Genesis 28 – 30: “Two weddings & a fraudulent father-in-law”
The story of ABRAHAM’S family
o 1st generation: Abraham fathers Ishmael & Isaac;
ISAAC “inherits the blessing” which Abram had received in chapters 12, 15 &
17.
o 2nd generation: Isaac fathers Esau & Jacob; JACOB
inherits the blessing, through no small amount of trickery/subterfuge (cf. Gn.
28.10, 13-14).
o 3rd generation: Jacob will father 12 sons through his 2
wives (Leah & Rachel = sisters) and his 2 concubines/maidservants; Joseph (son # 11) is his father’s
favourite and becomes the focus of chapters 37 – 50 of the book of Genesis.
Genesis 27.41 – 28.22: Jacob’s exile – punishment or providence?
Jacob “the trickster” has cheated
Esau out of both his birthright and the patriarchal blessing. First, he took advantage of Esau’s hunger in
order to have his older twin foreswear the birthright (cf. Gn. 25.29-34); and
then, at the prompting of his mother
Rebekah, Jacob swindled the blessing out of his father Isaac, who is now
blind and near death (cf. 27.1-40: “the days of mourning are approaching”). This is not the first time in the story that
we have seen a woman using manipulation in order to advance the cause of her
favourite son (cf. 21.8-21). The success of the son is the pride and joy of the mother.
Also, before we
jump to judge Jacob, we must remember that Jacob is acting in the spirit of his grandfather Abraham, who didn’t hesitate to
act in a shady manner if it was to his
advantage to do so (cf. 12.10-20; 20.1-18).
In the book of Genesis, he who dies with the most flocks, herds, women
and children wins. To amass wealth and
to have numerous offspring – that’s the
name of the game. It should come as
no surprise that God’s promises to Abraham (numerous descendants, a great name
and a land to call his own: 12.1-3) consist of things that any Ancient Near
Eastern nomad would give an arm for. Of
course, in the case of Abraham, the question remains as to why he would abandon
his stable, comfortable, urban existence in the city of Ur (or Haran, for that
matter) in order to take to the risky road and become a vagabond, a man
“without a country”. As was the case
with his grandfather, Jacob, the “quiet man who lived in tents” (cf. 25.27),
must leave the comforts of home behind and go out alone to face an uncertain
future, with nothing to depend on besides his wits.
The situation that
Jacob now finds himself in is the result of the convergence of the typical Ancient Near Eastern family
dynamic, on the one hand, and the
providential plan of God, on the other.
Yes, Jacob has been playing the game of family politics, and yet, his
connivance with his mother to “steal” the family blessing and thus identify
himself as the heir of the promises to Abraham is NOT in and of itself opposed to God’s plan. There’s the rub – what do we say about someone who uses questionable means to
achieve God’s will? Can God advance
his purposes through – and by – the ambiguous motives of his human
agents (cf. Gn. 45.7-8; 50.20; Romans 8.28)?
After all, part of Rebekah’s motivation to have Isaac inherit the
blessing/promises was the fact that Esau had married outside the family (cf. 26.34-35; 27.46; 28.6-9). If all of the men of one generation of
Abraham’s descendants were to marry “pagan” women, then all is lost – Abraham’s family would lose its distinct identity as God’s special people, the new humanity
destined to model genuine humanness for the rest of the world. As far as Rebekah is concerned, Esau had
betrayed the family destiny and had thus disqualified himself from inheriting
the promised blessing. So, two things
needed to happen. First of all, Jacob needed to be blessed by Isaac and
designated the successor of Abraham (cf. 28.4), the one who will carry on “the
line of the blessing”. Secondly, Jacob needs to marry a woman
from Abraham’s family – from Rebekah’s
family – those who remained in the city of Haran (eastern Syria) after Abraham
answered God’s call to “go to the land that I will show you” (cf. 11.31-32;
12.1-3). As was the case with his father
Isaac (cf. 24.1-67), Jacob must go to Haran and find himself a wife there. Once again, Rebekah is the one to arrange things; she gets her husband to send
Jacob, ironically, away from the
(usually safe) confines of the family
encampment due to the danger of
Esau’s murderous rage to travel the (usually dangerous) road to Haran alone, where he will hopefully find safety as well as a suitable wife.
As Jacob dreams
beside the road, God speaks to him (28.13-15), repeating the Abrahamic blessing
from earlier in the narrative (cf. 12.1-3 & 13.14-17). An interesting parallel can be made between
Jacob’s dream of the ladder that reaches from earth to heaven, on the one hand,
and the inhabitants of Babel who attempted to build a tower that would reach to
heaven (cf. 11.1-9), on the other. God
thwarted the human attempt to unite earth
and heaven, motivated as it was by insecurity and prideful arrogance. History demonstrates that all human attempts to create utopias
actually end up creating hell on earth. Ex: communist regimes in Russia,
China, Cambodia, etc. The 20th
century was the bloodiest century in the history of the planet, where most of
the killing was done in the name of
creating a world without class distinctions, a world of justice for all, a
world of freedom from fear and superstition.
Even the number of those killed by atomic bombs (~ 200,000) appears
insignificant beside the number of those killed by Communist regimes (ex: 20
million Russians were killed by Stalin, their own leader, between the years
1922-52). While the babbling builders
failed to unite earth and heaven with their tower, Jacob, the homeless
vagabond, receives a vision of how the two “dimensions” of the cosmos can truly
be united – by a sovereign, gracious act of the Creator, who, for reasons best known to himself,
allowed Jacob to glance through the portal between earth and heaven and to
behold the divine glory. Upon awaking
from sleep, Jacob sets up a stone as a monument/altar to the God of
Abraham. Interestingly, Jacob promises
to give a tithe (“tenth”) of all that
God gives him back to God (28.22; cf. Gn. 14.17-20; Lev. 27.30-33).
Genesis 29.1 – 30.13: double trouble in paradise
And so, Jacob
emerges from the wilderness and comes upon… a
well (surprise, surprise). We all
know what’s going to happen next (cf. 24.10-15). Sure enough, enter stage left: here’s Rachel! Not only does Jacob’s beautiful cousin just
happen to show up at the right moment, but this road-weary fugitive seizes the
opportunity to demonstrate his physical prowess – Jacob single-handedly removes
the stone from the mouth of the well and proceeds to water his uncle’s flock.[1] Note that this a bit of a reversal of the situation described in
chapter 24, in which case it had been Rebekah,
the bride-to-be, who watered the camels of Abraham’s servant. Interestingly, Laban, Jacob’s uncle, greets
his nephew with words that are reminiscent of the words of Adam when God
presented him with Eve: “Surely you are
my bone and my flesh!” (29.14; cf. Gn. 2.23).
From this point on, the story follows the
contours of many a novel[2] –
one man, two women; this man loves the woman whom, according to cultural
norms/tradition, he shouldn’t. Also,
this man is subject to the will of someone who wields economic and social power
over him. Jacob & Laban – two
crafty, shady characters – will now conduct a lengthy duel of sorts, and
Jacob’s two cousins – Leah & Rachel – are caught in the middle, like poker
chips. The narrator tells us that Rachel is the younger daughter – so we know that she is going to be the cause of
the trouble (29.16) – “Jacob loved Rachel”.
Notice Laban’s question to Jacob: “What shall your wages be?” (29.15); note
Jacob’s response: “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel” (29.18). Rachel is to be Jacob’s salary for 7 years of labour as a shepherd. Once again, we see how women – in the
(Ancient) Near East – are treated as “things” to be exchanged[3]:
Pharaoh gives Abraham flocks, herds, and servants after having taken Sarah into
his harem (cf. 12.16); Sarah “gives” Hagar, her maidservant, to Abraham to be
the surrogate mother of “her” son (16.1-2); Lot offers his two daughters to the
men of Sodom in exchange for their leaving his two angelic guests unmolested
(19.6-8), Laban gives his maids to his daughters as wedding gifts (29.24, 29),
etc.
So, 7 years go by
“like a few days” (29.20). Laban throws
the traditional 7-day-long wedding feast, and Jacob takes his bride into the
conjugal suite to consummate the marriage… and behold: “When morning came, it was Leah!” (29.25). Laban, the one
holding all the cards and slippery as ever, dangles the carrot in front of
Jacob’s nose once again: “…Complete the week of this one (Leah), and we will give you the other (Rachel) also in
return for serving me another seven years” (29.26-27). Laban has got Jacob right where he wants him
– trapped in a marriage that he didn’t want, but whose inherent responsibilities
he is nonetheless obliged to honour. After
all, Laban is the one who has the power to give him what he really wants – Rachel.
Laban can sit back and relax – Jacob
must serve him for another 7 years.
And really, once the children start to arrive, and as Jacob settles into
family life, will he ever desire/be able
to leave…? There is to be yet more
trouble in paradise – after two consecutive weeks of honeymooning with two
different women, the narrator tells us: “(Jacob) loved Rachel more than Leah”
(29.30). And so, in tragic irony, Leah,
the unloved one, is fertile and
Rachel, the beloved, is barren. And thus begins the second duel, this one between the two newly-wedded
sisters. Laban & Jacob are dueling;
Leah & Rachel are dueling. You can
cut the tension in this family with a knife.
The score of the sisterly duel will be counted in terms of how many children they can bear
(personally or through surrogates). The
record of this duel can be read in the names Jacob’s two wives give their sons:
“Leah conceived and bore a son, and
she named him Reuben; for she said,
“Because the Lord has looked on my affliction; surely now my husband will love me” (29.32).
“Rachel’s maid Bilhah conceived
again and bore Jacob a second son. Then Rachel said, “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister, and have
prevailed”; so she named him Naphtali”
(30.7-8).
Leah’s and Rachel’s maids become pawns in the child-bearing
competition between the two sisters.
Genesis 30.14-43: Of mandrakes & poplars: the ways of human and
animal fertility
Chapter 30
concludes with two episodes involving
plants and fertility. Firstly, the
petty, resentful nature of the conflict between Jacob’s two wives surfaces in
the “mandrake episode”:
“Then Rachel said to Leah, “Please
give me some of your son’s mandrakes.” But she said to her, “Is it a small
matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s
mandrakes also?” Rachel said, “Then he may lie with you tonight for your son’s
mandrakes.” When Jacob came from the field in the evening, Leah went out to
meet him, and said, “You must come in to me; for I have hired you with my son’s mandrakes.” (30.14-16).
Jacob’s two wives strike a bargain; Leah “hires” her
husband’s “services” for the “price” of some aphrodisiac plants!
Secondly, there is
the “poplar episode”. During his 14 years
spent in the service of his uncle, Jacob the trickster has had his eyes open
for the chance to get the upper hand. Jacob begins the bargaining by asking his
uncle for permission to leave and go home to Canaan. Laban counters by asking his nephew what wages he wants (30.28; cf. 29.15). Surely, Jacob has a price? Jacob agrees when his uncle says that God has
prospered him ever since Jacob arrived.
Jacob points out just how good things have been going during the last 14
years, and Laban asks once again: “What shall I give you?” (30.31). Now Jacob
lays the trap: “You shall not give me
anything… let me pass through all your flock today, removing from it every speckled and spotted sheep and every
black lamb, and the spotted and speckled among the goats; and such shall be
my wages” (30.31-32). Who wants speckled
and spotted sheep and goats? Surely,
Jacob is thinking, Laban will jump at this opportunity to “pay” me with the
runts of the litter? But Jacob may have
underestimated his father-in-law’s under-handed ways. After having agreed to the deal, Laban
removes all the male sheep and goats who are speckled and spotted, thereby (so
he believes) removing the possibility of there being any speckled offspring for
Jacob to claim. But Jacob does his uncle
one better.
“Then Jacob took fresh rods of poplar and almond and plane,
and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the rods. He set
the rods that he had peeled in front of the flocks in…the watering places,
where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink,
the flocks bred in front of the rods, and so the flocks produced young that were striped, speckled, and spotted”
(30.37-39).
It seems that peeled poplar rods are an aphrodisiac for
livestock! The narrator tells us that
“Thus (Jacob) grew exceedingly rich, and had large flocks, and male and female
slaves, and camels and donkeys” (30.43; cf. 12.16 = the description of the
riches that Pharaoh bequeathed to Abraham after having taken Sarah as a
concubine, and with which Abraham left Egypt, once he had recovered his wife
from the royal harem). Jacob has done
well for himself. He had arrived in Haran
as a penniless vagabond. As his
grandfather Abraham had left Egypt a much richer man than he had been when he
entered the country, so Jacob will eventually leave Haran, loaded down with the
great wealth that he had accumulated during his sojourn there. However, Jacob has yet to face his uncle, who
doesn’t want to lose his cash cow, and will attempt to prevent his nephew
returning home to Canaan. Even if he can
get to Canaan, Jacob will still have to face his twin brother…
[1] This
is a continuation of the “pastoral” theme in Genesis. The good guys (and gals) tend to be shepherds
– Abel (4.2), Rachel (29.9).
[2] E.g.
Legends of the Fall (novella: 1979;
film: 1994), a story about 3 brothers who love the same woman.
[3] In
the case of Hagar (and all the other female slaves in the Genesis narrative),
we see that it was not only men who “exchanged”
women amongst themselves; even women
in positions of power exchanged other women (who had no power) in order to
achieve their own ends.
Comments
Post a Comment