A Patriarch Reviews the Past to Impact the Future

As life draws to a close, individuals tend to take stock, attempting to find coherence and meaning in their past and crystallize the legacy they wish to leave for the future. Through this lens, the present discourse looks at Jacob’s final encounter with Joseph his son and soulmate, and the two grandchildren Efraim and Manasseh. The special place Jacob harbored for Joseph is well-known. The aim herein, however, is to explicate how he revisits the past, using recollection, reinterpretation, reconciliation, and rectification to build his case for securing a special place among the other brothers for posterity.

Retrospective Lens 1

‘God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz in the land of Canaan, and blessed me, And said unto me, Behold, I will make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, and I will make of thee a multitude of people [k’hal amim]; and will give this land to thy seed after thee for an everlasting possession’ (Gen. 48:3-4). In revisiting the past, Jacob opens his final encounter with Joseph and his grandchildren, Ephraim and Manasseh. Jacob is looking back, selectively paraphrasing a previous prophecy: And God said unto him: ‘I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation [goy] and a company of nations [k’hal goyim] shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins; and the land which I gave unto Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land’ (Gen. 35:11-12). This prophecy (experienced by Jacob on his way back home from Padan Aram) on its face speaks of a large nation (goy) composed of individual tribes (k’hal goyim) which will stem from Jacob.¹ Jacob will be given the land (originally granted to his father and forefather); it will pass from him as an inheritance to his progeny.² As will become apparent, Jacob retrospectively reinterprets this prophecy through the prism of subsequent events.

Witness the continuation of the text: ‘And now thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, which were born unto thee in the land of Egypt before I came unto thee into Egypt, are mine; as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine’ (Gen. 48:5). And now – subsequent to what had transpired after the prophecy, i.e., Rachel’s death in childbirth – Jacob upgrades his grandchildren Ephraim and Manasseh to the status of children. According to Rashi (commentary to Genesis 35:11 and again in commentary to Genesis 48:4), the prophecy specified that from Jacob would in the future ensue a “goy” (a nation) in the singular, and “kehal amim” (nations) in the plural. Binyamin, Jacob’s last child (as it turns out), who had not yet been born at the time of the prophecy, qualifies as “goy” (singular); in order to reconcile the prophecy with Rachel’s death, the kehal goyim, however, would need to come from the generation of grandchildren and be treated as children: Ephraim and Manasseh… as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine.³

Given that kehal amim needed to be grandchildren, must they be sons of Joseph? There were other grandchildren in the family. Indeed, several of the commentators address this issue; they maintain that Jacob’s interpretation (or reinterpretation) of the prophecy was that God not only gave the land to him, but more importantly, the prerogative to choose which grandchildren would inherit as children.⁴ Jacob always harbored a special love for Joseph; he considered him his ben zekunim, whom he perceived to be of superior moral stature and intelligence.⁵ He was his confidante/soulmate, a reflection and extension of himself – even his successor.⁶ The point here is, however, that Jacob acted upon this preference through recollection and reinterpretation of the past. Ohr Hahayim (commentary to Genesis 48:4-5) actually uses the word lemafrea, retrospectively, to make clear that Jacob’s understanding came about after events subsequent to the prophecy. He, like the former commentators, provides a rationale for the choice of Manasseh and Ephraim; Joseph perceived Jacob to be his essence and on the level of a quasi-patriarch (hence his children are on par with Jacob’s children). Hizkuni (commentary to 48:4) adds that Jacob felt indebted to Joseph for saving the entire family from famine. Assuming Jacob knew about his travails in Egypt prior to his rise to power,⁷ he no doubt revered Joseph for his uncompromising and unrelenting loyalty to the family tradition. Perceiving himself as divinely authorized, Jacob, based upon all these past considerations, chooses Ephraim and Manasseh.

Retrospective Lens 2

Jacob proceeds to share with Joseph an additional piece of life review as he revisits the tragedy of Rachel’s death, which follows subsequently to the original prophecy ([Gen. 35:16-17]): ‘And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan in the way, when yet there was but a little way to come unto Ephrath: and I buried her there in the way of Ephrath; the same is Bethlehem’ (Gen. 48:7). Rachel’s premature death did not only mean there would be no more children from Jacob, as previously alluded to; it also robbed her of the chance to have more children, a matter which Jacob sought to rectify. In addition to securing Joseph’s standing in his own right, Jacob wanted to bring about a “tikun” for his beloved Rachel. The two children of Joseph, her firstborn, would take the place of additional children she never had.⁸ The decision to catapult Efraim and Manasseh into the status of children is thus understandably sandwiched in between the recollection and (re)interpretation of the prophecy, and the circumstances of Rachel’s death.

Retrospectively Acknowledging a Miracle

Immediately prior to blessing the grandchildren, Jacob adds another recollection: And Israel said to Joseph, ‘I had not thought to see your face; but in fact, God has also shown me your offspring’ (Gen. 48:11)! These words are certainly an expression of joy as Jacob relives the reunion; Jacob had given up on ever seeing his son again, and here he “stands” before him and his two sons. Beyond being an outburst of emotion, however, these words solidify the groundwork for the special role he is about to bestow on Joseph. Jacob is interpreting the miracle as an obligation to single Joseph out. The act of Divine providence which orchestrated the great miracle of his son’s return mandated, Jacob perceived, a meaningful and substantive acknowledgment:⁹ Then he blessed Joseph and said, ‘May the God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked faithfully, the God who has been my shepherd all my life to this day, the Angel who has delivered me from all harm – may he bless these boys’ (Gen. 48:15).

Prior to addressing the content of the blessing, it is important to note the retrospective context Jacob gives them; the God he implores to bestow the blessing is the One with whom he and his ancestors had established an intimate and reciprocal relationship. Abraham and Isaac were His loyal servants, and Jacob in turn merited His protection from harm’s way over his lifetime. In light of past events, Jacob perceives himself rightful in designating Joseph and his children as successors to himself and his ancestral line. Against this backdrop, witness the blessing bestowed upon Ephraim and Manasseh: ‘May they be called by my name and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac’ (Gen. 48:16). To call someone by a certain name is to give them an identity; to call someone by the name of a father and forefather is to merge their callings and intertwine their destinies. The root k-r-a, used in the text to denote the “calling,” is the same root used in the verse in which God informs Abraham of a prior but related calling: “for in Isaac your seed shall be called” (Gen. 21:12). There is of course a difference between the two situations, as Isaac’s “calling” meant that he alone would be a successor to Abraham, to the exclusion of Ishmael. Jacob’s prayer to “call” Joseph’s children by the names of their forefathers was not meant to exclude the other sons from the ancestral legacy, as Jacob himself affirms within the parameters of the blessings to all his sons (Genesis 49),¹⁰ but clearly to insert Joseph’s children as the next link in the ancestral chain. In a similar vein, but with an eye to the future, Jacob prays: ‘In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh’ (Gen. 48:20). Future generations have indeed accepted Jacob’s blessing. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan to Genesis 48:20 maintains this blessing to be part of the brit milah ceremony. In addition, upon ushering in the Sabbath each week, it is customary for the descendants of Israel to bless their children with these very words.

One More Snippet of Life Review, Before the Curtain Closes

After ensuring Joseph’s special status – the aim of his visitation of the past – Jacob allows himself to become openly in touch with his death: And Israel said unto Joseph, ‘Behold, I die: but God shall be with you, and bring you again unto the land of your father’ (Gen. 48:21). As God promised to be with Jacob (Gen. 28:15), He will watch especially over Joseph and his progeny. Although this would be a fitting closure to the encounter, Jacob, after iterating the future return to the promised land, looks back to the past one more time and adds yet an additional and most meaningful gift: ‘Moreover, I have given to you one portion [Sh’khem] above your brothers, which I took from the hand of the Amorite with my sword and my bow’¹¹ (Gen. 48:22).

Assuming that Sh’khem is indeed the city harboring its name, two interpretational approaches are plausible with respect to Jacob’s “taking” it and bequeathing it to Joseph. According to the first approach,¹² Jacob is reinterpreting history and attributing the past conquest of Sh’khem to himself. The text does not mention a part for Jacob when recounting the event itself. On the contrary, it states Simeon and Levi took each man his sword (Gen. 34:25) and slew the males of Sh’khem – they were, moreover, rebuked by Jacob for their brutality (Gen. 34:25-30). With this in mind, some of the commentaries maintain that Jacob attributes the taking of the city to his own sword and bow by virtue of being head of the household, also in the capacity of military general, to whom all, including Simeon and Levi, are subservient.¹³ This opens the possibility of giving the city to Joseph, which Jacob in fact does. The sexual promiscuity of Sh’khem, but no less the cruelly vengeful actions taken by Joseph’s brothers in this regard, and later on, with respect to Joseph himself – mercilessly casting him into a pit full of snakes and scorpions – embodies the very antithesis of Joseph. The latter refrained from taking revenge on his brothers, rather embracing them and supporting them through the years of the famine. In addition, Joseph withstood the temptation of Potiphar’s wife, with great cost to himself. The gift of Sh’khem to Joseph was, to Jacob’s mind, rectification of the past. The brothers were not to reap the fruits of their cruelty; Sh’khem would remain forever the city of Joseph, vindicated – above the brothers. Via this gift, Jacob may also be assuaging his own guilt for initially sending Joseph off to Sh’khem to see to his brothers’ welfare.

An alternative approach to understanding the link between the two parts of the verse purports that Jacob’s claim is based upon the future inheritance of Sh’khem specifically by Joseph’s descendants (during the period of Joshua and the prophets), or a reference to the general additional portion of the land Joseph was to inherit as Ephraim and Menasseh.¹⁴ Jacob is using the term my sword and bow figuratively, but, in his mind, this is of no practical consequence. As the land was given to him in the past, it is as if it was already his possession. He may give it to the progeny of his choice. It is remarkable that paradoxically, on his deathbed, as vitality wanes, Jacob chooses to depart from Joseph with the words my sword and bow. These are words of power and possession. The patriarch ends the encounter anchored in the past, which he has utilized to make himself invincible in terms of his impact upon the future.

Above His Brothers

In summation, Jacob, approaching death, engages in a selective life review whose main purpose was to reinstate his son and soulmate, given up for dead over 22 years’ time, as his select son. The years of separation and travails for father and son have found reconciliation, and the tragedy of Rachel’s death has been meaningfully reintegrated into his life. It is remarkable that all through the encounter Jacob expresses no regret, not even a recollection of the initial favoritism he showed to Joseph – that which evoked jealousy among the brothers and led to subsequent tragic results. On the contrary, through the lens of his life review, he reaffirms his original perception of Joseph’s worthiness and assumes his brothers have also come around to this conclusion, after he became viceroy to Pharaoh and provided for them in Egypt.¹⁵ Jacob gives Joseph gifts of a much more substantial nature than a multi-colored coat. He gives him the city of Sh’khem (according to several commentators) – the place in which the brothers conspired to do away with him – and it becomes his burial place. Joseph’s two sons became tribes, each with their own flags, desert encampments and eventual territories. As recounted in the books of the Prophets, Joseph’s progeny, out of their own choosing, do not always live up to the model role Jacob carved out for them. This, however, is beyond the scope of the discourse, which comes only to explicate how Jacob’s life review empowered him to act retrospectively on his legitimately perceived preferences, and impact the future of his descendants according to his capacity.