Samaritan Interpretation of Shiloh in Genesis 49:10

📜 Samaritan Interpretation of Shiloh in Genesis 49:10


The Samaritan interpretation of “Shiloh” (שִׁילֹה) in Genesis 49:10 differs dramatically from traditional Jewish and Christian messianic readings. Samaritans identify Shiloh with King Solomon, viewing this passage not as a prophecy of the Messiah but as a negative assessment of Solomon’s reign and moral failings.


The Samaritan Text and Translation


The Samaritan Pentateuch presents Genesis 49:10-12 with significant textual variations from the Masoretic Text. Based on Samaritan Targumim (Aramaic translations), the passage reads: “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from among his hosts, until Shiloh comes. To him the people are gathering. He turned aside to his city, Gaphna [Jerusalem], and the sons of his strength to emptiness. He washes his garment in wine and his robe in the blood of grapes. His eyes are turbid from wine and white are his teeth from fat”.


In Samaritan Arabic translations, the identification becomes explicit. One medieval manuscript directly states: “The reign shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from among his hosts until Solomon comes. And the peoples will follow him”.


Theological Significance: Solomon as Shiloh


The medieval Samaritan-Arabic commentary Šarḥ al-barakatayn (“The Explanation of the Two Blessings”), commonly ascribed to the period after Ṣadaqa b. Munaǧǧā (died after 1223), provides detailed exegesis of this identification. According to this commentary:


The passage means that Judah’s descendants would remain under God’s blessing and obedience to the law “until the one mentioned before (i.e., Shiloh) comes. He removes the law, adopts a vile belief and permits negligence in religion, so that the fool may follow him”. The commentary explains that when it says “And the peoples will follow him,” this means many people will follow him, “because those who act righteously are small in number”.


The text explicitly states: “And this (i.e., Shiloh) is Solomon because the smallest of sins he committed, was that he took from the daughters of the kings dissenting from religion and married them, and (he committed even) more of the major sins”.


Criticism of Solomon’s Character


The Samaritan interpretation emphasizes Solomon’s moral deficiencies, particularly his excessive consumption and character flaws:


Wine and Luxury: Genesis 49:11 (“He binds his ass to the vine”) is interpreted as referring to Solomon’s excessive planting of vineyards and love for pressing wine. The commentary warns that “too much wine distracts the mind and hinders the body to rise, just as the clouds hinder the sunlight”.


Self-Indulgence: The phrase “his eyes are turbid from wine” is understood as describing Solomon when “the covetous power triumphs over the mind,” showing that “he was irrepressibly greedy and full of it”. The reference to teeth being “white from fat” indicates his excessive consumption of meat, which the commentary notes “is surely dispraised by law and by tradition”.


Historical Context and Samaritan Chronicles


This identification appears consistently in Samaritan literature beyond commentaries. The Samaritan Chronicle II (edited by Macdonald) uses “Shiloh” interchangeably with “Solomon” throughout, written in Neo-Samaritan Hebrew. The chronicle states: “Thus applies the statement of our ancestor Jacob concerning the tribe of Judah to the times of King Solomon the son of David. All these words apply in the same way to the deeds of King Solomon the son of David, for he behaved exactly as this statement said”.


Polemical Purpose


This interpretation serves a clear polemical function within Samaritan theology. The Samaritan tradition emphasizes the primacy of Joseph over Judah, in direct contrast to Jewish-Christian focus on Judah’s preeminence. By identifying Shiloh with Solomon and portraying him negatively, Samaritans accomplish several goals:


❇️ 1. Opposing Jewish messianic claims: They reject the Jewish identification of Shiloh with a future Messiah from the tribe of Judah.


❇️ 2. Discrediting the Jerusalem Temple: Solomon’s negative portrayal serves to delegitimize the Jerusalem Temple he built, which Samaritans considered a schismatic sanctuary competing with their legitimate worship center on Mount Gerizim.


❇️ 3. Challenging Davidic authority: The interpretation undermines the authority of the Davidic line and the tribe of Judah as a whole, “in gross opposition to the priority that is given to them in Jewish and Christian exegesis”.


This stands in stark contrast to ancient Jewish sources like the Dead Sea Scrolls and Targum Onkelos, which interpreted Genesis 49:10 messianically, as well as Christian interpretations that see it fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth. The Samaritan reading represents a unique alternative that transforms a prophecy of blessing into a warning about moral corruption and religious decline.

— Azahari Hassim

Founder, The World of Abrahamic Theology

Contents