Confrontation & Treaty: Jacob & Lavan

Dani Roth & Rabbi Moshe Ben-Chaim

Jacob sees that his success generated animosity from Lavan. God told Jacob to leave Lavan. Jacob flees with his family and flock. Lavan learns of his covert exit, and Lavan chases after Jacob. Lavan soon overtakes Jacob and accuses Jacob of stealing his gods and fleeing secretly with his daughters. Jacob defends himself, arguing he feared Lavan would forcibly take his daughters. A lengthy discussion follows, highlighting Jacob's years of service to Lavan, the hardships endured, and Lavan's changing wages.  They eventually make a covenant marked by a stone pillar and a heap of stones, signifying a mutual agreement to respect boundaries and refrain from future conflict. The covenant invokes the gods of their ancestors as witnesses.

But what was Lavan after, that he chased Jacob? The rabbis say Lavan was enraged and would have wiped out everyone, “I have it in my power to do you harm.”  He felt quite insulted, as Jacob fooled him, a most disturbing insult to Lavan who fooled Jacob numerous times over 20 years: Lavan changed Jacob’s wages 100 times intending to cheat him.

Lavan confronts Jacob:

And Lavan said to Jacob, “What did you mean by keeping me in the dark and carrying off my daughters like captives of the sword? Why did you flee in secrecy and mislead me and not tell me? I would have sent you off with festive music, with timbrel and lyre. You did not even let me kiss my sons and daughters goodbye! It was a foolish thing for you to do. I have it in my power to do you harm; but the God of your father’s [house] said to me last night, ‘Beware of attempting anything with Jacob, good or bad.’ Very well, you had to leave because you were longing for your father’s house; but why did you steal my gods?” 

Lavan tries to paint a good image of himself: “I would have sent you off with festive music…you did not let me kiss my sons and daughters goodbye.” But Lavan knows that doesn’t justify his enraged pursuit of Jacob, so he adds, “Why did you steal my gods?”

  Jacob answered Lavan: 

I was afraid because I thought you would take your daughters from me by force. But anyone with whom you find your gods shall not remain alive.

Jacob’s first response was politically brief. Jacob understood that in negotiations, one does not offer all his arguments at first: “Don’t blow your wad.” One must save additional arguments to counter his opponent’s many replies. Once one uses an argument or a set of arguments against his opponent’s “Reason A,” he can’t use those same arguments against “Reason B.” Had Jacob voiced all reasons at first, we would be left with no counter responses. Lavan too knew this tactic, and at first, did not state all his accusations. 

  Jacob and Lavan both knew the accusation of stolen idols was only a pretense…some element of justification for Lavan’s pursuit of Jacob. Lavan then must search all the tents for his idols, but finds nothing. Lavan didn’t care much for the idols, as much as he cared for something else. But Lavan must search for the idols as a ruse. Jacob then viewed Lavan’s failure to validate his idol theft accusation as a prized opportunity to gain the upper hand, so Jacob angrily attacks Lavan further: 

What is my crime, what is my guilt that you should pursue me?  You rummaged through all my things; what have you found of all your household objects?”

Jacob seized the opportunity further and verbalizes his extreme value to Lavan to counter Lavan’s greed, as Jacob knew what Lavan truly sought:

These 20 years I have spent in your service, your ewes and she-goats never miscarried, nor did I feast on rams from your flock. That which was torn by beasts I never brought to you; I myself made good the loss; you exacted it of me, whether snatched by day or snatched by night. Often, scorching heat ravaged me by day and frost by night; and sleep fled from my eyes. This is all mine: 20 years, I worked 14 years for your two daughters, and 6 years for your flocks; and you changed my wages time and again. Had not the God of my father’s [house]—the God of Abraham and the Fear of Isaac been with me, you would have sent me away empty-handed. But it was my plight and the toil of my hands that God took notice of and He rebuked you last night [in your dream]. 

Jacob knew Lavan’s true chase was his desire was to capture back his daughters and all Jacob’s flocks, as Jacob initially said, “you would take your daughters from me.”  That is why Jacob now says, “This is all mine.” It was the moment to bring into the open Lavan’s real motives and attack them as false. Then Lavan spoke up, showing Jacob was right:

Lavan said, “The daughters are my daughters, the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks; all that you see is mine. Yet what can I do now about my daughters or the children they have borne?”

The truth comes out. Astonishingly, although Lavan sold his daughters for Jacob’s labors, he said they were still his. The same with the flocks. But Lavan sees Jacob contended saying rightfully that the wives and flock were his. A stalemate. What is Lavan’s next move? He knew God warned him so his hands were tied. 

Lavan said, “Come, then, let us make a pact, you and I, that there may be a witness between you and me.”  Thereupon Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar. And Jacob said to his kinsmen, “Gather stones.” So they took stones and made a mound; and they partook of a meal there by the mound. 

Lavan named it Yegar-Sahadutha, but Jacob named it Gal-ed.  And Lavan declared, “This mound is a witness between you and me this day.” That is why it was named Gal-ed; and [it was called] Miztpah, because he said, “May God watch between you and me, when we are out of sight of each other: If you ill-treat my daughters or take other wives besides my daughters—though no one else be about, remember, it is God who will be witness between you and me.”  And Lavan said to Jacob, “Here is this mound and here the pillar which I have set up between you and me: this mound shall be witness and this pillar shall be witness that I am not to cross to you past this mound, and that you are not to cross to me past this mound and this pillar, with hostile intent. May the God of Abraham’s [house] and the god of Nahor’s house—their ancestral deities—judge between us.” And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.  

Dani Roth: Why did they set up a mound and a monument? Why does Lavan only say he can't pass the mound, but Yaakov can't pass both the mound and the monument, and further, Jacob can't pass it for “evil.”

Lavan called it Jegar-sahadutha, but in the next pasuk it says he called it Galeed. According to Rashi, Jegar-sahadutha is Lavan’s name for Galeed, but why does it need to tell us this, and why does he switch the name?

Lavan says, "He shall be a witness between you and me' (according to Rashi that's referring to God), but then in pasuk 48, Lavan calls the mound the witness. In pasuk 50 he calls God a witness directly, and then in pasuk 52 he calls both the mound and the monument a witness. Why are all these called witnesses in different places? Pasuk 46 and 54 it talks about eating, so what's this idea of eating on both places. Lastly, in 32:3, what does it mean that it's Gods camp?

Rabbi: The purpose of the monument stone and the stone heap was to demonstrate an agreement took place, bearing testimony to their agreement, in place of a signed document. People don’t feel words alone are binding to a treaty, so they create a physical demonstration to act as a testament. We find this many times in Torah. I am not certain what significance is indicated by Lavan calling it by its Aramaic translation Jegar-sahadutha. 

The stones bearing witness, refer to the agreement “content.” But God plays the role of responding to an agreement breach with “punishment,” an act of justice which stones cannot mete out. 

Now what about the content of the agreement: does Lavan really care about Jacob marrying more wives? According to the rabbis, Lavan was ready to kill everyone. That is why it was necessary for God to warn him. Perhaps this seeming “care” for his daughters was a guilty cover-up of his real lack of concern for them…he treated them like strangers when he sold them to Jacob (Gen. 31:15). So now that he lost his attempt to regain his daughters and the flocks, he needed to come out looking good by showing care for them. And what about Lavan setting up this stone and heap as a boundary that neither could pass over? If he cared so much for his daughters, why self-impose a travel restriction to see them? Perhaps here Lavan terminates dealing with Jacob due to his loss of the argument.  Sure, he’ll allow Jacob to travel to him for Lavan’s profit, but otherwise, Lavan wants an end to their relationship. Eating together might be their cultural display of their agreement or mutual peace.

Finally, 32:3 refers to 2 camps: Jacob’s resourcefulness, and God's providence were the two “camps” (Rabbi Israel Chait). This statement about 2 camps was Jacob's way of observing that his newfound success with his interactions with Lavan were not due only to his wisdom, but also to God's providence. Rabbi Chait asked: How did Jacob know that God's providence was also involved in Jacob's success? In 31:29 Lavan refers to the previous night’s dream where God warned him not to speak good or evil to Jacob. When Jacob heard this, he could not view this as a natural dream, but divine. For if Lavan was simply guilt-ridden about his intent to attack Jacob, a natural guilt dream would only contain Lavan hearing God warning him against evil. But that Lavan told Jacob that he was also warned against speaking good, Jacob knew this could not be a natural guilt dream, because a guilt dream doesn't warn you against good, only against bad. Thereby, Jacob knew that not only was he responsible for his success with Lavan, but God was involved too. These were the 2 camps.