Genèse 49:22

Joseph, my son, thou hast become great; Joseph, my son, thou hast become great and mighty; the end (determined) on thee was (that thou shouldst) be mighty, because thou didst subdue thy inclination in the matter of thy mistress, and in the work of thy brethren. Thee will I liken to a vine planted by fountains of water, which sendeth forth her roots, and overrunneth the ridges of stone, and covereth by her branches all unfruitful trees; even so didst thou my son Joseph subject by thy wisdom and thy good works all the magicians of Mizraim; and when, celebrating thy praises, the daughters of princes walking on the high places cast before thee bracelets and chains of gold, that thou shouldst lift up thine eyes upon them, thine eyes thou wouldst not lift up on one of them, to become guilty in the great day of judgment.

‘BEIN PORATH YOSEPH.’ A graceful son. It is an expression used in Aramaic: “Apiryon namtai (Let us gracefully treat) Rabbi Shimon.” Bein porath alei ayin. His gracefulness attracts the eye that sees him. This is the language of Rashi.
Now it is farfetched to base the interpretation of the word porath upon this Aramaic expression, for such expressions in the Talmud — be they Greek, Persian, or other languages — have no kinship with the Sacred Language. Moreover, each example found of this word is only an expression of blessing and praise, not grace, and the letter nun [in the word apiryon] is a root letter. has no nun. How then can Rashi explain the word porath as being similar to apiryon in which the nun is a root letter? It is so mentioned in Bereshith Rabbah: “And they blessed Rebekah. They were depressed and mean. They were m’pharnin (blessing) only with their mouth.”
It appears to me that the meaning of porath is as in the expression, “Purna belongs to the orphans,” where purna means the improvement in the value [of the orphans’ portion of the dowry which] belongs to the orphans. The Rabbis further called the kethubah (the written marriage-contract) purna, saying, “A woman collects the purna from them,”, 67a. meaning the kethubah which constitutes the benefit from her father’s house. They similarly said that “mohar (dowry) means pranun.”
But bein porath in the present verse is to be interpreted either as Onkelos has it as being an expression of fruitfulness and abundance, or as the grammarians. — who derived the word porath from the phrase, And its branches (‘p’orothav’) became long — would have it. They further said that the word bein is similar in meaning to “a plant” or “branch”, and they bring a similar verse as proof: And of the stock which Thy right hand hath planted, and the branch (‘bein’) that Thou madest strong for Thyself. Thus the purport of the verse is as if Jacob had said: “Joseph is a planting containing many branches.”
In my opinion, the word bein is to be understood in its ordinary sense, namely, “son,” with the verse stating that Joseph is a son who is similar to a many branched tree, planted beside a spring whose waters fail not, and whose branches in turn gave forth offspring, [i.e., other boughs]. [On account of their …

בן פורת יוסף בן פורת עלי עין, the first half of this verse is not to be understood until we have read the second half. The only reason it is written in this manner is in order to help us identify immediately who is the subject in our verse. We have a similar verse in Exodus 15,6 where in the first half of the verse G’d’s attribute of employing His right hand is extolled before we are tolled how this is manifest, i.e. by the manner in which He destroyed the enemy. A very familiar similar construction occurs in Psalms 93,3 a psalm we recite each Friday night, when the psalmist speaks of נשאו נהרות ה' נשאו נהרות קולם, and only afterwards we are told that the rivers raise their voices in response toכי הנה אויביך ה', כי הנה אויביך יאבדו. The verse means: ”The river raise ther “voices” (sounds), O Lord, the oceans sound their thunder and their pounding.” All of this is in response to verse 10 in the previous psalm where G’d’s enemies are described as perishing.” In fact the psalmist in 94,3 asks almost despairingly: “how long are the wicked going to be allowed to carry on successfully before the Just can rejoice when they observe their downfall?” Here too, the words בן פורת יוסף describe an attribute, referring to the tall and handsome person Joseph, before telling us that all the maidens of Egypt were craning their necks to catch a glimpse of him, each one trying to admire his features, trying to do so from a suitable vantage point. He, whose exterior had appealed to the wife of Potiphar at the time, now became a household word in Egypt so that all the women allowed out of their houses tried to catch a glimpse of him. [I paraphrased the author’s words in this paragraph. Ed.] Joseph’s handsome appearance had already inflamed the libido of Potiphar’s wife,

בן פורת יוסף, Joseph is considered the product of a proliferating grapevine. It spreads its protective shade for the benefit of many. In Psalms 80,11 we are told of this function of the grapevine in the words כסו הרים צלה, “the mountains were covered by its shade.” The simile means that Yaakov and his family lived under the protective cover of Joseph, i.e. in his shade.

The word פורת derivative of פוריה, fruitful, implies the proximity of a spring, a well of water. בנות, branches. The grapevine brings forth many branches.

צעדה עלי שור, describing how these branches even grow beyond the wall surrounding the orchard. Alternatively, what is meant is that the branches extend beyond the fence surrounding the well. Prior to its prolific growth it could not be seen from the far side of the wall. People living on that side of the wall did not even have an idea that something was growing there. Once the branches had topped the wall, its presence suddenly became noticeable and provoked reactions on the other side. The other side of the parable, are, of course, Yaakov on the one hand, and Joseph and his sons, who had developed in Egypt without their father even being aware that they were alive. Suddenly, what had been hidden from him for 22 years had become revealed. This is what he meant when he said on meeting him: ראה פניך לא פללתי והנה הראה אותי אלוקים גם את זרעך, I did not even expect ever to see your face again, and now G’d has shown me not only you but also your offspring. (48,11)

בן פרת יוסף בן פרת עלי עין, the branch סעיף, is referred to as בן, as it is an offshoot of the tree. Seeing that it is called בן in the masculine mode, he word פרת, the adjective modifying it, ought to be in the masculine mode also, but it is not. Suddenly, the Torah changes grammar in mid-stream and speaks of בנות צעדה עלי עין instead of בנים צעדו עלי עין, “his branches spilling (running) over the wall.” The reason is that the word סעיף also occurs as a feminine noun, as in Ezekiel 31,6 בסעפתיו קננו, “in its boughs they made their nest.” Such nouns in a dual role are not that rare, as for instance we find the חמור, male donkey, treated as if it were an אתון, the she-ass in Samuel II 19,27 אחבשה לי החמור וארכב עליה, “I will saddle my donkey and ride on her.” The donkey is both a beast, בהמה, a feminine noun, and a male of its species. We are therefore free to use either gender when referring to it. A similar example is found in Exodus 22,25 where the Torah describes the word שלמה, dress, as masculine although generally we always use it as feminine. The fact is that the specific garment “dress, שלמה,” is at the same time a garment, בגד, a noun describing all garments, a masculine noun. While a bough, פארה, is indeed a feminine noun, referring to a specific type of branch, the word סעיף includes many types of branches and is a masculine noun. There are quite a few examples of this grammatical phenomenon. As to the addition of the letter ת in פרת, it substitutes for the letter ה as it does on many occasions. Look at Deuteronomy 31,29 for instance, where we have וקראת instead of וקראה.

בן פרת עלי עין, its leaves will not wilt and it will prove to be very fruitful as per Psalms 1,3 והיה כעץ שמול על פלגי מים, “he will be as a tree planted by springs of water, etc.” The reason for this apparent duplication is that Joseph would be split into two of the twelve tribes, hence the blessing had to be twofold.

בנות צעדה עלי שור, these two branches (from the בן above) would grow and branch out so much until they would spillover the protective wall around the orchard, just as grapevines are in the habit of doing when they require trellises to support them..

בן פורת יוסף, “the land allocated to the tribe of Joseph is fruitful as a tree planted near a well of water.”

בנות צעדה עלי שור, (normal translation) “girls stepped atop the wall.” Our author prefers to understand the word בנות here as being derived from the root בנה, “to build,” i.e. the land of Joseph is so fruitful that it extends right up to the built up areas of the cities. (Compare Joshua15,45 עקרון, ובנותיה וחצריה, “Ekron with its dependencies and villages.”) [Yaakov used such flowery metaphors that it is easy to understand that our sages had difficulty in being certain of their meanings. Ed.] (Attributed to a Rabbi R. David.)