Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a 26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50
PADAN ARAM
In which the story of Eli-Ezer going to find a wife for Yitschak is in part repeated, in part developed, into the story of Ya'akov and Rach-El.
29:1 VA YISA YA'AKOV RAGLAV VA YELECH ARTSAH VENEY KEDEM
וַיִּשָּׂא יַעֲקֹב רַגְלָיו וַיֵּלֶךְ אַרְצָה בְנֵי קֶדֶם
KJ (King James translation): Then Jacob went on his journey, and came into the land of the people of the east.
BN (BibleNet translation)Then Ya'akov set out on his journey, and he came to the land of the Beney Kedem.
YISA RAGLAV: One of the great literary virtues of the Tanach is the range of tones and moods that it manages, encompassing poetry, legalistic writing, historical narrative, lyricism ... and here, the downright colloquial. Ya'akov does not "go on his journey", though of course he does; really this should be translated as: "so Ya'akov put his best foot forward, and went (went, not came) to the land of the Beney Kedem".
VENEY KEDEM (בני-קדם): Does Kedem here mean "east" or the land of the land of the people named Kedem, the Kadmonim of Genesis 15:19 and elsewhere?
29:2 VA YAR VE HINEH VE'ER BA SADEH VE HINEY SHAM SHELOSHA EDREY TSON ROVTSIM ALEYHA KI MIN HA BE'ER HA HI YASHKU HA ADARIM VE HA EVEN GEDOLAH AL PI HA BE'ER
וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה בְאֵר בַּשָּׂדֶה וְהִנֵּה שָׁם שְׁלֹשָׁה עֶדְרֵי צֹאן רֹבְצִים עָלֶיהָ כִּי מִן הַבְּאֵר הַהִוא יַשְׁקוּ הָעֲדָרִים וְהָאֶבֶן גְּדֹלָה עַל פִּי הַבְּאֵר
KJ: And he looked, and there was a well in the field, with three flocks of sheep grazing beside it; for out of that well they watered the flocks: and a great stone was upon the well's mouth.
BN: And he looked, and there was a well in the field, and three flocks of sheep lying there by it - for out of that well they watered the flocks. But the stone that sealed the well's mouth was massive.
Eli-Ezer likewise came to a BE'ER (well) in the middle of a field, but for the rest of his tale it was described rather as an AYIN, a spring or fountain (Genesis 24:11ff).
Again a stone plays a key part, though a rather different kind of stone on this occasion. Again the girl will be found watering her flock at a well (though she hasn't arrived yet. There are three flocks, but most of the watering on this occasion is being done by male shepherds; see v 4 ff, where it is stated that they are male (vayomer lahem...atem).
HA EVEN (האבן): this business of the stone interests me, having just had a stone in the previous story, which there became an altar, now another one protects a well; but that’s not so unusual, so why mention it, and why say it is GEDOLAH = "large"? At the end of the epic (Genesis 31:44 ff), it will be with a menhir, another kind of standing stone, that Ya'akov and Lavan will use to agree their land-treaty.
The sheep are important of course, because Rachel (רחל) means "ewe". Astrologically we have been witnessing throughout these early tales the shift from the age of the bull (Taurus/Kayin) to the age of the ram (Aries/Ya'akov) – and this may well help us understand why the source-myths were re-ascribed - click here for more on this.
29:3 VE NE'ESPHU SHAMAH CHOL HA ADARIM VE GALALU ET HA EVEN ME AL PI HA BE'ER VE HISHKU ET HA TSON VE HESHIYVU ET HA EVEN AL PI HA BE'ER LIM'KOMAH
וְנֶאֶסְפוּ שָׁמָּה כָל הָעֲדָרִים וְגָלֲלוּ אֶת הָאֶבֶן מֵעַל פִּי הַבְּאֵר וְהִשְׁקוּ אֶת הַצֹּאן וְהֵשִׁיבוּ אֶת הָאֶבֶן עַל פִּי הַבְּאֵר לִמְקֹמָהּ
KJ: And thither were all the flocks gathered: and they rolled the stone from the well's mouth, and watered the sheep, and put the stone again upon the well's mouth in his place.
BN: And there all the flocks were gathered; and they rolled the stone from the well's mouth, and watered the sheep, and put the stone back in its place on the well's mouth.
SHAMAH (שמה): not SHAM (שם); Shamah (שמה) is usually dative.
GALELU (גללו): "to roll", whence the word Galilee, from the rolling waves (I jest; it's generally a very calm lake); also the word Gil-Gal (גלגל) = "a stone circle", and Golgot-Yah (Golgothah).
This verse is an explanation of an ancient system, not a description of events. The actually opening and using and closing of the well doesn't happen for several more verses (see verse 8). But apparently, by the 5th century BCE when this was written down, wells of this type were no longer in use, and therefore needed this explanation.
29:4 VA YOMER LAHEM YA'AKOV ACHAI ME AYIN ATEM VA YOMRU ME CHARAN ANACHNU
וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם יַעֲקֹב אַחַי מֵאַיִן אַתֶּם וַיֹּאמְרוּ מֵחָרָן אֲנָחְנוּ
KJ: And Jacob said unto them, My brethren, whence be ye? And they said, Of Haran are we.
BN: And Ya’'akov said to them, "My brothers, where do you come from?" And they said, "We are from Charan."
Note the use of "brethren", for these are ostensibly just any people - like sating "friends", or "comrades"; whereas Ya'akov knows exactly where he is: a kind of dramatic irony.
29:5 VA YOMER LAHEM HA YEDA'TEM ET LAVAN BEN NACHOR VA YOMRU YAD'ANU
וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם הַיְדַעְתֶּם אֶת לָבָן בֶּן נָחוֹר וַיֹּאמְרוּ יָדָעְנוּ
KJ: And he said unto them, Know ye Laban the son of Nahor? And they said, We know him.
BN: And he said to them, "Do you know Lavan ben Nachor?" And they said, "We know him".
Genesis 25:20 told us: "And Yitschak was forty years old when he took Rivkah, the daughter of Betu-El the Aramaean, of Padan-Aram, the sister of Lavan the Aramaean, to be his wife." Betu-El being himself the son of Nachor, and Lavan and Rivkah Nachor's grandchildren. Should we then translate LAVAN BEN NACHOR as "Lavan of the tribe of Nachor", given that "son" is inaccurate? Or do we yet again have two versions of the same story?
29:6: VA YOMER LAHEM HA SHALOM LO VA YOMRU SHALOM VE HINEH RACHEL BITO BA'AH IM HA TSON
וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם הֲשָׁלוֹם לוֹ וַיֹּאמְרוּ שָׁלוֹם וְהִנֵּה רָחֵל בִּתּוֹ בָּאָה עִם הַצֹּאן
KJ: And he said unto them, Is he well? And they said, He is well: and, behold, Rachel his daughter cometh with the sheep.
BN: And he said to them, "Is it well with him?" And they said, "It is well; and here comes his daughter Rachel with the sheep."
This is practically untranslatable and inexplicable in English. RACHEL (רחל) = "a sheep", specifically a young, female sheep; and we are dealing here with sheep and shepherds; when they say "here comes Rachel with the flock", the Yehudit almost seems to suggest that she is herself one of the flock; with Ya'akov himself as the goat-god who will marry the sheep-goddess in the most pastoral of all myths (and at a time in the of evolution of animal husbandry when sheep and goats were not as easy to distinguish as they have become today).
SHALOM: We use the word today to say "hello", or in another of its limited meanings of "peace", but SHALOM really means "wholeness" or "perfection", of which of course peace forms one attribute; but so does health, as here. In modern Ivrit, rooted in this verse, MAH SHALOMCHA is the equivalent of "how are you doing?"
29:7 VA YOMER HEN OD HA YOM GADOL LO ET HE'ASEPH HA MIKNEH HASHKU HA TSON U LECHU RE'U
וַיֹּאמֶר הֵן עוֹד הַיּוֹם גָּדוֹל לֹא עֵת הֵאָסֵף הַמִּקְנֶה הַשְׁקוּ הַצֹּאן וּלְכוּ רְעוּ
KJ: And he said, Lo, it is yet high day, neither is it time that the cattle should be gathered together: water ye the sheep, and go and feed them.
BN: And he said, "But the sun is still high in the sky. It isn't yet time to bring in the cattle. Water your sheep. Go and feed them."
English translations seem entirely confused, and have invented all sorts of oddities. Why can they not feed till sunset? Or should that read moonrise? Why the word cattle, suggesting oxen; when what they have are flocks. The impression is that, upon seeing Rachel, the trickster Ya'akov is immediately up to naughtiness; he notes the time so that he can encourage them to water their sheep now, and then go away to feed them; in the meanwhile he will be alone at the well with Rachel until the time is right for the "cattle herders" to arrive for the next round of watering. Unfortunately his ruse does not work.
29:8 VA YOMRU LO NUCHAL AD ASHER YE'ASPHU KOL HA ADARIM VE GALALU ET HA EVEN ME AL PI HA BE'ER VE HISHKIYNU HA TSON
וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֹא נוּכַל עַד אֲשֶׁר יֵאָסְפוּ כָּל הָעֲדָרִים וְגָלֲלוּ אֶת הָאֶבֶן מֵעַל פִּי הַבְּאֵר וְהִשְׁקִינוּ הַצֹּאן
KJ: And they said, We cannot, until all the flocks be gathered together, and till they roll the stone from the well's mouth; then we water the sheep.
BN: And they said, "We cannot, until all the flocks are gathered together, and they roll the stone from the well's mouth; then we water the sheep."
Or is it simply that the stone is so heavy, or the sand so great, that they only want to lift it once, so they wait till all the shepherds are gathered and then do it? More likely they are waiting for the precise moment of twilight, the way we wait for Shabbat today: prayers perhaps will be said at the rolling of the stone, to thank the water-goddess for providing water (and perhaps Rachel is one of the priestesses of that water-goddess).
29:9 ODENU MEDABER IMAM VE RACHEL BA'AH IM HA TSON ASHER LE AVIYHAH KI RO'AH HI
עוֹדֶנּוּ מְדַבֵּר עִמָּם וְרָחֵל בָּאָה עִם הַצֹּאן אֲשֶׁר לְאָבִיהָ כִּי רֹעָה הִוא
KJ: And while he yet spake with them, Rachel came with her father's sheep: for she kept them.
BN: While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her father's sheep, for it was she who tended them.
A kind of Beney Yisra-Eli Artemis-of-the-sheep! And presumably, if Lavan also had a dairy herd, that would have been Le'ah's responsibility (explanation of that will follow at verse 16).
29:10 VA YEHI KA ASHER RA'AH YA'AKOV ET RACHEL BAT LAVAN ACHI IMO VE ET TSON LAVAN ACHI IMO VAYIGASH YA'AKOV VA YAGEL ET HA EVEN ME AL PI HA BE'ER VA YASHK ET TSON LAVAN ACHI IMO
וַיְהִי כַּאֲשֶׁר רָאָה יַעֲקֹב אֶת רָחֵל בַּת לָבָן אֲחִי אִמּוֹ וְאֶת צֹאן לָבָן אֲחִי אִמּוֹ וַיִּגַּשׁ יַעֲקֹב וַיָּגֶל אֶת הָאֶבֶן מֵעַל פִּי הַבְּאֵר וַיַּשְׁקְ אֶת צֹאן לָבָן אֲחִי אִמּוֹ
KJ: And it came to pass, when Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother's brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother's brother, that Jacob went near, and rolled the stone from the well's mouth, and watered the flock of Laban his mother's brother.
BN: And so it came to pass that, when Ya'akov saw Rachel, the daughter of Lavan, his mother's brother, and the sheep of Lavan, his mother's brother, that Ya'akov approached her, and rolled the stone from the well's mouth, and watered the flock of Lavan his mother's brother.
Has he not just been told they are waiting for the flocks to gather before they roll the rock? So why would he do this? Or was the arrival of Rachel the changing factor? And if so, because she's the priestess, or because she's bringing the boss' sheep – or more likely both, because the daughters of the sheikh would have served the priestly role.
The text is heavy in its very deliberate emphasis on the fact that they are first cousins, as were Yitschak and Rivkah, though once removed in their case.
29:11 VA YISHAK YA'AKOV LE RACHEL VA YISA ET KOLO VA YEVCH
וַיִּשַּׁק יַעֲקֹב לְרָחֵל וַיִּשָּׂא אֶת קֹלוֹ וַיֵּבְךְּ
KJ: And Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice, and wept.
BN: And Ya'akov kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice, and wept.
VA YISHAK (הישק): another untranslateable pun. NASHAK (נשק) = "to kiss" is the root from which the Hiphil gives Hashkot (השקות) = "to give drink"; thus the word game has him either watering Rachel as ewe, or her flock, or kissing her, or in kissing her symbolically "watering" her – i.e. some kind of romanto-spiritual nourishment.
How would the kiss have been given? Presumably a cousinly peck. But she has no idea who he is, and surely the other shepherds would have found it forward to say the least. So…
VA YEVCH (ויבך): Why? Pure sentimentality, or relief at finding refuge (or relief at finding that his future bride was gorgeous)? KNowing Ya'akov, it may just have been a manipulative device to gain some sympathy.
29:12: VA YAGED YA'AKOV LE RACHEL KI ACHI AVIYHA HU VE CHI VEN RIVKAH HU VA TARATS VA TAGED LE AVIYHA
וַיַּגֵּד יַעֲקֹב לְרָחֵל כִּי אֲחִי אָבִיהָ הוּא וְכִי בֶן רִבְקָה הוּא וַתָּרָץ וַתַּגֵּד לְאָבִיהָ
KJ: And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother, and that he was Rebekah's son: and she ran and told her father.
BN: And Ya'akov told Rachel that he was her father's kinsman, and that he was Rivkah's son; and she ran and told her father.
ACHI AVIYHA HU (אחי אביה הוא): "Brother"in the English - incorrectly, because he isn't; or else, as with the word AVI (אבי), ACHI (אחי) is being used to mean more than "brother"; here "kin" or "clansman", "tribal-fellow" (if there is such a term). But it is important because again it gives evidence of the multiple use of the word BEN (בן), which elsewhere means very different things from son; especially the 12 tribes.
29:13 VA YEHI CHI SHEMO'A LAVAN ET SHEMA YA'AKOV BEN ACHOTO VA YARATS LIKRA'TO VA YECHABEK LO VA YENASHEK LO VA YEVIY'EHU EL BEITO VA YESAPER LE LAVAN ET KOL HA DEVARIM HA ELEH
וַיְהִי כִשְׁמֹעַ לָבָן אֶת שֵׁמַע יַעֲקֹב בֶּן אֲחֹתוֹ וַיָּרָץ לִקְרָאתוֹ וַיְחַבֶּק לוֹ וַיְנַשֶּׁק לוֹ וַיְבִיאֵהוּ אֶל בֵּיתוֹ וַיְסַפֵּר לְלָבָן אֵת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה
KJ: And it came to pass, when Laban heard the tidings of Jacob his sister's son, that he ran to meet him, and embraced him, and kissed him, and brought him to his house. And he told Laban all these things.
BN: And it came to pass, when Lavan heard the news about Ya'akov his sister's son, that he ran out to meet him, and embraced him, and kissed him, and brought him to his house. And he told Lavan all these things.
VA YARATS: repeating precisely what happened at the arrival of Eli-Ezer in Genesis 24:29.
HA DEVARIM HA ELEH: All what things? In the Eli-Ezer version the full tale of what happened at the well was retold in full; is that what Ya'akov does now? Sadly, the writer forgot to complete the sentence.
From now on we must remember that Lavan, in some primal form, was the moon-god (and quite probably, like Lot, a masculinisation of a female goddess, HA LAVANAH, the white moon connected to Mount Chermon, which is the mountain dividing north-east Kena'an from south-west Padan Aram and the source of the name Lebanon; as Ya'akov was the goat-god connected to the sun-cult. Whenever we hear of Ya'akov "serving" Lavan, we must understand it mythologically and not just literally. As Herakles "served" Eurystheus.
At the narrative level, compare the welcome Lavan gives Ya'akov now with the animosity at their final parting.
29:14 VA YOMER LO LAVAN ACH ATSMI U VESARI ATAH VA YESHEV IMO CHODESH YAMIM
וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ לָבָן אַךְ עַצְמִי וּבְשָׂרִי אָתָּה וַיֵּשֶׁב עִמּוֹ חֹדֶשׁ יָמִים
KJ: And Laban said to him, Surely thou art my bone and my flesh. And he abode with him the space of a month.
BN: And Lavan said to him, "Surely you are my bone and my flesh." And he stayed with him for a full month.
CHODESH YAMIM (חדש ימים): a full month, lunar of course. This is the first time that we have had time calculated by the moon, and not surprising, given that we are in the realm of HA LAVANAH.
Staying with him for a month as a guest; after which he has outstayed his guestly welcome, and needs to move on, or...
29:15 VA YOMER LAVAN LE YA'AKOV, "HA CHI ACHI ATAH, VA AVADETANI CHINAM. HAGIDAH LI MAH MASKURTEYCHA?"
וַיֹּאמֶר לָבָן לְיַעֲקֹב הֲכִי אָחִי אַתָּה וַעֲבַדְתַּנִי חִנָּם הַגִּידָה לִּי מַה מַּשְׂכֻּרְתֶּךָ
KJ: And Laban said unto Jacob, Because thou art my brother, shouldest thou therefore serve me for nought? tell me, what shall thy wages be?
BN: And Lavan said to Ya'akov, "Just because you are my kinsman, does that mean you should work for me for nothing? Tell me, what shall your wages be?"
Even if he hasn't been told, Lavan would surely have guessed by now that Ya'akov must have been kicked out, or run away, because, unlike Eli-Ezer – and remember that Lavan was there and took a central role - he has arrived penniless, and not entouraged by camels, and bearing jewelery to put on a daughter's wrist and nose, despite his father being one of the richest men in Kena'an! The custom of working instead of paying the bride-price still exists in the Arab world today.
29:16: U LE LAVAN SHETEY VANOT SHEM HA GEDOLAH LE'AH VE SHEM HA KETANAH RACHEL
וּלְלָבָן שְׁתֵּי בָנוֹת שֵׁם הַגְּדֹלָה לֵאָה וְשֵׁם הַקְּטַנָּה רָחֵל
KJ: And Laban had two daughters: the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel.
BN: Now Lavan had two daughters. The name of the elder was Le'ah, and the name of the younger was Rachel.
Preparing us for yet another case of the first-born being ousted by the second-born; though here there will be more of a struggle, as the father resists the sacrifice.
LE'AH (לאה): from the root LA'AH (לאה) meaning "to labour" or "be weary"; she is traditionally thought of as being linked to the cow, as Rachel is to the sheep, thus adding a Kayin/Havel dimension to this story too; though the root doesn't actually give this meaning. On this basis it has been suggested that Lavan, the moon-god, who is also depicted taurally, has a daughter for each horn in the tanist manner, Le'ah the waning moon and Rachel the waxing moon. If we go back to the Lot tale and remember that the goddess came in triple form, we can in fact deduce that either, a) Lavan wasn't the father but, in his original female incarnation, the eldest of the three sisters; or b) but less likely, there was a third sister at some stage of the story. Alternately, again picking up the Kayin/Havel parallel, if we are witnessing the transition from Taurus to Aries (click here), Lavan and Le'ah represent the bull and cow, Ya'akov and Rachel the ram and ewe.
Anyone living at that time would have understood that the younger daughter does not get married first. We need to keep this in mind as we read on. At a narrative level, this is about to be a story of the biter bit, and then biting back: Ya'akov who tricked Esav will be tricked by Lavan and then trick him back, literally stealing his sheep – Rachel and the flock.
29:17 VE EYNEY LE'AH RAKOT VE RACHEL HAYETA YEPHAT TO'AR VIY'PHAT MAR'EH
KJ: Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured.
BN: But Le'ah was a sad-eyed lady, where Rachel had a magnificent figure as well as the loveliest of faces.
RAKOT (רכות): means "soft", not "weak"; this is a standard figurative expression for cow's eyes and is playing on the understood root meaning of her name.
This seems to be a very polite way of saying that Le'ah was neither good-looking of face nor attractive of body.
End of third fragment.
29:18 VA YE'EHAV YA'AKOV ET RACHEL VA YOMER E'EVADECHA SHEVA SHANIM BE RACHEL BIT'CHA HA KETANAH
KJ: And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.
BN: And Ya'akov fell head-over-heels in love with Rachel, and he said, "I will work for you seven years for Rachel, your younger daughter."
Perhaps he was unaware of the convention that elder daughters marry first? Or is it again a case of matrilocal versus patrilocal rules? And why did he offer seven years? We might think it was like Muhammad with Aisha, the latter being nine at the time of their betrothal, and therefore an expectation of waiting till she reached puberty before the marriage; but the description of Rachel in verse 17 dismisses that. He had no need to offer any period of time, and if he wanted the girl in exchange for his labour, he could have married her straight away, or within months. So the time-determination has to be significant, and we know that cultic king-priests always served seven years, and in the eighth, in the oldest times, were sacrificed? David served seven years in Chevron, then successive periods of seven years in Yeru-Shala'im, each jubilee ending with his having to fight his way to keep power. Seven is too significant and sacred a number to be chosen randomly. What we are really reading, reduced to mere folk-tale by the Redactor (the equivalent of today's Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty stories), is an account of Ya'akov's coronation as the sacred king of Mount Chermon, servant of the moon-goddess, HA LAVANAH, consort of LE'AH, her priestess; after which he (or quite probably a completely different person who likewise takes the king-name YA'AKOV as the dynastic title) will serve a seven year term with the consort RACHEL.
But there is also the literary level for us to explore, and there this could be read as Lavan tricking him into marrying Le'ah as a just vengeance, eye for eye and tooth for tooth, through the conduit of Lavan, for what he did to Esav.
Note that he specifically states Rachel, and in the next verse Lavan's answer "appears" to consent.
And no apologies for my over-the-top translation, but I wanted to make clear just how deeply he fell for her; and more importantly, that heel-joke, to parallel all the Rachel-ewe jokes in the Yehudit, was irresistible.
29:19 VA YOMER LAVAN TOV, TITI OTAH LACH MI TITI OTAH LE ISH ACHER SHEVA IMADI
KJ: And Laban said, It is better that I give her to thee, than that I should give her to another man: abide with me.
BN: And Lavan said, "It is better that I give her to you, than that I should give her to another man; stay here with me."
SHEVA (שבה): As if the puns are simply irresistible; in this case an aural pun. Sheva = 7 is written with an Ayin (שבע), where "abide with me", which is also said as SHEVA, is written with a Hey (שבה) for its last letter. It is intriguing how limited the vocabulary available was, and therefore how repetitive and formulaic so many of the narrative techniques, and yet at the same time the writer(s) manage to find an enormous amount of verbal play from the letters of the words or their multiple meanings.
29:20 VA YA'AVOD YA'AKOV BE RACHEL SHEVA SHANIM VA YIHEYU VE EYNAV KE YAMIM ACHADIM BE AHAVATO OTAH
KJ: And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her.
BN: So Ya'akov worked seven years for Rachel; and they seemed to him only a few days, because of the love he had for her.
Wonderful story-telling - seven years in a flash. But again, remember, AVAD (עבד) means worship as well as service. As cultic-priest he would have done both, of course.
29:21 VA YOMER YA'AKOV EL LAVAN HAVAH ET ISHTI KI MAL'U YAMAI VE AVO'AH ELEYHA
KJ: And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her.
BN: Then Ya'akov said to Lavan, "Give me my wife, that I may go in to her. I have served my time."
He makes it sound like it was a prison sentence.
29:22 VA YE'ESOPH LAVAN ET KOL ANSHEY HA MAKOM VA YA'AS MISHTEH
KJ: And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast.
BN: And Lavan gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast.
MISHTEH: Culturally interesting how words are formed. The root here is the drink part of the feast, rather than the food part: LISHTOT = "to drink". If it were primarily a meal, and especially one connected to a religious festival, it would probably use the word SE'UDAH (סעודה).
29:23 VA YEHI VA EREV VA YIKACH ET LE'AH VITO VA YAV'E OTAH ELAV VA YAVO ELEYHA
KJ: And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her.
BN: And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Le'ah his daughter and brought her to him; and he went in to her.
Could he not tell that it wasn't Rachel? (Could Yitschak not tell that it wasn't Esav?) Parallels. Always parallels.
29:24: VA YITEN LAVAN LAH ET ZILPAH SHIPHCHATO LE LE'AH VITO SHIPHCHAH
KJ: And Laban gave unto his daughter Leah Zilpah his maid for an handmaid.
BN: And Lavan gave Zilpah his handmaid to his daughter Le'ah for a handmaid.
ZILPAH (זלפה): literally means "a dropping"; however this is probably a corruption of ZILAPH (זלעף), i.e. the same root with an Ayin (ע) third letter, making a non-Yehudit four letter root, probably connected to ZA'APH (זעף), both of which have the same meaning = "to be hot"; ZALAPHAH (זלעפה) is a violent heat, especially of the wind, which is to say the wind that is now called the CHAMSIN, or CHAMESHIM (חמשים) = the fifty day wind that blows out of the Arabian desert. On the other hand, in a tale that is mythologically connected to the sheep and the cows...
Lavan gives Zilpah to Le'ah, not to Ya'akov. When Le'ah later gives her to Ya'akov, note the similarities with Sarah and Hagar. Once again (Genesis 16:1 was the previous example), this is in line with the Hammurabic Law (see especially the laws from 137 onwards).
The presence of the verse here is odd though. Ya'akov has just got into bed with the wrong woman, and that narrative will continue a verse on; suddenly this is interjected.
29:25 VA YEHI VA BOKER VE HINEH HI LE'AH VA YOMER EL LAVAN MAH ZOT ASIYTA LI HA LO BE RACHEL AVADETI IMACH VE LAMAH RIMIYTANI
KJ: And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me.
BN: And it came to pass in the morning that, behold, it was Le'ah. And he said to Lavan, "What is this that you have done to me? Did I not work for you for Rachel? Why have you tricked me?"
The duper duped - again this is only really credible in pantomime or Hollywood B-movie. Something out of Chaucer or Boccaccio perhaps. And of course, as literature, it parallels the duping of Yitschak. One has to imagine (as delicately as possible, of course, given the circumstances) Ya'akov lying there, caressing his young wife, in darkness which is a form of blindness, thinking "the voice, the voice, is it really Rachel's, it sounds so much like Le'ah's...") just as his own father doubted and questioned him. Not that, in Ya'akov's case, he thought to light a candle, or even ask; or maybe he did, but being a normal male...
29:26 VA YOMER LAVAN LO YE'ASEH CHEN BIM'KOMEYNU LATET HA TSE'IYRAH LIPHNEY HA BECHIYRAH
KJ: And Laban said, It must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn.
BN: And Lavan said, "It isn't done that way here, to give the younger away before the first-born.
This is tremendously important, because it reflects again on the primo-ultimo-geniture conflict that runs through the entire Tanach. If what Lavan says is true, then we must ask: at what point did it change, in the tribe of Nachor anyway? Since Kayin and Havel already reflect ultimogeniture.
Note also the words, which have significance elsewhere, and their use here helps us understand them there. HA TSE'IRAH...HA BECHIRAH, reminding us of Tso'ar in the Lot story, and the word games with BACHUR, LIVCHOR etc in the Ya'akov/Esav tale.
29:27 MAL'E SHEVU'A ZOT VE NITNAH LECHA GAM ET ZOT BA AVODAH ASHER TA'AVOD IMADI OD SHEVA SHANIM ACHEROT
KJ: Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years.
BN: "Complete the week with this one, and we will give you the other as well for the work that you are going to do for me over the next seven years."
SHEVU'A ZOT (שבע זאת): sociologically interesting, that there should be a whole week of nuptials in order to consummate the marriage; cf Judges 14:12. The word links to "oath" and to the well at Be'er Sheva, and of course to the number seven again; he has worked seven years to win her according to Lavan's "oath" (Shavu'a - שבוע), and now he will spend a week fulfilling his honeymoon duties.
However I do wonder if the Shavu'a was not in fact the seven year kingship as well as, or rather than, the seven day marriage celebrations. If so, Lavan is saying "serve seven years with Le'ah and then serve a second seven years with Rachel". What is not clear, from this verse or afterwards is: does he sign a contract for Rachel and marry her at once, or does he wait a further seven years for her? Jewish tradition tends to view it as the latter; the text of this verse seems to indicate the former.
Polygamy is expressly outlawed in Leviticus 18:18. On the other hand Jeremiah 3:6 ff and Ezekiel 23:1 ff both speak metaphorically of Elohim's marriage to the sisters Yisra-El and Yehudah, anthropomorphised as Aholah and Aholivah; and all the patriarchs had several wives. The Sinai laws explicitly forbid the marrying of two sisters – which would make Ya'akov culpable here, as Av-Raham was on the kashrut laws elsewhere. For the revival of Concubinage see Jewish Chronicle 12th July 1996.
More interesting even than this though is Deuteronomy 21:15/17, which states: "If a man has two wives, the one loved and the other hated, and they bear him children, both the loved and the hated; and if the first-born son be hers that is hated, then it shall be that in the day that he gives his inheritance he may not make the son of the beloved the first-born, but he shall acknowledge the first-born, the son of the hated, by giving him a double portion." Presumably this could have been applied by Av-Raham to Yishma-El too. And of course Yoseph, not first-born in one sense, though first-born to Rachel, received a double-portion through his two sons. And think of Bin-Yamin.
Trying to rediscover the mythological source behind this pretty little romantic tale, the original Ya'akov will not have been quite so displeased. The seven days spent in the "Tent of Sarah" were part of the May-King/May-Queen rituals, and not a familial marriage at all; they established the Bough-Guardian (to use Frazer's terminology) – the Davidic role as priest-king, ruler of the shrine, with the high priestess serving as oracle. Rather than being sacrificed in the eighth year (circumcision on the eighth day comes from the same mythological root), the moon goddess (Ha Lavanah/Lavan) has chosen him for her consort a second time, and Rachel will be his next May-Queen.
What is missing, as noted earlier, is the third sister, for the third seven-year term that we know he will serve; but wait till we get there to see that in full. And keep in mind that Lavan gave Zilpah to Le'ah as a "handmaid", who will become Ya'akov's third wife; with Bilhah to follow, making in theory a fourth seven year term, just like King David's.
29:28 VA YA'AS YA'AKOV KEN VA YEMAL'E SHEVU'A ZOT VA YITEN LO ET RACHEL BITO LO LE ISHAH
KJ: And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also.
BN: So Ya'akov did so, fulfilling her week; and he gave him Rachel his daughter as a wife.
Again, does this mean that he gets the wife before working the seven years, and not afterwards? If so, is it a consequence of Lavan having come to trust him; a foolishness if true, as we will see later. In this verse he certainly appears to receive his bride now; tradition maintains that he only receives her after completing the 2nd period of 7 years and the phrasing of Lavan's promise in verse 27 also implies this. However the custom of the sacred-kingship was to incipit the reign with the ritual marriage and he has already served seven years for Le'ah.
29:29 VA YITEN LAVAN LE RACHEL BITO ET BILHAH SHIPHCHATO LAH LE SHIPHCHAH
KJ: And Laban gave to Rachel his daughter Bilhah his handmaid to be her maid.
BN: And Lavan gave Bilhah his handmaid to Rachel his daughter, to be her handmaid.
BILHAH: possibly from the root BALHAH = "to be modest, feeble, timid"; possibly BALAH = "to fear, be terrified"; possibly BALAH = "to fall, waste away". There was also a town in Shim'on (Simeon) called BALAH.
As with Zilpah, the maid is Rachel's, not yet Jacob's; in the same way that Hagar was Sarah's, until she gave her to Av-Raham. The giving of the handmaid appears to be connected to the marriage, as though it were an expectation that the bride, being the daughter of the sheikh, comes with a personal servant. But if this was originally a goddess tale, then the Shipchah would have been her priestess. As with all the pilgashim, the speed at which Rachel then gives Bilhah to Ya'akov as a concubiine, almost coincidental with the marriage, seems to imply a priestess status. Not allowed to bear children, was she required to be celibate as well? Because if so, this too affects the story - but see the mandrakes incident later.
29:30 VA YAVO GAM EL RACHEL VA YE'EHAV GAM ET RACHEL MI LE'AH VA YA'AVOD IMO OD SHEVA SHANIM ACHEROT
KJ: And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
BN: And he went in to Rachel too, and he loved Rachel more than Le'ah, and worked for him for seven more years.
29:17 VE EYNEY LE'AH RAKOT VE RACHEL HAYETA YEPHAT TO'AR VIY'PHAT MAR'EH
וְעֵינֵי לֵאָה רַכּוֹת וְרָחֵל הָיְתָה יְפַת תֹּאַר וִיפַת מַרְאֶה
KJ: Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured.
BN: But Le'ah was a sad-eyed lady, where Rachel had a magnificent figure as well as the loveliest of faces.
RAKOT (רכות): means "soft", not "weak"; this is a standard figurative expression for cow's eyes and is playing on the understood root meaning of her name.
This seems to be a very polite way of saying that Le'ah was neither good-looking of face nor attractive of body.
End of third fragment.
29:18 VA YE'EHAV YA'AKOV ET RACHEL VA YOMER E'EVADECHA SHEVA SHANIM BE RACHEL BIT'CHA HA KETANAH
וַיֶּאֱהַב יַעֲקֹב אֶת רָחֵל וַיֹּאמֶר אֶעֱבָדְךָ שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים בְּרָחֵל בִּתְּךָ הַקְּטַנָּה
KJ: And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.
BN: And Ya'akov fell head-over-heels in love with Rachel, and he said, "I will work for you seven years for Rachel, your younger daughter."
Perhaps he was unaware of the convention that elder daughters marry first? Or is it again a case of matrilocal versus patrilocal rules? And why did he offer seven years? We might think it was like Muhammad with Aisha, the latter being nine at the time of their betrothal, and therefore an expectation of waiting till she reached puberty before the marriage; but the description of Rachel in verse 17 dismisses that. He had no need to offer any period of time, and if he wanted the girl in exchange for his labour, he could have married her straight away, or within months. So the time-determination has to be significant, and we know that cultic king-priests always served seven years, and in the eighth, in the oldest times, were sacrificed? David served seven years in Chevron, then successive periods of seven years in Yeru-Shala'im, each jubilee ending with his having to fight his way to keep power. Seven is too significant and sacred a number to be chosen randomly. What we are really reading, reduced to mere folk-tale by the Redactor (the equivalent of today's Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty stories), is an account of Ya'akov's coronation as the sacred king of Mount Chermon, servant of the moon-goddess, HA LAVANAH, consort of LE'AH, her priestess; after which he (or quite probably a completely different person who likewise takes the king-name YA'AKOV as the dynastic title) will serve a seven year term with the consort RACHEL.
But there is also the literary level for us to explore, and there this could be read as Lavan tricking him into marrying Le'ah as a just vengeance, eye for eye and tooth for tooth, through the conduit of Lavan, for what he did to Esav.
Note that he specifically states Rachel, and in the next verse Lavan's answer "appears" to consent.
And no apologies for my over-the-top translation, but I wanted to make clear just how deeply he fell for her; and more importantly, that heel-joke, to parallel all the Rachel-ewe jokes in the Yehudit, was irresistible.
29:19 VA YOMER LAVAN TOV, TITI OTAH LACH MI TITI OTAH LE ISH ACHER SHEVA IMADI
וַיֹּאמֶר לָבָן טוֹב תִּתִּי אֹתָהּ לָךְ מִתִּתִּי אֹתָהּ לְאִישׁ אַחֵר שְׁבָה עִמָּדִי
KJ: And Laban said, It is better that I give her to thee, than that I should give her to another man: abide with me.
BN: And Lavan said, "It is better that I give her to you, than that I should give her to another man; stay here with me."
SHEVA (שבה): As if the puns are simply irresistible; in this case an aural pun. Sheva = 7 is written with an Ayin (שבע), where "abide with me", which is also said as SHEVA, is written with a Hey (שבה) for its last letter. It is intriguing how limited the vocabulary available was, and therefore how repetitive and formulaic so many of the narrative techniques, and yet at the same time the writer(s) manage to find an enormous amount of verbal play from the letters of the words or their multiple meanings.
29:20 VA YA'AVOD YA'AKOV BE RACHEL SHEVA SHANIM VA YIHEYU VE EYNAV KE YAMIM ACHADIM BE AHAVATO OTAH
וַיַּעֲבֹד יַעֲקֹב בְּרָחֵל שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים וַיִּהְיוּ בְעֵינָיו כְּיָמִים אֲחָדִים בְּאַהֲבָתוֹ אֹתָהּ
KJ: And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her.
BN: So Ya'akov worked seven years for Rachel; and they seemed to him only a few days, because of the love he had for her.
Wonderful story-telling - seven years in a flash. But again, remember, AVAD (עבד) means worship as well as service. As cultic-priest he would have done both, of course.
29:21 VA YOMER YA'AKOV EL LAVAN HAVAH ET ISHTI KI MAL'U YAMAI VE AVO'AH ELEYHA
וַיֹּאמֶר יַעֲקֹב אֶל לָבָן הָבָה אֶת אִשְׁתִּי כִּי מָלְאוּ יָמָי וְאָבוֹאָה אֵלֶיהָ
KJ: And Jacob said unto Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in unto her.
BN: Then Ya'akov said to Lavan, "Give me my wife, that I may go in to her. I have served my time."
He makes it sound like it was a prison sentence.
29:22 VA YE'ESOPH LAVAN ET KOL ANSHEY HA MAKOM VA YA'AS MISHTEH
וַיֶּאֱסֹף לָבָן אֶת כָּל אַנְשֵׁי הַמָּקוֹם וַיַּעַשׂ מִשְׁתֶּה
KJ: And Laban gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast.
BN: And Lavan gathered together all the men of the place, and made a feast.
MISHTEH: Culturally interesting how words are formed. The root here is the drink part of the feast, rather than the food part: LISHTOT = "to drink". If it were primarily a meal, and especially one connected to a religious festival, it would probably use the word SE'UDAH (סעודה).
29:23 VA YEHI VA EREV VA YIKACH ET LE'AH VITO VA YAV'E OTAH ELAV VA YAVO ELEYHA
וַיְהִי בָעֶרֶב וַיִּקַּח אֶת לֵאָה בִתּוֹ וַיָּבֵא אֹתָהּ אֵלָיו וַיָּבֹא אֵלֶיהָ
KJ: And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him; and he went in unto her.
BN: And it came to pass in the evening, that he took Le'ah his daughter and brought her to him; and he went in to her.
Could he not tell that it wasn't Rachel? (Could Yitschak not tell that it wasn't Esav?) Parallels. Always parallels.
29:24: VA YITEN LAVAN LAH ET ZILPAH SHIPHCHATO LE LE'AH VITO SHIPHCHAH
וַיִּתֵּן לָבָן לָהּ אֶת זִלְפָּה שִׁפְחָתוֹ לְלֵאָה בִתּוֹ שִׁפְחָה
KJ: And Laban gave unto his daughter Leah Zilpah his maid for an handmaid.
BN: And Lavan gave Zilpah his handmaid to his daughter Le'ah for a handmaid.
ZILPAH (זלפה): literally means "a dropping"; however this is probably a corruption of ZILAPH (זלעף), i.e. the same root with an Ayin (ע) third letter, making a non-Yehudit four letter root, probably connected to ZA'APH (זעף), both of which have the same meaning = "to be hot"; ZALAPHAH (זלעפה) is a violent heat, especially of the wind, which is to say the wind that is now called the CHAMSIN, or CHAMESHIM (חמשים) = the fifty day wind that blows out of the Arabian desert. On the other hand, in a tale that is mythologically connected to the sheep and the cows...
Lavan gives Zilpah to Le'ah, not to Ya'akov. When Le'ah later gives her to Ya'akov, note the similarities with Sarah and Hagar. Once again (Genesis 16:1 was the previous example), this is in line with the Hammurabic Law (see especially the laws from 137 onwards).
The presence of the verse here is odd though. Ya'akov has just got into bed with the wrong woman, and that narrative will continue a verse on; suddenly this is interjected.
29:25 VA YEHI VA BOKER VE HINEH HI LE'AH VA YOMER EL LAVAN MAH ZOT ASIYTA LI HA LO BE RACHEL AVADETI IMACH VE LAMAH RIMIYTANI
וַיְהִי בַבֹּקֶר וְהִנֵּה הִוא לֵאָה וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל לָבָן מַה זֹּאת עָשִׂיתָ לִּי הֲלֹא בְרָחֵל עָבַדְתִּי עִמָּךְ וְלָמָּה רִמִּיתָנִי
KJ: And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me.
BN: And it came to pass in the morning that, behold, it was Le'ah. And he said to Lavan, "What is this that you have done to me? Did I not work for you for Rachel? Why have you tricked me?"
The duper duped - again this is only really credible in pantomime or Hollywood B-movie. Something out of Chaucer or Boccaccio perhaps. And of course, as literature, it parallels the duping of Yitschak. One has to imagine (as delicately as possible, of course, given the circumstances) Ya'akov lying there, caressing his young wife, in darkness which is a form of blindness, thinking "the voice, the voice, is it really Rachel's, it sounds so much like Le'ah's...") just as his own father doubted and questioned him. Not that, in Ya'akov's case, he thought to light a candle, or even ask; or maybe he did, but being a normal male...
29:26 VA YOMER LAVAN LO YE'ASEH CHEN BIM'KOMEYNU LATET HA TSE'IYRAH LIPHNEY HA BECHIYRAH
וַיֹּאמֶר לָבָן לֹא יֵעָשֶׂה כֵן בִּמְקוֹמֵנוּ לָתֵת הַצְּעִירָה לִפְנֵי הַבְּכִירָה
KJ: And Laban said, It must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn.
BN: And Lavan said, "It isn't done that way here, to give the younger away before the first-born.
This is tremendously important, because it reflects again on the primo-ultimo-geniture conflict that runs through the entire Tanach. If what Lavan says is true, then we must ask: at what point did it change, in the tribe of Nachor anyway? Since Kayin and Havel already reflect ultimogeniture.
Note also the words, which have significance elsewhere, and their use here helps us understand them there. HA TSE'IRAH...HA BECHIRAH, reminding us of Tso'ar in the Lot story, and the word games with BACHUR, LIVCHOR etc in the Ya'akov/Esav tale.
29:27 MAL'E SHEVU'A ZOT VE NITNAH LECHA GAM ET ZOT BA AVODAH ASHER TA'AVOD IMADI OD SHEVA SHANIM ACHEROT
מַלֵּא שְׁבֻעַ זֹאת וְנִתְּנָה לְךָ גַּם אֶת זֹאת בַּעֲבֹדָה אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲבֹד עִמָּדִי עוֹד שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים אֲחֵרוֹת
KJ: Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years.
BN: "Complete the week with this one, and we will give you the other as well for the work that you are going to do for me over the next seven years."
SHEVU'A ZOT (שבע זאת): sociologically interesting, that there should be a whole week of nuptials in order to consummate the marriage; cf Judges 14:12. The word links to "oath" and to the well at Be'er Sheva, and of course to the number seven again; he has worked seven years to win her according to Lavan's "oath" (Shavu'a - שבוע), and now he will spend a week fulfilling his honeymoon duties.
However I do wonder if the Shavu'a was not in fact the seven year kingship as well as, or rather than, the seven day marriage celebrations. If so, Lavan is saying "serve seven years with Le'ah and then serve a second seven years with Rachel". What is not clear, from this verse or afterwards is: does he sign a contract for Rachel and marry her at once, or does he wait a further seven years for her? Jewish tradition tends to view it as the latter; the text of this verse seems to indicate the former.
Polygamy is expressly outlawed in Leviticus 18:18. On the other hand Jeremiah 3:6 ff and Ezekiel 23:1 ff both speak metaphorically of Elohim's marriage to the sisters Yisra-El and Yehudah, anthropomorphised as Aholah and Aholivah; and all the patriarchs had several wives. The Sinai laws explicitly forbid the marrying of two sisters – which would make Ya'akov culpable here, as Av-Raham was on the kashrut laws elsewhere. For the revival of Concubinage see Jewish Chronicle 12th July 1996.
More interesting even than this though is Deuteronomy 21:15/17, which states: "If a man has two wives, the one loved and the other hated, and they bear him children, both the loved and the hated; and if the first-born son be hers that is hated, then it shall be that in the day that he gives his inheritance he may not make the son of the beloved the first-born, but he shall acknowledge the first-born, the son of the hated, by giving him a double portion." Presumably this could have been applied by Av-Raham to Yishma-El too. And of course Yoseph, not first-born in one sense, though first-born to Rachel, received a double-portion through his two sons. And think of Bin-Yamin.
Trying to rediscover the mythological source behind this pretty little romantic tale, the original Ya'akov will not have been quite so displeased. The seven days spent in the "Tent of Sarah" were part of the May-King/May-Queen rituals, and not a familial marriage at all; they established the Bough-Guardian (to use Frazer's terminology) – the Davidic role as priest-king, ruler of the shrine, with the high priestess serving as oracle. Rather than being sacrificed in the eighth year (circumcision on the eighth day comes from the same mythological root), the moon goddess (Ha Lavanah/Lavan) has chosen him for her consort a second time, and Rachel will be his next May-Queen.
What is missing, as noted earlier, is the third sister, for the third seven-year term that we know he will serve; but wait till we get there to see that in full. And keep in mind that Lavan gave Zilpah to Le'ah as a "handmaid", who will become Ya'akov's third wife; with Bilhah to follow, making in theory a fourth seven year term, just like King David's.
29:28 VA YA'AS YA'AKOV KEN VA YEMAL'E SHEVU'A ZOT VA YITEN LO ET RACHEL BITO LO LE ISHAH
וַיַּעַשׂ יַעֲקֹב כֵּן וַיְמַלֵּא שְׁבֻעַ זֹאת וַיִּתֶּן לוֹ אֶת רָחֵל בִּתּוֹ לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה
KJ: And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also.
BN: So Ya'akov did so, fulfilling her week; and he gave him Rachel his daughter as a wife.
Again, does this mean that he gets the wife before working the seven years, and not afterwards? If so, is it a consequence of Lavan having come to trust him; a foolishness if true, as we will see later. In this verse he certainly appears to receive his bride now; tradition maintains that he only receives her after completing the 2nd period of 7 years and the phrasing of Lavan's promise in verse 27 also implies this. However the custom of the sacred-kingship was to incipit the reign with the ritual marriage and he has already served seven years for Le'ah.
29:29 VA YITEN LAVAN LE RACHEL BITO ET BILHAH SHIPHCHATO LAH LE SHIPHCHAH
וַיִּתֵּן לָבָן לְרָחֵל בִּתּוֹ אֶת בִּלְהָה שִׁפְחָתוֹ לָהּ לְשִׁפְחָה
KJ: And Laban gave to Rachel his daughter Bilhah his handmaid to be her maid.
BN: And Lavan gave Bilhah his handmaid to Rachel his daughter, to be her handmaid.
BILHAH: possibly from the root BALHAH = "to be modest, feeble, timid"; possibly BALAH = "to fear, be terrified"; possibly BALAH = "to fall, waste away". There was also a town in Shim'on (Simeon) called BALAH.
As with Zilpah, the maid is Rachel's, not yet Jacob's; in the same way that Hagar was Sarah's, until she gave her to Av-Raham. The giving of the handmaid appears to be connected to the marriage, as though it were an expectation that the bride, being the daughter of the sheikh, comes with a personal servant. But if this was originally a goddess tale, then the Shipchah would have been her priestess. As with all the pilgashim, the speed at which Rachel then gives Bilhah to Ya'akov as a concubiine, almost coincidental with the marriage, seems to imply a priestess status. Not allowed to bear children, was she required to be celibate as well? Because if so, this too affects the story - but see the mandrakes incident later.
29:30 VA YAVO GAM EL RACHEL VA YE'EHAV GAM ET RACHEL MI LE'AH VA YA'AVOD IMO OD SHEVA SHANIM ACHEROT
וַיָּבֹא גַּם אֶל רָחֵל וַיֶּאֱהַב גַּם אֶת רָחֵל מִלֵּאָה וַיַּעֲבֹד עִמּוֹ עוֹד שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים אֲחֵרוֹת
KJ: And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
BN: And he went in to Rachel too, and he loved Rachel more than Le'ah, and worked for him for seven more years.
No, there is no question that he has Rachel for his wife now, before the 7 years, not at the end; the word-order of the verse confirms it: he goes in to her, then he serves for seven years. Why then is Jewish tradition so certain that he had to wait a second seven years for her?
Once again, see Deuteronomy 21:15/17 for the laws on this.
29:31 VA YAR YHVH KI SENU'AH LE'AH VA YIPHTACH ET RACHMAH VE RACHEL AKRAH
KJ: And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.
BN: And YHVH saw that Le'ah was hated, and he opened her womb; but Rachel was barren.
AKRAH (עכרה): Why this obsessive feature of the patriarchal wives that they are all apparently barren but later produce the favoured children? Hints of divine interference perhaps? Immaculate conception? Miracle births? Or is it all a necessary part of the fertility cult; after all, if the woman were not apparently barren, then she could not attribute her pregnancy to the wonder and power of the goddess, and the child would therefore be an ordinary and not a special child.
But in this case something else appears to be happening. Remember that these tales were created to answer questions about the workings of the Cosmos, but without the lexicon of Physics, Chemistry and Biology to do so. So they made up tales. What if the question now were: why do the constellations of the heavens move around the way they do, seeming to make a very slow circle, so that the age of Taurus is even now passing into the age of Aries, the bull being supplanted by the ram? Or the cow by the ewe in this case. Ya'akov goes into Le'ah, and in each of the next six years she will produce a son, either directly, through her own womb, or through her "handmaid"; but Rachel's time has not yet come, and will not until he completes the seven years. Then she will supplant her elder sister, and her sons, Yoseph and Ben-Oni (Bin-Yamin), will become the predominant tribes - Yoseph's son Ephrayim the northern kingdom, Bin-Yamin's main city, Yeru-Shala'im, the nation's capital.
Or pehaps that was not the question, but rather it was: why does the moon start each month as a crescent, facing one direction, grow full, and then shrink to a crescent facing the other direction - and then vanish altogether for three days before starting the whole cycle over again? Out of this come the three daughters of al-Lah, the three sisters of so many fairy tales: the young virgin, who is Rachel here, the Madonna, who will be Le'ah with these several sons, and the old crone, post-menopausal, who may be the original of Lavan, or simply not present because not relevant on this occasion.
And as to that last clause in this verse, see the Nazirite laws in Numbers 6, for of course all these princely priests are sacred children.
SENU'AH (שנואה): if she was hated, why did he open her womb? Whose side is the god on in this story? This sentence needs a lot of thinking about. It seems to imply childbirth as a reward for being hated, barrenness a punishment for being loved; yet remember that LE'AH means "to labour", and think back to the Eden ordinances, where this is Chavah's punishment.
29:32: VA TAHAR LE'AH VA TELED BEN VA TIKRA SHEMO RE'U-VEN KI AMRAH KI RA'AH YHVH BE ANYIY KI ATAH YE'EHAVANI ISHI
KJ: And Leah conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Reuben: for she said, Surely the LORD hath looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me.
BN: And Le'ah conceived and bore a son, and she named him name Re'u-Ven, for she said, "Because YHVH has seen how much I have suffered, and maybe now my husband will love me."
I have commented several times previously that the mothers sometimes name the child, but the fathers do it on other occasions, and sometimes both, so the child gets two names. Here it is the mother, and it appear to be a necessity of the story-teller rather than evidence for the social anthropologist.
More bizarre explanations. American "Indians" are supposed to have named their children after the first thing seen after birth, whence Sitting Bull or Red Cloud. Generally people don't name their children after their psychological states or their aspirations, or we would have lots of little girls named Princess and Neurotic, and lots of little boys named Baseball and Beer. What we can suggest is that Le'ah offered up a prayer of thanks when the child was born, thanking YHVH for giving her a son, and expressing the naive hope that, now that he was a father, Ya'akov might look more kindly upon the mother. As a blessing, it works; as a name, not at all. Five more children will be mothered by her, so he can't have hated her quite that much.
RE'U-VEN (ראובן): this one in particular is absurd. It is important to remember throughout the whole of what follows that it is an artificial attempt to give the twelve tribes a shared ancestry as children of Ya'akov; and that this is overlaid upon whatever the original story may have been.
Le'ah's aetiology is not "behold a son", as in Re'u-Ven (ראובן); but Re'u-Avoni (אבוני) = "seen my affliction". However, there is a problem here, because "affliction" in Yehudit is spelled with an Ayin (ע), not an Aleph (א) - from the root Aven/עבן. See notes on RE'UMAH earlier. The use of RA'AH (ראה) makes clear that the verb "to look" or "behold" is intended. We can therefore treat the explanation as apocryphal, and wonder why it was added. The answer is usually, to conceal a paganism. So what paganism is here concealed? Most likely this is simply the exclamation of the midwife: "Look, it's a boy", which of course ought to be the fact that turns Ya'akov towards Le'ah, because the birth of a son is everything... or would be, in a world of primogeniture, and that, yet again, is the critical difference between the Lavan and the Yitschak sides of the family. Re'u-Ven too will be supplanted, though his place in the Yoseph story, and his later involvement with Bilhah, will demonstrate some significant differences between Re'u-Ven as supplanted firstborn and the others whom we encounter.
29:33 VA TAHAR OD VA TELED BEN VA TOMER KI SHAMA YHVH KI SENU'AH ANOCHI VA YITEN LI GAM ET ZE VA TIKRA SHEMO SHIM'ON
KJ: And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Because the LORD hath heard that I was hated, he hath therefore given me this son also: and she called his name Simeon.
BN: And she conceived again, and bore a son, and said, "Because YHVH has heard how much I am hated, he has therefore given me this son as well." And she called his name Shim'on.
It would have made more sense, given the logic of her hate-womb link, for Shim'on to have come first; but again the explanation is ludicrous. If Ya'akov hates her that much, why does he keep sleeping with her and getting her pregnant - there are four more sons yet to come? Can we take SENU'AH (שנואה) to mean something other than "hatred"? And in fact there is nothing in the text to suggest that it is Ya'akov's hatred that YHVH has heard. Shim'on is rooted in Shema, "to hear", but that is actually as far as it goes.
Thinking this text through a modern lens, what kind of psychological damage is a mother doing to a child when she names her child "because your father hates me"?
29:34 VA TAHAR OD VA TELED BEN VA TOMER ATAH HA PA'AM YILAVEH IYSHI ELAI KI YALADETI LO SHELOSHAH VANIM AL KEN KARA SHEMO LEVI
KJ: And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Now this time will my husband be joined unto me, because I have born him three sons: therefore was his name called Levi.
BN: And she conceived again, and bore a son, and said, "Surely this time will my husband will feel some kind of a connection with me, given that I have borne him three sons." Therefore she named him Levi.
We are told that her husband hates her, and yet she appears to fall pregnant annually. This hatred does not convince. What point is the Redactor trying to drive home? The law of the hated wife in its relevance to the predominance of the surviving tribes of Yehudah and Bin-Yamin? Or is it really as she perceives it, that Ya'akov uses her as a convenience, the way he might a prostitute, because he can?
LEVI (לוי): for an explanation of the name Levi, go to the notes in the Dictionary of Names.
29:35:VA TAHAR OD VA TELED BEN VA TOMER HA PA'AM ODEH ET YHVH AL KEN KARAH SHEMO YEHUDAH VA TA'AMOD MI LEDET
KJ: And she conceived again, and bare a son: and she said, Now will I praise the LORD: therefore she called his name Judah; and left bearing.
BN: And she conceived again, and bore a son; and she said, "This time I will praise YHVH." And so she named him Yehudah; and she stopped having children.
HA PA'AM ODEH ET YHVH: Implying that she had not previously; whereas we know she did when Re'u-Ven was born. Though there is also some question whether it would have been YHVH anyway that Le'ah praised.
YEHUDAH (יהודה): for an explanation of the name Yehudah, go to the notes in the Dictionary of Names.
TA'AMOD MI LEDET (ותעמד מלדת): strange phrase, having more to do with cows too old for breeding than with menopausal women; and of course Le'ah means cow (though some say it means gazelle).
And anyway she does not cease breeding, for there are yet two more sons to follow, as well as DINAH. So this verse is nonsense, and helps us confirm that the attached meanings are apocryphal.
End of chapter 29
Once again, see Deuteronomy 21:15/17 for the laws on this.
29:31 VA YAR YHVH KI SENU'AH LE'AH VA YIPHTACH ET RACHMAH VE RACHEL AKRAH
וַיַּרְא יְהוָה כִּי שְׂנוּאָה לֵאָה וַיִּפְתַּח אֶת רַחְמָהּ וְרָחֵל עֲקָרָה
KJ: And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.
BN: And YHVH saw that Le'ah was hated, and he opened her womb; but Rachel was barren.
AKRAH (עכרה): Why this obsessive feature of the patriarchal wives that they are all apparently barren but later produce the favoured children? Hints of divine interference perhaps? Immaculate conception? Miracle births? Or is it all a necessary part of the fertility cult; after all, if the woman were not apparently barren, then she could not attribute her pregnancy to the wonder and power of the goddess, and the child would therefore be an ordinary and not a special child.
But in this case something else appears to be happening. Remember that these tales were created to answer questions about the workings of the Cosmos, but without the lexicon of Physics, Chemistry and Biology to do so. So they made up tales. What if the question now were: why do the constellations of the heavens move around the way they do, seeming to make a very slow circle, so that the age of Taurus is even now passing into the age of Aries, the bull being supplanted by the ram? Or the cow by the ewe in this case. Ya'akov goes into Le'ah, and in each of the next six years she will produce a son, either directly, through her own womb, or through her "handmaid"; but Rachel's time has not yet come, and will not until he completes the seven years. Then she will supplant her elder sister, and her sons, Yoseph and Ben-Oni (Bin-Yamin), will become the predominant tribes - Yoseph's son Ephrayim the northern kingdom, Bin-Yamin's main city, Yeru-Shala'im, the nation's capital.
Or pehaps that was not the question, but rather it was: why does the moon start each month as a crescent, facing one direction, grow full, and then shrink to a crescent facing the other direction - and then vanish altogether for three days before starting the whole cycle over again? Out of this come the three daughters of al-Lah, the three sisters of so many fairy tales: the young virgin, who is Rachel here, the Madonna, who will be Le'ah with these several sons, and the old crone, post-menopausal, who may be the original of Lavan, or simply not present because not relevant on this occasion.
And as to that last clause in this verse, see the Nazirite laws in Numbers 6, for of course all these princely priests are sacred children.
SENU'AH (שנואה): if she was hated, why did he open her womb? Whose side is the god on in this story? This sentence needs a lot of thinking about. It seems to imply childbirth as a reward for being hated, barrenness a punishment for being loved; yet remember that LE'AH means "to labour", and think back to the Eden ordinances, where this is Chavah's punishment.
29:32: VA TAHAR LE'AH VA TELED BEN VA TIKRA SHEMO RE'U-VEN KI AMRAH KI RA'AH YHVH BE ANYIY KI ATAH YE'EHAVANI ISHI
וַתַּהַר לֵאָה וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן וַתִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ רְאוּבֵן כִּי אָמְרָה כִּי רָאָה יְהוָה בְּעָנְיִי כִּי עַתָּה יֶאֱהָבַנִי אִישִׁי
KJ: And Leah conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Reuben: for she said, Surely the LORD hath looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me.
BN: And Le'ah conceived and bore a son, and she named him name Re'u-Ven, for she said, "Because YHVH has seen how much I have suffered, and maybe now my husband will love me."
I have commented several times previously that the mothers sometimes name the child, but the fathers do it on other occasions, and sometimes both, so the child gets two names. Here it is the mother, and it appear to be a necessity of the story-teller rather than evidence for the social anthropologist.
More bizarre explanations. American "Indians" are supposed to have named their children after the first thing seen after birth, whence Sitting Bull or Red Cloud. Generally people don't name their children after their psychological states or their aspirations, or we would have lots of little girls named Princess and Neurotic, and lots of little boys named Baseball and Beer. What we can suggest is that Le'ah offered up a prayer of thanks when the child was born, thanking YHVH for giving her a son, and expressing the naive hope that, now that he was a father, Ya'akov might look more kindly upon the mother. As a blessing, it works; as a name, not at all. Five more children will be mothered by her, so he can't have hated her quite that much.
RE'U-VEN (ראובן): this one in particular is absurd. It is important to remember throughout the whole of what follows that it is an artificial attempt to give the twelve tribes a shared ancestry as children of Ya'akov; and that this is overlaid upon whatever the original story may have been.
Le'ah's aetiology is not "behold a son", as in Re'u-Ven (ראובן); but Re'u-Avoni (אבוני) = "seen my affliction". However, there is a problem here, because "affliction" in Yehudit is spelled with an Ayin (ע), not an Aleph (א) - from the root Aven/עבן. See notes on RE'UMAH earlier. The use of RA'AH (ראה) makes clear that the verb "to look" or "behold" is intended. We can therefore treat the explanation as apocryphal, and wonder why it was added. The answer is usually, to conceal a paganism. So what paganism is here concealed? Most likely this is simply the exclamation of the midwife: "Look, it's a boy", which of course ought to be the fact that turns Ya'akov towards Le'ah, because the birth of a son is everything... or would be, in a world of primogeniture, and that, yet again, is the critical difference between the Lavan and the Yitschak sides of the family. Re'u-Ven too will be supplanted, though his place in the Yoseph story, and his later involvement with Bilhah, will demonstrate some significant differences between Re'u-Ven as supplanted firstborn and the others whom we encounter.
29:33 VA TAHAR OD VA TELED BEN VA TOMER KI SHAMA YHVH KI SENU'AH ANOCHI VA YITEN LI GAM ET ZE VA TIKRA SHEMO SHIM'ON
וַתַּהַר עוֹד וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן וַתֹּאמֶר כִּי שָׁמַע יְהוָה כִּי שְׂנוּאָה אָנֹכִי וַיִּתֶּן לִי גַּם אֶת זֶה וַתִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ שִׁמְעוֹן
KJ: And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Because the LORD hath heard that I was hated, he hath therefore given me this son also: and she called his name Simeon.
BN: And she conceived again, and bore a son, and said, "Because YHVH has heard how much I am hated, he has therefore given me this son as well." And she called his name Shim'on.
It would have made more sense, given the logic of her hate-womb link, for Shim'on to have come first; but again the explanation is ludicrous. If Ya'akov hates her that much, why does he keep sleeping with her and getting her pregnant - there are four more sons yet to come? Can we take SENU'AH (שנואה) to mean something other than "hatred"? And in fact there is nothing in the text to suggest that it is Ya'akov's hatred that YHVH has heard. Shim'on is rooted in Shema, "to hear", but that is actually as far as it goes.
Thinking this text through a modern lens, what kind of psychological damage is a mother doing to a child when she names her child "because your father hates me"?
29:34 VA TAHAR OD VA TELED BEN VA TOMER ATAH HA PA'AM YILAVEH IYSHI ELAI KI YALADETI LO SHELOSHAH VANIM AL KEN KARA SHEMO LEVI
וַתַּהַר עוֹד וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן וַתֹּאמֶר עַתָּה הַפַּעַם יִלָּוֶה אִישִׁי אֵלַי כִּי יָלַדְתִּי לוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה בָנִים עַל כֵּן קָרָא שְׁמוֹ לֵוִי
KJ: And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Now this time will my husband be joined unto me, because I have born him three sons: therefore was his name called Levi.
BN: And she conceived again, and bore a son, and said, "Surely this time will my husband will feel some kind of a connection with me, given that I have borne him three sons." Therefore she named him Levi.
We are told that her husband hates her, and yet she appears to fall pregnant annually. This hatred does not convince. What point is the Redactor trying to drive home? The law of the hated wife in its relevance to the predominance of the surviving tribes of Yehudah and Bin-Yamin? Or is it really as she perceives it, that Ya'akov uses her as a convenience, the way he might a prostitute, because he can?
LEVI (לוי): for an explanation of the name Levi, go to the notes in the Dictionary of Names.
29:35:VA TAHAR OD VA TELED BEN VA TOMER HA PA'AM ODEH ET YHVH AL KEN KARAH SHEMO YEHUDAH VA TA'AMOD MI LEDET
וַתַּהַר עוֹד וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן וַתֹּאמֶר הַפַּעַם אוֹדֶה אֶת יְהוָה עַל כֵּן קָרְאָה שְׁמוֹ יְהוּדָה וַתַּעֲמֹד מִלֶּדֶת
KJ: And she conceived again, and bare a son: and she said, Now will I praise the LORD: therefore she called his name Judah; and left bearing.
BN: And she conceived again, and bore a son; and she said, "This time I will praise YHVH." And so she named him Yehudah; and she stopped having children.
HA PA'AM ODEH ET YHVH: Implying that she had not previously; whereas we know she did when Re'u-Ven was born. Though there is also some question whether it would have been YHVH anyway that Le'ah praised.
YEHUDAH (יהודה): for an explanation of the name Yehudah, go to the notes in the Dictionary of Names.
TA'AMOD MI LEDET (ותעמד מלדת): strange phrase, having more to do with cows too old for breeding than with menopausal women; and of course Le'ah means cow (though some say it means gazelle).
And anyway she does not cease breeding, for there are yet two more sons to follow, as well as DINAH. So this verse is nonsense, and helps us confirm that the attached meanings are apocryphal.
End of chapter 29
Surf The Site
Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a 26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50
Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a 26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50
Copyright © 2020 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment