Deu 33:6-8 | KD | STEP | The blessings upon the tribes commence with this verse. “ Let Reuben live and not die, and there be a (small) number of his men .” The rights of the first-born had been withheld from Reuben in the blessing of Jacob ( ); Moses, however, promises this tribe continuance and prosperity. The words, “and let his men become a number,” have been explained in very different ways. מספּר in this connection cannot mean a large number (πολὺς ἐν ἀριθμῷ, lxx), but, like מספּר מתי ( ; ; ), simply a small number, that could easily be counted (cf. ). The negation must be carried on to the last clause. This the language will allow, as the rule that a negation can only be carried forward when it stands with emphatic force at the very beginning ( Ewald , §351) is not without exceptions; see for example , where three negative clauses follow a positive one, and in the last the לא is omitted, without the particle of negation having been placed in any significant manner at the beginning. - Simeon was the next in age to Reuben; but he is passed over entirely, because according to Jacob’s blessing ( ) he was to be scattered abroad in Israel, and lost his individuality as a tribe in consequence of this dispersion, in accordance with which the Simeonites simply received a number of towns within the territory of Judah ( ), and, “having no peculiar object of its own, took part, as far as possible, in the fate and objects of the other tribes, more especially of Judah” ( Schultz ). Although, therefore, it is by no means to be regarded as left without a blessing, but rather as included in the general blessings in and , and still more in the blessing upon Judah, yet it could not receive a special blessing like the tribe of Reuben, because, as Ephraim Syrus observes, the Simeonites had not endeavoured to wipe out the stain of the crime which Jacob cursed, but had added to it by fresh crimes (more especially the audacious prostitution of Zimri, Num 25). Even the Simeonites did not become extinct, but continued to live in the midst of the tribe of Judah, so that as late as the eighth century, in the reign of Hezekiah, thirteen princes are enumerated with their families, whose fathers’ houses had increased greatly (1Ch 4:34.); and these families effected conquests in the south, even penetrating into the mountains of Seir, for the purpose of seeking fresh pasture ( ). Hence the assertion that the omission of Simeon is only conceivable from the circumstances of a later age, is as mistaken as the attempt made in some of the MSS of the Septuagint to interpolate the name of Simeon in the second clause of Deu 33:6.

‏ Deuteronomy 33:6-8

The blessings upon the tribes commence with this verse. “Let Reuben live and not die, and there be a (small) number of his men.” The rights of the first-born had been withheld from Reuben in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:3); Moses, however, promises this tribe continuance and prosperity. The words, “and let his men become a number,” have been explained in very different ways. מספּר in this connection cannot mean a large number (πολὺς ἐν ἀριθμῷ, lxx), but, like מספּר מתי (Deu 4:27; Gen 34:30; Jer 44:28), simply a small number, that could easily be counted (cf. Deu 28:62). The negation must be carried on to the last clause. This the language will allow, as the rule that a negation can only be carried forward when it stands with emphatic force at the very beginning (Ewald, §351) is not without exceptions; see for example Pro 30:2-3, where three negative clauses follow a positive one, and in the last the לא is omitted, without the particle of negation having been placed in any significant manner at the beginning. - Simeon was the next in age to Reuben; but he is passed over entirely, because according to Jacob’s blessing (Gen 49:7) he was to be scattered abroad in Israel, and lost his individuality as a tribe in consequence of this dispersion, in accordance with which the Simeonites simply received a number of towns within the territory of Judah (Jos 19:2-9), and, “having no peculiar object of its own, took part, as far as possible, in the fate and objects of the other tribes, more especially of Judah” (Schultz). Although, therefore, it is by no means to be regarded as left without a blessing, but rather as included in the general blessings in Deu 33:1 and Deu 33:29, and still more in the blessing upon Judah, yet it could not receive a special blessing like the tribe of Reuben, because, as Ephraim Syrus observes, the Simeonites had not endeavoured to wipe out the stain of the crime which Jacob cursed, but had added to it by fresh crimes (more especially the audacious prostitution of Zimri, Num 25). Even the Simeonites did not become extinct, but continued to live in the midst of the tribe of Judah, so that as late as the eighth century, in the reign of Hezekiah, thirteen princes are enumerated with their families, whose fathers’ houses had increased greatly (1Ch 4:34.); and these families effected conquests in the south, even penetrating into the mountains of Seir, for the purpose of seeking fresh pasture (1Ch 4:39-43). Hence the assertion that the omission of Simeon is only conceivable from the circumstances of a later age, is as mistaken as the attempt made in some of the MSS of the Septuagint to interpolate the name of Simeon in the second clause of Deu 33:6. Deu 33:7

The blessing upon Judah is introduced with the formula, “And this for Judah, and he said:” “Hear, Jehovah, the voice of Judah, and bring him to his people; with his hands he fights for him; and help against his adversaries wilt Thou be.” Judah, from whom the sceptre was not to depart (Gen 49:10), is mentioned before Levi as the royal tribe. The prayer, May Jehovah bring Judah to his people, can hardly be understood in any other way than it is by Onkelos and Hengstenberg (Christol. i. 80), viz., as founded upon the blessing of Jacob, and expressing the desire, that as Judah was to lead the way as the champion of his brethren in the wars of Israel against the nations, he might have a prosperous return to his people; for the thought, “introduce him to the kingdom of Israel and Judah” (Luther), or “give up to him the people which belongs to him according to Thine appointment” (Schultz), is hardly implied in the words, “bring to his people.” Other explanations are not worth mentioning. What follows points to strife and war: “With his hands (ידיו accusative of the instrument, vid., Ges. §138, 1, note 3; Ewald, §283, a.) is he fighting (רב participle of ריב) for it (the nation); Thou wilt grant him help, deliverance before his foes.” Deu 33:8-11

Levi. - Deu 33:8, Deu 33:9. “Thy right and Thy light is to Thy godly man, whom Thou didst prove in Massah, and didst strive with him at the water of strife; who says to his father and his mother, I see him not; and does not regard his brethren, and does not know his sons: for they observed Thy word, and kept Thy covenant.” This blessing is also addressed to God as a prayer. The Urim and Thummim - that pledge, which the high priest wore upon his breast-plate, that the Lord would always give His people light to preserve His endangered right (vid., Exo 28:29-30), - are here regarded as a prerogative of the whole of the tribe of Levi. Thummim is placed before Urim, to indicate at the outset that Levi had defended the right of the Lord, and that for that very reason the right of the Urim and Thummim had been given to him by the Lord. “Thy holy one” is not Aaron, but Levi the tribe-father, who represents the whole tribe to which the blessing applies; hence in Deu 33:9 and Deu 33:10 the verb passes into the plural. To define more precisely the expression “Thy holy one,” reference is made to the trials at Massah and at the water of strife, on the principle that the Lord humbles His servants before He exalts them, and confirms those that are His by trying and proving them. The proving at Massah refers to the murmuring of the people on account of the want of water at Rephidim (Exo 17:1-7, as in Deu 6:16 and Deu 9:22), from which the place received the name of Massah and Jeribah; the striving at the water of strife, to the rebellion of the people against Moses and Aaron on account of the want of water at Kadesh (Num 20:1-13). At both places it was primarily the people who strove with Moses and Aaron, and thereby tempted God. For it is evident that even at Massah the people murmured not only against Moses, but against their leaders generally, from the use of the plural verb, “Give ye us water to drink” (Exo 17:2). This proving of the people, however, was at the same time a proof, to which the Lord subjected the heads and leaders of the nation, for the purpose of trying their faith. And thus also, in Deu 8:2., the whole of the guidance of Israel through the desert is described as a trial and humiliation of the people by the Lord. But in Moses and Aaron, the heads of the tribe of Levi, the whole of the tribe of Levi was proved. The two provings by means of water are selected, as Schultz observes, “because in their correlation they were the best adapted to represent the beginning and end, and therefore the whole of the temptations.”