Parshas Vayigash
1. On the verse "ומקצה אחיו לקח חמשה אנשים ויציגם לפני פרעה" ("And from among his brothers he took five men and presented them before Pharaoh")1, Rashi explains: "מן הפחותים שבהם לגבורה שאין נראים גבורים שאם יראה אותם גבורים יעשה אותם אנשי מלחמתו" ("From the least of them in might, who did not appear mighty, for if he [Pharaoh] would see them as mighty, he would make them his men of war"), and he brings two opinions as to who were the weakest among the tribes: "Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yissachar and Binyamin — those whose names Moshe did not repeat when he blessed them; but the names of the mighty ones he did repeat" (and he enumerates them in detail2). "This is the wording of Bereishis Rabbah3, which is the Aggadah of Eretz Yisrael; but in our Babylonian5 Gemara4 we find that those whose names Moshe repeated are the weak ones6, and those he brought before Pharaoh," etc. (and he concludes:) "And in the Baraisa of the Sifri we learn in it, in Vezos HaBerachah7*78, as in our Gemara4."
This is not understood:
a) That Rashi needs to bring from our Sages which of the tribes were the weak ones and which were the mighty is understandable, for from the plain meaning of Scripture here one cannot know this. But what bearing does the further explanation have on the plain meaning of Scripture here — the length and details that this is connected with "he did not repeat their names when he blessed them" or "he repeated," etc.? Especially since Rashi in any case cites three books as the source — "whoever wishes may come and see."
b) From the fact that Rashi brings two (opposite) opinions of our Sages, it is evident that in the plain meaning of Scripture here there is no deciding between the opinions (it is only that the first interpretation has a certain advantage over the second, and therefore he brings it first). On this there is a twofold question:
(a) In Vezos HaBerachah9 Rashi says explicitly that "the five tribes whom he blessed last — Zevulun, Gad, Dan, Naftali and Asher — he repeated their names to strengthen them and make them mighty, because they were the weakest of all the tribes; they are the ones whom Yosef brought before Pharaoh, as it says, 'And from among his brothers he took five men.'" That is, according to the plain meaning of Scripture (since he says it without qualification, without the caveat of saying "our Rabbis expounded" or the like), he decides there (and like the second opinion)?
(b) In Parshas Matos10 and Devarim11 Rashi says — and in a straightforward manner — that the tribe of Gad was among those who "were mighty" — the opposite of what he says in Vezos HaBerachah, that (according to the plain meaning of Scripture) Gad was among the weak12?
One cannot answer this by saying that in each case separately Rashi explains according to what is compelled by the plain meaning of Scripture in that place [and in Parshas Matos and Devarim the plain meaning compels that the tribe of Gad was among the mighty, while in Vezos HaBerachah one must say that the tribe of Gad was among the five weak tribes, and in the plain meaning of our parsha there is no decisive proof]. For, as has been discussed many times (and it is self-evident), it cannot be that the interpretation according to the plain meaning of Scripture in one place should contradict the interpretation according to the plain meaning of Scripture in another place13.
2. The explanation of the above difference between Rashi's commentary here and his explanation in Parshas Matos and Devarim:
When we find that in one place Rashi brings two interpretations and in another verse he explains according to only one interpretation, this can be for one of two reasons: a) In the vast majority of cases — according to the interpretation he brings there is a difficulty in the (second) verse, and Rashi resolves it in his commentary, whereas according to the other (uncited) interpretation the verse is understood plainly and needs no resolution. b) The opposite reason — because in this place the plain meaning of Scripture implies the (cited) interpretation (but it is not compelling, for one could read it here according to the other interpretation as well).
Similarly (the second reason) in our case: In our parsha it is indeed not compelling who were the weak ones and who were the mighty, but in Parshas Matos and Devarim it is implied that the sons of Gad14 were mighty (for otherwise they would not have proposed "ואנחנו נחלץ חושים לפני בני ישראל" ("And we will arm ourselves quickly [to go] before the Children of Israel"), and Moshe Rabbeinu would not have accepted their proposal and, moreover, instructed them in the language of a command, "חלוצים תעברו לפני אחיכם בני ישראל" ("You shall cross over armed before your brothers, the Children of Israel")).
[Consequently, one cannot say that what Rashi explains in Parshas Matos and Devarim, that the sons of Gad were mighty, is because later "Moshe repeated their names" in his blessing15 — especially since Rashi's proof that "they were mighty" is not only from the verse "והחלוץ עובר לפני ה'" ("and the armed one passed before the L‑rd")16, which is stated in Yehoshua, at a time after Moshe's blessing, but from the verses in Parshas Matos and Devarim themselves — before Moshe's blessing.]
And this is no contradiction to the second interpretation in Rashi in our parsha (that Gad was among the "weak")17, for according to that interpretation one can say18 plainly19 that Gad the son of Yaakov was indeed among the weak, but his descendants, the men of the tribe of Gad 250 years later — the generation that entered the Land — were mighty20. Especially since the tribes intermarried with one another, it could well be that the sons of Gad married daughters of the mighty tribes, and their children inherited the might of the mother's family21.
It remains not understood, however: What is the implication in Vezos HaBerachah that those whose "names he repeated" were weak — as the second interpretation in Rashi in our parsha? And if this is implied by the plain meaning of Scripture (in Vezos HaBerachah), why does Rashi not bring it in our parsha as the first and primary interpretation?
3. One also needs to understand why Rashi in our parsha: 1) is lengthy in his commentary, 2) in language that is entirely unusual for Rashi:
a) He adds "(this is the wording of Bereishis Rabbah), which is the Aggadah of Eretz Yisrael"?
b) The wording "in the Babylonian Gemara (of ours22)"?
c) "And in the Baraisa of the Sifri we learn in Vezos HaBerachah as in our Gemara" — (a) what difference does it make that this is also stated in the Baraisa of the Sifri; (b) what is the precision in "in the Baraisa (of the Sifri)"; (c) what difference does it make whether the Baraisa and the Sifri are in "Vezos HaBerachah" or in another parsha?
4. The explanation of all this:
When one learns the verse "And from among his brothers he took five men," and it does not explain who they were, it is reasonable to say that somewhere in the Torah these five tribes are distinguished from the others.
Therefore Rashi brings the lengthy statement of our Sages that this is understood from the blessing of Moshe, where for some of the tribes "he repeated their names," and for some "he did not repeat their names." This is the (only) place where we find that the Torah singles out five tribes separately (according to the two approaches of the two interpretations).
On the other hand, although here the Torah does not spell out who the five weak ones were, from what one has learned up to this point one can indeed know (according to the plain meaning of Scripture) about the might (and weakness)23 of some of the tribes:
Learning the episode of Shechem24, it seems plain that Shimon and Levi were mighty — the two of them alone killed all the men of the city, etc. Therefore the first interpretation becomes difficult, that "those whose names he did not repeat" are the weak ones, since they include Shimon and Levi as well.
Therefore Rashi brings the interpretation that "those whose names Moshe repeated" are the weak ones, and consequently it emerges that Shimon and Levi are among the mighty. In doing so, however, Rashi must (qualify and) add: "And Yehudah, whose name was repeated, was not repeated because of weakness, but there is a reason for the matter." For it is clear from the events of the sons of Yaakov (which were learned earlier) that Yehudah was among the mighty; and even more: he was the mighty one among the tribes — the king among the tribes25; he stood up for Binyamin, he stood up against Yosef, the viceroy of Egypt, etc.26
However, the second interpretation is also difficult, in that Binyamin was among the mighty, whereas plainly it is implied that he was among the weak: he was the youngest; he is called27 "ילד זקנים קטן" ("a young child of old age"); Yaakov our father was especially afraid for him, "פן יקראנו אסון" ("lest harm befall him")28; and this is also implied (at least somewhat) from Yehudah's words to Yosef29.
5. Nevertheless, the first interpretation is the primary interpretation. For according to the second interpretation, although it is true that Yehudah's inclusion among those whose "names Moshe repeated" is for a different reason, not "because of weakness," so that there remains a count of five tribes (especially according to Rashi's emphasis in Vezos HaBerachah: "the five tribes whom he blessed last") whose "names he repeated" for the reason of "to strengthen them and make them mighty" — nevertheless the five tribes are not singled out in a clear manner, since ultimately Yehudah's name was also repeated. Therefore the first interpretation is more reasonable, since those whose "names he did not repeat" are singled out in a number of exactly five30.
And the above-mentioned difficulty31, that according to the first interpretation Shimon and Levi are among the weak, can be answered: indeed they were weak, and the fact that "ויהרגו כל זכר ואת חמור ואת שכם" ("they killed every male, and Chamor and Shechem")32 was not due to their might. Rather, what was at work here was that they felt upon themselves, as the eldest, the responsibility of taking revenge for "הכזונה יעשה את אחותנו" ("Should he treat our sister like a harlot?")32* — since Reuven did not do it33.
And especially since the men of Shechem were then "in pain"34. Also, "אפם כי עז" ("their anger, for it was fierce")*34 added might to them.
6. In Vezos HaBerachah, however, the plain meaning of the verses implies that those whose "names he repeated" are the weak ones, and not the reverse. To explain this, we first explain the reasons for the difference between the two interpretations — whether "he repeated their names" is on account of their weakness or on account of their might:
If one says that the weak ones are those whose "names he repeated," the reason for the repetition is an additional blessing — as Rashi says there: "to strengthen them and make them mighty." Because of their weakness they needed this.
When one learns that the repetition of the names refers to the mighty ones, the meaning is: being mighty gave them a special importance35, which expressed itself (also) in the repetition of the name — their names were heard more than the names of the other tribes (and similar to "ואגדלה שמך" ("and I will make your name great")36),
similar to Rashi's comment: "Avraham, Avraham — it is an expression of affection that He repeats his name"37, for which Rashi brings no explanations, because the matter is plain.
The difference between them with regard to Moshe's blessing itself: According to the interpretation that the repetition of the names of the weak is for an additional blessing, it is understood that Moshe Rabbeinu's repeating their names is a part (and continuation) of the blessing. But according to the interpretation that the mighty ones were those whose "names he repeated," the repetition of the name is not part of Moshe's blessing — the names of the mighty are not repeated by Moshe Rabbeinu for the sake of an additional blessing38; rather, in mentioning their names in the Torah39, he repeats them and emphasizes them more because of their renown — "his name precedes him."
Accordingly it is understood that, when learning the verses in Vezos HaBerachah plainly, and especially the verses that speak of Moshe's blessing itself, it is more reasonable that every word stated in the blessings of the tribes is part of Moshe's blessing.
And therefore Rashi learns there that these were the weak ones and "he repeated their names to strengthen them and make them mighty," for according to this the repetition of the name is also a matter of blessing40.
7. According to this, one will also understand what Rashi adds in our parsha, "which is the Aggadah of Eretz Yisrael" — "but in our Babylonian Gemara," for this explains the content of each interpretation and the reason for the difference between the interpretations.
The difference between the study in Eretz Yisrael (the Jerusalem Talmud) and the study of the Babylonian Talmud: The order of study in Eretz Yisrael is concise in content and style — without lengthy give-and-take in the content of the matter and without lengthy wording (and as the Gemara41 says: "האי תנא ירושלמי הוא דתני לישנא קלילא" ("This Tanna is a Jerusalemite, who teaches in light language")).
Whereas the order of study in Bavel — in the "Babylonian Gemara" — is lengthy, both in the give-and-take in the content of the matters and in style and wording.
And with this it is understood why Bereishis Rabbah, "which is the Aggadah of Eretz Yisrael," takes the approach that, when there is a choice between learning (that it is the names of the weak that were repeated) that Moshe Rabbeinu lengthened his words by "repeating their names" for the sake of a blessing (for a blessing and a prayer can be said — and we also find this — in brief wording42), or learning (that it is the names of the mighty that were repeated) that Moshe Rabbeinu was brief in his words — for the repetition of the names is not a lengthening of the wording of Moshe's blessing, but a separate matter emphasized in the Torah, that on account of their might their name precedes them — one must accept that Moshe Rabbeinu said the blessing in brief wording, and the weak ones are "those whose names Moshe did not repeat when he blessed them, but the names of the mighty he did repeat."
"But in our Babylonian Gemara" — according to the Babylonian approach to study, that for the sake of additional explanation in the content of the matter there must be lengthiness in style and wording, one must accept that "Moshe repeated their names" for the sake of an additional blessing to the weak tribes, that Moshe Rabbeinu lengthened the wording of their blessing in order "to strengthen them and make them mighty." And although one can accomplish this also through a brief blessing and prayer, nevertheless, since through repetition and lengthier wording an additional strengthening and emphasis is added, one must accept that this is what Moshe did.
8. Accordingly it is also understood why Rashi adds "And in the Baraisa of the Sifri we learn in it, in Vezos HaBerachah, as in our Gemara":
From all the above it emerges that each of the two interpretations has a twofold advantage over the other interpretation: a) from the standpoint of the plain meaning of the verses here; b) from the standpoint of the matter of repeating their names:
The twofold advantage of the first interpretation: a) that according to what is understood from the plain meaning of Scripture here, Binyamin was among the weak and Yehudah among the mighty; b) when the Torah singles out "(And from among his brothers he took) five men" and does not spell out who they were, it is reasonable that this refers to the five weak tribes, since with "Moshe did not repeat their names" there is an exact number of the "five" (men, tribes), as above.
The twofold advantage of the second interpretation: a) as is understood in the plain meaning of Scripture, Shimon and Levi were among the mighty and not among the weak; b) it is more reasonable that repeating the name in a blessing is a matter connected with the essence of the blessing — in order to strengthen them, etc. — than to say that the Torah thereby alludes to another matter, that they are the mighty ones43 (which is not particularly relevant when giving them a blessing; on the contrary, it is more fitting in a place that speaks of their own virtues).
And it is this second advantage that Rashi emphasizes by bringing the Sifri, and that in the Sifri "we learn in it, in Vezos HaBerachah, as in our Gemara" — since this is stated in "Vezos HaBerachah," it is reasonable that the repetition of the names is also a matter of blessing.
And just as with the first two interpretations Rashi points out the difference between their approaches by adding "which is the Aggadah of Eretz Yisrael" — "in our Babylonian Gemara," thereby alluding to their manner of study — so too here Rashi adds "in the Baraisa of the Sifri":
All the matters stated in the Baraisa derive from the Mishnayos, but with this difference: in the Mishnah it is stated briefly and by allusion, "a brief statement that includes many matters"44, while in the Baraisa it is explicit, at length and in detail.
And with this Rashi alludes that the manner of arrangement in the Baraisa (at length) explains and clarifies why the "Baraisa of the Sifri" learns like the "Babylonian Gemara," that "those whose names Moshe repeated are the weak ones" — and, as above, that Moshe Rabbeinu lengthened and repeated the names of the weak in order "to strengthen them and make them mighty."
Nevertheless, in our parsha this is a second interpretation: for this advantage of the second interpretation pertains mainly where the discussion is about blessing — in Vezos HaBerachah — whereas according to the plain meaning of Scripture in our parsha, the advantage of the first interpretation carries more weight, as above.
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Matos-Masei, 5729)
Notes
1) Our parsha, 47:2.
2) In the Rashi before us, he explains the repetition for Yehudah, Gad, Naftali and Dan, and concludes "and likewise for Zevulun and likewise for Asher"; but in the first printing, the second printing, and in several manuscripts of Rashi he explains all of them (although there too there are variations). It should be noted that the order of the names of the tribes whose names were repeated in Rashi (and likewise in Bereishis Rabbah, which he cites) follows neither the order of their births nor their order in Moshe's blessing (the Rashash on Bereishis Rabbah there already noted this); see below, note 31.
3) Our parsha, Bereishis Rabbah 95:4. In the Bereishis Rabbah before us it appears at greater length. It should be noted that in the first and second printings and several manuscripts of Rashi it reads "it is found in Bereishis Rabbah" (or the like), and not "this is the wording of Bereishis Rabbah."
4) In the first and second printings, and several manuscripts: "in the Talmud."
5) Bava Kamma 92a.
6) The Gemara does not state explicitly that they were the weak ones, but this is the plain meaning there, as is understood from the question, "Yehudah's [name] too was repeated" — see Rashi and Tosafos there. See also below, note 22.
7) — And so writes the Targum Yonasan ben Uziel here.
*7) It should be noted that in many places, and in the Chumashim before us, the parsha is called "Berachah."
8) In the blessing of Zevulun (33:18): "Why is this stated? Because it says, 'And from among his brothers he took five men and presented them…,' and their names were not specified — and this is one of them." Similarly regarding Gad (ibid., 20), Dan (ibid., 22), Naftali (23) and Asher (24).
9) 33:18.
10) 32:17.
11) End of Parshas Devarim.
12) And in Parshas Berachah itself Rashi explains (33:20) regarding Gad, "that all those near the border need to be mighty," and ibid., 21, "because they were mighty." And ibid. (33:22) regarding Dan: "therefore he compares him to lions."
13) See Sefer Maasei Hashem (by R. Eliezer (HaRofei) Ashkenazi) — Maasei Bereishis, ch. 1 — who objects to the Re'em: "In truth, the mind of an intelligent person will not accept that Rashi, of blessed memory, whose entire aim is to explain the Torah and to show the beauty of all his words being correct to the one who understands and upright to those who find knowledge, would explain the Torah in one place according to one Aggadah and in another place according to an Aggadah that contradicts the first. For in this way the verses too would be at odds with one another, and where Rashi, of blessed memory, sets out to benefit us by reconciling the verses, he would, on the contrary, establish that they conflict with one another. This is far from reason, and the mind of an intelligent person cannot tolerate it."
14) Regarding Reuven the proof is not as strong, for the main ones in Parshas Matos and Devarim (with regard to the war and crossing over armed) are the sons of Gad — see Matos 32:6, 25, 29, 31, 33, where the sons of Gad are mentioned before the sons of Reuven. And in Rashi on Matos (and Devarim): "they were mighty, as it says of Gad, 'he tears the arm, even the crown of the head'" (and in Rashi on Yehoshua (6:9): "The sons of Reuven and the sons of Gad were passing before them, because the sons of Gad were mighty and [struck] the arm, etc." [OCR unclear]), and the sons of Reuven were secondary to them. See Likkutei Sichos vol. 9, p. 271, and the sources cited there.
15) As the second answer in the Maskil LeDovid on Berachah, there.
16) See Likkutei Sichos vol. 9, p. 5, note 25, and the gloss at the bottom of the page.
17) Or according to the first [interpretation], that Reuven was among the weak — but on this the question is not as strong, as above, note 14.
18) Alternatively, one can say that according to the second [interpretation] here, that Gad was among the weak, the fact that they said in Parshas Matos, "And we will arm ourselves quickly before the sons of Gad" [sic; the verse reads "before the Children of Israel"], was because they were confident in the blessing of Yaakov (Vayechi 49:19 and Rashi): "'And he will return on his heel' — all his troops will return on their tracks to their inheritance which they took across the Jordan, and not one of them will be missing." Therefore Rashi did not need to explain the verse "And we will arm ourselves quickly…" according to this opinion that they were weak — for it is understood from what he already explained in Parshas Vayechi. See along these lines the Pnei Yehoshua [abbreviation uncertain] on Parshas Matos there.
This also fits the plain meaning of Scripture there, for the plain flow of the verses there is that their words, "And we will arm ourselves quickly before the Children of Israel…," are a response to Moshe's argument to them (because they had asked to remain across the Jordan), "Why do you discourage the heart of the Children of Israel from crossing… So did your fathers do" (32:7 ff.), and in order to negate this concern completely they needed to say this. See Likkutei Sichos vol. 9 (p. 6 ff.), that also according to Rashi there, "since they were mighty," this is the plain meaning of the passage.
One cannot say that Yaakov's words were merely words of prophecy — telling what would actually happen, for whatever reason — because: a) in any case, it is Yaakov's blessing (and consequently an empowerment). b) On the contrary — if it were prophecy, it is even more understandable that they did not need might to say "we will arm ourselves quickly…," since they knew that not one of them would be missing.
Nevertheless, the interpretation that they were mighty is plainer in the plain meaning of Scripture in Parshas Matos, and especially in Parshas Devarim. For according to the above, it only explains why they were not afraid and pledged, "And we will arm ourselves quickly before the Children of Israel"; but if they were weak, this is not sufficient for Moshe and all the Children of Israel to accept their words, command them "You shall cross over armed…," and rely on a miracle. See Likkutei Sichos there.
19) Especially since in our parsha it emphasizes "men."
20) See [OCR: "עדין"] the explanation in the Maskil LeDovid there, in the first answer. As for the contradiction in Rashi on Vezos HaBerachah (33:18; 33:20–21) — "Gad . . who were weak, etc."; "Like a lion . . near the border . . need to be mighty"; "they would go before the vanguard . . because they were mighty, etc." — see the commentators on Rashi there. This is not the place [to elaborate].
21) See Rashi on our parsha (46:15): "He attributed the males to Leah . . to teach you that if the woman emits seed first, etc."
22) Regarding the addition of the word "shelanu" ("ours"), one can say that its intent is to exclude another version (cited in Dikdukei Sofrim on Bava Kamma there) in which (instead of "Yehudah's too was repeated") the question is "But these are six!" and the answer is "Yehudah's was repeated for his own matter." From this it is implied that he took the mighty ones, and therefore it asks that there are six and not five, and which of them did he not take, etc. Note also the version in Rashi (cited in the Ein Yaakov on Bava Kamma there): "so that the evil eye should not have power over them" (and the word "shelanu" refers to the "Gemara" before it, as he concludes, "our Gemara"). See also the Yalkut on the verse: "And some say the reverse, because it says, 'And from among his brothers he took,' and their names were not specified — those whose names were repeated he took." One can explain that "some say the reverse" is (only) "the reverse" of what he cited before it — whom he [brought] before [Pharaoh]. See also the Radak here on the verse: "the least of them or the greatest of them, for there is a dispute in the words of our Sages." [See also] Tzror HaMor and the Tur HaAroch here.
23) And although "the tribes were all mighty" (Rashi, Mikeitz 42:5; see also Rashi there, 44:13) — here what matters is how they appeared in Pharaoh's eyes during the moments when he presented them before him, as Rashi says here: "the least of them in might, who did not appear mighty, etc."
24) Vayishlach 34:25 ff. See also Rashi's wording, Mikeitz 42:14, 24.
25) As is understood from Vayeishev 37:26. See also Rashi there, 38:1. Note also Vayechi 49:8–9, where Yehudah is likened to a lion — the king of the beasts.
26) Beginning of our parsha. And in Rashi there: "If you provoke me, I will kill you and your master."
27) Our parsha, 44:20.
28) Mikeitz 42:4 (ibid., 38). And although Rashi explains "that the Satan accuses at a time of danger," yet "Yaakov sent his [other sons]" [OCR unclear], and he feared this only for Binyamin. Note also the Targum Yonasan ben Uziel on Mikeitz there, "he is a youth," and the Ramban on our parsha (44:29).
29) Rashi on our parsha, 44:33: "In every respect I am superior to him — in might, in war, and in service."
30) Although this requires some further study, because: a) Shimon is not mentioned there in Moshe's blessing (see Rashi there, 33:7). b) Yosef's name is also not repeated there.
31) One can also say that the first interpretation is closer to the plain meaning of Scripture here, from the fact that we find, according to the plain meaning of the verses in general (not only in the verses up to this point), who the mighty ones were. Therefore he begins with Yehudah, and after that Gad (which is proven from Parshas Matos, Devarim and Berachah (33:20–21), as above), and continues with Naftali — see Vayechi 49:21 and Rashi; Dan (Berachah ibid., 22, and Rashi)*; and concludes "and likewise for Zevulun and likewise for Asher," regarding whom we find nothing at all. Note Rashi on Berachah (ibid., 19, s.v. "U'sfunei") regarding Zevulun, "and he stands on the border" (see Rashi on Gad and Dan, above). And in Rashi there, before this: "Zevulun is a people that risked its life to the death" (Shoftim 5:18) — in the war against Sisera.
*) And the reason he puts Naftali before Dan — although regarding Dan it says "a lion's whelp" . . "he compares him to lions" — is because Naftali is the one who brought about and caused Barak's song, etc., over the victory in the war against Sisera (cited in Rashi on Vayechi there), whereas Dan stood ready to flee (Rashi, Shoftim 5:17).
32) Vayishlach 34:25–26.
32*) Vayishlach ibid., 31.
33) Why Reuven did not act in this, even though he was the eldest — and it must be understood plainly, since Rashi does not address it, not even by allusion — one can suggest several reasons:
a) It was not fitting for a son of Yaakov (and on the contrary, the novelty is that Shimon and Levi did this — as Rashi explains in the continuation of the story, 34:25).
b) His character traits were gentle, the opposite of the matter of revenge (as Rashi explains earlier — 29:32).
c) He was exceedingly G‑d-fearing (see Rashi, Vayeishev 37:29: he was occupied with his sackcloth and his fasting for having (merely) disturbed his father's bed). See also Vayeitzei 30:14: "And Reuven went…" (although this is the praise of the tribes — Rashi there — it is specified regarding Reuven).
d) It is reasonable that when all the sons are at home, serving the father should be done by the eldest (whereas when they must be away [OCR unclear] — each one has his day (Rashi, Vayeishev 37:29)). — Note Rashi, Vayeira 18:4*; the opinion of R. Yehoshua, cited in the Matnos Kehunah on Bereishis Rabbah 84:19.
*) For since there is an advantage in doing it oneself and not through an agent, then all the sons would make the effort; consequently, precedence goes to the eldest. Note also Rashi, Noach 9:25. [OCR unclear]
34) Vayishlach 34:25. Note also Rashi there, "that they gave themselves over to it" [reading uncertain].
*34) See Vayechi 49:6–7 — though this is stated later.
35) In the Gur Aryeh here: "And the verse comes to tell that they are mighty, and therefore he repeated [their names]." See also Divrei Dovid by the author of the Taz here: "because this is a testimony for them, etc."
36) Beginning of [Parshas] Lech.
37) Vayeira 22:11.
38) In [OCR unclear: "בכנ"ד"]: "everyone whose name was repeated in Moshe's blessing." See also the Gur Aryeh cited in note 35: "And the verse comes, etc."
39) And so one must read Rashi here, with some difficulty: "those whose names Moshe did not repeat when he blessed them."
40) As for what he explains regarding Gad (Berachah 33:20–21), one can say that this too is blessing (see above, note 20). And even if they were mighty in their own right, Moshe added to them through his blessing (see above, note 18, regarding Yaakov's blessing).
41) Bava Kamma 6b. See also the books of the rules of the Yerushalmi.
42) See Behaaloscha 12:13, and Rashi there.
43) Accordingly, it is all the more appreciated why Rashi also adds, "And Yehudah, whose name was repeated, was not repeated because of weakness, but there is a reason for the matter, as stated in Bava Kamma" — for the repetition of Yehudah's name too is a blessing and a prayer, in that Moshe "sought mercy" for him, as in the Gemara there (cited in Rashi, Berachah 33:7).
44) Rambam, in his introduction to the Commentary on the Mishnah (s.v. "Achar kein ra'ah lehistapek").
Key Lesson
Moshe Rabbeinu repeated the names of the weaker tribes "to strengthen them and make them mighty" — the extra words of blessing were themselves a source of strength. So too, when we bless or encourage another Jew, especially one who feels weak, we should not suffice with a brief word but add warmth and emphasis, since every added word of blessing gives added strength.