Chapter Thirty
Rachel, grieved by her barrenness, gives her maidservant Bilhah to Jacob as a concubine
Genesis 30:1. When Rachel saw that she bore no children to Jacob, Rachel envied her sister and said to Jacob: “Give me children, or I shall die! The mutual jealousy of wives, an inevitable companion of polygamy in general, acquires special force and sharpness when one wife was barren while the other had children (see 1 Sam 1:2; Deut 21:15 and following). This evil was not absent from Jacob’s family: “they were imperfect, the daughters of a man with false gods, calling idols gods. Therefore the Lawgiver God forbids such marriage and says: ‘You shall not take a wife and her sister as rivals’ (Lev 18:18); (Blessed Theodoret, Answer to Question 87). Rachel’s demand for children from Jacob, apart from God, on her part is unreasonable and impious, “characteristic of a wife and a soul tormented by jealousy” (John Chrysostom, Homily 61, p. 601). Therefore it provokes Jacob’s anger, although the burden of childlessness among the ancient Hebrews made it almost a synonym for death (only leprosy and blindness were considered comparable disasters, also compared to death), as indeed Rachel says here, and this mitigates her guilt.
Genesis 30:2. Jacob became angry with Rachel and said: “Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb? Jacob directs Rachel’s thought to God, the Author of all life and the source of the increase of mankind through childbearing (Gen 1:28; Ps 126:3). According to ancient Hebrew understanding (Beresch. r. par. 78, s. 355), God keeps three keys, which He does not give to any Angel or Seraph: life and birth (1 Sam 2:5-6; Ps 112:9); rain or fruitfulness (Deut 28:12); and grave and resurrection (Ezek 37:12-13). A reverential and comforting teaching that places in the hand of God Himself the beginning, continuance, and completion of human existence (Metropolitan Philaret, Notes on Genesis 2, 65-66).
Genesis 30:3. She said: Here is my maidservant Bilhah; go in to her, that she may bear upon my knees, and that I too may have a child through her. Following the example of Sarah, who offered Abraham Hagar (Gen 16:2), Rachel gives her maidservant Bilhah to Jacob as a wife with the condition that the children from this union would be born “upon my knees” (see Gen 30:3; Job 3:12), that is, by adoption would be counted as her own children—a custom that still exists in China and among the ancient Hebrews arose from that same passionate desire for posterity which moved the husband to polygamy (or at least bigamy) and the wife to make such a renunciation as willingness to temporarily cede her marital rights to her maidservant. Instead of: “that I may build myself a house (posterity) through her” the Hebrew reads (ibbaneh).
Genesis 30:6. Rachel said: “God has judged me and also heard my voice and given me a son.” Therefore she called him Dan. “Thus Rachel received some consolation when her maidservant bore; therefore she herself gives a name to the child” (Chrysostom 61, 603). The name “Dan” in Hebrew means “judged,” that is, God by His righteous judgment freed Rachel from the shame of childlessness. In Gen 49:16 the name Dan is linked with the task of the tribe of Dan “to judge” Israel.
Genesis 30:7–8. Bilhah, Rachel’s maidservant, conceived again and bore Jacob a second son. Rachel said: “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister and have prevailed.” So she called his name Naphtali. The name Naphtali, Hebrew Naftali—“wrestling,” “struggle” (or “wrestler”), refers not so much to open struggle conducted with force as to struggle by cunning, by intrigue (Hebrew patal means “to twist,” “to wind,” from which niphtal, twisted, deceitful (see Job 5:13; Prov 8:8)). Rachel calls her struggle with Leah “divine,” perhaps in the sense of strength, the intensity of this struggle (see expressions: “mountains of God,” “cedars of God” (Ps 35:7)), or (according to the Targum) in the sense of Rachel’s prayerful appeal to God in her rivalry with Leah; by such prayer-struggle Jacob struggled later (Gen 32:24-30; Hos 12:3-4). To speak of Rachel’s victory over Leah after the former had borne only two and those adopted sons, while the latter already had 4 of her own, could be done only in that exalted state of spirit which Rachel was experiencing at that moment. The Septuagint, Vulgate, and Slavonic express the thought that Rachel only compared herself to her sister. In any case, there is no need for the supposition of Gunkel (p.302) that, according to the Elohist (supposed author of Genesis XXX), Leah until then had only one son.
Leah, from jealousy, gives Jacob her maidservant Zilpah and she bears Gad and Asher
Genesis 30:9. Leah saw that she had ceased bearing, and she took her maidservant Zilpah and gave her to Jacob as a wife, [and he went in to her]. The act of Leah, who already had 4 sons, is even less excusable than the long childless Rachel’s. But the boasting of the latter with all its force aroused jealousy in Leah, and she arranges a new cohabitation of Jacob; “knowing,” says Abarbanel, “that Jacob will have 4 wives, Leah hastens to prevent, as if he might not take a 4th wife from outside” (Philipps. 151).
Genesis 30:10–11. Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant, [conceived and] bore Jacob a son. Leah said: “Good fortune!” And she called his name Gad. Gad—with Hebrew meaning fortune (in Isa 65:11 Gad is a deity of fortune among pagans). The word bagad—in fortune or: to fortune, Septuagint: ἐυτύχη, Vulgate: feliciter, Slavonic: “good fortune befell me”—some Hebrew manuscripts (in Kennicott) divide it into two: ba + gad, “comes or has come fortune”; this reading is noted among the Masoretes by the sign Keri. But the authority of the Septuagint, Josephus, the Targum, and the parallelism of the word bagad with the word beaschri (v. 13) speak in favor of the first reading. To the question: why Scripture mentions fortune here, Blessed Theodoret answers (p. 88): “the words: ‘good fortune befell me’ are spoken not by Jacob, but by his wife Leah, reared not in godliness or poorly instructed in the divine.” In Gen 49:19 the name Gad is linked with the word gedud, band, troop (“a troop comes,” that is, of children, as some interpreted).
Genesis 30:12–13. Zilpah, Leah’s maidservant, [conceived again and] bore Jacob another son. Leah said: “Happy am I! For the women will call me happy.” So she called him Asher. The name of the second son of Zilpah—Asher—by meaning is synonymous with the name Gad: beaschri (Vulgate: pro beatitudine mea)—“to my fortune, to my good”; the motive: “for the women will call me happy” (v. 13) reminds of the magnificent confession of the Mother of God (Luke 1:48).
Leah bears her last children: Issachar, Zebulun, and her daughter Dinah
Genesis 30:14. During the wheat harvest, Reuben went out and found mandrakes in the field, and brought them to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah [her sister]: Please give me some of your son’s mandrakes. Reuben (who was probably about 5 years old at that time), during the wheat harvest, that is, in May, found mandrakes or mandrake apples in the field, Hebrew name: dudaim, amatoria (Septuagint: μῆλα μανδραγόρων)—apples of love; according to the most probable explanation, this plant is the so-called Atropa belladonna (a type of henbane), growing in Palestine or neighboring countries, with narcotic properties and believed to contribute to fertility. On the sturdy stem of this plant there appear greenish-white flower petals, serving as a harbinger of spring (Song 7:14), from which by May small reddish-yellow apples ripen, with a strong narcotic, though pleasant smell. The belief in the mysterious relation of this plant (by its form reminiscent of a human) led both in antiquity and in the Middle Ages to the preparation from it of a love potion. Apparently, mandrakes were rare in Mesopotamia, and the passionate Rachel, not having yet lost hope of having children of her own, resorts to the presumed magical power of mandrakes. In this bargaining about the latter, the struggle between Leah and Rachel reaches its highest degree.
Genesis 30:15–16. Leah said: Is it not enough that you have taken away my husband? Now you want to take my son’s mandrakes too? Rachel said: Very well, let him lie with you tonight in exchange for your son’s mandrakes. Jacob came in from the field in the evening, and Leah went out to meet him and said: You must come in to me, for I have bought you with my son’s mandrakes. So he lay with her that night. Leah, sharing Rachel’s belief in the procreative power of mandrakes, refuses to give them to Rachel, and from both her reproach and Rachel’s answer it is evident that Rachel had completely won Jacob’s affection (see “prevailed,” v. 8), so that only with her permission, exchanging with her the mandrakes, Leah obtained marital intimacy with Jacob. Without doubt, the sacred author does not share the superstition of Leah and Rachel concerning the action of mandrakes and even less ascribes (contrary to the opinion of some rabbis and modern biblical critics) any influence on the subsequent bearing of children by Leah—Issachar and Zebulun—and by Rachel—Joseph: he represents all this as the work of God’s grace (Gen 30:18).
Genesis 30:17–18. God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son. Leah said: “God has given me my reward, because I gave my maidservant to my husband.” So she named him Issachar. “Because God saw that Leah was grieved and did not enjoy her husband’s affection, He heard her” (John Chrysostom 56, 604). In the birth of her fifth son after some pause, Leah sees a reward from God for providing her maidservant to Jacob—by the understanding of that time (and perhaps from her special love toward Jacob), she considers this deed worthy of praise. In the name Issachar (with Hebrew either: “he will bring reward,” that is, God, according to Keri: “issa scnakar,” or: “there is reward”; according to Ketib: “esch sakar”), Leah expresses the idea of recompense, payment, pointing, on the one hand, to her self-denial in relation to the maidservant, and on the other, to her acquisition of Jacob from Rachel by the payment of mandrakes.
Genesis 30:19–20. Leah conceived again and bore Jacob a sixth son. Leah said: “God has endowed me with a good gift; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” So she named him Zebulun. With the birth of her sixth (and last) son, Leah again expresses the hope for her husband’s affection (among the Arabs even now the value of a wife grows with the increase in the number of her sons); in her words there is the usual play on words in Hebrew: “zabad”—“zevad”—gave (God) a gift (a son); “zaval”—will honor (Jacob); from the latter word—“Zebulun” (according to Blessed Jerome—habitation).
Genesis 30:21. Afterward she bore a daughter and named her Dinah. “Dinah”—judging (the feminine form of the word “Dan,” v. 6). Nothing more is said concerning the name of the daughter—in view of the lesser importance of women in ancient Hebrew genealogies; likewise other daughters of Jacob are not mentioned (Gen 46:7)—for the same reason. Dinah, born perhaps later, is mentioned here because of the incident that befell her in Shechem (Gen 34) and for the completeness of the account of Jacob’s children.
Rachel bears Joseph
Genesis 30:22–23. God remembered Rachel, and God heeded her and opened her womb. She conceived and bore a son and said: “God has taken away my shame. She conceived and bore a son for Jacob, and Rachel said: “God has taken away my shame.” “God remembered” – in biblical language means: sent mercy after a trial (cf. Gen 8:1; 1 Sam 1:11). “Shame” – barrenness (cf. Isa 4:1; Luke 1:25).
Genesis 30:24. And she called his name Joseph, saying: “May the Lord add to me another son. And the name “Joseph” (like Zebulun, v. 20, and Issachar, v. 18) in Rachel’s lips has a twofold origin and meaning: “taking away, removing” (shame of barrenness) and “adding, giving more” (i.e., another son) – “God has taken away the shame and may He add another son,” said Rachel; the latter wish, according to the rabbis, was a prophecy (Beresch. r. Par. 72:5, 354); it came true in the birth of Benjamin (Gen 35:16-18), and Rachel died.
Jacob, preparing to return to Canaan, makes a new agreement with Laban, works for him again for 6 years, and through his skill and cunning, becomes wealthy
Genesis 30:25–26. After Rachel gave birth to Joseph, Jacob said to Laban: “Send me away, that I may go to my place and to my own land; give me my wives and my children for whom I have served you, and let me go; for you know the service I have given you.” Immediately after Joseph’s birth, when the agreed – 14-year period of Jacob’s service with Laban ended, Jacob expresses his determination to return home, which may have been prompted by some news from his house (tradition tells that Rebekah sent to Jacob her nurse Deborah (Gen 35:8) to make him return home, as she had promised him (Gen 27:45), see Philipps. p. 184), and especially by the bitter realization that during 14 years of unpaid work for stingy Laban he had acquired nothing for his family (cf. v. 30); at this point Jacob (in the words – “send me away,” “you know my service”) makes a hint that he has earned some support from Laban, a hint which Laban understood (see v. 28). That, however, Jacob’s decision to separate from Laban was not yet firm, is evident from the fact that he soon agrees to remain with his father-in-law on new conditions: all the more earnestly, therefore, from this point on does Jacob pursue the goal of securing his large family, by means which, as appears from what follows, were not always morally irreproachable.
Genesis 30:27–28. And Laban said to him: “I pray that I may find favor in your sight! I have learned by experience that the Lord has blessed me for your sake. “Name your wages to me,” he said, “and I will give them to you.” Laban, knowing from experience the great value of Jacob’s service, begins his persuasion for him to stay in a humble and beseeching tone. “I have learned” – from the Hebrew: “I have divined” (cf. Gen 44:15), – perhaps by means of the teraphims that Laban possessed (according to the Masoretic text) (Gen 31:19 and others); but a broader meaning of the Hebrew nachasch is also possible – in the sense of “to guess.” Laban acknowledges (v. 27) that since Jacob’s arrival his household has prospered particularly (cf. v. 30) and offers him, as before (Gen 29:15), to name his own wages.
Genesis 30:29–30. Then Jacob said to him: “You know how I have served you, and how your cattle have fared with me; for it was little which you had before I came, and it has increased abundantly; the Lord has blessed you since my coming; but now, when shall I provide for my own household also?” A new agreement between son-in-law and father-in-law now begins, characterized on the surface by purely Eastern courtesy and verbosity, and at the same time showing Laban’s extraordinary shrewdness. In his reply, Jacob repeats Laban’s thought about the prospering of Laban’s household since his own arrival, and now directly expresses his intention to soon begin working for the benefit of his own family.
Genesis 30:31–32. Then Laban said: “What shall I give you?” And Jacob said: “Give me nothing at all. If you will do this one thing for me, I will again feed and keep your flocks. “I will pass through all your flocks today, removing from them every speckled and spotted animal, every dark-colored lamb among the sheep, and the spotted and speckled among the goats. Such shall be my wages [and shall be mine].” When asked by Laban what wages Jacob would wish to receive from him henceforth, Jacob, using a method characteristic of the ancient (Gen 23:6-18) and modern East, first as it were declines any wages, but then agrees to continue serving Laban on the following condition: he will receive his reward in kind – speckled and dark sheep and speckled goats. This condition was to go into effect immediately upon its agreement (see the addition of the LXX at the end of v. 32: words placed in brackets in the Russian (Synodal) translation): animals with the noted markings, those present, now passed into Jacob’s ownership, and so it was to be in the future. But animals of the designated colors are a rarity in the East: sheep there are usually white (Song 4:2), and goats are black.
Genesis 30:34. And Laban said: “Good, let it be according to your word. Thus “Jacob asked of Laban what, according to the natural order of things, seemed difficult or entirely impossible, and Laban, for this very reason, did not hesitate to agree to his demand” (John Chrysostom, Homily 57, p. 608). But Jacob’s skill overcame the natural order of things (v. 37).
Genesis 30:35–36. Then he separated the spotted and speckled male goats, and all the spotted and speckled female goats (every one that had any white in it), and all the dark lambs, and gave them into the hands of his sons; and he set three days’ journey between himself and Jacob. Jacob was pasturing the rest of Laban’s flocks. The subject who “separated” the single-colored cattle from the many-colored, including in the latter the dark lambs, according to the connection with the preceding (34) verse and with the following speech, is Laban; “his sons” – meaning, the sons of Laban, since Jacob’s sons were still too young to be entrusted with the care of the flocks; moreover, Laban’s distrust of Jacob moved him to entrust the cattle separated as a reward to Jacob to the supervision of his own sons, while setting a distance “between himself” and the flocks of his own, entrusted to Jacob, and between the flocks of Jacob, which his sons were now to tend. Thus Laban, accepting (in agreement with Jacob’s own proposal) measures to protect his own cattle from passing into Jacob’s ownership, Jacob, in turn, employs the following three methods to increase the number of animals of the agreed colors in his own herd – and achieves his goal, although by means that are morally irreproachable.
Genesis 30:37–39. And Jacob took fresh poplar rods, almond rods, and plane-tree rods, and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the rods, and placed the peeled rods in the drinking troughs, where the cattle came to drink, so that they might conceive when coming to drink. And the flocks concealed before the rods, and the flocks brought forth speckled, spotted, and speckled offspring. First method: as an experienced herder, Jacob utilizes the well-known extreme susceptibility of sheep and goats to external impressions and sensory perceptions during mating – in the drinking troughs he places before the eyes of the heated females speckled rods of poplar, plane-tree, and almond-tree, skillfully stripping them of bark and making them many-colored. The consequence of this was the mass birth of animals with various kinds and forms of spots and speckles, which, according to the agreement (vv. 33–34), became Jacob’s property. It may be thought that Jacob in this “did not rely upon the hewn rods, but waited for God’s help” (answer to question 90 by the blessed Theodoret), and that in what was happening there was “much that is marvelous and exceeding the natural order of things” (John Chrysostom, 57, 609).
Genesis 30:40. And Jacob separated the lambs, and set the flocks to face the speckled and all the dark of the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves and did not mix them with Laban’s flock. Second method: in addition to the impression on sheep and goats produced by the speckled rods, Jacob, having in mind the same law of nature, produced an impression upon them by the sight of speckled cattle, causing the latter to pass before the eyes of the females, but remembering the agreement, not to mix his own cattle with Laban’s.
Genesis 30:41–42. And whenever the stronger livestock were breeding, Jacob placed the rods in the watering troughs in front of the livestock, so they would conceive near the rods. And when the livestock were feebler, he did not place them. So the feebler livestock fell to Laban, and the stronger to Jacob. Finally, the third method: wishing to have cattle not only in large quantity, but also of good quality, and on the other hand – not to make the increase of his own cattle too conspicuous to Laban, Jacob applied the said two methods only at the time when stronger livestock were breeding, i.e., in early spring (Rosenmüller, Scholia, 1:1, p. 478–479), and when weaker livestock were to breed, he left the matter to nature itself, and the livestock were born single-colored, falling to Laban.
Genesis 30:43. Thus the man became exceedingly prosperous, and had large flocks [and herds], and female servants and male servants, and camels and donkeys. The livestock which Jacob continually acquired in greater quantity, he sold and bartered for the things he needed: thus he became rich – the blessing of Isaac clearly began to be fulfilled in Jacob. But at the same time his relationship with Laban began to become strained – again a situation was created for Jacob requiring divine aid and guidance, and it was given to him (ch. 32–33). * * * According to Josephus (Antiqu. I, 18, 19) the meaning of “Naphtali” is ἀμηχάνητος – διὰ τὸ ἀντιτεχνάσασθαι (“unconquerable, by reason of wrestling by skill”). Mahanaim: Hebrew Bible: Lectures by Z. Dashevsky on the book “Shmuel”. – “Those teraphims which Rachel stole from Laban were clearly, as appears from the text of the Torah, the objects of idolatry. Laban directly says to Jacob: ‘Why did you steal my gods?’ There is no reason to even think that in David’s house there could be any such object. Teraphim is a noun in the plural form, but it is completely obvious that this does not necessarily denote a multitude of objects; it is called this way because of its large size, for example. According to the majority of opinions, this is a figure of some kind having human forms.”