VaYetze
Rabbi
Bernard Fox
“And Yaakov told Rachel that he was the brother of
her father and that he was the son of Rivka.
And she ran and told her father.” (Beresheit
29:12)
The
Torah cannot be defined as merely a religion.
The term religion is generally understood to refer to a system of
worship. It is true that the Torah does
include a system of divine service.
However, this is only a part of the message to the Torah. Beyond providing a system of worship the
Torah also deals with many other issues.
It regulates conduct within the family.
It includes a system of adjudication and social welfare. The Torah provides regulation and an
orientation that extends to virtually every element of communal, national and
personal life. This includes a
sophisticated system of laws and ethics that govern commercial and business
conduct. Our parasha includes the
first extensive treatment of business relations. This is communicated through a comparative analysis of the
business ethics of Yaakov and his father-in-law Lavan.
Yaakov
travels to Haran. There he comes to a
well and meets Rachel the daughter of Lavan.
In our pasuk, Yaakov introduces himself to Rachel. He tells her that he is her father’s
brother. Rashi is bothered by the
obvious question. This was not an
accurate description of his relationship to Lavan. Yaakov was not Lavan’s brother.
He was Lavan’s nephew. Yaakov’s
mother – Rivka – was Lavan’s sister.
Rashi
offers two explanations. The simple
interpretation is that Yaakov did not mean that he was Lavan’s brother in the
literal sense. He meant that they were
kin. Rashi points out that this is not
the only instance in which the term brother is used to denote kinship.
However,
Rashi offers another explanation. Yaakov
provided two descriptions of himself.
He said he was the brother of Lavan and the son of Rivka. Now, it would have sufficed for Yaakov to
describe himself as Rivka’s son. Why
did Yaakov also describe himself as the brother or relative of Lavan? Rashi responds that there was a message
communicated in this description. Rivka
was an honest, straightforward individual.
In contrast, Lavan was a dishonest conniver. Yaakov intended to compare
himself to both his mother and uncle and communicate that he was the equal of
both. He was as honest as Rachel but
also capable as being as devious as Lavan.[1]
It
seems that Yaakov is saying that he is prepared to act dishonestly! If Lavan attempts to treat him unfairly, he
will retaliate by treating Lavan in the same manner. Yaakov seems to be arguing that it is sometimes appropriate to be
less that fair and honest. But as we
shall see this was not Yaakov’s message.
“And Yaakov loved Rachel and he said, “I will work
for you for seven years for Rachel, your younger daughter.” (Beresheit 29:18)
Our pasuk
tells us that Yaakov loved Rachel and wished to marry her. He asked her father for his approval of the
marriage and offered to work for Lavan for seven years in exchange for marriage
to Rachel. He described Rachel as
“Rachel, your younger daughter.” Once
again, Yaakov adopts a rather elaborate description when a more simple
description would seem adequate. Lavan
knew who Rachel was. Yaakov did not
need to describe Rachel as Lavan’s younger daughter.
Rashi
explains that Yaakov was fully aware of Lavan’s deviousness. He did not want to describe his chosen wife
as “Rachel.” Lavan might substitute
another girl with the same name. Also, Yaakov
was not satisfied to describe his wife as “Rachel, your daughter.” Lavan might switch the names of his
daughters and then substitute Leya – the newly named Rachel – for the real
Rachel. In order to preclude either of
these possibilities, Yaakov described his chosen very carefully as “Rachel,
your younger daughter.” But Rashi
explains that despite these precautions, Lavan succeeded in deceiving Yaakov
and substituting Leya for Rachel.[2],[3]
This
raises two questions. Yaakov claimed
that he could be Lavan’s equal in deviousness.
Apparently, Yaakov was very wrong!
Why did Yaakov assume he could match Lavan and where did he make his
mistake?
Let us
begin with the first question. Why did
Yaakov assume he could match Lavan?
Yaakov believed that he was just as smart as Lavan. He knew that Lavan was very shrewd. But he assumed that his own wisdom was a match
for Lavan’s shrewdness. In fact, Yaakov
was correct. Yaakov described Rachel
with such precision that he succeeded in precluding any legitimate substitution
of Leya or any other woman for Rachel.
It is true that Lavan substituted Leya for Rachel. But Lavan never claimed that he had
fulfilled his bargain. He admitted to
the substitution.
We can
now understand Yaakov’s intention in describing himself as Lavan’s equal. He did not means that it is appropriate to
be dishonest or unfair and that he could and would match Lavan in
dishonesty. He meant that his wisdom
was the match for Lavan’s shrewdness. He
claimed that he would be able to foresee and preclude any attempt by Lavan to
be devious with his own wisdom. HHeHeHeeSo,
what was Yaakov’s mistake?
“And Lavan said, “This is not done in our place – to
give the younger daughter before the elder daughter.” (Beresheit
29:26)
Yaakov
discovers that Lavan has substituted Leya for Rachel. He confronts Lavan. Lavan
does not deny the substitution. Instead,
he explains that the substitution is justified. Leya is the elder daughter.
It not appropriate to give the younger daughter in marriage before the
elder daughter.
In this
passage, the Torah tells us how Lavan succeeded in deceiving Yaakov. Yaakov realized that Lavan would use any
legitimate means to substitute Leya or some other woman for Rachel. He assumed that by removing all legitimate
opportunities for a substitution he would prevent the substitution. However, he did not realize that Lavan would
rationalize an overt abrogation of their agreement. Through relying on the rationalization that Leya was the elder
daughter, Lavan completely ignored the terms of his agreement with Yaakov and
substituted Leya. In other words, because
Yaakov underestimated Lavan’s deviousness he was deceived. He assumed that Lavan would rely on his
shrewdness. But he did not expect an
open breach of their agreement.
Of
course, this raises another question.
Yaakov recognized that Lavan was a cheat. He knew he was devious.
Yet, he did not predict that Lavan would be able to rationalize and open
breach of their agreement. Why was
Yaakov unable to foresee the extent of Lavan’s dishonesty?
“And he came also to Rachel. And he loved Rachel more than Leya. And he worked with him another, additional seven
years.”
(Beresheit 29:30)
Lavan
agrees to give Rachel to Yaakov as a wife.
They make a new deal. In
exchange for Rachel, Yaakov will work for Lavan for an additional seven years. Our pasuk tells us that Lavan gives Rachel
to Yaakov and Yaakov fulfills his part of the bargain by serving Lavan the
additional years.
The
wording of the passage is problematic.
The pasuk says that Yaakov worked for Lavan another, additional seven
years. The phrase “another, additional”
is a clear redundancy. It would have
sufficed to use either term – another or an additional. But why does the Torah use both? Rashi explains that the intent is to equate
this second seven years for the first seven years of labor that Yaakov
provided. During the first seven years,
Yaakov worked under the assumption that Lavan would respect their agreement and
provide him with Rachel as a wife.
However, the second seven years began after Lavan cheated Yaakov. This second set of seven years was a direct
result of Lavan’s dishonesty.
Nonetheless,
the service that Yaakov provided during this second seven years was
undistinguishable for the service during the first set. During the first set, Yaakov was a dedicated
and honest employee. He provided the same
level of service during the second set.[4]
There
is an important point here. Yaakov
entered into this agreement as a result of Lavan’s dishonesty. Nonetheless once Yaakov made the agreement,
he scrupulously observed its terms.
Unlike Lavan, he did not resort to rationalization. He did not breach his agreement and reduce
the quality of his service. Despite the
disagreeable circumstances that motivated him to enter into this agreement,
Yaakov did not rationalize cheating Lavan.
Now, we
can explain Yaakov’s error at a deeper level.
Yaakov was confident in his own wisdom.
He correctly considered it the match for Lavan’s shrewdness. But his was not a master of human
psychology. As a fundamentally honest
person, he could not appreciate the ability of human beings to rationalize
complete dishonesty. Lavan resorted to
a form of behavior with which Yaakov could not identify. Because this behavior was so alien to him,
he could not foresee or predict it. Yaakov
could not rationalize dishonesty. Because
he could not identify or relate to such open dishonesty, he could not foresee
Lavan’s behavior. Because of his own
goodness, he underestimated the human ability to rationalize open dishonesty.
[1] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 29:12.
[2] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 29:18.
[3] It should be noted that there seems to be a contradiction in Rashi’s comments. Our Rashi explains that Lavan succeeded in deceiving Yaakov. However according to Rashi’s comments later in the parasha, this is not the case. According to these later comments, Yaakov and Rachel agreed to a signal that they would use in order to assure that the woman Yaakov married was indeed Rachel. This signal should have prevented Lavan from making a substitution. However, when Lavan made the substitution Rachel provided Leya with the signal, rather than expose her sister to embarrassment. According to these comments, Lavan did not succeed in out-maneuvering Yaakov. Instead, Rachel’s complicity led to Yaakov’s marriage to Leya. It is possible that this apparent contradiction can be resolved through assuming that Lavan suspected that Yaakov and Rachel had arranged some signal but depended on Rachel’s loyalty to Leya to undermine this precaution. However, this explanation is speculative.
[4] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 29:30.