“(Chapter 48, Verse 1) And it came to pass after these things, that one told Joseph, Behold, thy father is sick: and he took with him his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim. And from this, what we said above is demonstrated, that Joseph had only two sons in that place, Ephraim and Manasseh. For if many years later, when Jacob his father died, he led only two sons for the blessing, surely at that time, when his sons were unable to beget children, being young and nursing infants, he could not have grandchildren from them at the entrance of his father and brothers.”

“(Version 2.) And Israel, strengthened, sat upon the bed. The reason why the Seventy Interpreters have rendered the same word differently, I do not know; but I boldly say this one thing, that the word itself, Meta, which they translated here as bed, in the place where we have said above that Jacob worshipped on it, they have rather called a rod than a bed.”

“ויגד literally, AND HE TOLD — “he” means the messenger whoever it was — TO JACOB. It does not state plainly who told it; there are many such elliptical verses ויתחזק ישראל AND ISRAEL STRENGTHENED HIMSELF — he said, “Although he is my son, he is a king, and I will do honour to him” (Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 6). From this we may infer that we must show honour to a person of royal rank (Cf. Menachot 98a). Similarly, Moses showed honour to the king when he said, (Exodus 11:8) “And all these, thy servants, shall come down to me” (which was only a polite way of saying. “Thou, thyself, wilt be forced to come down to me”); so, too, did Elijah: (1 Kings 18:46) “and he girded up his loins [and ran before Ahab] etc.” (Midrash Tanchuma, Bo 7)”

“ונתתיך לקהל עמים AND I WILL MAKE OF THEE AN ASSEMBLY OF PEOPLES — He announced to me that there were yet to issue from me an assembly of peoples (i.e. at least two more tribes). Now, it is true that He then said to me, (Genesis 35:11) “A nation and an assembly of nations [shall be of thee]”, but when He said “a nation” He intended it to refer to Benjamin who was not yet born, and this promise of “a nation” has been fulfilled by the birth of Benjamin, and for that reason I do not mention it now. “An assembly of nations [shall be of thee]”, however, presupposes that two more would descend from me besides Benjamin. Consequently, since no other son besides Benjamin was born to me, He was really telling me that one of my tribes (i.e. the tribe formed by one of my sons) would be divided so as to constitute at least two tribes, thus giving that son more importance, and that privilege I confer upon you (Genesis Rabbah 82:4; Pesikta Rabbati 3).”

“I WILL MAKE OF YOU A COMMUNITY OF PEOPLES; AND I WILL ASSIGN THIS LAND. All of the sons except Binyamin had already been born, and He had previously said to me, on my leaving for Haran (28:13), "the land on which you are lying I will assign to you and to your offspring." Thus, the intent was that He would give me an assembly of nations with respect to the inheritance of the land. And one cannot think that He said this other than with regard to you, that He would give me you and your two sons together.”

“This clearly shows [that Jacob makes Ephraim and Manasseh his own]. Since Jacob had twelve sons, to whom the twelve tribes owed their existence, he distributed the two sons of Joseph into two tribes; and so the tribes became thirteen as the tribe of Joseph was divided between his two sons. And therefore Paul himself, the apostle, was related to these events. After being chosen among the tribes, he was counted the thirteenth after the apostles, and so he was sent to the Gentiles as apostle.”

“Joseph was eager to receive the blessing (Gen. XLVIII, 1 et seq.). Finally, he presented his sons Manasseh and Ephraim, whom Jacob blessed. And because he had twelve sons, and the thirteenth was to be the apostle Paul, as if a later chosen one, the thirteenth Tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim were sanctified in both, so that Paul would not be found outside the number of the paternal Tribes, who was an outstanding preacher of the Old and New Testament and could easily prove his inheritance of the paternal blessing.”

“(Verse 5.) And now behold, your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine, Ephraim and Manasseh, just as Reuben and Simeon shall be mine. But any children born to you after them shall be yours. They shall be called by the names of their brothers. If anyone doubted that seventy persons, the children of Israel, had entered Egypt, and that at the time when Jacob entered Joseph had not nine but only two sons, this is confirmed in the present chapter. Indeed, Jacob himself speaks, saying that he had two sons, not nine. And what he says, 'Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, just as Reuben and Simeon,' that means, just as Reuben and Simeon were two tribes and were called by their own names, so Ephraim and Manasseh shall be two tribes, and they shall produce two peoples, and thus they shall inherit the land of promise, just like my sons. But the remaining sons, he says, whom you will bear after my death, showing that they were not yet born at that time, shall be yours.”

“הנולדים לך עד באי אליך literally, WHO WERE BORN TO THEE . . . UNTIL I CAME TO THEE, i.e. before I came to thee. It signifies as much as: WHO WERE BORN from the time when you left me UNTIL THE TIME WHEN I CAME TO YOU. לי הם THEY SHALL BE MINE — they shall be counted amongst my other sons, to receive a portion in the Land each for himself (i.e. each to have his own territory exactly as each of my other sons has). לי הם THEY SHALL BE MINE — they shall be counted amongst my other sons, to receive a portion in the Land each for himself (i.e. each to have his own territory exactly as each of my other sons has).”

“Although the Land was divided according to the number of heads — as it is written, (Numbers 26:54) “To the more numerous thou shalt give a larger inheritance” — and each person had an equal share except those who were first-born sons (and these received a double share), yet only these of Joseph’s sons bore the name of “tribe” when it became a matter of casting lots for the partition of the land according to the number of the tribes (cf. Numbers 26:55), and of appointing princes to the various tribes and of assigning banners to each of them.”

“AND THE CHILDREN THAT WERE BORN TO YOU AFTER THEM. “If you beget any more children, they will not be numbered among my sons, but they will rather be included among the tribes of Ephraim and Menasheh. Nor shall they have a name amongst the tribes as far as inheritance in the Land of Israel is concerned.” Now even though the Land of Israel was divided according to the number of persons, as it is written, To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, and each person received an equal share except for the first-born, who received a double share, nevertheless only these sons were designated as “tribes.” This is the language of Rashi. Now this is not correct, for if so, then Jacob’s granting of the birthright to Joseph was just nominal, its only effect being that Joseph’s sons would be called “tribes,” whereas the verse states, in their inheritance. This indicates that the two sons of Joseph were to be given the extra right of the firstborn in the matter of inheritance. In the Gemara, the Sages have said: “I have likened Ephraim and Menasheh to Reuben and Simeon with respect to the matter of inheritance, but not with respect to other matters,” even though they did not constitute an actual majority of the entire population. In that case Ephraim and Menasheh are considered part of the tribe of Joseph. as is stated in Tractate Horayoth. Our Rabbis have mentioned in many places that Joseph was the first-born as far as inheritance was concerned, and that he received a double share in the Land, as is the rule of every first-born, but not that his being first-born consisted merely of his sons being called “tribes,” as the Rabbi [Rashi] would have it. From this we further learn that the Land was not divided among all the tribes of Israel according to their populations for if so, what was the significance of this primogeniture with respect to inheritance? If we would say it meant that each and every individual offspring of Joseph was given double that of each person of all other tribes, this is not mentioned at all in Scripture, and we do not find Jacob giving the birthright to Joseph except by what he said here, As Reuben and Simeon shall they be to me,, and based upon this, Scripture states, His [Reuben’s] birthright was given to the sons of Joseph the son of Israel. If so, then Ephraim and Menasheh were fully considered as two tribes, and it was this which constituted Joseph’s birthright, and the words of the Sages indeed corroborate this everywhere. Thus the matter is not at all as the Rabbi stated it. Instead, the Land of Israel was divided according to tribes. They made twelve equal parts of it, with Simeon, the least populous of the tribes, taking a share equal to that of Judah, the most populous of the tribes, and thus, Ephraim and Menasheh took exactly the same amount of land as Reuben and Simeon. This is the conclusion of the Gemara in the chapter, Yesh Nochalin. (“There are some that inherit,”) the eighth chapter of that tractate, deals with all problems of personal inheritance, as well as with the whole range of problems connected with the original division of the Land by Joshua. Scripture also states, Ye shall divide the land for inheritance according to the twelve tribes of Israel, Joseph receiving two portions. So too does Onkelos say, “Two tribes shall come forth from his sons. They shall receive chulka ve’achsanta (portion and inheritance),” which means that they shall be equal to the other tribes with respect to inheritance received. Now chulka (portion) refers to the extra share of the first-born, and achsanta (inheritance) refers to ordinary inheritance. In the verse stating, To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance, Scripture refers to the paternal families mentioned there in the chapter., Verses 8-50. Scripture is stating that the tribe divides its share of the land among the paternal families that left Egypt by giving a larger portion to a more populous family and a smaller portion to a less populous family, with the dead becoming heirs of the living, as is explained in the Sifre and is mentioned by Rashi in the Parshah of Pinchas. Thus the general principle with respect to Joseph was that he was the first-born as regards inheritance, and if, as mentioned in the Gemara, (“There are some that inherit,”) the eighth chapter of that tractate, deals with all problems of personal inheritance, as well as with the whole range of problems connected with the original division of the Land by Joshua. the land was divided according to the number of tribes, they gave the children of Joseph portions equal to those of Reuben and Simeon. And even if we were to say that the land was divided according to the number of persons, as is apparent from the verse,, etc. (Numbers 26:54.) then we would say that they gave them double portions commensurate with their numbers — an ordinary share as large as all the other people, and a second portion for the birthright. In that case, the meaning of Jacob’s words, As Reuben and Simeon shall they be to me, is that they should receive as many shares as twice their number of people. But that Joseph should be as the other tribes with respect to inheritance, with the birthright consisting of his two sons being called “tribes,” as the Rabbi stated, this is impossible under any circumstance.”

“(1) BUT YOUR PROGENY WHOM YOU BEGAT AFTER THEM. They are your grandchildren, who are the ones truly called "your moledet." (2) THEY SHALL BE YOURS. They will be called "Bet Yosef" and will be blessed in the blessing to you. (3) THEY WILL BE CONSIDERED WITH THEIR BROTHERS IN THEIR INHERITANCE. Each of Menashe's sons will be considered like his brothers, under the name of Menashe, to inherit their inheritance with them, and similarly, each of Efraim's sons will be considered like his brothers, under the name of Efraim, to inherit Efraim's inheritance with them.”

“'ואני בבאי מפדן וגו AND AS FOR ME, WHEN I CAME FROM PADAN etc. — “And although I trouble you to take me for burial into the land of Canaan and I did not do this for your mother (i.e., I did not take the trouble to bury her in a place other than that in which she died, which was by the road-side) which I might easily have done since she died quite close to Bethlehem”. כברת ארץ is a measure of land equal to 2000 cubits which is the extent of a Sabbath day’s journey. This is according to the statement of R. Moses the Expositor. — “Do not imagine that it was the rains which prevented me from bringing her to Hebron for burial. It was the dry season when the ground is riddled and full of holes like a sieve (כברה). ואקברה שם AND I BURIED HER THERE and did not carry her even the short distance to Bethlehem to bring her into a city. I know that in your heart you feel some resentment against me. Know, however, that I buried her there by the command of God”. And the future proved that God had commanded him to do this in order that she might help her children when Nebuzaradan would take them into captivity. For when they were passing along that road Rachel came forth from her grave and stood by her tomb weeping and beseeching mercy for them, as it is said, (Jeremiah 31:15) “A voice is heard in Rama, [the sound of weeping … Rachel weeping for her children]”, and the Holy One, blessed be He, replied to her (v. 16) “There is a reward for thy work, says the Lord etc. (v. 17) for thy children will return to their own border”. Onkelos translated it (כברת ארץ) by כרוב ארעא which is a full measure of one day’s ploughing. I am of opinion that they had a definite measure which they called “one full furrow”; old French cordié. So we say, (Bava Metzia 107a) “He ploughs (כריב) and ploughs again”, and (Yoma 43b) “as much earth as a fox carries on its feet from a ploughed field (בי כרבא).””

“AND I BURIED HER THERE. In Rashi’s commentary it is written, “And I did not transport her for burial even to Bethlehem to bring her into the Land.” Now I do not know the meaning thereof. Was Rachel buried outside of the Land? Forbid it! She died within the Land, and she was buried there, just as it says here in the parshah: Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan. And there in the narrative of her death it is still more clearly written, And Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan — the same is Beth-el, and it is further stated, And they journeyed from Beth-el and there was still some way to come to Ephrath,, Verse 16. and Rachel died on the way between Beth-el and Bethlehem Ephratha in the Land of Israel. AND I BURIED HER THERE. “Now I know that there is some resentment in your heart against me [for not having brought her into the city]. But you should know that I buried her there by the word of G-d, that she might help her children when Nebuzaradan would exile them,” for when they passed along that road, Rachel came forth from her grave and stood by her tomb beseeching mercy for them, as it is said, A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children, and the Holy One, blessed by He, answered her, Thy work shall be rewarded … and the children shall return to their own border., Verses 16-17. This is the language of Rashi. Now in any case there should be some allusion in Scripture to this interpretation which is stated in this Agadah. Perhaps this is alluded to in the expression of the verse, She died by me … in the way … And I buried her in the way, (in the way) is unnecessary except as an allusion to “the way” which Rachel’s children were destined to use when they went into captivity. (Bachya. See my Hebrew commentary on Ramban, p. 261.) that is to say, “She died on the road which her children would pass, and I buried her there for her advantage.” She did not die on the road, but in Ramah, a city in the land of Benjamin, and there she was buried. [Thus, according to the Midrash, Scripture is implying that] she died on the road which her children were destined to pass in the future, as Scripture does not fully explain future events but only alludes to them in a general manner. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture, it is likewise understood that Jacob spoke to Joseph in an apologetic vein so that when he discerned his father’s wish to be buried in the cave of Machpelah, Joseph should not be angered about his failure to bury his mother there just as he buried Leah there. It was for this reason that Jacob told him that she died in the land of Canaan, and she was not buried outside of the Land in the manner in which an Egyptian burial would befall Jacob. Furthermore, she died on the road suddenly, and he could not bury her in the cave of Machpelah for how could he leave his children and his flocks on the road and hurry with her body to the cave of Machpelah? And where could he find doctors and medicines to embalm her? This is the meaning of the word alai (by me) [in the verse, Rachel died by me]. Even though the cave of Machpelah is but a half-day’s distance from the place of her death, Jacob was heavily laden with much cattle and family, and he would not arrive there for many days. Thus he did indeed spend many days on that road until he came to his father. Our Sages have further taught: “The bier of a woman may never be set down, out of respect.” Now it is my opinion that these are but words of apology as Joseph already knew that Rachel died on the road and was buried in the Land, and that honor was paid to her when she died. But the reason Jacob did not transport Rachel to the cave of Machpelah was so that he should not bury two sisters there, for he would be embarassed before his ancestors. Now Leah was the one he married first, and thus her marriage was permissible, while he married Rachel out of his love for her and because of the vow he made to her.”

“(1) AND I. Lest you say that, when God said to me (v.4), "I will make you ... a community of peoples," the intent was that I would have more sons, but sin canceled [that promise], that cannot be the case ... (2) because WHEN I WAS RETURNING FROM PADAN. when God appeared to me then, ... (3) RACHEL DIED ON ME. As [the Sages] said, "A woman dies only to her husband" ... (4) ON THE ROAD WHEN STILL SOME DISTANCE SHORT OF EPHRATH. Immediately I had left that place where God's word came to me, while I was still on the road, before my arrival at Bethlehem. AND I BURIED HER THERE ON THE ROAD TO EPHRATH, and my burden and sorrow were so great that I could not muster the strength to transport her to the Bethlehem cemetery. And doubtless, my mind was so empty inside me, and the evil inclination had no control over me, and so my desire weakened and no strength remained in me to beget children.”

“וירא ישראל את בני יוסף AND ISRAEL SAW JOSEPH’S SONS — he wished to bless them but the Divine Presence departed from him because he saw that from Ephraim would be born the wicked kings Jeroboam and Ahab, and from Manasseh Jehu and his sous (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6). ויאמר מי אלה AND HE SAID “WHO ARE THESE?” — Whence come these who are unfitted for blessing?”

“בָּזֶה IN THIS PLACE (literally, by this, or by means of this) — He showed him the contract of betrothal and the contract of marriage (evidence that their mother had adopted the faith of Israel, and that his and her offspring were of their faith) and Joseph prayed to God about the matter and the Holy Spirit again rested upon him (Jacob) (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6). ויאמר קחם נא אלי ואברכם AND HE SAID, BRING THEM, I PRAY THEE, UNTO ME, AND I WILL BLESS THEM — It is to this that the text alludes, (Hosea 11:3) “And I, תרגלתי לאפרים taking them (קחם) upon his arms”, meaning, I made My Spirit once again a familiar thing (תרגלתי) in Jacob for Ephraim’s sake until he took them (him and Manasseh) upon his arms (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6).”

“WHOM G-D HATH GIVEN ME HERE. It was really not necessary for Joseph to inform his father that his two sons were born to him in Egypt since when Joseph left him he had no wife and children, and Jacob himself had previously said to him, Thy two sons, who were born unto thee in the land of Egypt. It appears to me that the meaning of the word bazeh (here) is “in this matter concerning which you have spoken,” i.e., “G-d gave them to me before you came to Egypt to me, and they are the ones concerning whom you have said that they are yours.” A similar use of the word bazeh is found in the verse, In this way (‘u’bazeh’) the maiden came to the king., Verse 12). Now Joseph said, G-d hath given me, meaning that “G-d had performed miracles for me until the king gave me this wife, and I have these children from her.””

“See how he also taught his sons from the very beginning to show due respect for the old man. Joseph brought them along according to seniority, the text says, and presented Manasseh and then Ephraim. At this point notice, I ask you, how the good man's bodily eyes were by this time weak through old age ("His eyes had faded with age," remember, "and he could not see"), but the eyes of his mind were strengthened, and by faith Jacob already saw what was going to happen. I mean, instead of heeding Joseph, Jacob crossed his hands over in blessing them and gave precedence to the younger, putting Ephraim ahead of Manasseh.”

“ויוצא יוסף אתם AND JOSEPH BROUGHT THEM OUT — After he (Jacob) had kissed them, Joseph brought them out from between his knees in order to place them one at the right and the other on the left in order that Jacob might thus lay his hands upon them and bless them וישתחו לאפיו AND HE PROSTRATED HIMSELF BEFORE HIS FACE — after he had stepped backwards from before his father.”

“Although these mysteries are glorious in this, that Joseph, taking his sons whom he had adopted in Egypt, Ephraim, he placed at his right hand, but Manasseh at his left, so that Israel, their father, was on their right side. But Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it upon the head of Ephraim, who was the younger and stood at his left side; and his left hand he laid upon Manasseh, who was at his right side. And thus, changing his hands, he blessed them. In this, Joseph also preserved the order of nature by giving more deference to his elder son, just as Isaac also desired to give the blessing to his firstborn son, Esau. But he believed that the younger son should be preferred in the role of the younger people, just as he himself was preferred by his mother. Finally, Manasses is designated by the Latin interpretation as coming from oblivion (Gen. XLI, 51), because the people of Judah forgot their God who made them. And whoever from that people believes, is called back from oblivion. Ephraem, however, promises the abundance of faith by the interpretation of his name, who increased his father, as Joseph himself says: Because God increased me in the land of my humility (Ibid., 52). This is the characteristic of the younger people, who is the body of Christ, increasing the Father and not abandoning their own God.”

“שכל את ידיו PLACING HIS HANDS DESIGNEDLY — Understand this as the Targum renders it: אחכמינון he put wisdom into them (viz., into his hands), meaning designedly and wisely he moved his hands for this purpose, intelligently and with full knowledge, for he knew that Manasseh was the first-born and yet he did not place his right hand upon him.”

“AND HE BLESSED JOSEPH, AND SAID. The meaning of this verse is that in order to bless Joseph, out of his love for him, he blessed his sons. Scripture is relating that Joseph had no other children and his entire blessing was inherent in the blessing of these boys. It may be that [the blessing here was directed at Joseph himself, stating that] the other children who will be born to him in the future shall be called by the name of their brothers and be blessed with their blessing. In my opinion this latter interpretation is correct since the prophet Jacob said, And the children that were born (‘holad’to’) is in the past tense and means “were born to you.” Ramban will explain that Jacob’s words are to be understood as if they were in the future tense: “And the children that will be born to you after them shall be thine.” Joseph thus had other children besides Ephraim and Menasheh, whom Scripture does not record, as they were counted among the tribes of his first sons. after them, shall be thine, and his word would not be in vain. However, Joseph did beget children after that, just as is the opinion of Onkelos, who translated: “And the children that you will beget after them.” And thus, asher holad’to is a past tense replacing a future, just as in the verse, Which I took out of the hand of the Amorite, (I took) is to be understood as if it were in the future tense. and many additional verses besides. Even in line with the literal interpretation of Scripture it would appear that Joseph had children that he had begotten after his father came to him in Egypt. This is obvious from the fact that Jacob found it necessary to elaborate rather than say, “And now thy sons, Ephraim and Menasheh, who were born to thee, shall be mine as Reuben and Simeon, and the children that will be born shall be thine.” This is the reason why Scripture states, And unto Joseph were born two sons before the year of famine came, since after the famine additional children were born to him, but Scripture does not mention them as there is no need for us to know of them [since they were absorbed into the tribes of Ephraim and Menasheh]. THE G-D, BEFORE WHOM MY FATHERS, ABRAHAM AND ISAAC, DID WALK, THE G-D WHO HATH BEEN MY SHEPHERD ALL MY LIFE LONG UNTO THIS DAY. The prophet (G-d) in this blessing: The G-d before Whom … the G-d who hath been my shepherd. calls upon the G-d of his fathers Who [has] the greatness and the power and Who did great and tremendous things for them, and [after that he refers to Him in a synonymous way and] he calls upon the true G-d, Who had been his shepherd all his life. It is possible that the word haro’eh (shepherd) — in the phrase, Who hath been my shepherd — is derived from the word rei’ah (friend), as in the verse, Thine own friend (‘rei’acha’), and thy father’s friend, forsake not, for in that attribute there is peace and friendship. Do not find difficulty with the expression, all my life unto this day, in connection with that which we have written on the verse, And he offered sacrifices unto the G-d of his father Isaac, for from his very inception He did indeed lead him in the true path, but His attribute of truth was not brought to bear upon him completely until he returned to the land of his ancestors as he was outside of the Land, and also because he was constrained to conduct himself in a crafty manner towards Laban, and that was not the path of truth.”

“Words of a grateful heart, of a God-fearing spirit keeping fresh in his mind God's kindnesses. He to whom my forebears were pleasing, he is saying, who reared me from youth to the present, who from the beginning snatched me from every trouble, who showed such care for me, he "will bless these children; my name will be invoked in them, as also the name of my forebears Abraham and Isaac, and they will grow into a teeming multitude on the earth." Do you see Jacob's insight and, at the same time, his humility? His insight, on the one hand, in foreseeing with the eyes of faith, and so giving precedence to Ephraim ahead of Manasseh. And on the other his humility, in making no mention at all of his own virtue but instead invoking a blessing on them on the basis of the satisfaction given by his forebears and the kindnesses done to him.”

“המלאך הגאל אתי THE ANGEL REDEEMING ME — The angel who was usually sent to me in my trouble, as it is said, (Genesis 31:11) “And the angel of God said unto me in the dream: Jacob etc. … (Genesis 31:13), I am the God of Beth-el.” יברך את הנערים SHALL BLESS THE LADS — viz, Manasseh and Ephraim. וידגו AND LET THEM INCREASE — like fishes (דגים) which are fruitful and which multiply and which the evil eye cannot effect (Berakhot 20a).”

“AND LET MY NAME BE CALLED ON THEM. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that it means that all Israel be called by the name Ephraim, (Jeremiah 31:19), the reference there being to all Israel. just as they are called “the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” This is not correct for Scripture uses the word bahem (on them), [thus referring to both Ephraim and Menasheh], and they were not called by the name of Menasheh. But perhaps this is because they were called the house of Joseph.. The correct interpretation though is that their race and their name will exist forever, and the name of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will forever be upon them.”

“IT DISPLEASED HIM. Perhaps Joseph loved Menasheh more on account of his being the first-born. Hence it displeased him. The correct interpretation in my opinion is that he thought that his father had made a mistake concerning them, and if his blessing will be without true knowledge it will never be fulfilled upon them as it will not have been done with the proper Ruach Hakodesh (holy spirit). But when his father told him, I know it, my son, I know it, he was reconciled.”

“ידעתי בני ידעתי I KNOW IT, MY SON, I KNOW that he is the first-born. גם הוא יהיה לעם וגם הוא יגדל HE ALSO SHALL BECOME A PEOPLE, AND HE ALSO SHALL BE GREAT, for of him will be born Gideon through whom the Holy One, blessed be He, will perform a miracle (See Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6). ואולם אחיו הקטן יגדל ממנו BUT TRULY HIS YOUNGER BROTHER SHALL BE GREATER THAN HE — for of him will be born Joshua who will make Israel inherit the land of Canaan and will instruct them in the Torah (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayechi 6). וזרעו יהיה מלא הגוים AND HIS SEED SHALL BECOME A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS (more lit, shall fill the nations) — the fame and renown of his seed, Joshua, will spread abroad and fill the whole world when he will make the sun stand still upon Gibeon and the moon in the valley of Aijalon (Avodah Zarah 25a).”

“Finally, the Lord, speaking in a spiritual manner about the people, declared this to be a mystery. For when the son thought his father had made a mistake due to his dull appearance, he wanted to turn his hands around, saying, 'Not so, Father, for this one is the firstborn; place your right hand on his head.' But his father refused and said, 'I know, my son, I know. He will also become a people, and he will be exalted. However, his younger brother will be greater than he, and his descendants will become a multitude of nations.' (Genesis 48:18-19). Finally, he preferred the elder Ephraem, even prophesying in a series of blessings, saying: 'In you Israel shall be blessed, saying: May God make you like Ephraem and Manasseh' (Ibid., 20). And therefore, since they were grandsons, they were adopted in place of sons, so that they would not be deprived of the ancestral blessing.”

“Do you see how God's grace foretold this to him and how, moved by a prophetic spirit, he blessed Joseph's sons in this way, foreseeing as already present and visible to the brothers what would happen so long afterward? This is what prophecy is like, after all. Just as the eyes of the body can form an image of nothing beyond visible things, so the eyes of faith do not see visible things but form an image of things that are due to happen many generations later. You will gain a more precise notion of this from the blessings he bestows on his own sons.”

“בך יברך ישראל IN THEE SHALL ISRAEL BLESS — When one wishes to bless his sons he will bless them by reciting the formula with which they were blessed — a man will say to his son, “God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh.” וישם את אפרים AND HE PUT EPHRAIM etc. — i.e. in the blessing he bestowed upon them he put Ephraim’s name before that of Manasseh, so giving him precedence over his brother when the Israelites encamped and marched beneath their banners in the wilderness (cf. Numbers 2:18 and Numbers 10:22), and when at the dedication of the altar by the princes of the tribes each brought his gifts (cf. Numbers 7:48 Numbers 7:54). (see Genesis Rabbah 97:5).”

“AND HE BLESSED THEM THAT DAY. The meaning of that day is that since Joseph had urged him to give Menasheh precedence, the verse declares that Jacob did not wish to remove his right hand from Ephraim’s head to that of Menasheh. Moreover, he expressly reiterated on that occasion, in Joseph’s presence, when he blessed them by saying, As Ephraim and Menasheh. And he put Ephraim before Menasheh in all his blessings. BY THEE SHALL ISRAEL BLESS. Jacob addressed this to Joseph. It means that the nation of Israel will bless with your children and say to those being blessed, God make thee as Ephraim and Menasheh.”

“Let us therefore not be anxious to amass money and bequeath it to our children; rather, let us teach them virtue and call down blessing from God on them. This, you see, this is the greatest wealth; this wealth is beyond counting, proof against consumption, leading to greater wealth as each day passes. Nothing in fact is equal to virtue; nothing more potent than it. Even if you were to mention kingship itself and the wearer of the crown, he would be worse off than any pauper clad in rags if he lacked virtue. What good, after all, could the crown or royal purple be to the man betrayed by his own indifference? I mean, surely the Lord has no respect for distinctions based on externals? Surely he is not moved by the fame of prominent people? One thing is to be sought after with him, to be able to find the door opened to confidence with him on the basis of the operation of virtue. The person who enjoys no such confidence will be among the least respected and least entitled to speak.”

“After he blessed the sons and promoted the younger ahead of the elder by way of forecasting the future, he wanted to convince Joseph that it was not idly or to no purpose that he had done this but to foretell what was due to happen. So he predicted his own death and the fact that they would return from foreign parts to Canaan, the land of their ancestors, and raised sound hope in them so as to cheer them up with the expectation. The hope of good things to come, after all, always mitigates the troubles of the present life.”

“(Verse 22.) And I gave ((Or, do)) to you Sicima, the special one, over your brothers, which I received from the hands of the Amorites with my sword and arrow. Sicima, according to Greek and Latin custom, is declined. Otherwise, in Hebrew it is called Sichem, as John the Evangelist also testifies (IV, 5): although erroneously, it is read as Sichar, the error has prevailed: and now it is the city of Neapolis, the city of the Samaritans. Therefore, because Sichem () is translated into Hebrew as shoulder, he cleverly alluded to the name, saying: And I will give you one shoulder. For it is written specially, that is, in Hebrew. And what he says that he possessed it in a bow and sword: the bow here, and the sword, he calls righteousness, through which he deserved to be delivered from danger as a stranger and sojourner, by slaying Shechem and Hamor. For, as we read above, he feared lest the neighboring cities and castles should rise up against him for the destruction of the federal city (Gen. 34): and the Lord did not permit them to harm him. Certainly, you should understand it this way: I will give you Sichem, which I acquired with my own strength, that is, with money, which I earned with much labor and much sweat. And what he said, surpassing your brothers, shows that it was given to Joseph without any obligation. For indeed, Joseph is buried in the same place, and his tomb can still be seen there today.”

“ואני נתתי לך MOREOVER I HAVE GIVEN TO THEE — Because you will take the trouble to engage in my burial “I” give you an inheritance in which you will be buried. And which was this? Shechem, as it is said, (Joshua 24:32) “And the bones of Joseph which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem”. שכם אחד על אחיך Jacob meant by the word שכם the actual city of Shechem and said: this shall be to you one portion additional to what you will receive together with your brothers. בחרבי ובקשתי WITH MY SWORD AND WITH MY BOW — When Simeon and Levi slew the inhabitants of Shechem all the surrounding nations gathered together to join in battle against them and Jacob girded on his weapons to war against them (cf. Genesis Rabbah 80:10) Another explanation of this verse: שכם אחד ONE PORTION [ABOVE THY BRETHREN] — this refers to the birthright (Genesis Rabbah 97:6): that Joseph’s children should receive two portions when Canaan would be divided amongst the tribes (cf. Deuteronomy 60:17; Joseph therefore was to be regarded as the first-born). The word שכם signifies portion. “For thou wilt make them שכם” i.e. thou wilt place my enemies before me in portions (thou wilt scatter them before me); (Deuteronomy 60:8) “I will divide שכם the portion”; (Hosea 6:9) “on the way they murder שכמה” i.e. each man kills someone as his own portion; (Zephaniah 3:9) “to serve him as though they were all but one portion (שכם)” i.e. to serve him unitedly. אשר לקחתי מיד האמרי WHICH I TOOK OUT OF THE HAND OF THE AMORITE—out of the hand of Esau whose deeds were like those of an Amorite (Genesis Rabbah 97:6). Another interpretation of אמורי in reference to Esau is: he used to ensnare his father by the words (אמרי) of his mouth (cf. Rashi on Genesis 25:7). בחרבי ובקשתי that is, by means of his spiritual weapons: his wisdom and his prayer (“בַּקָשָׁתִי” cf. The Targumim and Bava Batra 123a).”

“MOREOVER I HAVE GIVEN TO THEE ONE PORTION ABOVE THY BRETHREN. After he had blessed Joseph’s children and made them two tribes, he returned to Joseph and said to him: “Behold, I die; but G-d will be with you in exile in order to save you from all trouble, and you will increase and multiply exceedingly, and He will bring you back to the land of your fathers to inherit it. I have already given you the one portion in my power to bestow — namely, the portion of the birthright — to be yours above that of your brothers, right from the day that I took it out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow.” All this is a conciliation to Joseph and a manifestation of his love for him, for he informed him that he gave him the birthright, meaning that his sons will henceforth be blessed by becoming two tribes, also in the banners which were assigned in the desert, and in the dedication of the Tabernacle by the princes of the tribes., Chapter 7. He also gave him his portion in the inheritance which he would acquire when the children of Israel will conquer the Land by sword and bow and war. Jacob thus told him: “I have done for you all the good which I was able to do for you as long as it was in my power to do it.” Jacob’s right in the Land was but one portion for he had no right to divest any of his sons of his inheritance. Only the birthright was his to give to whomever he pleased, and it was to Joseph that he gave it. OUT OF THE HAND OF THE AMORITE. The meaning of this is that Israel first took the Land from the hand of the Amorite. Sichon and Og were two Amorite kings, and the first great war in the conquest of the Land took place between the children of Joseph and the Amorites. This was the war of Joshua with the Amorites, and it was in the course of the war with them that the great miracle took place, as it is written, Then spoke Joshua to the Eternal in the day when the Eternal delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, etc. And it was out of the hand of the Amorites that the children of Joseph took their portion and inheritance in the Land, as it is written, And the children of Machir the son of Menasheh went to Gilead, and took it, and dispossessed the Amorites that were there. The children of Ephraim likewise inherited in the territory of the Amorites, as it is written, But the Amorites were resolved to dwell in Har-cheres, in Ayalon, and in Shaalbin; yet the hand of the house of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tributary. WITH MY SWORD AND WITH MY BOW. The meaning thereof is that the Land was captured by them only through the sword and bow. This alludes to that which Scripture states, There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, save the Hivites the inhabitants of Gibeon; they took all in battle. For it was of the Eternal to harden their hearts, to come against Israel in battle, that they might be utterly destroyed. He attributes the sword and bow to himself. for it was his merit which waged war for them and fought on their behalf, not they themselves, even as the verse states it, For not by their own sword did they get the land in possession, neither did their own arm save them, but Thy right hand, and Thine arm, and the light of Thy countenance, because Thou wast favorable unto them. This is a reference to the merit of the patriarchs, for by way of the truth, Thy right hand [is a reference to the merit of] Abraham, Thine arm to that of Isaac, and the light of Thy countenance to that of Jacob. It further appears reasonable to me that Jacob did as the prophets later on were wont to do. He inclined his hand with a sword towards the land of the Amorites and cast arrows there to symbolize that the land would be captured by his children, even as Elisha did: And he laid his hands upon the king’s hands, and Elisha said, Shoot; and he shot. Now even though Scripture does not relate it here, it is alluded to in this verse. It is possible that this is the meaning of Jacob’s saying, lakachti (I took), for from that moment on the Land was taken for his sons.”