AND HE LOOKED, AND BEHOLD A WELL IN THE FIELD, AND LO THREE FLOCKS OF SHEEP LYING THERE BY IT. Scripture tells this story at length in order to let us know that they that wait for the Eternal shall renew their strength,⁵⁹ and the fear of Him gives strength. For here our father Jacob is coming from the journey and he is tired, yet he alone rolls away the stone, a task which required all the shepherds. The many shepherds and all the watchmen of the three flocks of sheep could not shift the rock. With respect to this chapter, our Rabbis in Bereshith Rabbah⁶⁰ also have a secret which alludes to the future. For it happened to him that he came to Haran by way of the well, and only three of all the flocks were gathered. He arrived at the time when the stone was yet upon the mouth of the well, and the flocks waited for the water thereof. Likewise, the matter which is narrated here is all for the purpose of letting it be known that Jacob will succeed in this venture and will have children worthy of the fulfillment of this allusion. For the well alludes to the Sanctuary, and the three flocks of sheep are symbolic of the pilgrims ascending to the Sanctuary during the three festivals.⁶¹, and Succoth. See Deuteronomy 16:16. The expression, For out of that well they watered the flocks, alludes to the fact that they drew holy inspiration from the pilgrimages to the Sanctuary. It may be that it alludes to the verse, For out of Zion shall go forth Torah⁶² — which has been likened to water,⁶³, 55:1, Baba Kamma 17a. and the word of the Eternal from Jerusalem.⁶² — And thither were all the flocks gathered⁶⁴ — from the entrance of Hamath unto the Brook of Egypt.⁶⁵. — And they rolled the stone from the well’s mouth and watered,⁶⁴ for they drew holy inspiration therefrom. And they put the stone back⁶⁴ to lie dormant until the next festival.

footnotes: ⁵⁹ Isaiah 40:31. ⁶⁰ 70:8. ⁶¹ Pesach, Shevuoth ⁶² Isaiah 2:3. Thus both prophecy and law emanated from the Sanctuary. ⁶³ Ibid. ⁶² Isaiah 2:3. Thus both prophecy and law emanated from the Sanctuary. ⁶⁴ Verse 3 here. ⁶⁵ I Kings 8:65. The verse refers to the gathering of pilgrims for the festival of Succoth ⁶⁴ Verse 3 here. ⁶⁴ Verse 3 here.

KNOW YE LABAN THE SON OF NAHOR? Laban was recognized and known by the name of his father’s father Nahor since Nahor was more important than Laban’s father [Bethuel], and he was the head of their family, as it is written, the G-d of Abraham and the G-d of Nahor.⁶⁶ [Thus, Laban being the son of Bethuel,⁶⁷ was nevertheless known by his father’s father’s name, Nahor.]⁶⁸, 22:22. It is possible that Bethuel was a dishonorable person, and Laban wanted people to ascribe his lineage only to his father’s father, for so we find, And Laban and Bethuel answered.⁶⁹ [Laban is thus mentioned before his father, which indicates that Bethuel was not regarded as the head of the family.] Perhaps all this is in honor of Abraham for [by virtue of Laban’s being known by Nahor’s name], the whole family traced its lineage to Nahor the brother of Abraham,⁷⁰, 22:23. [and thus demonstrated its connection with its illustrious relative Abraham].

footnotes: ⁶⁶ Further, 31:53. ⁶⁷ Above, 28:5. ⁶⁸ Ibid. ⁶⁹ Above, 24:50. ⁷⁰ Ibid.

FOR SHE WAS A SHEPHERDESS. The intent of this is to relate that Laban’s sheep had no shepherd other than Rachel, since her father turned over the flock to her alone. She alone tended them all the days, and Leah did not go with the flock at all. The matter was thus unlike that of the daughters of Jethro, where all seven daughters tended the flock simultaneously, as it is said, And they came and drew water.⁷¹ Perhaps due to Leah’s eyes being tender,⁷² the rays of the sun would have hurt her, or because Leah was older and of marriageable age, her father was more concerned about her. Jethro however was honored in his community and he was the priest of the country, and he was confident that people would be afraid of approaching his daughters. It may be that Laban was more modest than Jethro for Abraham’s family was proper and modest, but Rachel was yet young and there was no concern for her. This is the sense of the verse, And Jacob kissed Rachel.⁷³ It may be as Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that where the Hebrew word for “kissing” is followed by the letter lamed — [as here: Vayishak Yaakov l’Rachel, instead of the word eth] — it means not on the mouth, but that he kissed her on her head or on her shoulder.

footnotes: ⁷¹ Exodus 2:16. ⁷² Further, Verse 17. ⁷³ Verse 11 here.

AND SHE TOLD HER FATHER. Rashi comments: “Her mother was dead.” And so it is stated in Bereshith Rabbah.⁷⁴ But according to the plain meaning of Scripture, Rachel related it to her father in order to inform him of the arrival of his relative and so that he should go forth to meet him and honor him. For, as regards her mother, what was Jacob to her and what could she do for him? However, Rebekah did show her mother the jewels which Eliezer gave her,⁷⁵ as is the custom of maidens.

footnotes: ⁷⁴ 70:12. ⁷⁵ Above, 24:28.

IS IT BECAUSE THOU ART MY BROTHER, THAT THOU SHOULDEST SERVE ME FOR NOUGHT? Scripture did not relate that Jacob served Laban. It is possible that from the time Scripture stated, And he watered the flock of Laban his mother’s brother,⁷⁶ the flock never left his care, for when he saw that Rachel was a shepherdess, Jacob had compassion for her and desired that she no longer tend the sheep. So, out of his love for her, he tended them. It is also possible to say that Laban spoke with cunning. First he said to him that he is his bone and his flesh,⁷⁷ and that he will have compassion for him as a man has compassion for his own bone and flesh, but when he saw that Jacob tarried there, supporting himself from Laban’s belongings, he said to him, “Is it because thou art my brother, that thou shouldest serve me for nought? For I know that you will henceforth serve me for you are an ethical man, and you will not support yourself from the property of others. Nor do I desire that the labor you perform for me be free without full compensation. Therefore tell me what you want for your hire, and I will give it.” Jacob then discerned Laban’s mind, and he told him that he would serve him for seven years for Rachel. Undefined, “serving” here means tending the sheep, for this is what was needed and this was the subject of their conversation.

footnotes: ⁷⁶ Verse 10 here. ⁷⁷ Verse 14 here.

FOR MY DAYS ARE FULFILLED. This means “the time which my mother told me to remain away from home.” Another explanation is: For my days are fulfilled — “I am now eighty-four years old and when shall I beget twelve tribes?” These are the words of Rashi.

FULFILL ‘SHVUA’ (THE WEEK OF) THIS ONE. The word shvua is in the construct state for it is punctuated with a sheva. It thus means the seven days of this wife, referring to the seven days of the wedding feast. These too are the words of Rashi. But if so, [i.e., if Rashi interprets shvua as referring to the seven days of the wedding feast rather than, more simply, the seven years of labor, thus implying that the seven years of work had been completed], why did not the Rabbi [Rashi] explain the verse above, my days are fulfilled, as referring to the years of work and the condition which were completed, as Onkelos has it,⁷⁸ and which is the true sense of the verse, [instead of explaining it as referring to the length of time his mother told him to remain there or to his advanced age]? For merely because the days his mother told him to remain with him were completed or because of his advanced age, Laban would not give him his daughter before the mutually agreed time, and it is enough to expect of Laban that he fulfill his condition. It is according to Onkelos, [who says that Jacob’s seven years of work had been completed], that we are bound to explain, fulfill ‘shvua’ this one, as referring to the seven days of the wedding feast for as Jacob had told him, the days of work had already been completed. So also did Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explain it. And I do not know [how the reference here could be to “the seven days of the marriage feast,” as Rashi claims], for “the seven days of the wedding feast” is an ordinance established for Israel by our teacher Moses.⁷⁹ Perhaps we may say that the dignitaries of the nations had already practiced this custom of old, just as was the case with mourning, as it is written, And he made a mourning for his father seven days.⁸⁰ And that which the Rabbis have deduced from here in the Yerushalmi⁸¹ and in Bereshith Rabbah,⁸² “One must not mix one rejoicing with another,” that is merely a Scriptural intimation based upon the customary practices of the ancient ones prior to the giving of the Torah. But in our Gemara,⁸³ the Rabbis did not derive it from here, [i.e., from Laban’s statement], but instead they deduced it from the verse, And Solomon held the feast etc.⁸⁴. The Rabbis explain that the first seven days were a feast of dedication of the new Temple, and the second seven days were the feast of Tabernacles, and he did not combine the two festivities into one because “we must not mix one rejoicing with another.” — The explanation for this principle is stated by Tosafoth Moed Katan 8b. “For just as we must not perform religious duties bundle-wise, but pay exclusive attention to each singly, so must we turn our heart completely toward one rejoicing only, without interference from another.” Now it is possible to say that this was part of “the changing of the hire ten times”⁸⁵ of which Jacob accused Laban. For Jacob told Laban originally that the days were fulfilled, and Laban kept quiet and gave him Leah. Later, Laban told him, “Fulfill ‘shvua’ this one, for the work period for Leah has not been fulfilled, and I gave her to you before the time I had agreed upon.” And Jacob listened to Laban and completed the days as defined by Laban, for he desired Rachel, and what could he do? Therefore, Scripture does not say at first, “And it came to pass when the days were fulfilled, and Jacob said, etc.,” [for this would have indicated mutual agreement concerning the completion of the work period, whereas Laban, as explained, claimed that that time had not yet arrived]. It is also possible to say that when the seventh year arrived, Jacob said to Laban, Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, meaning that this is the year in which the days will be fulfilled. Similarly, The aged with him that is full of days,⁸⁶ which means, “he who is attaining his final year.” Similarly, Until the day of your consecration be fulfilled,⁸⁷ which means, “until the seventh day in which the days of your consecration will be fulfilled.” It is possible that Jacob said, My days are fulfilled, because they were about to be fulfilled and are considered as if fulfilled. There are many similar examples in Scripture. Likewise, in the next Seder (portion of the Torah), As her soul was departing, for she died,⁸⁸ which means, “when she was near death, and was considered as if she had already died.” And this is the meaning of the expression, that I may come unto her,⁸⁹ that is to say, Jacob said, “My request is not that you give her to me and I will then leave, but rather that I marry her and complete the few days which are still obligatory upon me for now that the period is almost over, you will not be afraid that I might leave you.” Our Rabbis have given a Midrashic interpretation to the words, that I may come unto her,⁹⁰ because it is not the ethical way to mention it in this manner, the more so with righteous people, but the intent is as I have said. Laban then told Jacob, “Fulfill the seven years of this one, Leah, for perhaps since I transgressed your will by giving you Leah instead of Rachel you will not fulfill them.” Perhaps he mentioned it in order that it be known when the days of work for Rachel begin, and then he told him, “I will give you the other daughter, Rachel, for the service which thou shalt serve with me after the wedding.”

footnotes: ⁷⁸ The days of my work are fulfilled. (Onkelos, Verse 27.) ⁷⁹ Yerushalmi Kethuboth I, 1. ⁸⁰ Further, 50:10. Thus the seven-day period of mourning was already an established practice in the days of the patriarchs. ⁸¹ Moed Katan I, 7. ⁸² 70:18. ⁸³ Moed Katan 9a. ⁸⁴ I Kings 8:65. The verse reads: And Solomon held the feast at that time … seven days and seven days, even fourteen days ⁸⁵ Further, 31:41. ⁸⁶ Jeremiah 6:11. ⁸⁷ Leviticus 8:33. ⁸⁸ Further, 35:18. ⁸⁹ Verse 21 here. ⁹⁰ Bereshith Rabbah 70:17; also mentioned in Rashi, Verse 21: his mind was intent upon having children and rearing them in the religious traditions of his fathers.

‘VENITNAH’ (AND WE WILL GIVE) THEE. The verb is plural, as in, *Let us go down, and let us confound there;*⁹¹ And let us burn.⁹², Verse 3. Here too it is a form of venitein (and we will give). This is Rashi’s comment, but he did not say why an individual person [Laban] would use the plural form. Perhaps Rashi thought that this is the manner in which dignitaries speak in the Sacred Language, i.e., as if others are speaking. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said here that nitnah is in the (niphal) passive tense and the prefix vav converts it from the past to the future, thus meaning, “and it shall be given to you.” The correct interpretation appears to me to be that Laban’s words were spoken with cunning. He said to Jacob, “It is not so done in our place,⁹³ for the people of the place will not let me do so, [i.e., to marry off the younger before the firstborn], for this would be a shameful act in their eyes. But you fulfill the week of this one, and we — I and all the people of the place — will give you also this one, for we will all consent to the matter, and we will give you honor and a feast as we have done with the first one.”

footnotes: ⁹¹ Above, 11:7. ⁹² Ibid. ⁹³ Verse 26 here.

AND HE LOVED RACHEL MORE THAN LEAH. The reason why Scripture mentions that he also loved Rachel more than Leah is that it is natural for a man to have more love for the woman with whom he first had relations, just as the Sages have mentioned with reference to women:⁹⁴ “And she makes a firm commitment only to he who marries her first.” Thus Jacob’s loving Rachel more than Leah was unnatural. This is the sense of the word gam: [and he loved ‘gam’ Rachel than Leah].

footnotes: ⁹⁴ Sanhedrin 22b.

AND THE ETERNAL SAW THAT LEAH WAS HATED. Now Leah had deceived her sister and also Jacob. For even if we were to say that she showed respect for her father, who took her and brought her in to him and she was not rebellious against him, she should have by word or sign indicated that she was Leah. All the more is this so since she feigned herself all night to be another, which was the reason why Jacob did not recognize her until he saw her in the morning. It was for this reason that Jacob hated her. But G-d, knowing that she did so in order to be married to the righteous one, had compassion upon her. And so the Rabbis said in Bereshith Rabbah:⁹⁵ “When Jacob saw the deeds by which Leah had deceived her sister, he decided to divorce her. But when the Holy One, blessed be He, remembered her by giving her children, Jacob said, ‘Shall I divorce the mother of these children?’” This is the meaning of the expression, And the Eternal saw: He had compassion upon her so that Jacob should not leave her. But there are some scholars⁹⁶ who say that in the case of two wives, one of whom is loved exceedingly, the second one, who is the less beloved, is called “hated” relative to the first, just as Scripture said, And he loved Rachel more than Leah,⁹⁷ but not that he hated her. Leah however was ashamed of the matter and so G-d saw her affliction.

footnotes: ⁹⁵ 71:2. ⁹⁶ R’dak in his Commentary on the Torah. ⁹⁷ Verse 30 here.