Parashas VaYetze
Rabbi
Bernard Fox
“And
Yaakov went forth from Beer-Shava, and he went to Haran.” (Beresheit 28:10)
The
Chumash is divided into section – parsheyot.
Generally, a blank space in the Torah separates parsheyot. The various parsheyot
are separated by a blank space. In most
cases, the blank space is created by beginning a parasha on a new line. However, in a few cases, a blank space is
inserted in the middle of a line. In other words, in such instances, one parasha ends, there is a blank space,
and the new parasha begins on the
same line. This less-common model is used to separate Parshat VaYaetzai from
the preceding Parshat Toldot.
Rabbaynu
Yosef ibn Kaspi explains the significance of these two different methods of
separating parsheyot. Parsheyot are designed as sections of
roughly equal length. Ideally, each parasha
should be delineated by a change in subject matter. When a new parasha begins, with a change in the
topic, the objective of creating sections of roughly equal length is achieved
in the ideal manner. In these instances, the new parasha begins on a new line of the Torah. In some cases, it is
impossible to adhere to the ideal. To avoid an overly long parasha, a break must be inserted within a single topic. In this
less-common case, the new parasha
begins on the same line as the previous parasha.
The topic of Parshat VaYaetzai is directly related to the end of Parshat
Toldot. For this reason, the new parasha
begins and Parshat Toldot ends on the same line.[1]
“And
he also married Rachel and he loved Rachel more than Leya. He worked with him for another seven
years. Hashem saw that Leya was
despised. He made her fertile and
Rachel was barren.” (Beresheit 29:30-31)
These
passages introduce the rivalry between Rachel and Leya. Each sought to be the mother of Yaakov’s
children. These passages are difficult
to understand. First, the passages seem
to be contradictory. Initially, the
Torah tells us that Yaakov preferred Rachel over Leya. Later, the Torah states that Yaakov despised
Leya. Second, why did Yaakov dislike
Leya? Third, why did the Almighty
intervene of Leya’s behalf and cause her to conceive? Finally, how did Leya’s fertility earn her Yaakov’s love and
appreciation?
Rabbaynu
Yonatan ben Uziel offers a simple answer to the first question. He explains that the Torah does not intend
to indicate that Yaakov despised Leya.
The term used in the Torah to describe Leya is s’nuah. This term can be
translated as “despised”. However, it
can also indicate a preference. In this
instance, the term s’nuah describes a
preference. In other words, the Torah
is not telling us that Yaakov hated Leya.
It is saying that he favored Rachel over Leya. Nachmanides points out another instance in which the term s’nuah is used in this fashion. The Torah describes a man with two
wives. One is loved the second is a s’nuah.
The s’nuah has a son and then
the beloved wife has a son. The son of
the s’nuah is the firstborn and is
entitled to inherit a double portion of the father’s possessions. The father may not transfer this right to
the son of the preferred wife.[2] Nachmanides points out that in this context
the Torah is clearly describing a relative preference. One is favored over the other. The term s’nuah
refers to the less favored wife. The
term does not seem to indicate a despised wife.[3] This supports Rabbaynu Yonatan ben Uziel’s
interpretation of our pasuk.
This
interpretation answers the first question.
However, it does not answer our other questions. Nachmanides offers another approach to these
passages. This approach provides a more
comprehensive explanation. He begins
with the first question. He comments
that Yaakov favored Rachel over Leya.
This preference existed even prior to their marriage. However, beyond this innocent partiality,
Yaakov actually had negative feelings towards Leya. Lavan had secretly substituted her for Rachel. This deception had required Leya’s
complicity. Yaakov felt that Leya had
acted dishonestly towards him.
Nachmanides
explains that Yaakov was wrong in his assessment of Leya. She recognized Yaakov’s righteousness. She wanted to marry this tzadik.
This was her sole motivation for participating in Lavan’s
deception. This explains the Almighty’s
response to Leya’s plight. Hashem knows
the inner motivations of every human being.
He recognized that Leya was judged harshly and her sincerity was not
appreciated. Hashem responded by
granting Leya children and refusing Rachel.
Sforno
offers the most comprehensive explanation of the pesukim. He begins with the
same approach as Nachmanides. But he
explains that Yaakov had a specific theory that explained Leya’s complicity in
Lavan’s deception. Yaakov observed that
his marriage to Leya was not followed by her conceiving. He suspected that Leya was barren. This would account for her cooperation with
Lavan. She was afraid that her barren
condition might be discovered. She was
desperate to marry before this occurred.
Therefore, she followed Lavan’s directions and deceived Yaakov.
Of
course, this was not the case. Leya did
not marry Yaakov in order to capture a husband. She recognized Yaakov’s unique righteousness. Hashem responded to Leya’s predicament. She had been misjudged. He granted Leya a son. This proved that she had not been barren. Yaakov’s suspicions were disproved. The
cause for his negative feelings was removed.[4]
“And
he placed a distance of three days between himself and between Yaakov. And Yaakov shepherded remaining sheep of
Lavan.” (Beresheit 30:36)
Yaakov
works for Lavan as a shepherd. He
decides that the time has come to leave Lavan.
Lavan realizes that his flocks have flourished under Yaakov’s care. He asks Yaakov to remain as his
shepherd. Yaakov can specify his own
wage. Yaakov asks Lavan to enter into
an unusual arrangement. He will tend
Lavans’ flocks in exchange for ownership of all spotted or marked lambs and
goats born from this day onward. All
other sheep and goats will remain Lavan’s.
He further tells Lavan to remove from the flock any sheep or goats which
have these markings. This will assure
that any marked members of the flock were born subsequent to the agreement and
are clearly Yaakov’s.
Yaakov’s
deal seems odd. He was left with only
solid colored sheep and goats. It was
likely that they would produce similarly solid colored offspring. How did Yaakov expect this flock to produce
the marked offspring that would be his compensation?
It
is true that Yaakov initiated a remarkable program that did result in the flock
producing marked lambs and goats.
However, Yaakov later explained, to his wives, that this plan only
succeeded through Hashem’s intervention.[5] It seems unlikely that Yaakov was relying on
this intervention when he entered into the agreement with Lavan!
Gershonides
explains that our pasuk provides the
answer. Yaakov told Lavan to remove the
marked animals from the flock. Yaakov
wanted to be certain that Lavan would not claim that marked animals born into
the flock were not Yaakov’s. Yaakov
expected that Lavan would separate these animals from the flock. Lavan might count them and turn them over to
the care of his own sons. The two
flocks would still graze in the same general area. They would mingle at
times. They would breed together. This process would cause solid colored goats
and sheep to give birth to spotted offspring.
Yaakov would have his compensation.
Lavan
did remove the marked animals and handed them over to his sons. However, Lavan then took a further
step. He sent these animals to a new
location three-days from the main flock.
Yaakov had not suggested or anticipated this step. This forced Yaakov to devise his unusual
program designed to cause solid animals to produce marked offspring. Yaakov had not originally assumed he would
need to resort to extraordinary means to secure his compensation. Lavan’s subterfuge forced Yaakov to devise
this plan.[6]
“I
never brought you an animal that had been attacked. I took the blame myself.
You made me responsible whether it was stolen in the day or by night.” (Berseheit 31:39)
Yaakov
confronts Lavan over his dishonesty. He
contrasts Lavan’s ethics with his own.
Yaakov served Lavan as a shepherd.
He fulfilled his duties diligently.
In contrast, Lavan arbitrarily changed Yaakov’s compensation. He also held Yaakov responsible for all
losses. This included losses that were
beyond the responsibility of a shepherd.
Rabbaynu
Avraham ben HaRambam explains that Lavan demanded that Yaakov repay him for
animals attacked and killed by wild beasts.
This is not a reasonable responsibility. A shepherd can justly be held responsible for protecting his
flock from smaller animals. However, in
some cases the shepherd cannot be expected to drive off the marauding
attackers. Lavan did not distinguish.
Second,
the shepherd can be held accountable for an animal stolen during the day. However, he cannot reasonably be expected to
prevent theft during the night. Lavan
demanded that Yaakov make restitution for all stolen animals.[7]
Yaakov
clearly maintained that Lavan had required an inappropriate level of
accountability from his shepherd. How
did Yaakov determine the appropriate standard for a shepherd’s liability? True, the Torah deals with this issue and
establishes clear rules for the conduct and responsibility of the shepherd. But the Torah had not yet been revealed. Furthermore, even if Yaakov was aware of the
Torah standards, through prophecy, this would not bind Lavan.
Rabbaynu
Avraham ben HaRambam deals with this issue.
He explains that the standards for a shepherd’s responsibilities
pre-existed the Torah. These standards
were generally accepted. Yaakov
referred to these standards in critiquing Lavan’s ethics. The Torah did not create these
standards. Instead, the Torah provided
strict legal definition and codification of the existing standards.
Rabbaynu
Avraham explains that this is not the only instance in which the Torah codified
an existing practice or custom. The
practice of yibum also predates the
Torah. This practice applies to a
married woman, whose husband died without male offspring. The prevalent practice was to require the
wife to marry the brother of the deceased.
Any children, resulting from the new union, would be regarded as
offspring of the deceased. This
practice was incorporated into the Torah as a mitzvah. [8]
This thesis explains
another incident in the Torah.
Yehudah’s oldest son married Tamar.
He died, without children.
Yehudah arranged for Onan, his next to eldest son, to marry Tamar. This is was yibum.[9] According to Rabbaynu Avraham it is not
necessary to assume that Yehudah was aware of the Torah requirement. Instead, he was following the practice that
already existed.
[1] Rabbaynu Yosef ibn Kaspi, Mishne Kesef, Part 2, Parshat VaYaetzai.
[2] Sefer Devarim 21:16-17.
[3] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban / Nachmanides), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 29:30.
[4] Rabbaynu Ovadia Sforno, Commentary on Sefer Beresheit, 29:31.
[5] Sefer Beresheit 31:4-12.
[6] Rabbaynu Levi ben Gershon (Ralbag / Gershonides), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit, (Mosad HaRav Kook, 1994), p 187.
[7] Rabbaynu Avraham ben HaRambam, Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 31:39.
[8] Rabbaynu Avraham ben HaRambam, Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 31:39
[9] Sefer Beresheit 38:6-8.