intelligence, wisdom.” The ten fingers are to be the instrument which draws down blessings from its celestial source.

כי מנשה הבכור, “although Menashe was the first-born.” Yaakov ignored this biological phenomenon as the younger of Joseph’s sons displayed signs of spiritual superiority. The use of the word כי in the sense of “although” is not unique. We find it being used in the same sense in Psalms 41,5 רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך, “heal me although I have sinned against You.” Another example of the use of the word כי in the sense of ”although” is found in our daily prayer: “forgive us our Father although we have sinned.” It would certainly not be logical to translate the words סלח לנו אבינו כי חטאנו, “forgive us our Father for we have sinned.”

ויברך את יוסף ויאמר, “He blessed Joseph, saying:” In commencing with Joseph’s blessing Yaakov blessed him only by conferring his blessing on Joseph’s sons.

From what appears to be a simplistic point of view, i.e. a reading of the text without reading between the lines, the message of the Torah is that the true blessing a person can experience is that his sons (children) are being blessed. The vicarious aspect of the blessing is its most powerful aspect. (The Torah only had to write: “he blessed them,” instead of bothering to write ”He blessed Joseph and said; etc.”)

A kabbalistic approach sees in this blessing an allusion to all ten emanations. The wordsאשר התהלכו אבותי לפניו ה-אלו-הים embody the attributes חסד וגבורה, the outstanding qualities of Avraham and Yitzchak seeing that it is such an unusual way of phrasing the blessing. We would have expected Yaakov to say ה-אלו-הים אשר הלכו לפניו אברהם ויצחק. The fact that Yaakov added the words אבותי are a reference to the names of the attributes of G’d which had been revealed to Yaakov. A few words later he adds: ה-אלו-הים הרועה אותי; the word רועה is derived from ריע, companion. Yaakov referred to the attribute of G’d which had become manifest to him throughout the vicissitudes of his trouble-filled life. His שלום וריעות, “peace and serenity,” had been achieved only by means of that attribute of G’d. Psalms 80,2 alludes to this when the psalmist says: רועה ישראל האזינה, נוהג כצאן יוסף, “Give ear, O shepherd of Israel who leads Joseph like a flock!” He concludes his blessing with the words המלאך הגואל ...בקרב הארץ, “the angel who redeems me...may they proliferate like the fish within the land.” The word בקרב, is analogous to כי שמי בקרבו, “for My name is present within him (Exodus 23,21).” Had Yaakov begun his prayer with the words המלאך הגואל, this would have sounded heretical, as if he had prayed to the angel. Seeing that he commenced his prayer with the words ה-אלו-הים, there cannot be a suspicion that he addressed the angel as the one who should fulfill his prayer. A careful analysis of the wording used by Yaakov in verses 15-17 will demonstrate that this blessing is essentially the same as the one he extended to Joseph in verses 22-26. In the latter blessing Yaakov spoke of מידי אביר יעקב, “from the hands of the mighty One of Yaakov,” as being the source which רעה אבן ישראל, “shepherded the stone of Yisrael.” The words ידי are a reference to the two hands supporting the throne of Solomon, the attributes גדולה and גבורה respectively; these attributes were earlier referred to by the words אברהם ויצחק; the expression אביר יעקב which refers to תפארת ישראל, the attribute which combines the attributes of Avraham and Yitzchak respectively, is called אביר יעקב, in verse 24. Proof that the Torah speaks of a unique attribute of Yaakov is the fact that you do not find the expression אביר אברהם or אביר יצחק anywhere in the Torah. In our prayers we call upon this attribute when we say עננו אביר יעקב “answer us O mighty One of Yaakov” in the Selichot during the days preceding Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. This attribute occurs only in connection with either יעקב or ישראל. In verse 24 it appears in both forms as אביר יעקב and as רועה אבן ישראל The overall meaning of verse 24 is that the source of Yaakov’s spiritual strength also known as תפארת ישראל is אבן ישראל, another name for כנסת ישראל, the “spiritual concept of the people of Israel.”

There is therefore no reason to be surprised that the Torah (Yaakov) describes the blessing of Joseph’s sons as the blessing of Joseph. Blessing the “fruit,” i.e. the product, is the most effective way of blessing the tree, the source.

וגם הוא יגדל ואולם אחיו הקטן יגדל ממנו, “he too will become great; however, his younger brother will become even greater than he.” Yaakov used both the adjectives “great” and “small” in connection with Joseph’s sons. We have encountered this description of relative “smallness” already in connection with the sun and the moon on the fourth day of creation (Genesis 1,16) where both luminaries have first been described as “great;” subsequently the Torah distinguishes the relative greatness of one of he luminaries, the sun, by describing it as “great” when compared to the lesser luminary the moon. The “greatness” of Ephrayim which Yaakov referred to was that Joshua would be descended from that tribe. Joshua was so great that he could arrest the orbit of both sun and moon as we know from Joshua 10,12. In response to Joshua’s instruction for the sun and the moon to “stand still,” the Book of Joshua informs us in Joshua 10,13 that they did indeed interrupted their respective orbits until Joshua had taken his revenge of the Canaanites. In that verse the prophet reports that this miracle was recorded in a book called ספר הישר, and our sages in Avodah Zarah 25 have revealed to us that the ספר הישר is none other than the Book of Genesis, a Book describing the outstanding feats of the patriarchs Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov. They are the ones who are called ישרים, “the upright ones.” Joshua was a product of these people and the prophet testifies that G’d was with Joshua and that his fame spread throughout the globe (Joshua 6,27).

בך יברך ישראל, “By you shall Israel bless:” Yaakov told Joseph that when Israel would bless its children they would hold up Joseph’s children as the models they hoped their own children would emulate. When blessing Jewish boys the father would invoke the names of Ephrayim and Menashe as the models he wished G’d to use when blessing his own children. וישם את אפרים לפני מנשה, “he placed Ephrayim ahead of Menashe.” The Torah means that in all the blessings Yaakov bestowed he always mentioned the name of Ephrayim before mentioning the name Menashe. He did so knowing full well that Ephrayim was the younger of the two as he had detected qualities in the character of Ephrayim which were superior to those of Menashe.

It is also possible to interpret the words: “ahead of Menashe,” in a literal sense, i.e. Ephrayim stood in front of Menashe. In that event Yaakov would not have referred to Ephrayim’s superiority over Menashe. The words “in front of Menashe” would emphasize Menashe’s superiority, his being used as the term of reference. We find something similar in Genesis 44,14 where Yehudah is mentioned before Joseph and the Torah describes the brothers as prostrating themselves “before Him,” meaning Joseph, of course, seeing he was superior in stature to Yehudah though he was named last. If we accept this interpretation then the lesson in etiquette which Yaakov taught us on that occasion was that the older brother is to be treated respectfully because he is biologically senior. When a person places someone in front of a person of superior rank then this does not mean that the person so placed is superior but the very opposite is the case. This interpretation does not conflict with the fact that Yaakov foresaw a greater future for Ephrayim. On the contrary, precisely because in the future someone may attain a higher rank than his brother this is no excuse not to defer to his older brother when this future has not yet occurred.

ויאמר ישראל אל יוסף, “Yisrael said to Joseph, etc.” After Yisrael had blessed the lads and appointed each one of them to become a founding father of one of the tribes, he turned his attention back to Joseph and promised him both matters pertaining to the exile as well as matters pertaining to the eventual redemption when G’d would bring the nation back to the land of Canaan.

שכם אחד על אחיך, “one portion more than to your brothers.” According to the plain meaning of the text Yaakov told Joseph that he had already apportioned the one piece of land which was specifically his to apportion to Joseph. This was the portion which according to Jewish law is the extra portion belonging to the first-born. Seeing Yaakov personally had wrested the town of Shechem from the Emorite by fighting when attacked by the Emorite, he was personally entitled to it as spoils of war. This fact enabled him to apportion two parts to the sons of Joseph and to appoint princes from each without depriving any of Joseph’s brothers of their rightful share or even diminishing their shares.

The words מיד האמורי, “from the hands of the Emorite,” may be understood as if he had said מיד הכנעני, “from the Canaanite.” The reason Yaakov mentioned the Emorite was because of all the Cannanite tribes the Emorite was the most powerful and the most aggressive.

What did Yaakov mean when he described himself as having taken that city בחרבי ובקשתי, ”with my sword and with my bow?” Did he really mean that he personally had been involved in a battle for the town of Shechem? Yaakov meant that when the time would come for the Jewish people to inherit the land of Canaan this would be preceded by physical warfare. Our verse is an allusion to Joshua 11, 19-20 that “there was not a city that had made peace terms with the Israelites; all were taken in battle. For it was the Lord’s doing to stiffen their hearts to give battle to Israel, in order they might be proscribed without quarter and wiped out, as the Lord had commanded to Moses.” [The only exception were the Gibeonites who misrepresented themselves as not being Canaanites and tricked the Israelites into making a covenant with them]. Actually, you would have expected Yaakov to say: בחרב וקשת, “with sword and bow,” instead of “with my sword and my bow.” The reason Yaakov represented the sword and bow he spoke of as being his very own was that he claimed that success of the Israelites in battle was due to his merit. Compare Psalms 44,4: “it was not by their sword that they took the land, their arm did not give them victory, but Your right hand, Your arm, and Your goodwill for You favoured them.” The psalmist attributes the success of the Israelites’ arms to the merit of the patriarchs. The word “Your goodwill” is a reference to Yaakov. The words “Your right hand” are a reference to Avraham, and the words “Your arm” are a reference to Yitzchak. The facial features of Yaakov are engraved on G’d’s throne. Onkelos translates the word בחרבי as בצלותי, “with my prayer,” and the word בקשתי as ובבעותי “with my entreaty.” We could read the word bekashti as bakashati, “my request,” changing only the vowel pattern. From a defensive point of view, prayer and entreaty may be viewed as viable alternatives to sword and bow. It is also possible that the word בחרבי is a veiled reference to Torah, i.e. the merit of having studied Torah. The patriarchs had not only studied but also observed even minutiae of the Torah precepts. They had divined by means of their intellect what G’d would require of the Jewish people when He would give them the Torah in due course. Our sages also interpreted Yaakov’s words when he sent a message to his brother Esau as informing him that he had observed the 613 commandments of the Torah while employed by Lavan. The words he used (Genesis 32,5) to hint at this were עם לבן ג-ר-ת-י, the word גרתי having a numerical value and the same letters as 613. We find that the Torah is compared by our sages to a two-edged sword in the hands of those who study it and practice it in Shir Hashirim Rabbah 1,16 (compare Psalms 149 6). A two edged sword cuts with both edges. The Ten Commandments, i.e. the Tablets, are also described by the Torah as being two-edged, i.e. as having been engraved from either side (Exodus 32,15).

Nachmanides writes as follows: It is very likely that Yaakov acted similarly to the prophets. He aimed his sword in the direction of the Emorites and sprayed arrows in that direction so that he land was conquered before him. Elisha did something like this as reported in Kings II 13,16-17. He said to the King of Israel: “grasp the bow!” When the King had grasped the bow, Elisha put his hands over the King’s hands and said to him: “open the window toward the east.” When the King had opened the window Elisha said: “shoot!” and he shot. Then Elisha said: “an arrow of victory for the Lord.” The report goes on suggesting that if only the King had carried out all of Elisha’s instructions his symbolic actions alone would have secured victory over Aram for him. Yaakov referred to his own symbolic actions with sword and bow which had resulted in the Emorites’ defeat.

The words אשר לקחתי, “which I captured,” may be a reference to the birthright Yaakov secured for himself from Esau who was the original Emorite, i.e. who acted as did the Emorites. Alternatively, Esau was compared to the Emorites as he also hunted, using his mouth as his weapon in setting traps for his father. When Yaakov said: “I have given it (Shechem) to you,” he meant that seeing he had come by it by his own merit he was entitled to give it to whomever he wanted.

A Midrashic interpretation (compare Rashi) does not see in Yaakov’s assertion the right to apportion the birthright he had himself bought from Esau to Joseph, but sees in it a reference to the actual town of Shechem. Yaakov said to Joseph: ”since I put you to the trouble to bury me in the cave of Machpelah, I for my part have assigned the city of Shechem to be the place where you will be buried.” This accounts for Joshua 24,32 writing “and the remains of Joseph whom the children of Israel had taken up from Egypt they buried in Shechem.”