And he heard the words of Laban's sons, saying: "Jacob has taken away all that was our father's; and of that which was our father's has he gotten all this wealth."
verse value 4349
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 66 letters. The shortest word is "took" (לָקַ֣ח, 3 letters) and the longest is "all·the·wealth" (אֵ֥ת כׇּל־הַכָּבֹ֖ד, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 99: to·our·father, to·our·father. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "sons·of·Laban" (בְנֵֽי־לָבָן֙), "and·from·which" (וּמֵאֲשֶׁ֣ר), "all·the·wealth" (אֵ֥ת כׇּל־הַכָּבֹ֖ד). The root אב appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "saying" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "and·from·which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "to·our·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis). First appearance of the root כבוד ("all·the·wealth") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·our·father', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיִּשְׁמַ֗ע [and·heard] (426) + אֶת־דִּבְרֵ֤י [the·words·of] (617) + בְנֵֽי־לָבָן֙ [sons·of·Laban] (144) + לֵאמֹ֔ר [saying] (271) + לָקַ֣ח [took] (138) + יַעֲקֹ֔ב [Jacob] (182) + אֵ֖ת כׇּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר [all·which] (952) + לְאָבִ֑ינוּ [to·our·father] (99) + וּמֵאֲשֶׁ֣ר [and·from·which] (547) + לְאָבִ֔ינוּ [to·our·father] (99) + עָשָׂ֕ה [has·acquired] (375) + אֵ֥ת כׇּל־הַכָּבֹ֖ד [all·the·wealth] (482) + הַזֶּֽה [this] (17) = 4349.
Onkelos
He heard the words of Laban's sons, who were saying: Jacob has taken all that belonged to our father, and from what belonged to our father he has acquired all this wealth.
Rashi
עשה HE HATH MADE — i.e. gathered, as (1 Samuel 14:48) “And he gathered (ויעש) troops and smote the Amalekites”.
Ibn Ezra
"The words of Laban's sons" — he had male sons, as it says: "and he placed [them] in the hand of his sons" (Genesis 30:35).
Sforno
He heard the words. He heard that Lavan’s sons were slandering him out of jealousy.
Kli Yakar
“Jacob took all that belonged to our father.” Later they said “and from what belonged to our father he made all this wealth.” The word from what implies only a portion and not everything, thus their statements seem to contradict each other. Moreover, it is difficult to understand how they could speak such an obvious falsehood — did Jacob really take everything that belonged to their father, leaving him with nothing? After all, Laban still had sheep, cattle, and tents! The explanation of these matters is as follows: Initially, they weren’t speaking about physical possessions at all, but rather about the schemes and matters of deception in which their father was more expert and knowledgeable than anyone else in the world. He was able to deceive others, but others could not deceive him. Jacob learned all of Laban’s deceptive ways until even Laban himself couldn’t stand against him, for Jacob outmaneuvered Laban. Regarding this they said Jacob took all that belonged to our father — meaning he acquired all his methods of deception. When speaking about the actual wealth, they said and from what belonged to our father he made all this glory/wealth.
And Jacob beheld the countenance of Laban, and, behold, it was not toward him as beforetime.
verse value 2493
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 38 letters. The shortest word is "Laban" (לָבָ֑ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "face" (אֶת־פְּנֵ֣י, 5 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "as·yesterday" (כִּתְמ֥וֹל), "day·before" (שִׁלְשֽׁוֹם). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "and·saw" (root ראה, 140x in Genesis); "with·him" (root עם, 87x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Laban', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיַּ֥רְא [and·saw] (217) + יַעֲקֹ֖ב [Jacob] (182) + אֶת־פְּנֵ֣י [face] (541) + לָבָ֑ן [Laban] (82) + וְהִנֵּ֥ה [and·behold] (66) + אֵינֶ֛נּוּ [is·not] (117) + עִמּ֖וֹ [with·him] (116) + כִּתְמ֥וֹל [as·yesterday] (496) + שִׁלְשֽׁוֹם [day·before] (676) = 2493.
Onkelos
Jacob saw the face of Laban, and behold, it was not toward him as it had been yesterday and the day before.
Sforno
Yaakov saw Lavan’s face. He saw that he had accepted his sons’ slander.
Or HaChaim
וירא יעקב…ויאמר ה׳ אל יעקב. Jacob saw, etc….G'd said to Jacob. We need to analyse how these two verses are connected to one another. The intent of the verse is to explain the two separate considerations which preceded Jacob's flight from Laban. Unless both considerations had prompted him Jacob would not have departed without informing Laban about this first. Or, he might have waited a few days to see if Laban's attitude towards him would undergo a change for the better. After all, Jacob was a free man, he was not Laban's slave and the latter could not have prevented his departure by legal means. In view of what he heard Laban's sons say Jacob was afraid that Laban would steal all his wealth. Jacob himself said in 31,31 that he had feared that Laban would steal his daughters back from him. Had he not received a prophetic vision to leave he would not have been in a hurry to take such a step. He would have attempted to secure Laban's goodwill. We therefore need both these verses to explain Jacob's behaviour.
And Hashem said to Jacob: "Return to the land of your fathers, and to your kindred; and I will be with you."
verse value 2258 — יְהֹוָה֙ = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 45 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָה֙) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "return" (שׁ֛וּב, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·to·your·native·land" (וּלְמוֹלַדְתֶּ֑ךָ, 8 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "your·ancestors" (אֲבוֹתֶ֖יךָ). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "and·I·will·be" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "to·land" (root ארץ, 305x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·to·your·native·land', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 2 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֤אמֶר [and·said] (257) + יְהֹוָה֙ [Hashem] (26) + אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֔ב [to·Jacob] (213) + שׁ֛וּב [return] (308) + אֶל־אֶ֥רֶץ [to·land] (322) + אֲבוֹתֶ֖יךָ [your·ancestors] (439) + וּלְמוֹלַדְתֶּ֑ךָ [and·to·your·native·land] (536) + וְאֶֽהְיֶ֖ה [and·I·will·be] (27) + עִמָּֽךְ [with·you] (130) = 2258.
Onkelos
Hashem said to Jacob: Return to the land of your fathers and to your birthplace, and My Word will be with you.
Rashi
שוב אל ארץ אבותיך RETURN UNTO THE LAND OF THY FATHERS — and there I will be with thee; but as long as you are associated with the unclean Laban it is impossible to make my Divine Presence (Shechina) rest upon you (Midrash Tanchuma, Vayetzei 10).
Sforno
!ויאמר אלוקים אל יעקב שוב, The Torah informs us that as a result of the meeting between Yaakov and his wives he fled from Charan without taking formal leave of Lavan as ordinary courtesy would have required him to do. He was convinced that in view of the fact that Lavan had accepted the badmouthing of him by his sons, he would steal some or most of his belongings before allowing him to leave. He said so himself during the confrontation in verse 31 when he expressed concern that Lavan would even have robbed him of his wives, claiming them as his seeing that they were his daughters. ואהיה עמך. So that you will not be harmed on the way.
Chizkuni
ויאמר ה' אל יעקב, “the Lord said to Yaakov;” what follows is the dream that he told his wives.
And Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah to the field to his flock,
verse value 1685
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 33 letters. The shortest word is "Jacob" (יַעֲקֹ֔ב, 4 letters) and the longest is "to·his·flock" (אֶל־צֹאנֽוֹ, 6 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·to·Leah" (וּלְלֵאָ֑ה), "to·his·flock" (אֶל־צֹאנֽוֹ). 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "and·called" (root קרא, 123x in Genesis); "and·sent" (root שלח, 72x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·to·Leah', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 2 words. Full calculation: וַיִּשְׁלַ֣ח [and·sent] (354) + יַעֲקֹ֔ב [Jacob] (182) + וַיִּקְרָ֖א [and·called] (317) + לְרָחֵ֣ל [Rachel] (268) + וּלְלֵאָ֑ה [and·to·Leah] (72) + הַשָּׂדֶ֖ה [the·field] (314) + אֶל־צֹאנֽוֹ [to·his·flock] (178) = 1685.
Onkelos
Jacob sent and called Rachel and Leah out to the field, to his flock.
Rashi
ויקרא לרחל וללאה AND HE CALLED RACHEL AND LEAH — First Rachel and afterwards Leah for she was the chief wife of the house for whose sake Jacob had entered into relations with Laban. Even the descendants of Leah admitted this (that Rachel was the principal wife), for Boaz and his Law-Court who were of the Tribe of Judah (Leah’s son) said (Ruth 4:11) “like Rachel and like Leah which two did build etc.”, mentioning Rachel before Leah (Genesis Rabbah 71:2).
Chizkuni
ויקרא לרחל וללאה, “he sent word to Rachel and Leah to come to him;” the Torah mentions the names of these wives by name as they were the senior wives; he did not have to send messages to Zilpah and Bilhah and their respective children as they were in his proximity all the time, helping him tend the flocks.
Targum Yonatan
And Jakob sent Naphtali, who was a swift mes-senger, and he called Rahel and Leah, and they came into the field unto his flock.
and said to them: "I see your father's countenance, that it is not toward me as beforetime; but the God of my father has been with me.
verse value 2810 — אָבִ֔י = 13 (echad/ahavah)
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 58 letters. Notable word values: "my·father" (אָבִ֔י) = 13, the value of echad ('one') and ahavah ('love'). The shortest word is "to·them" (לָהֶ֗ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "that·it·is·not" (כִּֽי־אֵינֶ֥נּוּ, 7 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "your·father" (אֲבִיכֶ֔ן), "that·it·is·not" (כִּֽי־אֵינֶ֥נּוּ), "as·yesterday" (כִּתְמֹ֣ל). The root אב appears 2 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "was" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "and·God·of" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'day·before', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֣אמֶר [and·said] (257) + לָהֶ֗ן [to·them] (85) + רֹאֶ֤ה [seeing] (206) + אָנֹכִי֙ [I] (81) + אֶת־פְּנֵ֣י [face] (541) + אֲבִיכֶ֔ן [your·father] (83) + כִּֽי־אֵינֶ֥נּוּ [that·it·is·not] (147) + אֵלַ֖י [to·me] (41) + כִּתְמֹ֣ל [as·yesterday] (490) + שִׁלְשֹׁ֑ם [day·before] (670) + וֵֽאלֹהֵ֣י [and·God·of] (52) + אָבִ֔י [my·father] (13) + הָיָ֖ה [was] (20) + עִמָּדִֽי [with·me] (124) = 2810.
Onkelos
He said to them: I see your father's face, that it is not toward me as it was yesterday and the day before. But the God of my father has been with me.
Ibn Ezra
"The face of your father" — I have seen by his expression that he is not with me as he was yesterday and the day before. Or the meaning of 'he is not toward me' is like: "The face of Hashem has dispersed them" (Lamentations 4:16).
Or HaChaim
ויאמר להן ראה אני פני אביכם, He said to them: "I look upon the face of your father, etc." Jacob invited his wives to give him a reasonable sounding explanation for their father's recent hostility topwards him. In the event that his wives would justify their father's attitude by the fact that Jacob had become wealthier than their father, Jacob added "G'd was with me." He told them that his new wealth was a blessing by G'd not the result of competing with their father.
And you know that with all my power I have served your father.
verse value 2086
Insights
Verse structure: 6 words, 30 letters. The shortest word is "for" (כִּ֚י, 2 letters) and the longest is "your·father" (אֶת־אֲבִיכֶֽן, 7 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "you·know" (יְדַעְתֶּ֑ן), "with·all·my·strength" (בְּכׇל־כֹּחִ֔י), "your·father" (אֶת־אֲבִיכֶֽן). 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "your·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis); "for" (root כי, 167x in Genesis); "with·all·my·strength" (root כל, 127x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'you·know', dividing the verse into phrases of 2 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְאַתֵּ֖נָה [and·you] (462) + יְדַעְתֶּ֑ן [you·know] (534) + כִּ֚י [for] (30) + בְּכׇל־כֹּחִ֔י [with·all·my·strength] (90) + עָבַ֖דְתִּי [I·served] (486) + אֶת־אֲבִיכֶֽן [your·father] (484) = 2086.
Onkelos
You yourselves know that with all my strength I served your father.
Ramban
THAT WITH ALL MY POWER I HAVE SERVED YOUR FATHER. That is, “from the outset, and he has been blessed since my coming.” It is possible that Laban’s flocks had been many, but that even the feebler ones were blessed since Jacob came, for Laban’s sons complained only out of jealousy of Jacob that he had gotten all this wealth. here.
And your father has mocked me, and changed my wages ten times; but God suffered him not to hurt me.
verse value 4204 — אֱלֹהִ֔ים = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 52 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִ֔ים) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "in·me" (בִּ֔י, 2 letters) and the longest is "my·wages" (אֶת־מַשְׂכֻּרְתִּ֖י, 8 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·your·father" (וַאֲבִיכֶן֙), "has·mocked" (הֵ֣תֶל), "and·changed" (וְהֶחֱלִ֥ף). 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "God" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "and·your·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis); "and·did·not·allow·him" (root נתן, 150x in Genesis). First appearance of the root חלף ("and·changed") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'times', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַאֲבִיכֶן֙ [and·your·father] (89) + הֵ֣תֶל [has·mocked] (435) + בִּ֔י [in·me] (12) + וְהֶחֱלִ֥ף [and·changed] (129) + אֶת־מַשְׂכֻּרְתִּ֖י [my·wages] (1371) + עֲשֶׂ֣רֶת [ten] (970) + מֹנִ֑ים [times] (140) + וְלֹֽא־נְתָנ֣וֹ [and·did·not·allow·him] (543) + אֱלֹהִ֔ים [God] (86) + לְהָרַ֖ע [to·harm] (305) + עִמָּדִֽי [with·me] (124) = 4204.
Onkelos
Yet your father has deceived me and changed my wages ten times. But Hashem did not allow him to do me harm.
Rashi
עשרת מנים TEN TIMES — The word מנים never means less than ten (Ruth 4:11). מנים signifies sum — the total of enumeration — these are tens: we may infer, therefore, that he changed the conditions of his hire one hundred times (Genesis Rabbah 74:3).
Ramban
AND YOUR FATHER HATH MOCKED ME, AND CHANGED MY WAGES TEN TIMES. This was true, even though Scripture did not previously relate it. And so too did Jacob tell Laban: And thou hast changed my wages ten times. There are many similar places in the Torah. For example, in this earlier section, Scripture did not relate that Leah gave the mandrakes to Rachel [although the event is referred to later in Verse 16: for I have hired thee with my son’s mandrakes].
Ibn Ezra
"He mocked me" (הֵתֵל בִּי) — this is an unusual word, because the tav is without a dagesh, whereas by right it should be doubled, as in: "And Elijah mocked them" (I Kings 18:27), which conveys ridicule. "Ten times" (עֶשֶׂרֶת מֹנִים) — from the root of "count the people" (II Samuel 24:1, with variation); the meaning is ten in number. Or he mentioned ten because it is a round number.
Or HaChaim
ואביכן התל בי, "and your father deceived me, etc." What precisely was the deception which Laban was guilty of? If it was עברת הדרך, this should be called robbery. Perhaps Laban noticed already the first time that it was unusual for most of the flocks to give birth to animals with the skin patterns which he had allocated to Jacob. As a result he tried to be clever and changed the designation of the animals which were to be Jacob's as soon as the animals were in heat, before they actually gave birth. If that is what happened the description of his trick as התול, deception, instead of as robbery would be accurate.
If he said thus: The speckled shall be your wages; then all the flock bore speckled; and if he said thus: The streaked shall be your wages; then all the flock bore streaked.
verse value 3140
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 75 letters. The shortest word is "if·thus" (אִם־כֹּ֣ה, 4 letters) and the longest is "all·the·flocks" (כׇל־הַצֹּ֖אן, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 540: your·wages, your·wages. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "if·thus" (אִם־כֹּ֣ה), "and·if·thus" (וְאִם־כֹּ֣ה). The root אם appears 2 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "he·would·say" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "shall·be" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "and·bore" (root ילד, 193x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'speckled', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 8 words.
Onkelos
If he said thus: The speckled ones shall be your wages — then all the flock bore speckled ones. And if he said thus: The striped ones shall be your wages — then all the flock bore striped ones.
Ramban
IF HE SAID THUS: THE SPECKLED SHALL BE THY WAGES. The meaning thereof is that at first Laban agreed to give Jacob the two appearances the speckled and the spotted — also the brownish lambs. Then he retracted and agreed to give him another color, and thus he changed it every year. The flocks, however, gave birth accordingly. This was not due to the power of the sticks, for he was telling them of the deed of the Great G-d who treated him wondrously each and every year, just as he said, But G-d suffered him not to do me evil. It is also possible that Laban changed his wages after the flocks became pregnant and gave birth in accordance with Jacob’s will, it pleasing the Creator to do so. [In this case, it clearly was not due to the power of the sticks.] And so we find in Bereshith Rabbah:2. “The Holy One, blessed be He, foresaw what Laban was destined to do to our father Jacob, and He created the form of the sheep to conform to the colors Laban was to stipulate. Thus, it is not written here, ‘If he said (amar) thus,’ but it is written, ‘If he will say (yomar) thus,’” [indicating that G-d foresaw what Laban was destined to stipulate to Jacob].
Ibn Ezra
And this is what he said: 'The ring-straked shall be your wages' — it is known that he changed his wages each time, first to take only the ring-straked alone, and then at another time only the spotted.
Or HaChaim
אם כה יאמר, "If he said thus, etc." Although the original condition had been that Jacob should take the spotted and speckled ones, he did not honour his word but agreed to give him only one of these two. Another reason is that originally the ankle-striped ones had not been included in the agreement at all. Laban therefore argued that those certainly were not part of Jacob's share. The fact that Laban did not admit the truth can be seen from the fact that he had removed this category of animal, whereas later on he negotiated with him about exchanging them for animals with a different skin pattern. This kind of wheeling and dealing was repeated no fewer than ten times. All the while the original conditions remained legally valid. The reason the Torah describes this as in the future, i.e. ואם כה יאמר, instead of אם כה אמר, may be support for my theory that Laban hastened to change the terms of the agreement as soon as the animals were in heat and conceived, but before they actually gave birth again. Clearly Jacob's success was not due to his own machinations but only to G'd's intervention on his behalf.
Kli Yakar
If he would say, “The speckled ones shall be your wages,” etc. The text should have said “if he said” [in past tense], because if he would say implies the future. It appears that this relates to what [Jacob] said and God did not allow him to harm me, because he had already seen in his dream I have seen all that Laban is doing to you, etc. Therefore he said if he would say referring to the future, because obviously during the time of placing the rods, spotted and speckled ones would be born. Rather, even in the future when I won’t place the rods, nevertheless everything will be according to his condition — that if he says the speckled shall be your wages, they will all birth speckled ones, because I was thus promised in the dream from the Almighty, since God saw my affliction and all that Laban was doing to me. For when I said remove from there every speckled and spotted sheep, my intention was to say that there should be two flocks close to each other, and if the females would go to the flock of speckled and spotted ones, it would be due to my fortune, and if they would become pregnant in their [Laban’s] flock, it would be due to his fortune. Presumably Laban would agree to this because it’s more likely they would become pregnant in their own flock than go to another flock. But Laban distanced them by a three days’ journey in such a way that it would be impossible for the females to go to that [other] flock, so that Jacob would leave empty-handed. Therefore, he needed to do the matter with the rods, and the Holy One, Blessed be He, agreed with his method, indicating that even without placing the rods, it would be so in the future. In the book Toldot Yitzchak, he explained that the reason it states if he would say thus is because Laban saw that everything Jacob desired, God fulfilled and agreed to. Therefore, he thought to devise a scheme against God’s will, which was to initially stipulate spotted ones [as Jacob’s wages], and when spotted ones would be conceived, he would then change the agreement to speckled ones, since the spotted ones had already been conceived. However, the Holy One, Blessed be He, knew what was in Laban’s heart — that this is what he would say after they were conceived — and so God caused them to be conceived with the appearance that Laban would specify in the future at the time of conception, saying “this is the appearance I desire.” This is why it states if he would say thus in the future tense.
Tur HaArokh
אם כה יאמר: נקודים יהיה שכרך, וגו', “if he would say thus: “the blotched ones will be your wages, etc.” Originally, Yaakov had stipulated two skin patterns among the goats, as well as the colour brown when it would show up among the sheep. When the result favoured Yaakov, Lavan changed the terms of the agreement, substituting skin patterns which had been rare up to that point. However, as soon as he did so, the animals bore young with the skin patterns which favoured Yaakov disproportionately. The new skin patterns were already totally unrelated to anything Yaakov could do by peeling them and patterning them. It was clear that without Divine intervention on behalf of Yaakov, he could not have become so rich in so short a period of time. We know this from the fact that Yaakov did not add that he had to use these stratagems again and again.
Thus God has taken away the cattle of your father, and given them to me.
verse value 1397 — אֱלֹהִ֛ים = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 5 words, 26 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִ֛ים) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "and·has·taken·away" (וַיַּצֵּ֧ל, 4 letters) and the longest is "the·livestock·of" (אֶת־מִקְנֵ֥ה, 6 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·has·taken·away" (וַיַּצֵּ֧ל), "the·livestock·of" (אֶת־מִקְנֵ֥ה). 5 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "God" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "your·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis); "and·gave·to·me" (root נתן, 150x in Genesis). First appearance of the root נצל ("and·has·taken·away") in Genesis. Full calculation: וַיַּצֵּ֧ל [and·has·taken·away] (136) + אֱלֹהִ֛ים [God] (86) + אֶת־מִקְנֵ֥ה [the·livestock·of] (596) + אֲבִיכֶ֖ם [your·father] (73) + וַיִּתֶּן־לִֽי [and·gave·to·me] (506) = 1397.
Onkelos
Hashem has separated your father's livestock and given them to me.
Ibn Ezra
"And God delivered" — like the meaning of "and they despoiled Egypt" (Exodus 12:36); both derive from the root of "deliver me, I pray" (Genesis 32:12), though the connection is somewhat distant. And what Jacob said to his wives is itself true, for he saw this in a dream — that Hashem would help him to strengthen the flock and cause them to give birth even without the rods.
Chizkuni
את מקנה אביכם, “the herds of your father.” The masculine ending ם is used although according to the rules of grammar the feminine ending should have been used.
Rashbam
ויצל, He separated. Any word in the Hebrew language denoting salvation, involves setting someone apart from others who share doom.
And it came to pass at the time that the flock conceived, that I lifted up my eyes, and saw in a dream, and, behold, the he-goats which leaped upon the flock were streaked, speckled, and grizzled.
verse value 3135 — בַּחֲל֑וֹם = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 68 letters. Notable word values: "in·a·dream" (בַּחֲל֑וֹם) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "at·the·time·of" (בְּעֵת֙, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·he-goats" (הָֽעַתֻּדִים֙, 6 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "was·in·heat" (יַחֵ֣ם), "and·I·lifted" (וָאֶשָּׂ֥א), "the·he-goats" (הָֽעַתֻּדִים֙). The root צאן appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·it·was" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "and·I·saw" (root ראה, 140x in Genesis); "my·eyes" (root עין, 79x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·a·dream', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 7 words.
Onkelos
It came to pass at the time the flock conceived, I lifted my eyes and saw in a dream — and behold, the he-goats that mounted the flock were striped, speckled, and spotted.
Rashi
והנה העתדים BEHOLD THE RAMS — Although Laban had separated all these so that the sheep should not give birth to young marked similar to them, angels brought them from the flock which had been placed in charge of Laban’s sons to the flock in Jacob’s charge (Genesis Rabbah 73:10). וברדים GRISLED — Explain it as the Targum renders it: פציחין open; old French faissie, checquered. There was a white stripe going right round the body, the spots of which it was composed being open and running from one end to the other. But I can bring no evidence from Scripture that this is the meaning.
Ramban
AND IT CAME TO PASS AT THE TIME THAT THE FLOCK CONCEIVED. This was after Laban changed his wages, and therefore the angel said to Jacob, For I have seen all that Laban does unto thee. here. AND, BEHOLD THE HE-GOATS WHICH WENT UP ON THE FLOCKS [WERE RINGSTRAKED, SPECKLED, AND GRIZZLED]. The meaning thereof is that it was shown to Jacob in a dream that the he-goats which mounted the flocks were all ringstraked, and afterwards they were all speckled, and still later they were all grizzled. And the angel told him that in view of the injustice which Laban does him by changing his wages, the future offspring will have the appearance which Jacob will need, and that henceforth Jacob should not make the sticks, for Whoso putteth his trust in the Eternal shall be set up on high. AND, BEHOLD, ‘HA’ATUDIM’ WHICH WENT UP ON THE FLOCKS. He-goats and rams are called atudim for all the adults in the flocks are so called. This applies also to the mighty ones among men, as in: ‘atudei’ (the chief ones) of the earth. And Rashi comments: “Although Laban had separated all these so that the sheep should not give birth to young marked similarly to them, angels brought them from the flock which had been placed in charge of Laban’s sons to the flock in Jacob’s charge.”In line with the simple meaning of Scripture this was a vision assuring Jacob that the flocks would give birth to young similar to the marked rams and he-goats, and the proof of it is the word vehinei (and behold), for this expression is used with respect to all dreams, indicating that it is as if the action is in the presence of the dreamer. In Bereshith Rabbah,18373:7. the Sages did not mention the angels [bringing the marked ones from the flocks of Laban], but it may be inferred by exegesis. Thus they said: “It is not written here olim (went up) but ha’olim (those that mounted),” [meaning those which actually mounted. Thus the dream only indicated the action of the atudim which came from Laban’s flocks and that they were ringstraked, speckled, etc. However, the fact that they came was not part of the dream. This really occurred since the angels brought them]. But the plain sense of the verse is as we have said.
Chizkuni
וברודים, speckled, some of the animals he saw in the dream showed such skin patterns.
Tur HaArokh
והנה העתודים העולים על הצאן עקודים, נקודים וברודים. “and behold, the he-goats were ankle striped, dappled, and blotch-striped.” If the male possessed one of each of these skin patterns, the lamb born by the female which it had mounted would have the corresponding skin pattern. According to Nachmanides, whenever the Torah mentions the term עתודים, what are meant are the rams or billy-goats, the אילים, the fully grown, even outsize specimen. Other commentators understand the term עתודים as describing fat animals of their species The reason that they are mentioned separately is that although these animals are raised only for eventual slaughter to serve as meat, and not for siring lambs, the phenomenon of the lambs which they sired having the skin pattern favouring Yaakov was in evidence. According to Rashi, angels brought these animals from Lavan’s flock to Yaakov’s flocks in order to help him increase the proportion of appropriately skin-patterned animals. According to Nachmanides, the plain meaning is that appropriately skin patterned males had to be seen as mounting the females which would later on bear the young reflecting the father-animal’s genes. The word הנה, which Yaakov uses in describing his dream, is meant to show how vividly he experienced this in his dream.
And the angel of God said to me in the dream: Jacob; and I said: Here am I.
verse value 1110 — בַּחֲל֖וֹם = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 35 letters. Notable word values: "in·a·dream" (בַּחֲל֖וֹם) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "to·me" (אֵלַ֜י, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·God" (הָאֱלֹהִ֛ים, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 91: messenger, the·God. The root אמר appears 2 times in this verse. 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "the·God" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "to·me" (root אל, 242x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Jacob', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 2 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֨אמֶר [and·said] (257) + אֵלַ֜י [to·me] (41) + מַלְאַ֧ךְ [messenger] (91) + הָאֱלֹהִ֛ים [the·God] (91) + בַּחֲל֖וֹם [in·a·dream] (86) + יַֽעֲקֹ֑ב [Jacob] (182) + וָאֹמַ֖ר [and·I·said] (247) + הִנֵּֽנִי [here·I·am] (115) = 1110.
Onkelos
The angel of Hashem said to me in the dream: Jacob! And I said: Here I am.
And he said: Lift up now your eyes, and see, all the he-goats which leap upon the flock are streaked, speckled, and grizzled; for I have seen all that Laban does to you.
verse value 4761
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 75 letters. Verse gematria: 4761 = 69². The shortest word is "for" (כִּ֣י, 2 letters) and the longest is "all·the·he-goats" (כׇּל־הָֽעַתֻּדִים֙, 8 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "all·the·he-goats" (כׇּל־הָֽעַתֻּדִים֙). The root ראה appears 2 times in this verse. 15 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "for" (root כי, 167x in Genesis); "is·doing" (root עשה, 152x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·mottled', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 6 words.
Onkelos
He said: Lift your eyes now and see — all the he-goats mounting the flock are striped, speckled, and spotted; for all that Laban has done to you is revealed before Me.
Or HaChaim
העתודים…עקודים, נקודים וברודים. the ankle-striped ones, the spotted ones and the blotch-striped. We need to know what precisely was the category described as ברודים. Unless that category was also part of the original agreement between Laban and Jacob, why did the angel show Jacob that category in his dream? I have seen an explanation by Ibn Ezra (30,39) who identifies the ברודים with the טלואים. He does not offer any proof for his contention. Furthermore, from a close look at Jacob citing such examples as: אם כה יאמר עקודים יהיה שכרך, it is clear that Jacob took for himself only either עקודים or נקודים. Why would he have the ewes mounted by categories of rams which were not his share at all? The reason therefore appears to be that Laban was not only a swindler but he also had תרפים, charms that supposedly revealed to him many hidden things. Midrash Tanchuma describes Laban as consulting these charms which would reveal to him what developed inside the animals' wombs and the appearance of the fetuses [much like what we learn nowadays through the ultrasound examinations Ed.]. In view of this Jacob was stymied every which way through these תרפים. This is why G'd had to interfere on Jacob's behalf. It is important to appreciate that the skin patterns of the animals to be born was determined at the time they were in heat; these skin patterns were not subject to change afterwards except through miraculous intervention by G'd. Such a miracle was one of upsetting natural laws in a very basic manner. G'd does not ligthly engage in the performance of this kind of miracle. We know this from statements of our sages in Sotah 2 and Shabbat 23. G'd therefore acted with particular adroitness so as not to have to upset the laws of nature unduly. He did this by causing three categories of rams to mount the ewes when they were in heat. As a result each of the female animals contained the sperm of three different types of rams, each potentially fertilising the ewes they had mounted and causing them to have its particular skin pattern. This stymied the power of the charms. The charms could not then reveal to Laban which skin pattern would ultimately result at the time these ewes gave birth. Since Laban and Jacob had agreed that the skin pattern of the animals to be born would determine which belonged to Jacob, Laban did not know in advance what skin pattern would emerge. This matter is not as far-fetched as you may think since we know of certain birds that can change colour in order to adapt themselves to their environment so that it helps camouflage them against predators. G'd simply employed a natural process such as the birds employ for themselves and made it operate with these sheep and goats. When the Torah speaks about ברודים, it refers to a kind of טלוא as stated by Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryah. Perhaps this particular variety of טלוא contained more white speckles, similar to white pellets of hail (ברד). כי ראיתי את בל אשר לבן עשה לך. "For I have seen all that Laban is doing to you." The angel explained to Jacob the reason G'd performed this miracle, that G'd had observed the evil machinations of Laban and how the latter had employed the idols (תרפים) to help him cheat Jacob. There had been no other way to save Jacob from Laban's trickery except by miracle. The angel also hinted to Jacob that the result of all of Laban's machinations were meant for Jacob to retain. This is why the Torah did not write: כל אשר עשה לך, "all that he is doing to you." The verse may be read thus: "all that Laban is doing—is yours." You are not a thief by keeping all these animals that are born with these skin patterns; the G'd who judges fairly has taken from the one and given to the other (the victim).
I am the God of Beth-el, where you anointed a pillar, where you made a vow to Me. Now arise, go out from this land, and return to the land of your birth.
verse value 6722 — הָאֵל֙ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 20 words, 72 letters. Notable word values: "God" (הָאֵל֙) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "there" (שָּׁם֙, 2 letters) and the longest is "from·the·land" (מִן־הָאָ֣רֶץ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: which, which. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "anointed" (מָשַׁ֤חְתָּ), "you·vowed" (נָדַ֥רְתָּ), "your·native·land" (מוֹלַדְתֶּֽךָ). The root אשר appears 2 times in this verse. 16 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "from·the·land" (root ארץ, 305x in Genesis); "God" (root אל, 242x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'vow', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 8 words.
Onkelos
I am the God who appeared to you at Bethel, where you anointed a pillar, where you made a vow before Me. Now arise, go out from this land and return to the land of your birth.
Rashi
האל בית אל is the same as אל בית אל the ה of האל being redundant. It is customary for Scripture to speak thus, e. g. (Numbers 34:2) “When ye come into the land of Canaan הארץ כנען (instead of ארץ כנען). משחת שם WHERE THOU ANOINTEDST [A PILLAR] — This denotes distinction and eminence just as when one is anointed king one is raised to eminence: thus, too (Genesis 28:18) “and he poured oil upon the top of it (the stone)” that it might be anointed to be an altar (thus being distinguished among other stones). אשר נדרת לי WHERE THOU VOWEDST A VOW UNTO ME —and you are bound to fulfill it, for you said (Genesis 28:22) “it shall be God’s house”, signifying that you would offer sacrifice there.
Ramban
I AM THE G-D OF BETH-EL. Jacob related to his wives all that G-d’s angel had told him in the dream, all this serving to persuade them to go with him. However, what he told did not consist of one dream. The statement, Lift up now thine eyes, and see, all the he-goats here. was made to him when he served Laban for his flock, at the time the flock conceived here. in one of the first years. See further, 31:41. The statement, I am the G-d of Beth-el was made to him after that, at the time of the journey, for after He said to him, Now arise, get thee out from this land, he no longer remained in Haran to further tend Laban’s flocks so that the he-goats would mount the flocks and the flocks would give birth to speckled and spotted. But on the morrow of the dream, he sent for Rachel and Leah and told them his dream, and they left Haran.I am ‘ha’e-il’ (the G-d) of Beth-el. The meaning thereof is, as Rashi explained it, that the letter hei in ha’e-il is redundant and is the same as if it were written: “I am e-il Beth-el (the G-d of Beth-el).” Similarly, To ‘ha’aretz’ (the land) of Canaan; [the hei is redundant and is the same as if it were written: “to eretz Canaan (the land of Canaan).”] Grammarians adjusted it by saying that it is as if it were written, “I am the G-d, who is the G-d of Beth-el.” Similarly, And the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, [which is as if it said: “and the tree of the knowledge, namely the knowledge of good and evil”]; the cords of gold, [which is as if it said, “the cords, which are cords of gold]. And the angel here speaks in the name of He Who sent him, [therefore, he speaks in the first person and says, “I am, etc.”] …. WHERE THOU DIDST ANOINT A PILLAR, WHERE THOU DIDST VOW A VOW UNTO ME. The meaning thereof is that “you have vowed to worship the Proper Name of the Eternal in the Chosen Land, and that this stone should be to you a house of G-d in which to set aside your tithes, and if you further delay the fulfillment of your vows, G-d might yet be angry at your voice.”
Ibn Ezra
"I am the God of Bethel" — its meaning is: "the God, God of Bethel." Similarly: "the tree of knowledge, knowledge of good and evil" (Genesis 2:9).
Rabbeinu Bahya
אנכי הא-ל בית אל, “I am the G’d of Bet El, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text the reference to Bet El is to G’d’s appearing to Yaakov in his dream of the ladder at that location. A kabbalistic approach: The angel who here calls himself “El” is a good angel, the one to whom G’d referred in Exodus 33,19 when He told Moses: ”I will let all ‘My goodness’ pass before you.” As to the word “Bet,” house, this is a reference to when G’d said to Miriam and Aaron concerning Moses in Numbers 12,6 בכל ביתי נאמן הוא, “he is thoroughly trusted in all parts of My house.” Man considers his own house as “his goodness.” The best one can do for a person is to provide him with a house which contains all the appurtenances. The angel therefore said concerning himself, that he represented such an agent of G’d. As a result, Yaakov later called the place where he had this vision Bet El, to commemorate this site and who had reiterated his promise that he would get home safely. (35,7)
Tur HaArokh
אנכי הא-ל בית א-ל, “I am the G’d of Beyt-El, etc.” According to Nachmanides, Yaakov recounted all that the angel had said to him in his dream to his wives in order to win their agreement to leave their father’s house and to return with him to the land of Canaan. This was not all a single dream. The revelations involving the aspen sticks occurred while Yaakov was still in Lavan’s employ, whereas the revelation in our verse here occurred during their journey, for as soon as Yaakov had been instructed by G’d to leave Charan and to return to Canaan he did so. He sent for Rachel and Leah, told them of the Divine instructions in his dream, and they left forthwith.
And Rachel and Leah answered and said to him: "Is there yet any portion or inheritance for us in our father's house?
verse value 2435 — ל֑וֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 44 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (ל֑וֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֑וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·they·said" (וַתֹּאמַ֖רְנָה, 7 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·answered" (וַתַּ֤עַן), "and·Leah" (וְלֵאָ֔ה), "and·they·said" (וַתֹּאמַ֖רְנָה). 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·they·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "our·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis); "in·the·house·of" (root בית, 121x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·him', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַתַּ֤עַן [and·answered] (526) + רָחֵל֙ [Rachel] (238) + וְלֵאָ֔ה [and·Leah] (42) + וַתֹּאמַ֖רְנָה [and·they·said] (702) + ל֑וֹ [to·him] (36) + הַע֥וֹד [still] (85) + לָ֛נוּ [to·us] (86) + חֵ֥לֶק [share] (138) + וְנַחֲלָ֖ה [and·inheritance] (99) + בְּבֵ֥ית [in·the·house·of] (414) + אָבִֽינוּ [our·father] (69) = 2435.
Onkelos
Rachel and Leah answered and said to him: Is there yet a portion or an inheritance for us in our father's house?
Rashi
העוד לנו IS THERE YET ANY FOR US? — Why should we prevent you from returning? Can we at all hope to inherit anything belonging to our father together with his sons?
Sforno
Do we still have a portion. Why do you think it will be difficult for us to part from our father?
Or HaChaim
העוד לנו חלק ונחלה, "Do we still have a share or an inheritance in our father's house?" When Rachel and Leah mentioned both חלק and נחלה they referred to two things. They referred to their maternal inheritance seeing that their mother had already died; they also referred to a potential inheritance from their father and concluded that they had no prospect of either. They cited as proof the fact that their father had considered them as strangers already at the time he had sold them. Their father had not considered them as his children for some time already. As a result, even though according to the laws of the Gentiles daughters stand to share in the inheritance, they felt they did not have such a chance. When Rachel and Leah added: ויאכל גם אכול את כספנו, "he also consumed our wages," this refers to both the money of the marriage settlement of their mother and the value of the labour Jacob performed for fourteen years in order to marry them.
Tur HaArokh
ותען רחל ולאה, “Rachel and Leah replied, etc.” I have been bothered by the fact that Rachel did not display courtesy for her older sister and spoke first. In the meantime I have seen a comment in Bereshit Rabbah, 74,4 where the author quotes an opinion that the reason that Rachel died before her sister was that she spoke up before her sister. In that connection Rabbi Yossi questioned the author of that statement by asking him if he had ever seen that when someone calls Reuven that Shimon will answer that call (instead of Reuven?) What did Rachel do wrong? The Torah reports that Yaakov called Rachel and Leah to the field in that order. Why should not Rachel have replied first? Rabbi Yossi must explain Rachel’s death as due to a different circumstance, i.e. Yaakov’s conditional curse of the person who had stolen Lavan’s teraphim.
Are we not accounted by him strangers? for he has sold us, and has also quite devoured our price.
verse value 2310 — ל֖וֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 43 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (ל֖וֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֖וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "our·money" (אֶת־כַּסְפֵּֽנוּ, 7 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "outsiders" (נׇכְרִיּ֛וֹת), "we·have·been·reckoned" (נֶחְשַׁ֥בְנוּ), "he·has·sold·us" (מְכָרָ֑נוּ). The root אכל appears 2 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "for" (root כי, 167x in Genesis); "is·it·not" (root לא, 127x in Genesis); "and·ate" (root אכל, 74x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'he·has·sold·us', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 3 words. Full calculation: הֲל֧וֹא [is·it·not] (42) + נׇכְרִיּ֛וֹת [outsiders] (686) + נֶחְשַׁ֥בְנוּ [we·have·been·reckoned] (416) + ל֖וֹ [to·him] (36) + כִּ֣י [for] (30) + מְכָרָ֑נוּ [he·has·sold·us] (316) + וַיֹּ֥אכַל [and·ate] (67) + גַּם־אָכ֖וֹל [even·consuming] (100) + אֶת־כַּסְפֵּֽנוּ [our·money] (617) = 2310.
Onkelos
Are we not counted as foreigners by him? For he has sold us and has consumed our silver altogether.
Rashi
הלא נכריות נחשבנו לו ARE WE NOT THOUGHT ALIENS BY HIM? — Even at a time when it is customary for people to give a dowry to their daughters — at the time of their marriage — he treated us as strangers for he sold us to you in return for your labour during fourteen years את כספנו [HAS EATEN] OUR MONEY — for he kept for himself the money for the wages of your labour during the next six years.
Ibn Ezra
"For he sold us" — as though he sold us; for he did not act as fathers customarily do with their daughters, but instead said: 'Watch my flock and take my daughters as your wage.'
Chizkuni
את כספנו, “our money;” they told Yaakov that their father had withheld the money that had rightfully been theirs as their dowry, even though he had paid this in the form of physical labour as a shepherd. This would have been no more than common decency.
Rashbam
כספינו, which he had earned in payment for marrying us off. He even ate up the money you earned with your hard labour which was meant to support us.
For all the riches which God has taken away from our father, that is ours and our children's. Now then, whatsoever God has said to you, do."
verse value 3533 — אֱלֹהִים֙ = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 63 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִים֙) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "for" (כִּ֣י, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·to·our·children" (וּלְבָנֵ֑ינוּ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: which, which. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "all·the·wealth" (כׇל־הָעֹ֗שֶׁר), "and·to·our·children" (וּלְבָנֵ֑ינוּ). The root אשר appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "God" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·to·our·children', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 7 words.
Onkelos
For all the wealth that Hashem has separated from our father belongs to us and to our children. And now, do everything that Hashem has told you.
Rashi
כי כל העשר FOR ALL THE RICHES — The word כי here means but; as much as to say: of our father’s property we have nothing at all; but what The Holy One, blessed be He, has taken away from our father, that is ours. הציל means separated (or taken away). Similarly all forms from the Hiphil of this root occuring in Scripture (usually translated by “to deliver”, “to rescue“) mean taking away, for one who rescues a person takes him away from the misfortune or from the enemy.
Sforno
All the wealth that Elokim rescued. We do not expect to receive from him anything other than what Hashem has already rescued. Now. Now that he has accepted the slander about you and may use it to justify stealing whatever you have. Whatever Hashem has said, do it. There is no need for you to seek further permission.
Or HaChaim
אשר הציל, who has saved, etc. They viewed G'd as having saved the money that their father had stolen from them. The expression הצלה is appropriate when used about saving stolen goods from the robber. When the Torah quotes Leah and Rachel as saying לנו, ours, they meant משלנו, "he stole it from us."
Then Jacob rose up, and set his sons and his wives upon the camels;
verse value 2125
Insights
Verse structure: 6 words, 33 letters. The shortest word is "and·arose" (וַיָּ֖קׇם, 4 letters) and the longest is "on·the·camels" (עַל־הַגְּמַלִּֽים, 8 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·his·wives" (וְאֶת־נָשָׁ֖יו). 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "his·children" (root בן, 248x in Genesis); "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "and·his·wives" (root אשה, 148x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Jacob', dividing the verse into phrases of 2 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיָּ֖קׇם [and·arose] (156) + יַעֲקֹ֑ב [Jacob] (182) + וַיִּשָּׂ֛א [and·lifted] (317) + אֶת־בָּנָ֥יו [his·children] (469) + וְאֶת־נָשָׁ֖יו [and·his·wives] (773) + עַל־הַגְּמַלִּֽים [on·the·camels] (228) = 2125.
Onkelos
Jacob arose and lifted his sons and his wives onto the camels.
Rashi
את בניו ואת נשיו HIS SONS AND HIS WIVES — He took the males before the females whereas Esau took the females before the males, as it is said (Genesis 36:6) “And Esau took his wives and his sons etc.” (Genesis Rabbah 74:5)
and he carried away all his cattle, and all his substance which he had gathered, the cattle of his getting, which he had gathered in Paddan-aram, to go to Isaac his father to the land of Canaan.
verse value 5322
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 73 letters. The shortest word is "which" (אֲשֶׁ֣ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "all·his·livestock" (אֶת־כׇּל־מִקְנֵ֗הוּ, 9 letters). Words sharing gematria 520: he·had·amassed, he·had·amassed. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·drove·off" (וַיִּנְהַ֣ג), "all·his·livestock" (אֶת־כׇּל־מִקְנֵ֗הוּ), "and·all·his·wealth" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־רְכֻשׁוֹ֙). The root רכש appears 3 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "to·the·land" (root ארץ, 305x in Genesis); "to·go" (root בוא, 213x in Genesis). First appearance of the root קנין ("his·property") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Aram', dividing the verse into phrases of 11 and 5 words.
Onkelos
He led away all his livestock and all his property that he had acquired — the livestock of his property that he had acquired in Paddan-aram — to go to his father Isaac, to the land of Canaan.
Rashi
מקנה קנינו means — what he had purchased by means of קנינו his own property i.e. his sheep, viz., menservants, maidservants, camels and asses (Genesis Rabbah 74:5; cf. Rashi on Genesis 30:43).
Ibn Ezra
"Riches" (רְכֻשׁ) — from the root of "property" (רְכוּשׁ) (I Chronicles 28:1).
Now Laban was gone to shear his sheep. And Rachel stole the teraphim that were her father's.
verse value 3122
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 41 letters. The shortest word is "went" (הָלַ֔ךְ, 3 letters) and the longest is "teraphim" (אֶת־הַתְּרָפִ֖ים, 8 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "to·shear" (לִגְזֹ֖ז), "his·sheep" (אֶת־צֹאנ֑וֹ). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "to·her·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis); "went" (root הלך, 113x in Genesis). First appearance of the root גזז ("to·shear") in Genesis. First appearance of the root תרפים ("teraphim") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'his·sheep', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְלָבָ֣ן [and·Laban] (88) + הָלַ֔ךְ [went] (55) + לִגְזֹ֖ז [to·shear] (47) + אֶת־צֹאנ֑וֹ [his·sheep] (548) + וַתִּגְנֹ֣ב [and·stole] (461) + רָחֵ֔ל [Rachel] (238) + אֶת־הַתְּרָפִ֖ים [teraphim] (1136) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [which] (501) + לְאָבִֽיהָ [to·her·father] (48) = 3122.
Onkelos
Laban had gone to shear his flock, and Rachel took the idols that belonged to her father.
Rashi
לגזז את צאנו TO SHEAR HIS FLOCK which he had given into the charge of his sons at a distance of three days’ journey between himself and Jacob. ותגגב רחל את התרפים AND RACHEL STOLE THE TERAPHIM — her intention was to wean her father from idol-worship (Genesis Rabbah 74:5).
Ramban
AND RACHEL STOLE THE TERAPHIM. Her intention was to wean her father from idol-worship. This is the language of Rashi. Now it is possible that Laban used the teraphim for idol worship, as he himself said, Why hast thou stolen my gods? But not all teraphim were for the purpose of worship, for how could one find idolatry in the house of our lord David. That which the commentators say seems reasonable, namely, that these are vessels to receive196“Receive.” According to the Tur, “determine.” a knowledge of the hours, and they divine with them in order to gain knowledge of future events. The word teraphim is derived from the expressions: ‘rephai’ (weak) handed; ‘nirpim’ (idle) ye are, idle. They are called “teraphim” in order to hint by their name that their words are like a weak prophecy, usually occurring as a prophecy for many days hence and turning out to be false, just as the prophets have said, For the teraphim have spoken vanity. People of little faith set them up for themselves as gods. They do not seek to know by the glorious name of the Eternal, nor do they offer their prayers to Him. Rather, their deeds are guided by divination revealed to them by the teraphim. Thus it is written, And the man Micah had a house of G-d, and he made an ephod, and teraphim, and it is further written there, Ask counsel, we pray thee, of G-d that we may know whether our way which we are going shall be prosperous, for they used to ask of the teraphim. Such also was the case in Israel with the ephod, for, having been accustomed to the sacred ephod they made something similar in form, and they would seek guidance of it, believe in its words, and blunder after it. Even in sickness they sought not G-d but only them. This is the meaning of the verse, And Gideon made an ephod thereof, and put it in his city, even in Ophrah; and all Israel went astray after it there; and it became a snare unto Gideon, and to his house, for they turned aside from following the Eternal. Now Laban was a diviner and an enchanter, just as he said, I have divined. His country, too, was ever a land of diviners, as it is written, For they are replenished from the east, and with soothsayers like the Philistines, Laban’s city Haran was in the land of the children of the east (above, 29:1). and Balaam the son of Beor the diviner was from his city. And this is the meaning of, Why hast thou stolen my gods?
Ibn Ezra
"And Laban had gone to shear his flock" — it was in the charge of his sons, three days' distance away, as it is written (Genesis 30:35–36). That is why "Laban was told on the third day" (v. 22). "The teraphim" — some say they were a copper instrument made to determine the divisions of the hours. Others say that those skilled in astrology have the ability to fashion an image at certain designated hours and that image will speak; and their proof is: "for the teraphim speak vanity" (Zechariah 10:2). But that is not the correct interpretation of the verse. What seems to me most plausible is that the teraphim were fashioned in the form of human beings and were made to receive celestial influences — and I cannot explain this further. The proof that teraphim have this form is the teraphim that Michal daughter of Saul placed in the bed, so that the guards of the house thought it was David (I Samuel 19:13). As for the verse: "there is no ephod and no teraphim" (Hosea 3:4), it has two interpretations. The first: he says there is no king and no prince in Israel, for Hashem chose a king only from the house of David; that is why the next verse says: "and they shall seek Hashem their God." And there is no sacrifice and no pillar — for idolatrous worship. And there is no ephod, because the worshippers of Baal used to make something resembling Moses' ephod; therefore it says "ephod" without the definite article, unlike "bring the ephod" (I Samuel 23:9). And "the ephod was in his hand" (I Samuel 23:6) is not the ephod that Moses made — I will explain it in its proper place with full proofs, God willing. The second interpretation: that they worshipped neither Hashem nor idols. As for the teraphim, Laban called them his gods. Some say that Rachel stole them in order to abolish her father's star-worship (עבודת כוכבים). But if so, why did she take them with her and not bury them along the road? What seems most likely to me is that Laban her father was a reader of the stars, and she feared that her father would consult the stars to discover which road they had fled.
Chizkuni
ותגנוב רחל את התרפים, “Rachel stole the teraphim;” in order that Lavan would not be able to divine the route they had taken by consulting them as oracles. We have read about their uses in Hoseah 3,4 as well as in Zachariah 10,2.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ותגנב רחל את התרפים “Rachel stole the Teraphim.” Nachmanides speculates that these Teraphim were some kinds of hour-glasses or similar instruments with which to measure time. These vessels were employed to glean knowledge about future events. The word itself is derived from נרפים, (Compare Exodus 5,17, where Pharaoh accused the Israelites of pretending to be too weak to work hard) they called these vessels תרפים to hint that the power of foretelling events associated with these instruments was rather on the weak side. Predictions based on these instruments, while proving accurate in the majority of cases, were frequently wide off the mark. Zechariah 10,2 refers to these instruments when he says that they disappointed those who relied on their predictions. The question which concerns us is why Rachel bothered to steal them if they were so unreliable? Apparently Rachel stole the Teraphim so that they could not reveal Yaakov’s whereabouts to her father seeing that Yaakov and family had fled from Padan Aram. The Teraphim were Lavan’s deities; he put a great deal of faith in their ability to reveal to him what he wanted to know. Lavan was an expert magician. He himself had said נחשתי, “I have consulted oracles,” and these oracles had told him that his new-found wealth was due to Yaakov. The whole country Charan was well known for its preoccupation with oracles, snake-charmers, and all these methods to divine future events. This is already referred to in Isaiah 2,6 כי מלאו מקדם מעוננים כפלשתים, “for they are full of magic practices from the East and of soothsaying like the Philistines.” Also Bileam ben Be-Or was of the same ilk as he came from the same region; this is why when the Torah quotes his opening statements we find him saying: (Numbers 23,6) “From Aram has Balak brought me, Moav’s king from the hills of the East.” Concerning the significance of the Teraphim, Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra writes: “I am fairly convinced that these Teraphim resembled a human shape in order to enable them to receive celestial powers’ input. However, I cannot explain this in further detail (as the Torah has forbidden this). We can conjecture that Ibn Ezra was correct when we consider that Michal, David’s wife and daughter of King Saul had placed Teraphim in David’s bed to mislead the King’s police into thinking that David himself occupied that bed (compare Samuel I 19,16). [Michal had claimed that her husband was sick and could not present himself at court.] This leaves us with the question of how to explain Hoseah 3,4 ואין אפוד ותרפים, “that the Israelites would go for a long time without either Ephod or Teraphim.” The meaning there seems to be that they would practice no religion, neither the Jewish religion symbolised by the Ephod which contained the means for the High Priest to receive communication from G’d, nor Teraphim which was a means to receive such communication from spiritually negative forces in the celestial spheres. Rabbeinu Chananel writes as follows concerning the subject of the Teraphim: Rachel stole the Teraphim in order to force her father to become a penitent seeing he would realise that a god which allows itself to be stolen surely could not be something of substance. How could a god who cannot take care of himself take care of others? We find the same argument spelled out in detail in Judges 6,31 where Yoash ridicules the people who want to avenge their idol and execute Jerubaal (Gideon) who had smashed its altar, saying to them: “let the Baal fight his own enemies if he is as powerful as you believe him to be!” Ezekiel 28,9 phrases it thus: “Will you then say before your murderer: ”I am a god?’ But you are a man and no god in the hand of your desecrators.” [The subject of discussion was Chiram King of Tyre, a friend of David and Solomon who developed illusions of grandeur]. A Midrashic approach: When Lavan accused Yaakov of having stolen the Teraphim למה גנבת אלהי, “why did you steal my gods (31,31)?” The reason he thought that they had been stolen was in order that they should not reveal to Lavan that Yaakov had fled. The Midrash asks: “were the Teraphim then able to speak?” Do we not have a specific verse in Psalms 115,7 לא יהגו בגרונם, “they cannot make a sound with their throats?” The answer given is that indeed the Teraphim could speak as we know on the authority of Zechariah 10,2 “for the Teraphim spoke delusion.” How do the Teraphim “speak?” One places in front of them a firstborn person, slaughters him and salts him adding a variety of spices. One then proceeds to write the name of a deity on a headband made of gold; one places this headband under the tongue of this dead person using the appropriate idolatrous incantations and places the carcass in the wall; one lights candles in front of this stuffed human being and prostrates oneself in front of him. This is the meaning of what is written in Zechariah: “for the Teraphim speak delusions.” Rachel’s whole purpose in stealing such Teraphim was to wean her father from the practice of idolatry. After all, G’d had promised to remove idolatry from the face of the earth as is written (Isaiah 2,18) והאלילים כליל יחלוף, “and as for idols, they shall vanish completely.”
Tur HaArokh
ותגנב רחל את התרפים, “Rachel stole the teraphim.” According to Rashi, she intended to wean her father from idolatry by removing the idol from him. Nachmanides admits that it is possible that Lavan had been using the teraphim in his worship of idolatry. It is however by no means certain that teraphim served only as idols. We certainly would not expect to come across idols in King David’s residence, and yet we are told in Samuel I 19,13 that Michal, David’s wife placed such teraphim in David’s bed, feigning that it was he who was sleeping in that bed. Surely, David did not keep idolatrous figures in his home. It is most likely that the teraphim were objects which enabled people to know the time of day, and in that connection they were also used to help them to predict future events. The root of the word is from רפה, “weak” as in רפי ידים, “weak-handed,” or נרפים אתם, “you are weak” (in the sense of lazy, not pulling one’s weight.) The reason people call these objects תרפים is to hint that the reliability of these objects in predicting future events is not very strong, although in the majority of instances the predictions prove more or less accurate. Only people who do not pray to the Lord, the Creator, would be foolish enough to put their trust in them. Some people argue that astrologers possess the power to summon up certain images at a time which they can accurately predict. Ibn Ezra writes that teraphim are objects made of copper which are designed to help us determine portions of an hour, such as minutes. Some people claim that some astrologers possess the skill to raise some life-like shapes at a predetermined hour, and that apparition appears to speak intelligently. Personally, I believe that teraphim are replicas of human beings, constructed in a manner designed to endow them with some divine powers. Some commentators believe that Rachel stole the teraphim in order to wean her father from practicing idolatry. If that were so indeed, why did she keep these teraphim with her instead of at least burying them? It is far more likely that Rachel, being aware that her father was an astrologer, was afraid that by a combination of astrology and the teraphim he would succeed in tracking the movements of Yaakov and his family and he would overtake them in short order. Another view is that she took the teraphim so that these would not reveal to him where Yaakov was at that time. [according to that view she did not really ”steal” them but denied him their use at a critical point in time. Ed.]
Cross-references: I Samuel 15:23; II Kings 23:24; Genesis 30:26; Genesis 24:50
And Jacob outwitted Laban the Aramean, in that he told him not that he fled.
verse value 1476 — ל֔וֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 40 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (ל֔וֹ) = 36, double chai. Verse gematria: 1476 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֔וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·stole" (וַיִּגְנֹ֣ב, 5 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·stole" (וַיִּגְנֹ֣ב), "the·heart·of" (אֶת־לֵ֥ב), "without·telling" (עַל־בְּלִי֙). 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "that" (root כי, 167x in Genesis); "he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·Aramean', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיִּגְנֹ֣ב [and·stole] (71) + יַעֲקֹ֔ב [Jacob] (182) + אֶת־לֵ֥ב [the·heart·of] (433) + לָבָ֖ן [Laban] (82) + הָאֲרַמִּ֑י [the·Aramean] (256) + עַל־בְּלִי֙ [without·telling] (142) + הִגִּ֣יד [told] (22) + ל֔וֹ [to·him] (36) + כִּ֥י [that] (30) + בֹרֵ֖חַ [fleeing] (210) + הֽוּא [he] (12) = 1476.
Onkelos
Jacob concealed this from the heart of Laban the Aramean, in that he did not tell him that he was going.
Ibn Ezra
"The heart of" — Jacob stole nothing other than his mind, for the essential seat of the mind is the heart.
Sforno
Yaakov fooled Lavan. He did not give any sign that he knew that Lavan had accepted the slander about him. The Aramean. Besides indicating his nationality, which is irrelevant here, this hints that he was an experienced swindler (ramai). Thus if he had realized that Yaakov knew of the change in his attitude he would not have left him any escape. על בלי הגיד לו, the word על here is used as in על עולת התמיד in Numbers 28,10 where it means: “with, in addition to.” Yaakov acted as if unaware of Lavan’s hatred in addition to not informing him of his intended departure. All of this was not exactly in accordance with accepted norms of conduct, but as dictated by sheer necessity, his survival instinct. כי בורח הוא; out of fear that Lavan would rob him with the aid of the people of his town. He said so to Lavan later when explaining his decision and his actions.
Or HaChaim
ויגנב יעקב את לב לבן הארמי, Jacob deceived Laban the Aramite, etc. It is difficult to justify the expression "fled" which is applied here to a departure without previous good-byes. Perhaps what is meant is that when Jacob gave Laban an accounting about all that he had done, etc., he concealed the fact that he intended to leave him. He presumably asked Laban to dismiss him, thus in effect telling Laban that he had no intention of leaving without a proper ceremony. Had Laban had the slightest notion that Jacob intended to take his family and leave without a send-off, he would have had him watched day and night. The successful flight was possible only because Jacob "stole" Laban's heart. Basically, our verse wanted to explain how it was that Jacob succeeded to depart unnoticed with all his family, herds and flocks.
So he fled with all that he had; and he rose up, and passed over the River, and set his face toward the mountain of Gilead.
verse value 3156
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 48 letters. The shortest word is "mountain" (הַ֥ר, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·all·that·was·his" (וְכׇל־אֲשֶׁר־ל֔וֹ, 8 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·fled" (וַיִּבְרַ֥ח), "the·river" (אֶת־הַנָּהָ֑ר), "his·face" (אֶת־פָּנָ֖יו). 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "he" (root הוא, 133x in Genesis); "his·face" (root פנים, 133x in Genesis); "and·all·that·was·his" (root כל, 127x in Genesis). First appearance of the root גלעד ("the·Gilead") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·river', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיִּבְרַ֥ח [and·fled] (226) + הוּא֙ [he] (12) + וְכׇל־אֲשֶׁר־ל֔וֹ [and·all·that·was·his] (593) + וַיָּ֖קׇם [and·arose] (156) + וַיַּעֲבֹ֣ר [and·passed·over] (288) + אֶת־הַנָּהָ֑ר [the·river] (661) + וַיָּ֥שֶׂם [and·put] (356) + אֶת־פָּנָ֖יו [his·face] (547) + הַ֥ר [mountain] (205) + הַגִּלְעָֽד [the·Gilead] (112) = 3156.
Onkelos
He went — he and all that was his — arose, crossed the Euphrates, and set his face toward the mountain of Gilead.
Sforno
ויברח, usually the word בריחה, flight, means that someone departs without being pursued. The flight is inspired by fear of damage and harm not imminent. When the word ניסה is used to describe flight, this describes people fleeing from pursuers, out of fear from immediate damage and harm.
Targum Yonatan
And he went, he with all that he had. And he arose and crossed the Pherat, and set his face to ascend toward the mountain of Gilead; because he saw by the Holy Spirit that from thence would be deliverance for his sons, in the days of Jephtach, who was of Gilead.
And it was told Laban on the third day that Jacob was fled.
verse value 1270
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 27 letters. The shortest word is "that" (כִּ֥י, 2 letters) and the longest is "third" (הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֑י, 6 letters). 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "that" (root כי, 167x in Genesis); "on·the·day" (root יום, 126x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'third', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 3 words. Full calculation: וַיֻּגַּ֥ד [and·it·was·told] (23) + לְלָבָ֖ן [to·Laban] (112) + בַּיּ֣וֹם [on·the·day] (58) + הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֑י [third] (655) + כִּ֥י [that] (30) + בָרַ֖ח [fled] (210) + יַעֲקֹֽב [Jacob] (182) = 1270.
Onkelos
Laban was told on the third day that Jacob had fled.
Rashi
ביום השלישי ON THE THIRD DAY—for there was a journey of three days between them.
Ramban
ON THE THIRD DAY. For there was a journey of three days between them. Seven days’ journey— here. throughout these three days during which the messenger had travelled to tell Laban that Jacob had proceeded on his journey, Jacob was consequently a six days’ journey distance from Laban. On the seventh day, [that is, on the day during which Jacob covered the stretch of ground which made him seven days’ journey distance from Laban’s starting point, Laban] overtook him. We may thus infer that the entire distance which Jacob covered in six210“Six.” In our Rashi we have “seven,” which seems to fit the calculation better. days, Laban covered in one day. These are the words of Rashi quoting Bereshith Rabbah 4:4. It is correct that Laban should proceed as a strong man to run his course, for such is the way of pursuers. However, Laban had set a three days’ journey between his flock and the flock which was in Jacob’s care, not between the city and his flock. Thus if Laban tended his flocks to the east of the city, Jacob did so to the west, and between them there was a three days’ journey. Now Jacob began his journey from the city, in which were his wives, sons and daughters, and all his belongings with the exception of the flocks. The fact of his flight was told to Laban on the third day since they were not aware of it on the first day, and then Laban returned to his nearby city and took his brethren here. from there, and starting from his city he pursued him for seven days. [Hence, it should have been said that what Jacob covered in ten days Laban covered in seven days!] We must say then, according to the opinion of Bereshith Rabbah, that it was from the field where the flocks were that Jacob left for the journey, and that Laban took his brethren with him from the shearers of his flocks. [Since there was a three days’ journey between them at the outset and Jacob had already travelled for three days, they were thus six travel days apart. On that day Laban was informed, and the following day he pursued him and overtook him. Jacob meanwhile had covered an additional day’s distance, with the result that the distance Jacob travelled in seven days, Laban covered in one day]. In Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer it appears that Laban returned to his city, and from there he took all mighty men and all valiant ones, and he pursued Jacob from there.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויוגד ללבן ביום השלישי, “Lavan was told on the third day.” There was a distance of three days’ journey between the area where Yaakov and Lavan grazed their flocks respectively. When the person who told Lavan that Yaakov had left told him about it on the third day, Lavan took his brothers with him and returned to Padan Aram, so that six days had elapsed until he could begin the pursuit. On the seventh day Lavan caught up with Yaakov. This is the meaning of the words וירדף אחריו שבעת ימים, “he pursued him for (a distance of) seven days.” This shows that during the six days Yaakov had managed to cover only a single day’s distance. It is possible that Yaakov left Padan Aram on a Sunday and that Lavan caught up with him on the Sabbath, seeing Yaakov would not travel on that day.
Tur HaArokh
ויגד ללבן ביום השלישי, “Lavan was informed on the third day, etc.” Rashi explains the time lag by the fact that Lavan’s flocks grazed a distance of three days travel from those which Yaakov tended. It does not refer to a distance between the town and the area where Lavan’s flocks were grazing. Nachmanides questions Rashi’s commentary that there is no proof for his contention as Yaakov hardly set out from the middle of the field, but went back to town to gather up his and his family’s belongings. It is possible that Lavan’s flocks grazed close to the town, these flocks being on the east side of town, whereas Yaakov grazed his flocks on the west side of the town. Yaakov returned home, gathered up his belongings. Seeing that he had not given Lavan reason to suspect that he was about to leave him, he gained an initial advantage and Lavan only found out that he was gone when he had occasion to return to the town. By the time Lavan had organized his sons and sheepshearers, arranged for a pursuit, plus the time spent riding in pursuit, seven days had elapsed until he caught up with Yaakov.
And he took his brothers with him, and pursued after him seven days' journey; and he overtook him in the mountain of Gilead.
verse value 3135
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 50 letters. The shortest word is "with·him" (עִמּ֔וֹ, 3 letters) and the longest is "kinsmen" (אֶת־אֶחָיו֙, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·overtook" (וַיַּדְבֵּ֥ק). 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "kinsmen" (root אח, 164x in Genesis); "and·took" (root לקח, 142x in Genesis); "seven" (root שבע, 117x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'days', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיִּקַּ֤ח [and·took] (124) + אֶת־אֶחָיו֙ [kinsmen] (426) + עִמּ֔וֹ [with·him] (116) + וַיִּרְדֹּ֣ף [and·pursued] (300) + אַחֲרָ֔יו [after·him] (225) + דֶּ֖רֶךְ [way] (224) + שִׁבְעַ֣ת [seven] (772) + יָמִ֑ים [days] (100) + וַיַּדְבֵּ֥ק [and·overtook] (122) + אֹת֖וֹ [him] (407) + בְּהַ֥ר [in·the·mountain] (207) + הַגִּלְעָֽד [the·Gilead] (112) = 3135.
Onkelos
He took his kinsmen with him and pursued him a journey of seven days, and he overtook him at the mountain of Gilead.
Rashi
את אחיו HIS BRETHREN — i.e. his kinsmen. דרך שבעת ימים SEVEN DAY’S JOURNEY — During all the three days during which the messenger had gone to tell Laban Jacob had proceeded on his journey. Consequently Jacob was then six days distance from Laban. On the seventh day i.e. on the day when Jacob covered that stretch of ground which made him seven days distant from Laban’s starting point Laban overtook him. We may infer, therefore, that all the distance that Jacob would have taken seven days to cover Laban covered in one day. And thus it states: “and he pursued after him seven day’s journey” and it does not say “and he pursued after him for seven days” (Genesis Rabbah 74:6).
Ramban
AND HE OVERTOOK HIM IN THE MOUNTAIN OF GILEAD. For on the eve of the seventh day Laban reached the base of the mountain, and he saw Jacob encamped at a distance. That night he slept below Jacob’s camp and the dream came to him.
Or HaChaim
דרך שבעת ימים. a distance of seven days. We must examine why the earth did not "fold" under Jacob on this occasion to facilitate his journey (in response to the urging of the angel) as it had done when he was on the way to Charan at the beginning of our פרשה. If the earth even "folded" for Eliezer, Abraham's servant at the time (as we know from Bereshit Rabbah 59,11), it would certainly have seemed appropriate that the same should happen to the righteous Jacob, especially since he then would have been out of danger of pursuit. Perhaps the failure of the earth to "fold" was a way of G'd telling Jacob that he did not need to flee, that even if Laban were to catch up with him he would not even be able to speak to him offensively or threateningly. Had G'd made the earth "fold" for him, Jacob might have thought that G'd had no other means of putting him out of Laban's reach. If G'd had not spoken to Laban even קפיצת הדרך would not have sufficed to allow Jacob to escape Laban and his sons. The greatness of the miracle was that although Laban possessed freedom of choice he was prevented from exercising it against Jacob. The fact that G'd chose not to let the earth "fold" for Jacob on this occasion also became important historically. It led to Rachel being buried in a place where her prayers would intercede on behalf of the Jewish people going into exile, Midrash Hagadol Vayishlach 35,18; according to Sanhedrin 105 Laban is identical with Bileam and Cushan Rishotayim who attacked the Israelites in the time of Othniel. If the Israelites defeated him (Judges 3,10) it may have been because he breached the covenant that Jacob and Laban concluded at Galed. Had the encounter of Laban and Jacob not taken place at that time, there would not have been a breach of an agreement not to attack the descendants of Jacob in their own country.
Chizkuni
וירדוף אחריו, “he chased after him. According to Rashi, the distance that Yaakov with all his sheep and cattle had covered in seven days, Lavan, riding, had been able to cover in a single day. Yaakov had taken seven days to get from Padan Arom to Har Gilead. Different commentators disagree on how long it took Yaakov. Considering that we have been told in Genesis 30,36, that he had put three days walk between himself and Lavan, he had only travelled for 4 days before Lavan caught up with him. At any rate Lavan’s catching up with Yaakov is not surprising due to his riding either on camels or donkeys, and not being slowed down by animals and other heavy luggage.
Tur HaArokh
וידבק אותו בהר הגלעד, “He caught up with him at Mount Gilead.” Lavan reached the slopes of the mountain on the evening of the sixth day after Yaakov’s departure and he saw Yaakov’s encampment from a distance. During the night G’d appeared to him and warned him not to molest Yaakov in any shape or form. Ibn Ezra explains the sequence וידבק, “he caught up,” followed by ויבא, “he arrived,” as one of many examples in the Torah when a major point is being made before something which actually had happened earlier, but was subordinate in importance.
And God came to Laban the Aramean in a dream of the night, and said to him: "Take heed to yourself that you speak not to Jacob either good or bad."
verse value 2951 — אֱלֹהִ֛ים = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 61 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִ֛ים) = 86, equal to Elohim. Verse gematria: 2951 is divisible by 13, the value of echad ('one') and ahavah ('love'). The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֗וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "lest·you·speak" (פֶּן־תְּדַבֵּ֥ר, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 80: in·a·dream, night. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "lest·you·speak" (פֶּן־תְּדַבֵּ֥ר). 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "God" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "and·came" (root בוא, 213x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'night', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 8 words. Full calculation: וַיָּבֹ֧א [and·came] (19) + אֱלֹהִ֛ים [God] (86) + אֶל־לָבָ֥ן [to·Laban] (113) + הָאֲרַמִּ֖י [the·Aramean] (256) + בַּחֲלֹ֣ם [in·a·dream] (80) + הַלָּ֑יְלָה [night] (80) + וַיֹּ֣אמֶר [and·said] (257) + ל֗וֹ [to·him] (36) + הִשָּׁ֧מֶר [beware] (545) + לְךָ֛ [to·you] (50) + פֶּן־תְּדַבֵּ֥ר [lest·you·speak] (736) + עִֽם־יַעֲקֹ֖ב [with·Jacob] (292) + מִטּ֥וֹב [from·good] (57) + עַד־רָֽע [to·bad] (344) = 2951.
Onkelos
A word came from before Hashem to Laban the Aramean in a dream of the night and said to him: Take heed for yourself lest you speak to Jacob anything, from good to bad.
Rashi
מטוב עד רע EITHER GOOD OR EVIL — why should he not speak good? Because all the good that the wicked do to the righteous is evil in the opinion of the righteous (Yevamot 103b).
Ramban
LABAN THE ARAMEAN. The intent of this is to relate that even though he was an Aramean, and the people of his place used teraphim and were soothsayers like the Philistines, yet the prophetic dream came to him in honor of the righteous one [Jacob]. Similarly, And Jacob outwitted Laban the Aramean: here. [the epithet “Aramean” is mentioned in order to indicate that] even though Laban was the Aramean, the diviner and owner of teraphim, [he was still outwitted by Jacob]. EITHER GOOD OR BAD. [Why should he not speak good?] Because all the good that the wicked do is looked upon by the righteous as bad. This is Rashi’s language. But the plain meaning thereof is as follow: “Take heed that you speak not to Jacob and promise to treat him well if he will return with you from his journey, or lest you threaten to do him evil if he will not come with you, for it is I Who commanded him to return to his land.”
Ibn Ezra
"And God came to Laban the Aramean" — this happened before "and he overtook him" (v. 23); the meaning is: God had already come. I have already shown you many instances of this kind. Hashem came for the sake of Jacob's honor. "From good to bad" — even what you think is for his benefit, do not speak to him so as to bring him back.
Sforno
Guard yourself that you do not speak. You are forbidden even to speak! Either good. Do not try to lure Yaakov into returning with offers of benefits. Or evil. And do not threaten him.
Chizkuni
ויבא אלוקים אל לבן, G-d came (in a dream) to Lavan;
Kli Yakar
From good until bad. The phrase from good until bad refers to matters that can be interpreted in two ways. According to this interpretation, [God] prohibited Laban from three types of communication with Jacob: First, He forbade him from speaking good— meaning pleasant and comforting words — because the goodwill of the wicked is harmful to the righteous. This is because the wicked person’s heart ultimately intends to harm the righteous, and when he speaks kindly, his words are certainly mere flattery, intended to prevent the righteous person from being cautious and guarding against him. It is obvious that one should not engage in such speech, as it can lead to harm. Furthermore, even regarding ambiguous speech that can be interpreted in two ways, one might have thought it would be permitted to speak to him in this manner, and he should simply be mindful and suspicious [of the implications]. Therefore, the word “until” comes to teach that it is forbidden to mislead him with words. Not only are these two types of speech forbidden because they could cause the righteous person to stumble, but even regarding completely negative speech, one might have thought it would be permitted to threaten him with harsh words so that he would be cautious and guard himself, reasoning “if he is not careful, at least I have saved myself.” Therefore, the word bad comes to teach us that you must not threaten him or do him any harm. And with this they resolve [the apparent contradiction]: Regarding what was said subsequently and you shall not cross over this mound to me for evil — which implies that for good purposes you may cross over. However, in contrast, Laban said if I do not cross over to you this mound — which implies that under no circumstances would he cross over, even for good purposes. This is because “my goodness is not upon you,” as already last night God told me Beware of speaking with Jacob of good — from which we can deduce that He does not desire my goodness, for I am suspected in His eyes that all my “goodness” toward you is [actually] for evil. And he said if I do not cross over to you this mound — even if I do not also cross the pillar, but you shall not cross over to me the mound and the pillar for evil. This implies that [crossing] the mound alone without crossing the pillar is permitted even for evil purposes, because in the meantime Jacob would certainly regret the evil [intent], which is not the case with Laban. And this explanation is correct.
Tur HaArokh
אל לבן הארמי, “to Lavan from Aram.” The reason this detail-with which we are already familiar- was mentioned here, was to emphasize that although Lavan, as an Aramite like the other members of his town, was an idolater, G’d appeared to him in a dream for the sake of the righteous Yaakov. מטוב עד רע, “either good or evil (threats).” When wicked people do you favours, “טוב”, such favours are tainted because they originate with the wicked. Sooner or later, something רע, “evil,” will happen as a consequence of such a “favour.” According to Nachmanides, G’d did not permit Lavan to try and convince him to come back with him, in return for favourable conditions which he would provide for him. Neither was he allowed to try and frighten Yaakov by warning him of what he would do to him if he did not come back.
And Laban came up with Jacob. Now Jacob had pitched his tent in the mountain; and Laban with his brothers pitched in the mountain of Gilead.
verse value 3795
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 51 letters. The shortest word is "Laban" (לָבָ֖ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "Jacob" (אֶֽת־יַעֲקֹ֑ב, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 570: pitched, pitched. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·overtook" (וַיַּשֵּׂ֥ג), "his·tent" (אֶֽת־אׇהֳלוֹ֙). The root לבן appears 2 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "his·kinsmen" (root אח, 164x in Genesis); "Laban" (root לבן, 58x in Genesis). First appearance of the root נשג ("and·overtook") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Jacob', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 9 words. Full calculation: וַיַּשֵּׂ֥ג [and·overtook] (319) + לָבָ֖ן [Laban] (82) + אֶֽת־יַעֲקֹ֑ב [Jacob] (583) + וְיַעֲקֹ֗ב [and·Jacob] (188) + תָּקַ֤ע [pitched] (570) + אֶֽת־אׇהֳלוֹ֙ [his·tent] (443) + בָּהָ֔ר [on·the·mountain] (207) + וְלָבָ֛ן [and·Laban] (88) + תָּקַ֥ע [pitched] (570) + אֶת־אֶחָ֖יו [his·kinsmen] (426) + בְּהַ֥ר [in·the·mountain] (207) + הַגִּלְעָֽד [the·Gilead] (112) = 3795.
Onkelos
Laban overtook Jacob — Jacob had pitched his tent on the mountain — and Laban encamped with his kinsmen on the mountain of Gilead.
Ibn Ezra
"And Laban pitched — his kinsmen" — meaning, together with his kinsmen. "Jacob's tent" draws along with it another phrase, so that the verse reads: Jacob pitched his tent on the mountain, and Laban pitched his tent with his kinsmen on Mount Gilead.
Why did you flee secretly, and outwit me; and did not tell me, that I might have sent you away with mirth and with songs, with tabret and with harp;
verse value 4181
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 55 letters. The shortest word is "to·me" (לִּ֔י, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·you·did·not·tell" (וְלֹא־הִגַּ֣דְתָּ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 461: did·you·hide·yourself, and·you·stole. 7 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "did·you·hide·yourself" (נַחְבֵּ֙אתָ֙), "to·flee" (לִבְרֹ֔חַ), "and·you·did·not·tell" (וְלֹא־הִגַּ֣דְתָּ). 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·I·would·have·sent·you" (root שלח, 72x in Genesis); "and·you·did·not·tell" (root נגד, 44x in Genesis); "to·me" (root לי, 44x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'me', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 7 words. Full calculation: לָ֤מָּה [why] (75) + נַחְבֵּ֙אתָ֙ [did·you·hide·yourself] (461) + לִבְרֹ֔חַ [to·flee] (240) + וַתִּגְנֹ֖ב [and·you·stole] (461) + אֹתִ֑י [me] (411) + וְלֹא־הִגַּ֣דְתָּ [and·you·did·not·tell] (449) + לִּ֔י [to·me] (40) + וָֽאֲשַׁלֵּחֲךָ֛ [and·I·would·have·sent·you] (365) + בְּשִׂמְחָ֥ה [with·joy] (355) + וּבְשִׁרִ֖ים [and·with·songs] (558) + בְּתֹ֥ף [with·timbrel] (482) + וּבְכִנּֽוֹר [and·with·lyre] (284) = 4181.
Onkelos
Why did you hide to flee, and conceal yourself from me, and not tell me? I would have sent you off with joy and with songs, with timbrels and with lyres.
Rashi
ותגנב אתי — means thou didst steal away my mind (as in Genesis 5:26).
Targum Yonatan
Why didst thou hide from me that thou wouldst go, and steal my knowledge, and not tell me? For if thou hadst told me, I would have sent thee away with mirth, and with hymns, and with tambourines, and with harps.
and did not suffer me to kiss my sons and my daughters? now you have done foolishly.
verse value 3292
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 34 letters. The shortest word is "and·not" (וְלֹ֣א, 3 letters) and the longest is "you·left·me" (נְטַשְׁתַּ֔נִי, 6 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "you·left·me" (נְטַשְׁתַּ֔נִי), "to·kiss" (לְנַשֵּׁ֥ק), "you·have·done·foolishly" (הִסְכַּ֥לְתָּֽ). 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "my·sons" (root בן, 248x in Genesis); "doing" (root עשה, 152x in Genesis); "and·not" (root לא, 127x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·my·daughters', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְלֹ֣א [and·not] (37) + נְטַשְׁתַּ֔נִי [you·left·me] (819) + לְנַשֵּׁ֥ק [to·kiss] (480) + לְבָנַ֖י [my·sons] (92) + וְלִבְנֹתָ֑י [and·my·daughters] (498) + עַתָּ֖ה [now] (475) + הִסְכַּ֥לְתָּֽ [you·have·done·foolishly] (515) + עֲשֽׂוֹ [doing] (376) = 3292.
Onkelos
You did not allow me to kiss my sons and my daughters. Now you have acted foolishly in doing this.
Ibn Ezra
"You have acted foolishly" (הִסְכַּלְתָּ עֲשׂוֹ) — this is an infinitive form used as a predicate noun, and it is in construct; the word "this" or "thus" is absent [from the text but implied].
Chizkuni
לנשק לבני ולבנותי, “to provide my sons and daughters with parting gifts;” although the word נשק appears primarily as meaning “to kiss,” it is also the same word (as a noun) meaning neshek, “weapons,” in the sense of the equipment needed for survival, as we know from Psalms 2,12: נשקו בר, “gird yourselves;”
Targum Yonatan
Neither hast thou suffered me to kiss the sons of my daughters, nor my daughters. Now hast thou been foolish in what thou hast done.
Cross-references: Genesis 46:15; Nehemiah 5:5; I Samuel 30:6; Genesis 44:5
It is in the power of my hand to do you hurt; but the God of your father spoke to me yesternight, saying: Take heed to yourself that you speak not to Jacob either good or bad.
verse value 4194
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 66 letters. Verse gematria: 4194 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "harm" (רָ֑ע, 2 letters) and the longest is "with·Jacob" (עִֽם־יַעֲקֹ֖ב, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "it·is·in·the·power·of" (יֶשׁ־לְאֵ֣ל). The root רע appears 2 times in this verse. 15 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "and·God·of" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "to·me" (root אל, 242x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'harm', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 12 words.
Onkelos
It is in my power to do you harm. But the God of your father spoke to me last night, saying: Take heed for yourself lest you speak with Jacob anything from good to bad.
Rashi
יש לאל ידי means MY HAND HAS THE STRENGTH AND THE POWER — to do you hurt (אל therefore means strength and יש לאל ידי is equivalent to יש אל לידי). Wherever אל is used as a Divine Name it is because it signifies strength and abundance of power.
Ibn Ezra
"It is in the power" (יֶשׁ לְאֵל) — meaning strength, as in: "like a man who has no power" (Psalms 88:5).
Sforno
ואלוקי אביכם, not because of your merits.
Chizkuni
יש לאל ידי לעשות עמכם רע, “it is within my power to harm you;” Lavan implies that even G-d is aware of this and is afraid that I will take my revenge of you, and that it why He has warned me concerning you.
Rabbeinu Bahya
יש לאל ידי, “it is within my power, etc.” The wicked always boast of their wicked deeds; Lavan was no exception; he too boasted about his wickedness. When he coupled the statement יש לאל ידי with the words ואלוקי אביכם, he meant that for the last twenty years he had been able to inflict harm on Yaakov as the fact that G’d did not warn him not to harm Yaakov until the night before he caught up with him shows that prior to this G’d would not have prevented him from harming Yaakov. The fact that G’d did not appear to him until that night may also be taken as proof of Lavan’s goodwill towards Yaakov. Surely, if G’d was so solicitous of Yaakov’s welfare, He would have had to warn him off before now unless G’d was well aware that Lavan had not harboured any hostility against Yaakov. If Yaakov had only left because he was anxious to return to his family in Canaan why did he steal the Teraphim? He repeated mention of Yaakov having stolen something to lend emphasis to the fact that the very fact of Yaakov stealing from him bothered him the most. מטוב עד רע, “either good or evil, etc.” anything which was good for Lavan was bad for Yaakov. If Lavan decided not to kill Yaakov but to merely take away his possessions, this would prove to be bad for Yaakov; this is why G’d had to phrase His warning by saying טוב עד רע. We find a similar construction in Ezekiel 21,8 והכרתי ממך צדיק ורשע, “I will cut off from you righteous and wicked alike.” [Ezekiel speaks about relative degrees of wickedness; he calls someone who only occasionally worships the Baal a צדיק, whereas he who does so on a regular basis is a רשע by comparison. The fact is, however, that both are wicked (Rabbi Saadyah Gaon)]. The proof that our interpretation is correct can be seen from Yaakov’s reply לולי אלוקי אבי... כי עתה ריקם שלחתני, “if my father’s G’d had not been at my side, you would now have sent me off empty-handed.” In other words: sending Yaakov off empty-handed was Lavan’s idea of treating him “good.”
Tur HaArokh
ואלוקי אביכם אמש אמר אלי, וגו', “and the G’d of your father has said to me last night.” I find it difficult to understand why Lavan told Yaakov that G’d had told him not to do harm to him. After all, it was a known fact that Lavan hated Yaakov and wanted to totally uproot him. Seeing that G’d had forbidden him to do so, why did he mention this to Yaakov? Yaakov would have been more afraid of him if he had not mentioned his nocturnal experience at all? I believe the reason is that Lavan was aware that Yaakov was a prophet and he thought that G’d would have revealed to him what He had said to Lavan. Under those circumstances he felt it would be better for him to come clean right away and admit that G’d had warned him.
And now that you are surely gone, because you sore longest after your father's house, why have you stolen my gods?"
verse value 3298
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 44 letters. The shortest word is "surely" (הָלֹ֣ךְ, 3 letters) and the longest is "because·surely" (כִּֽי־נִכְסֹ֥ף, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 455: you·went, did·you·steal. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "you·went" (הָלַ֔כְתָּ), "because·surely" (כִּֽי־נִכְסֹ֥ף), "you·longed" (נִכְסַ֖פְתָּה). The root הלך appears 2 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "your·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis); "for·the·house·of" (root בית, 121x in Genesis); "surely" (root הלך, 113x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'your·father', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְעַתָּה֙ [and·now] (481) + הָלֹ֣ךְ [surely] (55) + הָלַ֔כְתָּ [you·went] (455) + כִּֽי־נִכְסֹ֥ף [because·surely] (240) + נִכְסַ֖פְתָּה [you·longed] (615) + לְבֵ֣ית [for·the·house·of] (442) + אָבִ֑יךָ [your·father] (33) + לָ֥מָּה [why] (75) + גָנַ֖בְתָּ [did·you·steal] (455) + אֶת־אֱלֹהָֽי [my·gods] (447) = 3298.
Onkelos
And now, though you had to go because you so longed for your father's house, why did you steal my object of dread?
Rashi
נכספתה means THOU DIDST LONG—It occurs many times in Scripture: (Psalms 89:3) “My soul yearneth (נכספה) yea, pineth”; (Job 14:15) “Thou wouldst have a desire (תכסוף) to the work of hands”.
Ibn Ezra
"You longed greatly" (נִכְסֹף נִכְסַפְתָּ) — this is an infinitive absolute from the nif'al conjugation, like: "if we indeed fight against them" (Judges 11:25). The word נִכְסַפְתָּ means "you yearned," and similarly: "he yearns to tear" (Psalms 17:12).
Sforno
ועתה Now that you have left without obtaining my permission and you misled me, I assume Now you have gone. You must have run off in this manner because you so yearned for your father’s house. But why did you steal. Your yearning for your father’s house was no justification for stealing my gods.
Or HaChaim
ועתה הלוך הלכת, "When you left now, etc." Laban said: "since you have previously expressed your longing to see your father again, why did you choose to leave now in such a way that it looked like a flight?" Laban was leading up to what he expected Jacob's defence to be, namely that he was anxious to see his father. If so, he argued, why did you have to steal my תרפים, charms? Surely this makes your entire departure appear like a flight! You must have been afraid that the תרפים would reveal your where-abouts to me!
Rabbeinu Bahya
כי נכסוף נכספת לבית אביך, “for you had a strong yearning for your father’s house.” When Lavan repeated the word נכסף he hinted that Yaakov’s yearning was not only for his paternal home but also for the Holy Land. We find this term applied to yearning for the Holy Land in Psalms 84,3 נכספה וגם כלתה נפשי לחצרות ה', “I long, I yearn for the courtyards of the Lord.” It is possible that the letter ה at the end of the word נכספתה is an allusion to glory, i.e. the glory of G’d, concerning Whom Isaiah 64,10 has said: בית קדשנו ותפארתנו, “the house of our sanctity and our glory.” Yaakov yearned for that house. The words בית קדשנו refer to G’d’s glory, whereas the word תפארתנו refers to Israel’s glory. We have the expression עוז ותפארת במקדשו, (Psalms 96,6) “strength and splendour are in His Temple,” which reflect similar sentiments. He who does not yearn for the Temple is the sinner. We find that the prophet rebukes Israel in words reflecting this feeling when he said (Tzefaniah 2,1), התקוששו, וקושו הגוי לא נכסוף, “gather together, gather, o nation without yearnings!” The prophet addressed a nation that lacked the feeling of yearning for G’d and His Temple.
And Jacob answered and said to Laban: "Because I was afraid; for I said: Lest you should take your daughters from me by force.
verse value 3638
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 49 letters. The shortest word is "for" (כִּ֣י, 2 letters) and the longest is "your·daughters" (אֶת־בְּנוֹתֶ֖יךָ, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 30: for, for. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "I·was·afraid" (יָרֵ֔אתִי), "lest·you·take" (פֶּן־תִּגְזֹ֥ל), "your·daughters" (אֶת־בְּנוֹתֶ֖יךָ). The root כי appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "for" (root כי, 167x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·Laban', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 7 words. Full calculation: וַיַּ֥עַן [and·answered] (136) + יַעֲקֹ֖ב [Jacob] (182) + וַיֹּ֣אמֶר [and·said] (257) + לְלָבָ֑ן [to·Laban] (112) + כִּ֣י [for] (30) + יָרֵ֔אתִי [I·was·afraid] (621) + כִּ֣י [for] (30) + אָמַ֔רְתִּי [I·said] (651) + פֶּן־תִּגְזֹ֥ל [lest·you·take] (570) + אֶת־בְּנוֹתֶ֖יךָ [your·daughters] (889) + מֵעִמִּֽי [from·me] (160) = 3638.
Onkelos
Jacob answered and said to Laban: Because I was afraid, for I said: Perhaps you would take your daughters from me by force.
Rashi
כי יראתי BECAUSE I FEARED — He answered his first question first, for he had asked him (Genesis 31:26) “[what hast thou done…] that thou hast carried away my daughters etc.” (this being the first of all Laban’s questions).
Sforno
פן תגזול את בנותיך, by saying that you had not given me your daughters in marriage in order for me to remove them from your homeland you would in effect commit robbery as you would detain both my children and my estate. In fact, Lavan used exactly this kind of argument when he said: “the children are my children the daughters are my daughters, etc.” (verse 43). You might have succeeded in doing all this with the help of the local townspeople. Now that I have left your country you will not be able to carry out such a plan.
Or HaChaim
ויען יעקב, Jacob replied, etc. Jacob said: "I do not deny that I fled. As to the reason why, 'I was afraid you would steal your daughters from me by force. As to your argument that I stole the תרפים so that they could not reveal my whereabouts to you, I swear that whoever has taken them shall not live.'" Jacob committed the fatal error of uttering a curse based on partial information.
With whomsoever you find your gods, he shall not live; before our brothers discern what is yours with me, and take it to yourself."—For Jacob knew not that Rachel had stolen them.—
verse value 3479
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 66 letters. The shortest word is "with" (עִ֠ם, 2 letters) and the longest is "your·gods" (אֶת־אֱלֹהֶ֘יךָ֮, 7 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "you·find" (תִּמְצָ֣א), "your·gods" (אֶת־אֱלֹהֶ֘יךָ֮), "identify·for·yourself" (הַֽכֶּר־לְךָ֛). 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "that" (root כי, 167x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·take·for·yourself', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 5 words.
Onkelos
With whomever you find your object of dread, he shall not remain alive before our kinsmen. Identify for yourself what is with me and take it. Jacob did not know that Rachel had taken them.
Rashi
לא יחיה LET HIM NOT LIVE — In consequence of this curse Rachel died on the journey (Genesis Rabbah 74:9). מה עמדי WHAT IS WITH ME that belongs to you.
Ibn Ezra
"He shall not live" — only that I will kill him. Some say this was spoken in the manner of a prayer, and therefore Rachel died on the road. If so, let them tell us: who prayed concerning the wife of Phinehas? (I Samuel 4:19–20).
Sforno
לא יחיה. He thought that one of the servants must have stolen the teraphim in order to worship them as he had been in the habit of doing before becoming part of Yaakov’s household. הכר לך מה עמדי, if you can find amongst my possessions any that you recognise as belonging to you, take them! ולא ידע יעקב, if he had known that Rachel had taken the teraphim he would not have had the audacity to deny this. Also, he most certainly would not have cursed her by saying “he shall not live!” [actually he had not cursed the thief but the one with whom the stolen goods would be found, and in the event Lavan never did find the teraphim. Ed.]
Or HaChaim
לא יחיה, "he shall not live!" Jacob applied the legal yardsticks applicable to all Gentiles, i.e. the death penalty. Should you argue that there was no need to spell out the penalty seeing everybody knew what the penalty for stealing was, Jacob wanted to emphasise that he would not plead that he had received these תרפים as a gift or had simply forgotten to return them.
Rabbeinu Bahya
עם אשר תמצא את אלוהיך לא יחיה, “the person in whose possession you will find your idols shall not live!” This curse resulted in Rachel dying on route; from here we also learn that a person must be very careful not to cause a righteous person to curse him. נגד אחינו הכר לך מה עמדי וקח לך, “in the presence of our kinsmen ascertain for yourself what is with me and take it back.” This proves Yaakov’s integrity. It is typical of the righteous that they do not covet money which is not theirs, not even if it belongs to close relatives. Yaakov who had stayed at his father-in-law’s house for twenty years and whose father-in-law had experienced tremendous blessings due to Yaakov, as he himself admitted, allowed his father-in-law to examine every part of his household and search for any item not his. Lavan actually was not abashed to take advantage of that opportunity as we know from Yaakov saying at the end (verse 37) “for you have handled everything; what did you find?”
Tur HaArokh
עם אשר תמצא את אלוקיך לא יחיה, “the one in whose possession you will find your deities shall not live.” Some commentators hold that this is not the formula used in a curse, but that Yaakov meant to say that such a person did not deserve to live, but deserved to be hung as a thief. If he were to be convicted of the death penalty, Yaakov promised to be the first one to assist in the execution.
And Laban went into Jacob's tent, and into Leah's tent, and into the tent of the two maid-servants; but he found them not. And he went out of Leah's tent, and entered into Rachel's tent.
verse value 2288 — לֵאָ֗ה = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 64 letters. Notable word values: "Leah" (לֵאָ֗ה) = 36, double chai. Verse gematria: 2288 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "Laban" (לָבָ֜ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·in·the·tent·of" (וּבְאֹ֣הֶל, 5 letters). Words sharing gematria 44: and·in·the·tent·of, and·in·the·tent·of. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "the·maidservants" (הָאֲמָהֹ֖ת), "from·the·tent·of" (מֵאֹ֣הֶל). The root אהל appears 5 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·came" (root בוא, 213x in Genesis); "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "and·not" (root לא, 127x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'found', dividing the verse into phrases of 11 and 6 words.
Onkelos
Laban entered Jacob's tent and Leah's tent and the tent of the two maidservants, and he found nothing. He went out of Leah's tent and entered Rachel's tent.
Rashi
באהל יעקב INTO JACOB’S TENT — This was Rachel’s tent also, for Jacob was constantly with her. For the same reason Scripture says (46:19) “the sons of Rachel Jacob’s wife”, whilst in the case of the other wives it does not state “Jacob’s wife” (Genesis Rabbah 74:9). ויבא באהל רחל AND HE CAME INTO RACHEL’S TENT — When he left Leah’s tent he returned again to Rachel’s tent before he searched the tent of the two maid-servants. Why did he feel compelled to do all this? Because he knew full well that she was meddlesome (Genesis Rabbah 74:9).
Ramban
IN THE TENT OF JACOB AND IN THE TENT OF LEAH. Rashi comments: “In the tent of Jacob — this was Rachel’s tent, for he was constantly with her. And so also Scripture says, The sons of Rachel Jacob’s wife, while in the case of the other wives it does not say ‘Jacob’s wife.’ And he entered into Rachel’s tent. When Laban left Leah’s tent he returned again to Rachel’s tent before he searched the tent of the two maid-servants. And why did he feel compelled to do all this? Because he knew her to be inclined to touch everything.” But in line with the plain meaning of Scripture, it is not correct for the same tent to be called by two names, [i.e., “the tent of Jacob” and “the tent of Rachel”] in one verse. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Laban entered into the tent of Jacob, the tent of Leah, and the tent of the two maid-servants [the singular form “tent” being used] since one tent served both. Afterwards he came back a second time to Leah’s tent, and after that he entered into Rachel’s tent. But this too is incorrect. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra further wrote: “The feasible interpretation appears to me to be that Scripture followed here a way of brevity and delayed mentioning the tent of Rachel in order to state concerning all of the others, but he found them not, as they were not there. Scripture then returns and explains that when he went out of Leah’s tent he came into Rachel’s tent where the teraphim were.” That is the correct interpretation. It is true that there were separate tents for all of the wives for this was due to the righteous man’s regard for modesty. Thus each one of the wives had a separate tent so that one should not know when he came to the other. It is also a matter forbidden by Torah law, as the Sages have mentioned in Tractate Niddah.21917a. And Jacob had a special tent, in which he would eat at his table with his children and people of the household. And the reason why Scripture mentions Jacob’s wife in connection with Rachel in my opinion, according to its simple sense, is that she is mentioned in that chapter among the concubines. For this reason Scripture does not say so in the Seder Vayishlach Yaakov, for there it mentions Leah and Rachel and then the maid-servants.
Ibn Ezra
"And Laban entered Jacob's tent, and Leah's tent, and the tent of the two maidservants" — either a single tent was shared by both maidservants, or he entered each one's tent. He then returned a second time to Leah's tent, as is evidenced by "and he came out of Leah's tent." Also plausible is that Jacob's tent stood between Leah's tent and Rachel's tent. What seems to me closest is that Scripture took a shortened path and deferred the mention of Rachel's tent; and the actual sequence was: he entered Jacob's tent, then Leah's tent, then Rachel's tent, then the tent of the two maidservants. The meaning is that he searched in Jacob's tent, in Leah's tent, and in the tent of the two maidservants and found nothing, because there was nothing there; and at the moment of his leaving Leah's tent and entering Rachel's tent — where the teraphim were — Rachel had already taken them and placed them in the camel's saddle.
Chizkuni
ויבא באהל רחל “he came into the tent of Rachel;” Rashi on these words (basing himself on Bereshit Rabbah 74,12) says that Lavan now went back to the tent of Rachel once more after having already searched the tent of Leah, before proceeding to the tents of the other matriarchs, because he considered her a thief. What is the reason that prompted Rashi to accept this interpretation, i.e. that Lavan searched the tents of the matriarchs last? I believe it is based on the words: ולא מצא “and he had not found” in our verse, after having told us that he searched the tents of Yaakov and the matriarchs. Clearly this had to refer to the tents of the matriarchs which would have been the logical starting point for the search. On the one hand, seeing that Rachel was Yaakov’s favourite wife and he spent most of his time with her, the reference to the tent of Yaakov could be understood as including searching Rachel’s belongings. Rachel’s personal tent, presumably used by her only while experiencing her menses, and therefore ritually impure, was located in the centre of the whole camp. The entrances of the tents of the matriarchs opened to public paths on the one side and to Rachel’s tent on the other. Some commentators argue that we must follow the sequence of the text, i.e. that Leah’s tent was in the centre Rachel’s tent adjoining, and the other two matriarchs’ tents adjoining that of Rachel. Only Leah’s and Rachel’s tents also had an entrance facing a public path, so that Yaakov could not go out to the public domain without the knowledge of either Rachel or Leah. Lavan was therefore forced to return to the tent of Leah, and subsequently to that of Rachel. [Lavan searched in the order of who he thought had most to gain by stealing his teraphim, commencing with Yaakov. Ed.]
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויבא לבן באהל יעקב ובאהל לאה, “Lavan entered the tent of Yaakov and the tent of Leah, etc.” After the Torah had already mentioned “the tent of Leah and that of the two maid-servants”, why did the Torah have to make special mention of “he left the tent of Leah?” All the Torah had to write was “he left the tent of the two maid-servants.” It is possible, however, that Leah’s tent was the biggest of them all, so that it contained the private tents of the two maid-servants within it. If so, Lavan would still have been standing within the tent of Leah at the time he left the respective tents of the maid-servants. This is why the Torah had to be precise in saying “he left the tent of Leah.” According to Rashi there were a total of three tents, seeing that the tent of Rachel and the tent of Yaakov were one and the same. Add to that the tent of Leah and the tent of the two maid-servants and you have a total of three tents. According to the opinion of Nachmanides, on the other hand, there were a total of five tents; each of the matriarchs had a tent of her own; each of the maid-servants had a tent of her own; Yaakov also had a tent of his own. It would have been a prerequisite of Yaakov’s privacy that his wives each had her own tent. Etiquette demanded that none of his wives would be aware when her husband visited the tent of her companion. According to the author it would be a Biblical prohibition for them to know with whom Yaakov was sleeping at the time.
Tur HaArokh
באהל יעקב ובאהל לאה, “in Yaakov’s tent and in Leah’s tent.” According to Rashi Yaakov’s tent was in fact Rachel’s tent as he spent most of his nights in her tent. Even when he left the tent of Leah, he, Lavan, went back a second time to Rachel’s tent as he was aware that she was fond of rummaging around. (Bereshit Rabbah on that section. Ed.]. Nachmanides does not agree that the same tent in the same verse is referred to once as Rachel’s tent and another time as Yaakov’s tent. Ibn Ezra wrote that Lavan searched in this order: 1) the tent of Yaakov, 2) the tent of Leah, followed by the tent of the two maidservants who shared a tent, or to each of their tents separately, Afterwards he went back once more to Leah’s tent. The proof is that the Torah writes: “he departed from the tent of Leah.” The Torah describes this procedure in a manner which enables it to say that Lavan had failed to locate the teraphim in any of these tents. as they had not been hidden there. In verse 34 when he came to a tent that did contain the teraphim, the Torah reports this search separately, to stress that although this tent contained the teraphim, Lavan failed to find them. Hence the words “he did not find” are repeated again. He continues that he feels that what most likely happened is that Lavan proceeded in order by first searching Yaakov’s tent, followed by searching the tent of Leah, followed by searching the tent of Rachel, and that of the two servant maids. The reason why the Torah describes Rachel’s tent as being searched last was to emphasise that in spite of the fact that the teraphim were in her tent, he did not find them as by then she had hidden them under the saddle of the camel that she was sitting on.
Now Rachel had taken the teraphim, and put them in the saddle of the camel, and sat upon them. And Laban felt about all the tent, but found them not.
verse value 4870
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 59 letters. The shortest word is "in·the·saddle·of" (בְּכַ֥ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "teraphim" (אֶת־הַתְּרָפִ֗ים, 8 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "had·taken" (לָקְחָ֣ה), "and·placed·them" (וַתְּשִׂמֵ֛ם), "and·rummaged" (וַיְמַשֵּׁ֥שׁ). 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "had·taken" (root לקח, 142x in Genesis); "and·not" (root לא, 127x in Genesis); "upon·them" (root על, 90x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'upon·them', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְרָחֵ֞ל [Rachel] (244) + לָקְחָ֣ה [had·taken] (143) + אֶת־הַתְּרָפִ֗ים [teraphim] (1136) + וַתְּשִׂמֵ֛ם [and·placed·them] (786) + בְּכַ֥ר [in·the·saddle·of] (222) + הַגָּמָ֖ל [the·camel] (78) + וַתֵּ֣שֶׁב [and·sat] (708) + עֲלֵיהֶ֑ם [upon·them] (155) + וַיְמַשֵּׁ֥שׁ [and·rummaged] (656) + לָבָ֛ן [Laban] (82) + אֶת־כׇּל־הָאֹ֖הֶל [the·whole·tent] (492) + וְלֹ֥א [and·not] (37) + מָצָֽא [found] (131) = 4870.
Onkelos
Rachel had taken the idols and placed them in the camel's saddlebag and sat upon them. Laban searched the entire tent but did not find them.
Rashi
בכר הגמל IN THE CAMEL’S SADDLE-PILLOW — כר has the same meaning as in the Talmudic phrase "pillows (כרים) and bolsters”. Explain it as the Targum renders it: “in the עביטא of the camel”. This is a packsaddle made like a pillow. In Erubin (Eruvin 16a) we find, "they enclosed it with עביטין” by which is meant the saddles of camels. old French bast, bat; English packsaddle.
Ibn Ezra
Some interpreters say that a כַּר (kar) is like a pack-saddle. What seems correct to me is that כַּר הַגָּמָל refers to the camel itself — a type of swift, noble camel — as in: "send the kar to the ruler of the land" (Isaiah 16:1), and similarly: "on swift camels" (בְּכַרְכָּרוֹת, Isaiah 66:20). The one who drives or rides such an animal is called the "Kari" (II Kings 11:19). Rachel thus took the teraphim and placed them in the place where the camel (כַּר הַגָּמָל) was kept and sat upon them — she was not inside the tent.
Chizkuni
ורחל לקחה את התרפים, “and Rachel had taken the teraphim; when Lavan left the tent of Leah went and placed them under her cushion while seated on the camel.
And she said to her father: "Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise up before you; for the manner of women is upon me." And he searched, but found not the teraphim.
verse value 4054
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 73 letters. The shortest word is "for" (כִּ֣י, 2 letters) and the longest is "teraphim" (אֶת־הַתְּרָפִֽים, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 37: not, and·not. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "let·not·be·angry" (אַל־יִ֙חַר֙), "not" (ל֤וֹא), "to·rise" (לָק֣וּם). The root לא appears 2 times in this verse. 16 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·she·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "let·not·be·angry" (root אל, 242x in Genesis); "to·her·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·me', dividing the verse into phrases of 13 and 4 words.
Onkelos
She said to her father: Let it not be displeasing in my master's eyes that I cannot rise before you, for the way of women is upon me. He searched but did not find the idols.
Ramban
LET NOT MY LORD BE ANGRY THAT I CANNOT RISE UP BEFORE THEE. I do not understand what kind of an apology this is. Do women in that condition not rise or stand? Perhaps she said that her head and limbs feel heavy, and she was sick on account of the menstruation, for such is the customary way among them, and all the more among those such as Rachel, whose birth-giving powers are diminished since they have little blood, and menstruation presses very heavily upon them. The correct interpretation appears to me to be that in ancient days menstruants kept very isolated for they were ever referred to as niddoth on account of their isolation since they did not approach people and did not speak with them. For the ancients in their wisdom knew that their breath is harmful, their gaze is detrimental and makes a bad impression, as the philosophers have explained. I will yet mention their experiences in this matter. And the menstruants dwelled isolated in tents where no one entered, just as our Rabbis have mentioned in the Beraitha223“Exterior,” a teaching of the Tannaim that for some reason had not been included in the Mishnah by Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi. The collection of Beraithoth was compiled by Rabbi Chiyah and Rabbi Oshayah. They are generally found in the Tosephta. which follows the order of the Mishnah. of Tractate Niddah: See my Hebrew commentary, p. 177, and commencing with the second edition also on p. 548, column 2, top of page. “A learned man is forbidden to greet a menstruant. Rabbi Nechemyah says, ‘Even the utterance of her mouth is unclean.’ Said Rabbi Yochanan: ‘One is forbidden to walk after a menstruant and tread upon her footsteps, which are as unclean as a corpse; so is the dust upon which the menstruant stepped unclean, and it is forbidden to derive any benefit from her work.’” Therefore Rachel said, “It would be proper for me to rise before my lord to kiss his hands, but the way of women is upon me, and I cannot come near you nor walk at all in the tent so that you should not tread upon the dust of my feet.” And Laban kept silent and did not answer her, as it was customary not to converse with them at all because the speech of a menstruant was unclean.
Rabbeinu Bahya
כי לא אוכל לקום מפניך, “for I am unable to rise before you.” This verse proves that the ancients already practiced the restrictions of ritual impurity when their women were menstruating. In fact, they treated such impurity as equivalent to the ritual impurity associated with a dead body. According to Niddah it was forbidden to enquire after the welfare of a menstruating woman. Rabbi Nechemyah there says that that even the words which come out of the mouth of a menstruating woman are ritually impure, and one is not to walk on the ground such a woman has walked on. One must also not make use of what such a woman has produced with her hands while in such an impure state. This is why Lavan kept quiet and left her tent. The high level of Yaakov’s chastity is attested to by the fact that each of his four wives had her own quarters.
Tur HaArokh
אל יחר בעיני אדוני כי לא אוכל לקום מפניך. “may my lord not be angry, for I am suffering from my monthly menstrual pains.” Nachmanides writes that he does not understand what kind of an excuse Rachel offered with these words. Who has ever heard of women who experience these pains being unable to get up and stand on the floor? Perhaps she meant that all women suffer from pains in their head and in their limbs when these pains begin. I believe it is far more likely that the women in those days were quarantined during their monthly cycles so that men would not approach them and speak to them as it was considered that they could thereby confer disease through their exhaling bad breath. Our sages have already confirmed this in a Baraitha in the tractate Niddah. Even to be looked upon by a menstruating woman was considered hazardous. This is why special huts were set aside for the use of women in such a condition. [this editor has seen such a hut in Hawai with his own eyes. Ed.] According to the aforementioned Baraitha, a Torah scholar is forbidden to even enquire after the well being of such a woman. Rachel said that good manners require that she give a kiss to her father but that due to her present condition she was unable to do so, etc. Some commentators do not understand the words דרך נשים as applying to menstruation pains but, on the contrary, to the state of pregnancy.
And Jacob was wroth, and strove with Laban. And Jacob answered and said to Laban: "What is my trespass? what is my sin, that you have hotly pursued after me?
verse value 3186
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 57 letters. Verse gematria: 3186 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "what" (מַ֣ה, 2 letters) and the longest is "what·is·my·crime" (מַה־פִּשְׁעִי֙, 6 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·quarreled" (וַיָּ֣רֶב), "with·Laban" (בְּלָבָ֑ן), "what·is·my·crime" (מַה־פִּשְׁעִי֙). The root יעקב appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "to·Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "that" (root כי, 167x in Genesis). First appearance of the root פשע ("what·is·my·crime") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'with·Laban', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 10 words. Full calculation: וַיִּ֥חַר [and·was·angry] (224) + לְיַעֲקֹ֖ב [to·Jacob] (212) + וַיָּ֣רֶב [and·quarreled] (218) + בְּלָבָ֑ן [with·Laban] (84) + וַיַּ֤עַן [and·answered] (136) + יַעֲקֹב֙ [Jacob] (182) + וַיֹּ֣אמֶר [and·said] (257) + לְלָבָ֔ן [to·Laban] (112) + מַה־פִּשְׁעִי֙ [what·is·my·crime] (505) + מַ֣ה [what] (45) + חַטָּאתִ֔י [my·guilt] (428) + כִּ֥י [that] (30) + דָלַ֖קְתָּ [you·have·pursued] (534) + אַחֲרָֽי [after·me] (219) = 3186.
Onkelos
Jacob became angry and quarreled with Laban. Jacob answered and said to Laban: What is my offense, what is my sin, that you have pursued me?
Rashi
דלקת means THOU HAST PURSUED — as in (Lamentations 4:19) “They chased us (דלקנו) upon the mountains”, and (1 Samuel 17:53) ‘‘from chasing (מדלק) after the Philistines”.
Ramban
AND JACOB WAS WROTH, AND QUARRELLED WITH LABAN. Jacob had originally given him permission to search the tents, for he said, With whomsoever thou findest thy gods, here. and he further said, before our brethren recognize what is thine with me, here. and how could Laban find it if not by searching and handling? At first, however, Jacob feared lest one of the wives or servants had stolen Laban’s gods, and now that he saw that they were not with them his anger was aroused, for he said, “He did not lose his gods, only he is seeking a quarrel with me.” So he said, “Why have you hotly pursued after me as one pursues a thief? You have not found in my possession anything of all thy household stuff here. though I was entitled to take from you all I could for you have changed my hire ten times, here. and you demanded of me recompense for the animals that were torn by beasts, here. and I paid you, though not legally by law required to do so.”
Ibn Ezra
"That you pursued" (כִּי דָלַקְתָּ) — that you chased, as in: "he pursues the poor" (Psalms 10:2).
Sforno
ויחר ליעקב וירב בלבן, after Lavan did not find anything, Yaakov thought that his teraphim had never been stolen at all, but that Lavan had used the accusation as a pretext to search Yaakov’s belongings and to make him appear as a suspected thief.?מה פשעי מה חטאתי, What wrong have I ever committed that entitles you to treat me now as suspect of stealing?
Or HaChaim
ויחר ליעקב וירב, Jacob then grew angry and argued, etc. The Torah stresses that Jacob's quarrelling was the direct result of his becoming angry. Otherwise he would not have started a quarrel. וירב בלבן. He quarrelled with Laban. The meaning of the word בלבן is to show that this argument was considered as a quarrel only in the eyes of Laban. Anyone else would not have considered Jacob's justified argument a quarrel. In Bereshit Rabbah 74,10 Rabbi Azaryah describes this irritability of the patriarchs as preferable to the humility of subsequent generations of their descendants. He describes Jacob's conduct as conciliatory. Jacob pointed out that it was no more than fair that a son-in-law makes use of his father-in-law's utensils once in a while, etc. The approach by Rabbi Azaryah closely reflects what we have said. Perhaps the Torah also had in mind to tell us that Jacob quarrelled "with Laban," i.e. when the two were not overheard, were in the privacy of his tent. He did not humiliate Laban by complaining to him in public. מה פשעי, מה חטאתי, "what intentional or even unintentional sin against you am I guilty of?" Jacob meant that if during the last twenty years Laban ever had occasion to fault him for an intentional or even an unintentional trespass against him, he could understand why Laban was suspicious of him now. Seeing that he had never given Laban any reason to suspect him of wrong-doing why would he do so now? Jacob also alluded to Laban's manner of searching his belongings. The way Laban had examined every last one of Jacob's belongings clearly indicated that he hoped to find not only his Teraphim but other triviae that Jacob might have stolen from him. Laban had used the disappearance of his Teraphim only as a pretext to conduct a thorough search of all of Jacob's belongings. Jacob challenged Laban's right to have done so.
Tur HaArokh
ויחר ליעקב,”Yaakov became angry.” Even though, originally, Yaakov had given Lavan permission to search, seeing that he had said that the person with whom the teraphim would be found should not live, and he had said in front of everybody “please identify anything in my entourage as yours if you are able to,” how would Lavan be able to find anything unless he searched all of Yaakov’s belongings? Originally, Yaakov had thought that Lavan suspects one of his servants to have stolen the teraphim; he therefore permitted the search. It had not occurred to him that Lavan would suspect even him or his wives of being thieves. When Lavan had not found anything in his camp, he concluded that he had come with a trumped up charge. This is why he accused Lavan of having staged a pursuit for nefarious reasons, other than that he wanted to retrieve his property. He now told him that if anyone had been robbed it was him, whose wages Lavan had changed so many times, that he, Yaakov, would have been in his rights to search among Lavan’s belongings what he had robbed Yaakov of.
Whereas you have felt about all my stuff, what have you found of all your household stuff? Set it here before my brothers and your brothers, that they may judge between us two.
verse value 3779
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 60 letters. The shortest word is "thus" (כֹּ֔ה, 2 letters) and the longest is "all·my·things" (אֶת־כׇּל־כֵּלַ֗י, 7 letters). 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "though·you·rummaged" (כִּֽי־מִשַּׁ֣שְׁתָּ), "all·my·things" (אֶת־כׇּל־כֵּלַ֗י), "what·have·you·found" (מַה־מָּצָ֙אתָ֙). The root כלי appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "my·brothers" (root אח, 164x in Genesis); "between" (root בין, 146x in Genesis); "from·all" (root כל, 127x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·your·brothers', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 3 words. Full calculation: כִּֽי־מִשַּׁ֣שְׁתָּ [though·you·rummaged] (1070) + אֶת־כׇּל־כֵּלַ֗י [all·my·things] (511) + מַה־מָּצָ֙אתָ֙ [what·have·you·found] (576) + מִכֹּ֣ל [from·all] (90) + כְּלֵי־בֵיתֶ֔ךָ [the·objects·of·your·house] (492) + שִׂ֣ים [set] (350) + כֹּ֔ה [thus] (25) + נֶ֥גֶד [before] (57) + אַחַ֖י [my·brothers] (19) + וְאַחֶ֑יךָ [and·your·brothers] (45) + וְיוֹכִ֖יחוּ [and·let·them·judge] (66) + בֵּ֥ין [between] (62) + שְׁנֵֽינוּ [us·two] (416) = 3779.
Onkelos
For you have searched all my belongings — what have you found of all your household's belongings? Set it here before my kinsmen and your kinsmen, and let them decide between the two of us.
Rashi
ויוכיחו — means that they may decide who is right. old French eprouver; English prove.
Or HaChaim
מששת את כל כלי, "you have handled all my utensils." You have examined items that could not be remotely capable of concealing your Teraphim, such as utensils which are much smaller than your Teraphim. מה מצאת מכל כלי ביתך, "which, if any of your own utensils did you find?" Did you even find a single utensil that could arouse the doubt that it was one of yours? שים כה נגד אחי, "place it here in the presence of my brothers, etc." Jacob referred to his having invited Laban in verse 32 to "identify anything of his that he would find." At that time Jacob had still believed that Laban was only interested in locating his Teraphim. This is why he had given him permission to search. In the meantime he found out that Laban had indeed suspected him of thievery. We have written earlier that villains have a tendency of suspecting others of being guilty of the same crimes they themselves are guilty of. Since Laban was a thief, it was natural for him to think of others as thieves also. Jacob now had reason to believe that Laban would claim as his what was really Jacob's. This is why he demanded that Laban display all such items and then proceed to identify them by describing them in minute detail while not looking at them. He was not willing to accept the opinion of Laban's brothers as corroboration of any of his claims, but wanted his own people to be present.
These twenty years have I been with you; your ewes and your she-goats have not cast their young, and the rams of your flocks have I not eaten.
verse value 2676
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 49 letters. The shortest word is "this" (זֶה֩, 2 letters) and the longest is "twenty" (עֶשְׂרִ֨ים, 5 letters). Words sharing gematria 31: not, not. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "your·ewes" (רְחֵלֶ֥יךָ), "and·your·she-goats" (וְעִזֶּ֖יךָ), "miscarried" (שִׁכֵּ֑לוּ). The root לא appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "year" (root שנה, 169x in Genesis); "not" (root לא, 127x in Genesis); "with·you" (root עם, 87x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'miscarried', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 4 words. Full calculation: זֶה֩ [this] (12) + עֶשְׂרִ֨ים [twenty] (620) + שָׁנָ֤ה [year] (355) + אָנֹכִי֙ [I] (81) + עִמָּ֔ךְ [with·you] (130) + רְחֵלֶ֥יךָ [your·ewes] (268) + וְעִזֶּ֖יךָ [and·your·she-goats] (113) + לֹ֣א [not] (31) + שִׁכֵּ֑לוּ [miscarried] (356) + וְאֵילֵ֥י [and·the·rams·of] (57) + צֹאנְךָ֖ [your·flock] (161) + לֹ֥א [not] (31) + אָכָֽלְתִּי [I·ate] (461) = 2676.
Onkelos
These twenty years I have been with you: your ewes and your she-goats did not miscarry, and the rams of your flock I did not eat.
Rashi
לא שכלו means HAVE NOT MISCARRIED — Similar are: (Hosea 9:14) ‘‘a miscarrying (משכיל) womb”; (Job 21:10) “his cow calveth and casteth (תשכל) not her calf”. ואילי צאנך AND THE RAMS OF THY FLOCK — From this phrase they (the Rabbis) inferred (Bava Kamma 65b) that a male sheep even when one day old is called a ram; for if this be not so, how was this creditable to him? Did he mean that he had not eaten rams (i. e. the larger animals), but that he had eaten the smaller sheep? If so, he was a thief! (39).
Sforno
רחליך ועזיך לא שכלו, you have found me as possessing the very reverse of the characteristics of a thief. Not only did I serve you faithfully, but I have treated you even better than fairness dictates. I have endeavoured with all my skill to prevent your sheep from giving birth to premature, and stillborn young. ואילי צאנך לא אכלתי, even things which according to accepted practice I could have treated as mine, I did not eat, seeing that they were nominally yours.
Or HaChaim
זה עשרים שנה, וג׳ "These twenty years, etc." The reason Jacob mentioned "twenty years" was that a thief or swindler would be on guard for a relatively short time not to commit any crimes. It is not in the nature of thieves to control their natural inclination for a long period of time. Jacob therefore wanted to show that the fact he had not stolen anything for such a long period should have made it plain that he was not a thief by nature. He underlined this by the word עמך, with you; He meant you have had plenty of opportunity to observe me commit a misdemeanour. When did I ever do so? רחליך ועזיך, "your ewes and your she-goats did not miscarry." We have to explore what Jacob meant by citing this detail. If he merely wanted to call attention to his success in managing Laban's flock, this is not the appropriate place for such a comment. He also referred to אילי צאנך, וג׳, "the rams of your flocks, etc." Who would have suspected Jacob of eating those? Moreover, if no one had knowledge of Jacob doing any such thing previously, who would step forward after all these years to testify against him? Jacob contrasted his own behaviour with that common amongst other shepherds. They all steal and account for the missing numbers by attributing them to animals miscarrying, whereas in reality they appropriated such lambs for themselves. Jacob now cited the fact that he had never even claimed that any of Laban's ewes or she-goats had miscarried as proof that he could not have stolen any of these animals. He could therefore not be accused of having eaten any of these animals himself. All his success had been due to G'd who had not allowed a single miscarriage to occur in order that Jacob could not be suspected of dishonesty. The reason that he mentioned "the rams of your flocks" is to teach us that the Torah considers a male baby lamb already as a ram when it has only just been born. Perhaps Jacob referred to a legal point mentioned by Maimonides Hilchot Gezeylah chapter 2, according to which if someone stole a lamb and it developed into a ram (grew up while in the thief's care) the thief has acquired it [legally speaking, this means primarily that he is responsible for its wellbeing. Ed.], the original owners not being able to reclaim the same animal as compensation. This rule applies even when the owners had not given up hope of retrieving the same animal. Jacob told Laban that even when the circumstances would have been such that he could have legally kept an animal for himself, he did not avail himself of the legality of the matter but acted strictly according to what his conscience dictated to him as being correct moral behaviour. He could have returned lambs to Laban instead of fully grown animals; however he returned fully grown ones if perchance an accident had happened to one of the young animals under his care. He did not even "consume" the difference in value between a lamb and a fully grown ram.
Chizkuni
לא שכלו, “did not miscarry;” it is customary for shepherds to occasionally beat one or another of the animals entrusted to him in order to force them to walk in line with the other beasts. This could result in a miscarriage of a pregnant animal. Yaakov prides himself never to have beaten any of these animals, and that is how he explains that in twenty years under his care none ever miscarried. ואילי צאנך, “and the ewes among your flocks,” Rashi here (based on Baba Kamma, 65 explains that we learn from this line that even a ewe only one day old, is already called “ewe” and not “sheep” or “lamb”. If Rashi were not correct, what point would Yaakov be making by claiming never to have eaten any of the flock entrusted to him? He could have eaten them while they bore a different name, such as mentioned! If you were to counter that we know from experience that the name “ewe” is not applied to male sheep until they have reached the age of two years and someone obligated to bring a sacrificial animal called “ewe” must bring one not younger that two years old, [and are therefore capable of copulating? Ed.] the answer is that, of course, the name “ewe” is applied to even one day old male sheep, it is only for the purpose of serving as a sacrificial animal that such a ewe must be at least two years old. ואילי צאנך לא אכלתי, “neither have I eaten from the ewes of your flocks.” It is the custom of shepherds to look after the flock by day and to bring the flock home at night to the owner; if during the night one or more of the sheep have been stolen, the loss is that of the owner. You, however, have demanded compensation from me even for sheep that disappeared while in your possession and inside your pens.
Rabbeinu Bahya
.רחליך ועזיך לא שכלו, “your ewes and she-goats never miscarried.” Yaakov attributed this to his merit. The Torah promises such a blessing to people observing its commandments (Exodus 23,26). ואילי צאנך לא אכלתי, “and I did not eat rams of your flock.” Other shepherds do eat these rams and their owners know about it. Ezekiel 34,3 writes: את החלב תאכלו ואת הצמר תלבשו הבריאה תזבחו הצאן לא תראון, “should you eat the fat, should you don the wool, should you slaughter the choicest- but not tend the sheep!” Clearly that verse proves that provided the shepherd carries out his duties he is entitled to the fringe benefits mentioned by the prophet.
That which was torn of beasts I did not bring to you; I bore the liability for it myself; from my hand you would require it — whether stolen by day or stolen by night.
verse value 2946
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 52 letters. The shortest word is "day" (י֔וֹם, 3 letters) and the longest is "I·did·not·bring" (לֹא־הֵבֵ֣אתִי, 7 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "a·torn·animal" (טְרֵפָה֙), "I·did·not·bring" (לֹא־הֵבֵ֣אתִי), "I·would·make·restitution" (אֲחַטֶּ֔נָּה). The root גנב appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·you" (root אל, 242x in Genesis); "I·did·not·bring" (root בוא, 213x in Genesis); "day" (root יום, 126x in Genesis). First appearance of the root בקש ("you·exacted·it") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'you·exacted·it', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 4 words. Full calculation: טְרֵפָה֙ [a·torn·animal] (294) + לֹא־הֵבֵ֣אתִי [I·did·not·bring] (449) + אֵלֶ֔יךָ [to·you] (61) + אָנֹכִ֣י [I] (81) + אֲחַטֶּ֔נָּה [I·would·make·restitution] (73) + מִיָּדִ֖י [from·my·hand] (64) + תְּבַקְשֶׁ֑נָּה [you·exacted·it] (857) + גְּנֻֽבְתִ֣י [stolen·from·me] (465) + י֔וֹם [day] (56) + וּגְנֻֽבְתִ֖י [or·stolen·from·me] (471) + לָֽיְלָה [night] (75) = 2946.
Onkelos
That which was torn I did not bring to you; what was missing from the count — from me you would demand it. I kept watch by day and I kept watch by night.
Rashi
טרפה THAT WHICH WAS TORN by a lion or a wolf. אנכי אחטנה I BARE THE LOSS OF IT — It has the same meaning as the verb in (Judges 20:16) “sling stones at a hair-breadth and not miss (יחטא)”, and (1 Kings 1:21) “that I and my son Solomon shall suffer the loss of it (חטאים)” i.e. shall be lacking in authority. The sense therefore is: “I” was short of it; if it was missing, it was missing to me because you required it of my hand. אנכי אחטנה In the Targum it is translated by דהות שגיא ממנינא which means that which was missing and deficient from the number of the animals. The words (Numbers 31:49) “There is missing (נפקד) not one man of us”, is rendered in the Targum by ולא שגיא גנבתי יום וגנבתי לילה WHETHER STOLEN BY DAY OR STOLEN BY NIGHT — everything I paid back. גנבתי As regards the suffix י it is similar to the י in (Lamentations 1:1) “great (רבתי) among the nations, princess (שרתי) among the provinces”; (Isaiah 1:21) “that was full of (מלאתי) justice”; (Hosea 10:11) “that loveth (אהבתי) to thresh”.
Ibn Ezra
"I would bear the loss" (אֲנֹכִי אֲחַטֶּנָּה) — if it had been torn [by a beast], the fault would have been upon me, and I would pay its equivalent. "Stolen by day" (גְּנֻבַת יוֹם) — the yod is an added letter, like the yod in "I was filled" (מָלֵאתִי, Isaiah 1:21); and it reads: whether stolen by day or by night, from my hand you would demand it.
Sforno
לא הבאתי אליך, אנכי אחטנה, I never brought you a diseased or fatally wounded animal whose death had been due to my negligence; all I ever brought you were animals which were the victims of genuine accidents, something I could not have prevented. Even so, מידי תבקשנה, you held me responsible for making good your loss, illegally, of course.
Or HaChaim
טרפה לא הבאתי אליך, "I did not bring you those torn by wild animals, etc." How does the expression הבאה, bringing, fit the situation of an animal torn by wild beasts? Also, why did he repeat: "They were my loss, you collected from me?" Jacob pointed out to Laban that he took compensation from him for something that he was legally liable for as well as for losses for which Jacob was not legally liable at all. He spelled out טרפה as an example of losses due to wolves, and: "I did not bring you," as examples of losses due to attacks by a lion. We find the following statement in Baba Metzia 93: "When a shepherd or trustee abandons the animals under his care by making a trip to the city, and a lion came and trampled an animal to death, or a wolf came and tore an animal, etc." We see that different animals cause death by different methods. A wolf leaves the scene of where he caused harm immediately, whereas the lion kills his prey and remains at that site until he has devoured it. He leaves only the skin and the dung. Similarly, Jacob alluded to these two kinds of predators. He added: אנכי אחטנה, concerning the fence for which he was responsible. Had there been a single wolf, proper fencing in of the animals would have prevented such an attack; therefore the paid keeper is responsible for such damage (Baba Metzia 72). Jacob referred to the other kind of fence, i.e. one that is trampled on by the lion, something for which the shepherd is not responsible. Laban took no notice of these distinctions and insisted on compensation from Jacob regardless of the cause of the damage he suffered. Rashi must been inspired by the Holy Spirit when he gave this explanation. He had the same thing in mind as we have just elaborated on. When Jacob added: גנובתי יום וגנובתי לילה, "regardless of whether it was stolen from me by day or by night," he referred to damage incurred through hostile humans; in either case Jacob paid, whether he was legally responsible or not, such as when it was stolen at night.
Chizkuni
טרפה לא הבאתי אליך, “I did not bring you the remains of animals that had been torn by wild beasts; even if I was completely powerless to prevent such incidences I did not expect it to become your loss; neither did I expect you to compensate me for animals stolen by day or night.
Rabbeinu Bahya
.טרפה לא הבאתי אליך, “that which was mangled I never brought to you.” Yaakov meant that while under his care no ferocious beast mangled any of Lavan’s animals. The expression טרפה is employed as in 37,33 חיה רעה אכלתהו, טרוף טורף יוסף, “a wild beast has devoured him, Joseph has been horribly mangled.” We have other verses in Scripture using the word in the same sense. אנכי אחטנה, “I myself would bear the loss.” The word is closely related to אל השערה ולא יחטיא, “accurate to a hair, without missing.” Yaakov assumed responsibility for such eventual loss in the event it would occur. He would consider it as his own fault. The author quotes Kings I 1,21 where Bat Sheva says to King David והייתי אני ובני שלמה חטאים, “and I and my son Solomon would be considered at fault,” as a similar meaning for the word אחטנה in our verse. מידי תבקשנה, “from me you would exact it.” Lavan would hold Yaakov responsible for any animal stolen from the flock under Yaakov’s control. He considered Yaakov a שומר שכר, a paid watchman who assumes such risks as thievery, robbery etc. We find a verse in Ezekiel 34,4 making a similar point where the prophet writes את האובדת לא בקשתם, “you have not sought out the lost one.” In that chapter the prophet scores the kings who are charged with tending their sheep, i.e. their human subjects, and who have been remiss in doing so, doing the reverse of what Yaakov considered himself charged with. גנובתי יום וגנובתי לילה, “whether it had been stolen by day or by night.” “I was always considered liable to make restitution.” A שומר שכר is responsible for these kinds of losses as we know from Exodus 23,11 ואם גנב יגנב מעמו שלם ישלם לבעליו, “if it be stolen, the keeper has to pay compensation to its owner.” Our sages (Baba Metzia 94) query “if the paid keeper is liable to compensate the owner for animals stolen, something akin to an accident, beyond the keeper’s control, why did Yaakov have to add that he was also liable for “lost” property, i.e. that negligence is also subject to restitution by the keeper? Yaakov simply stated here that whatever the cause of any loss, he personally assumed responsibility.
Tur HaArokh
טריפה לא הבאתי אליך, “I did not present to you wounded animals.” Even animals which had been wounded or killed by wolves and lions, for which I was not legally liable, I did not bring you as proof that I had not caused you the loss of an animal. I rather made restitution out of my own pocket. Seeing that according to Jewish law, a paid guard is responsible for this type of loss, how did Yaakov excel in any way by making good such losses to Lavan? When he speaks about stolen (not by violence) animals he refers still to the above-mentioned torn animals. He is only describing various situations which are all classed as force majeure, conditions beyond man’s control, for which he could not have been held responsible. Losing an animal to wolves or lions is something that no shepherd can be blamed for.
Thus I was: in the day the drought consumed me, and the frost by night; and my sleep fled from my eyes.
verse value 2559
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 39 letters. The shortest word is "scorching·heat" (חֹ֖רֶב, 3 letters) and the longest is "I·was" (הָיִ֧יתִי, 5 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "ravaged·me" (אֲכָלַ֥נִי), "and·frost" (וְקֶ֣רַח), "and·fled" (וַתִּדַּ֥ד). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "I·was" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "my·sleep" (root שנה, 169x in Genesis); "on·the·day" (root יום, 126x in Genesis). First appearance of the root קרח ("and·frost") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'night', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 3 words. Full calculation: הָיִ֧יתִי [I·was] (435) + בַיּ֛וֹם [on·the·day] (58) + אֲכָלַ֥נִי [ravaged·me] (111) + חֹ֖רֶב [scorching·heat] (210) + וְקֶ֣רַח [and·frost] (314) + בַּלָּ֑יְלָה [night] (77) + וַתִּדַּ֥ד [and·fled] (414) + שְׁנָתִ֖י [my·sleep] (760) + מֵֽעֵינָֽי [from·my·eyes] (180) = 2559.
Onkelos
By day the heat consumed me and the frost by night, and sleep fled from my eyes.
Rashi
אכלני חרב THE DROUGHT CONSUMED ME — the same metaphor as (Deuteronomy 4:24) אש אכלה “a consuming fire”. וקרח THE FROST — as (Psalms 147:17) “He casteth forth his ice (קרחו)”. In the Targum it is rendered by גלידא “hoar-frost”. שנתי means MY SLEEP.
These twenty years have I been in your house: I served you fourteen years for your two daughters, and six years for your flock; and you have changed my wages ten times.
verse value 8538
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 76 letters. The shortest word is "year" (שָׁנָה֮, 3 letters) and the longest is "fourteen" (אַרְבַּֽע־עֶשְׂרֵ֤ה, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 355: year, year. 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "this·for·me" (זֶה־לִּ֞י), "in·your·household" (בְּבֵיתֶ֒ךָ֒), "fourteen" (אַרְבַּֽע־עֶשְׂרֵ֤ה). The root שנה appears 3 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "year" (root שנה, 169x in Genesis); "in·your·household" (root בית, 121x in Genesis); "I·served·you" (root עבד, 109x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'for·your·flock', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 4 words.
Onkelos
This is twenty years for me in your house: I served you fourteen years for your two daughters and six years for your flock, and you changed my wages ten times.
Rashi
ותחלף את משכרתי AND THOU HAST CHANGED MY HIRE — You have altered the agreement regarding my hire between us from speckled to spotted and from streaked to grisled.
Sforno
ותחלף את משכרתי, by doing so you reversed yourself since it had been you who had determined what my wages should be.
Chizkuni
ושש שנים בצאנך, “and six years for “your” flocks. Under the same terms as those set forth in the Torah for a Jewish servant who has been indentured for a fixed period. (Exodus chapter 21) ותחלף, “you have repeatedly changed the terms during the currency of that term.” The vowel under the letter ל is a tzeyreh instead of the expected segol.
Rabbeinu Bahya
זה לי עשרים שנה בביתך, “this is my twenty years in your household;” The plain meaning of the text here is “seeing that I served you faithfully for twenty years you should have treated me with some respect; all the more so, seeing that I served for your two daughters for fourteen years and another six years for your flocks. However, you did not relate to me according to accepted standards You changed the type of remuneration I was to receive ten times, i.e. twice a year.” What Yaakov really alluded to was this: seeing that the sheep birth twice a year, you changed my wages twice a year, after every time the flock bore young ones. You received the benefit of ten throws in five years. A kabbalistic approach: The word זה is an allusion to זה אלי ואנוהו, ‘this is my G’d and I want to exalt Him,” There are other such verses; the point of the commentary is that we already know that Yaakov spent twenty years at Lavan. Why then did he make such a superfluous statement? The fact is that when Yaakov referred to the length of his stay at Lavan’s house earlier he spoke about himself. Here he alluded to the שכינה, the benevolent presence of G’d. He acknowledged that G’d had been with him during all these twenty years he had endured at Lavan and had worked for him. This is why he spelled it out even more forcefully in the next verse when he said: “if the G’d of my father had not been with me, you would now have sent me away empty-handed.”
Kli Yakar
“These twenty years to me in your house.” Earlier he said These twenty years I have been with you, and did not mention the word “li” [to me], and also said with you instead of in your house. Because in truth, Jacob was not in Laban’s house except for one month, as it is said and he stayed with him for a month of days, meaning he only dwelt with him in his house for a month of days. But during all the other times, he was dwelling in fields and tents to shepherd Laban’s flock and was not in Laban’s house, as he said I was consumed by heat in the day and frost by night. Therefore he said these twenty years I have been with you but not “in your house.” Nevertheless, even this month of days that he dwelt in the house of this wicked deceiver did not feel like just a few days to him, but rather like a long time because they were days of suffering, which appear as many days. And he said “Woe to me that I dwelled for such a long time with this wicked person,” even though it was brief, to me [li] — meaning in my eyes it weighs as if I had been in his house for all 20 years. Therefore he said these twenty years li [to me] in your house — in truth it wasn’t 20 years but only one month, but to me this month weighs as 20 years, not like my mother said and you shall dwell with him a few days, for perhaps my mother didn’t know the extent of his wickedness, but my heart knows the bitterness of his soul and how much suffering I endured while being with you in your house proper. Another interpretation: Initially, Jacob mentioned all that he had done with him [Laban], how he had acted with him in faithfulness, and afterward he mentioned all that Laban had done to him. Therefore, he first said These twenty years I have been with you, meaning “I acted with you in faithfulness, I did not bring you torn animals, etc.” And this entire account speaks of Jacob’s faithfulness. Afterward, he said to him, “Look, in contrast to this, what you did to me,” saying These twenty years for me in your house — see what you did to me. Indeed, I served you fourteen years for your two daughters and six years for your flocks, and through all this you changed my wages ten times, and you did not treat me according to my deeds. This explains well why he first mentioned with you and afterward said for me — and this is a precious explanation.
Were it not that the God of my father — the God of Abraham and the God whom Isaac feared — had been with me, surely you would now have sent me away empty-handed. God has seen my affliction and the labor of my hands, and gave judgment last night.
verse value 4282 — אָבִי֩ = 13 (echad/ahavah)
Insights
Verse structure: 20 words, 80 letters. Notable word values: "father·of" (אָבִי֩) = 13, the value of echad ('one') and ahavah ('love'). The shortest word is "to·me" (לִ֔י, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·the·toil·of" (וְאֶת־יְגִ֧יעַ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 46: God·of, God·of. 7 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "unless" (לוּלֵ֡י), "and·Fear·of" (וּפַ֤חַד), "empty-handed" (רֵיקָ֣ם). The root אלה appears 3 times in this verse. 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "was" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "God·of" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "father·of" (root אב, 196x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'you·would·have·sent·me·away', dividing the verse into phrases of 13 and 7 words.
Onkelos
Were it not that the God of my father — the God of Abraham and the One whom Isaac fears — had been with me, surely you would now have sent me away empty-handed. My toil and the weariness of my hands is revealed before Hashem, and He reproved you last night.
Rashi
ופחד יצחק AND THE DREAD OF ISAAC — He did not like to say “God of Isaac” because God does not associate His name with the righteous whilst they are alive. And although He (God) said, when he (Jacob) was departing from Beer-Sheba, (Genesis 28:13) “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham thy father and the God of Isaac”, this was because his (Isaac’s) eyes were dim and he might therefore be regarded as dead (Midrash Tanchuma, Toldot 7) — Jacob, however, feared to say “God of Isaac” and said “the Dread”. ויוכח The word here has the meaning of reproof (“and he reproved thee”; cf. Genesis 5:24) and not of deciding (as in Genesis 5:37).
Ramban
AND THE FEAR OF ISAAC HAD BEEN ON MY SIDE. “He did not want to say “G-d of Isaac” because G-d does not associate His name with the righteous during their lifetime. Although G-d said to Jacob when he was departing from the Land of Israel, I am the Eternal, the G-d of Abraham thy father and the G-d of Isaac, this was because Isaac’s eyes were dim, and he might therefore be regarded as dead. Jacob, however, feared to say so, [and instead said, ‘the Fear of Isaac’].” Thus the words of Rashi. It is also the opinion of Onkelos that pachad Yitzchak means “his G-d,” for he translated it as: “He Whom Isaac fears.”And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said: “Isaac’s fear of G-d helped me, for the merit of the father helps the son. And Jacob swore ‘bepachad’ of his father Isaac, — by Him Whom Isaac fears.” Ibn Ezra’s explanations of the same expression are thus not alike. Ibn Ezra further wrote, “And there are some who say that this ‘fear’ is an allusion to the day of Isaac’s Binding.” This is not far fetched. By way of the Truth [namely, the mystic lore of the Cabala] the language fits its plain meaning and intent, that is, it refers to the attribute of Justice on high. Based on this, Scripture says: Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Eternal their G-d, and David their king; and shall come trembling unto the Eternal and to His goodness in the end of days. The verse is stating that they will seek the Merciful One and the attribute of Justice on earth, and bring the Fear of Isaac to G-d and His goodness mentioned. ‘VAYOCHACH’ YESTERNIGHT. “The word here has the meaning of ‘reproof’ [and he reproved] and not of ‘clarification.’” These are the words of Rashi. But is more correct to say that it is an expression meaning “clarification.” Since Jacob said above, ‘veyochichu’ (that they may judge) between us both, here. he now said that it is G-d, Who knows the hidden secrets, Who should clarify the dispute between the two of them. This is why Jacob did not say, vayochach othcha emesh, [which would mean, “and He reproved ‘thee’ yesternight,” for the meaning of the word is not “rebuke” but “clarify”].
Ibn Ezra
"And the fear of Isaac" — Isaac's fear of Hashem is what benefited me, for the merit of the father avails the son. The mem of רֵיקָם (reikam, "empty-handed") is a suffix letter, and this word functions as a noun. It occurs with a singular masculine, a singular feminine, and with plurals. Similarly, the mem of אֻמְנָם (umnám) and also of חִנָּם (chinám).
Or HaChaim
31.42. לולי אלוקי אבי…היה לי, "Were it not for the fact that my father's G'd the G'd of Abraham helped me, etc." The reason Jacob did not merely say "the G'd of my father Abraham," and chose to repeat the word G'd, was twofold. 1) He meant to say "firstly my father's G'd stood by me because of my father's merits." 2) It was due to the unlimited power of G'd who supervised my fate personally so that I was able to salvage my earnings. When Jacob said: אלוקי אברהם, he meant that it had been Abraham who had spread the fame of that G'd and acquainted mankind with His truth. He demonstrated to the world that G'd judges fairly. Jacob implied that if his father had worshiped a different god such a god could not have saved him. Jacob had an additional thought when he spoke about "אלוקי אבי" (in addition to אלוקי אברהם). First he spoke about the "G'd of my father," i.e. the merit of his fathers, which assisted him. In the case of Abraham this was the merit of חסד, Abraham's outstanding virtue (compare Micha 7,20). In the case of his father Isaac it was the virtue of justice referred to by Jacob as פחד יצחק, "the One whom Isaac stood in awe of." Jacob refrained from saying אלוקי יצחק in order to be able to allude to his father's outstanding virtue. We find G'd Himself referring to אלוקי יצחק in Genesis 28,14. Jacob mentioned both attributes to illustrate the fact that G'd had done outstanding kindness for him and had also helped him to obtain justice from Laban. Unless G'd had employed both these attributes Jacob would not have attained all that he had. את עניי ואת יגיע כפי, "my misery and my handiwork." Jacob meant that had it not been for the misery he had suffered G'd would have paid him his reward only in the Hereafter even though he was entitled to it here and now. It was only because of the anguish Jacob experienced that G'd paid him his deserts already now and paid him what was due to him for the labour he had performed (compare Deut. 24,15).
Chizkuni
ופחד יצחק, Yaakov claims that if Lavan had not shown a degree of fear of the retaliation by Yitzchok his father who is wealthy and locally mighty, (in addition to the fear of Yaakov’s, Yitzchok’s and his own G-d) היה לי, “Who had repeatedly be on my side by making you scared;”An alternate interpretation: “if my father Yitzchok who revered and feared G-d, had not assisted me.”Rashi states here that Yaakov was afraid to refer to G-d as Yitzchok’s G-d, as we have a rule that G-d does not associate His sacred name with a person still alive, as there is no guarantee that he may not become a heretic. [If we find that G-d made an exception in the case of Yitzchok, as He said to Yaakov in the dream of the ladder, this was because Yitzchok was blind and housebound and therefore not subject to temptation by the evil urge; at this point Yaakov was not yet sure that the dream had not only been just his wishful thinking or a revelation to him by G-d. Ed.] We do find that Eliezer used the name of the Lord in connection with His being the G-d of Avraham four times, but that was only the Torah reporting it, no proof that G-d approved of his doing so. Alternately, seeing that Avraham had already passed 10 tests of his faith by G-d, Eliezer was on solid ground when he presumed it was in order. כי עתה ריקם שלחתני, “you would now have sent me away emptyhanded.” You simply would not have compensated me for the last six years that I worked for you.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ופחד יצחק היה לי, “and the Dread of Yitzchak had been with me, etc.” The plain meaning of these words is that “the same G’d whom Yitzchak reveres has been with me.” This, at least is what Onkelos had in mind. There are commentators who believe that he referred to the merit Yitzchak had acquired when he lay bound on the altar on Mount Moriah, a merit which had now benefited his son Yaakov. He was lying bound on the altar on Mount Moriah expecting to be sacrificed as a burnt-offering for G’d. Alternatively, it was a reference to the dread Yitzchak experienced when he saw the portals of Gehinom open before his eyes (Bereshit Rabbah 67,2), or it was the dread which resulted in Yaakov receiving confirmation of the blessing his father had given him (27,33). When Yaakov said to Lavan: “you would now have sent me away empty-handed,” he meant: “if the dread which my father experienced on those occasions had not benefited me, this is what would have happened.” A kabbalistic approach: the words ופחד יצחק היה לי are a reference to Yitzchak’s overriding attribute. Yaakov told Lavan: “if I had not made this attribute also my own, you would now have sent me away empty-handed.” When we follow this approach we will note that Yaakov enumerated the three outstanding characteristics of the patriarchs in their chronological order. He would do so again when he would pray to be delivered from the threat of encountering Esau and his four hundred armed men (32,10). When he first mentioned לולי אלוקי אבי, this was a reference to the merits of his father. A person is obligated to mention the merit of his immediate father first before he mentions the merits of his grandfather (Bereshit Rabbah 94,5). Afterwards (as a mention of merit) he mentioned the merit of his grandfather Avraham when he said אלוקי אברהם, followed by the merits of his father, i.e. פחד יצחק. Finally, he referred to G’d observing his own distress and reacting to it: According to Nachmanides, the wording of the Torah is quite clear and does not require us to read between the lines. Yaakov first acknowledged the attribute of Justice in the heaven and that is why we find in Hoseah 3,5 אחר ישובו בני ישראל ובקשו את ה' אלוקיהם ואת דוד מלכם ופחדו אל ה' ואל טובו באחרית הימים. “Afterwards, the Israelites will turn back and seek the Lord their G’d and David their King, and they will thrill over the Lord and over His bounty in the days to come.” The prophet sketched the order in which national repentance would occur. He used the order Yaakov described here as his pattern, that they would beg for the attribute of Mercy and Justice available on earth before qualifying to measure up even to the more stringent attribute of Justice which reigns in the celestial regions. Thus far Nachmanides את עניי ואת יגיע כפי ראה אלוקים ויוכח אמש, “G’d saw my wretchedness and the toil of my hands, so He admonished you last night.” He warned you last night not to kill me. If so, the merit of the toil of my hands has saved me from death whereas the merit of my fearing the Lord has saved my material wealth for me. This is what he meant when he connected the words “and the dread of Yitzchak worked on my behalf for else you would have sent me away empty-handed.” This teaches us that the way a person conducts himself in practice, i.e. “the toil of my hands,” is even more important than his philosophical and theological beliefs here described as פחד יצחק.
Kli Yakar
“If not for the God of my father, the God of Abraham, and the Fear of Isaac had been with me.” He [Jacob] said that regarding Abraham my grandfather, even though he had already died and you did not fear him directly, nevertheless his God exists forever, and from Him you feared lest He demand my blood from your hand if you would do me any harm or send me away empty-handed from all my labor. But Isaac my father, who is still alive, you feared him, for the Fear of Isaac means that you were afraid of him because he is a prince and his name is great among the nations. From him you feared to do me harm or to send me away completely empty-handed, lest he demand retribution for my insult from your hand. And if not for these two factors, then you would have sent me away empty-handed. And if you would say, “Who can prove that perhaps you did all this from the uprightness of your heart and not from fear?” To this he said, “Last night proves it,” meaning last night proves that it is as I say, for you yourself said It is in my power to do you harm, but the God of your father spoke to me last night, etc. From this we can deduce that it was from fear that you refrained from harming me, and not from love. And regarding what it says “and he swore by the Fear of his father Isaac”: Abarbanel wrote that he [Jacob] swore by the Binding of Isaac, as one would swear by a commandment. Similarly wrote the Toledot Yitzchak. And according to our interpretation, he swore by the reverence of his father, as this was a commandment dear to him — meaning he swore by the commandment of revering one’s father. And specifically by this commandment because he was now hurrying to go to his father’s house to fulfill this commandment, therefore he mentioned this commandment and swore by it.
Tur HaArokh
ופחד יצחק היה לי, “and the one whom Yitzchok fears was on my side.” Rashi explains that Yaakov did not want to use the name of G’d outright by saying אלוקי יצחק, “the G’d of “Yitzchok,” as we have a tradition that G’d does not associate His name with the living, as the chance always exists that even a righteous person may become corrupted before he dies. This “rule” is contradicted when Eliezer spoke of אלוקי אדוני אברהם, “the G’d of my master Avraham. [besides G’d Himself associated His name with the living in Yaakov’s dream of the ladder. Ed.] Ibn Ezra explains the words פחד יצחק as meaning that the fact that Yaakov’s father Yitzchok had been G’d fearing now came to the assistance of his son, something known as זכות אבות, the merit of the fathers. ויוכח אמש, “when He reproved you last night.” Rashi understands the word יוכח as a derivative of תוכחה, rebuke, and not as a derivative of הוכחה, proof. It is more likely that the word has the same meaning as in 31,37 ויוכיחו בין שנינו, “and let them judge between us.” At this point Yaakov says that the G’d Who is aware of all the things that are hidden from man, has intervened and shown who is upright and who is not. Proof that this is the correct interpretation is that Yaakov did not say ויוכח אותך אמש, “and He has judged you last night.”
And Laban answered and said to Jacob: "The daughters are my daughters, and the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks, and all that you see is mine; and what can I do this day for these my daughters, or for their children whom they have borne?
verse value 5063
Insights
Verse structure: 22 words, 97 letters. The shortest word is "or" (א֥וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·Jacob" (אֶֽל־יַעֲקֹ֗ב, 6 letters). 8 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "the·daughters" (הַבָּנ֨וֹת), "my·daughters" (בְּנֹתַ֜י), "and·the·children" (וְהַבָּנִ֤ים). The root בת appears 3 times in this verse. 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "about·these" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'is·mine', dividing the verse into phrases of 14 and 8 words.
Onkelos
Laban answered and said to Jacob: The daughters are my daughters, and the sons are my sons, and the flock is my flock, and all that you see is mine. Yet for my daughters — what can I do for them today, or for their children whom they have borne?
Rashi
מה אעשה לאלה WHAT CAN I DO UNTO THEM — How could it enter my mind injure them, my daughters!
Ramban
AND TO MY DAUGHTERS, WHAT CAN I DO TO THESE TODAY? Commentators have said that it is as if it were written, “And to my daughters, what could I do to them today?” and the word “them” constitutes additional clarification. Likewise, As we both of us have sworn, [the word “we” serving as additional clarification]; We, our sons and our daughters, [the word “we” is here too mentioned for the greater clarity]. But it appears to be more correct that this is said in a compassionate way: “And to my daughters, what can I do to these who are before me, for I am deeply stirred for them, or unto their children, who have been born in my house, and they are to me as my children?” This is also the meaning of whom they have borne. Laban thus said this as if defending himself against Jacob’s words by claiming: “I have come after you to see my daughters, and to determine what favor I can do for them or their children. Now I can do them this good by seeing that you make me a covenant that you will not afflict them and will take no other wives in addition to them.” here.
Ibn Ezra
"And as for my daughters, what can I do" — he added this to clarify, and it reads: and as for these daughters of mine, what can I do for them?
Sforno
והצאן צאני, if I had indeed changed your wages or sent you home empty-handed I would not have taken anything from you, seeing that it all originated from me. You only acquired it by deceit and deviousness, not legally. ולבנותי, it actually belongs to my daughters as a dowry. מה אעשה לאלה, even though I could take all of it away from you, what would I do afterwards in order to provide for them.
Or HaChaim
ויען לבן, Laban replied, etc. The word ויען is meant as the answer to Jacob's challenge to display and identify items Laban considered that Jacob had stolen from him. He said that he did not want to embarass his sons and daughters and would not conduct legal proceedings. His own children could testify to Jacob's trickery; however he did not think it seemly to involve his children in testifying against their husbands and father. He also hinted that the challenge of identifying household goods by mentioning specific details placed him at a disadvantage versus Jacob; the latter would certainly be far more familiar with them and be able to identify any special marks seeing the users were his own daughters who by virtue of using them knew more about them than he, Laban did. As to Jacob's charging that the manner of the search was demeaning, all that he Laban had done was examine things which were possessions of his own daughters, i.e. he felt at home in the tents of his daughters. Jacob had no reason to get upset about this. ולבנותי מה אעשה לאלה, "As to my daughters, what can I do to these?" The word לאלה appears to have no meaning. Perhaps it refers to the words: "all that you behold?" The verse then would mean this: "Since they are my daughters, what can I do to these possessions seeing they are also their children's?" Or, Laban may have meant that though my daughters describe themselves as strangers today, the fact is that I still consider them as my daughters. "What can I do about the way they feel?" We would have to read the words לאלה היום, as belonging together; "today they are called "these" in view of the actions they have committed against me although nominally they are still my daughters." לבניהם אשר ילדו, to their sons whom they bore. He made a point of saying: "whom they bore," in order not to identify the children with their mother. He only called them their sons since they were biologically their mothers' children. He hoped that they did not share their mothers' character traits. Although the Torah puts these words in the mouth of the wicked Laban, the Torah teaches us something of legal significance at the same time. This is the lesson that in Jewish law the term "family" is determined by the father and not by the mother. We find a similar lesson that the Torah teaches by using Laban as an illustration when the latter espoused the principle of אין מערבים שמחה בשמחה, that one does not celebrate two joyful events simultaneoulsy. Laban had used this rule when he delayed Jacob's and Rachel's wedding by a week so that Leah could have a full week of wedding celebrations with her husband (compare Jerusalem Talmud Moed Katan chapter 1).
Chizkuni
?ולבנותי מה אעשה, “Lavan is beginning to become more conciliatory by saying that he could not bring himself to harm his daughters [all four matriarchs were his daughters, though not from the same mother. Ed.]
Rabbeinu Bahya
הבנות בנותי והבנים בני, “the daughters are my daughters and the sons are my sons.” Rabbeinu Chananel comments on this that Lavan simply tried to deceive when he said that “the sons are my sons.” When the sages in Yevamot 62 said that “the grandsons are just like the sons,” they did not refer to grandsons who were the sons of daughters. Lavan similarly falsified the legal meaning of that statement of our sages when he described the flocks as “being my flocks.” He had given these flocks to Yaakov as wages for his hard toil and dedicated service. When Lavan continued: “and all that you see is mine,” he was equally wrong. Had not Yaakov already said to him: “here you have rummaged through all my things and you have not found a single thing of yours?” Lavan had not replied to this challenge. How could he now make a statement claiming everything Yaakov had was his? Lavan’s claim reminds us of Kings I 20,3 when Ben Hadad the King of the Syrians said to King Achav of Israel: “your silver and your gold, your wives and your good children are all mine.” At that juncture the prophet reports Achav as telling his own elders (verse 7) [after having been very conciliatory and even debasing himself vis-a-vis Ben Haddad. Ed.] “see for yourselves how this man is bent on evil.” Concering Yaakov’s counter claim: “why did you pursue me?” Lavan answered: “because the daughters (you took away) are my daughters.” In other words, Lavan claimed that he merely came to see his daughters. ולבנותי, מה אעשה לאלה היום, “and as to my daughters, what could I do to these today?” He meant: “what favours could I do for them today or to the sons they have born?” Lavan hinted that there was something else he could do for his daughters which did not involve “today,” i.e. something immediate. He could conclude a covenant with Yaakov in which Yaakov undertook never to discriminate against these wives or to treat them unfairly. His main point was that Yaakov should not marry additional wives. When Lavan said הבנות בנותי, both words in the plural, he referred to the four wives of Yaakov all of whom were Lavan’s daughters though not from the same wife, or that Bilhah and Zilpah had been raised in Lavan’s house.
Tur HaArokh
ולבנותי מה אעשה לאלה, “as to my daughters, what (harm) should I do to these?” We must understand this as if he had said ולבנותי מה אעשה להן. “what could I possibly do to my daughters?” Nachmanides explains the whole expression as one expressing pity, i.e. Lavan when looking at his daughters and grandchildren is overcome, and exclaims: “how could I possibly be cruel enough to cause any harm to my own family?” This is why he added the words אשר ילדו, “the children that they have given birth to in my own house?” He says this in the form of an apology to Yaakov who had accused him of pursuing him with evil intent. He asks Yaakov rhetorically how he could accuse him of harming them when all he wanted was to see his grandchildren, and kiss them! He now wants to do them a favour by making Yaakov promise that he would not marry any additional wives, depriving his grandchildren of part of their inheritance.
And now come, let us make a covenant, I and you; and let it be for a witness between me and you."
verse value 2586 — וְהָיָ֥ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 39 letters. Notable word values: "and·it·shall·be" (וְהָיָ֥ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "come" (לְכָ֛ה, 3 letters) and the longest is "let·us·cut" (נִכְרְתָ֥ה, 5 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "let·us·cut" (נִכְרְתָ֥ה), "as·a·witness" (לְעֵ֖ד). The root בין appears 2 times in this verse. 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·it·shall·be" (root היה, 313x in Genesis); "between·me" (root בין, 146x in Genesis); "come" (root הלך, 113x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·you', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְעַתָּ֗ה [and·now] (481) + לְכָ֛ה [come] (55) + נִכְרְתָ֥ה [let·us·cut] (675) + בְרִ֖ית [covenant] (612) + אֲנִ֣י [I] (61) + וָאָ֑תָּה [and·you] (412) + וְהָיָ֥ה [and·it·shall·be] (26) + לְעֵ֖ד [as·a·witness] (104) + בֵּינִ֥י [between·me] (72) + וּבֵינֶֽךָ [and·between·you] (88) = 2586.
Onkelos
So now, come, let us make a covenant, you and I, and let it be a witness between me and you.
Rashi
והיה לעד means and LET GOD BE FOR A WITNESS.
Ramban
‘VEHAYAH’ FOR A WITNESS. This means, “And let the Holy One, blessed be He, serve as a witness.” These are the words of Rashi. But this is not the usual sense of the expression. Rather, Laban is saying, “And let the covenant be for a witness between us, for he who violates it should be cursed with all the curses of the covenant,” similar in meaning to the verse, And they shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder. The meaning of the verse here may be: “Let us establish a covenant by a permanent thing which will serve as a witness between us.” For this reason, Jacob set up a stone as a pillar, and this is the meaning of that which he said, This stone-heap be witness, and this pillar be witness. here. A similar meaning is found in the verse, And Joshua said unto all the people: Behold, this stone shall be a witness against us.
Sforno
ועתה, seeing I do not wish to cause them any harm. לכה ונכרתה ברית, to ensure that you on your part will not cause me any harm either.
Tur HaArokh
והיה לעד ביני וביני, “which will be a witness between me and between you.” According to Rashi the subject of the word והיה is G’d, i.e. G’d will be the witness. Nachmanides says that G’d is not a part of this covenant at all, but the word ברית is the subject of the word והיה. In other words: “the covenant will serve as witness.” Anyone violating this covenant will become the victim of the curses associated with the sin of violating a solemn agreement. It is also possible to understand what happened here as follows: Lavan wanted to select a witness that endures throughout the lifetime and beyond of the parties making the agreement. This is why Yaakov erected a stone to serve as the witness. (verse 45) This is also why Lavan said in verse 48 that this heap of stones would serve as the witness to this agreement.
And Jacob took a stone, and set it up for a pillar.
verse value 767
Insights
Verse structure: 5 words, 21 letters. Verse gematria: 767 is divisible by 13, the value of echad ('one') and ahavah ('love'). The shortest word is "stone" (אָ֑בֶן, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·set·it·up" (וַיְרִימֶ֖הָ, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·set·it·up" (וַיְרִימֶ֖הָ). 5 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "and·took" (root לקח, 142x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'stone', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 2 words. Full calculation: וַיִּקַּ֥ח [and·took] (124) + יַעֲקֹ֖ב [Jacob] (182) + אָ֑בֶן [stone] (53) + וַיְרִימֶ֖הָ [and·set·it·up] (271) + מַצֵּבָֽה [a·pillar] (137) = 767.
Onkelos
Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar.
Ibn Ezra
"A monument" (מַצֵּבָה) — [so called] because he set it up (הִצִּיב).
Sforno
וירימה מצבה, as a symbol that this was to be something enduring.
And Jacob said to his brothers: "Gather stones"; and they took stones, and made a heap. And they did eat there by the heap.
verse value 1951
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 53 letters. The shortest word is "there" (שָׁ֖ם, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·made·a·mound" (וַיַּֽעֲשׂוּ־גָ֑ל, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 103: stones, stones. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "gather" (לִקְט֣וּ), "and·made·a·mound" (וַיַּֽעֲשׂוּ־גָ֑ל), "by·the·mound" (עַל־הַגָּֽל). The root אבן appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "there" (root שם, 180x in Genesis). First appearance of the root גל ("by·the·mound") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·made·a·mound', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 3 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֨אמֶר [and·said] (257) + יַעֲקֹ֤ב [Jacob] (182) + לְאֶחָיו֙ [to·his·kinsmen] (55) + לִקְט֣וּ [gather] (145) + אֲבָנִ֔ים [stones] (103) + וַיִּקְח֥וּ [and·took] (130) + אֲבָנִ֖ים [stones] (103) + וַיַּֽעֲשׂוּ־גָ֑ל [and·made·a·mound] (425) + וַיֹּ֥אכְלוּ [and·ate] (73) + שָׁ֖ם [there] (340) + עַל־הַגָּֽל [by·the·mound] (138) = 1951.
Onkelos
Jacob said to his kinsmen: Gather stones. They took stones and made a mound, and they ate there upon the mound.
Rashi
לאחיו UNTO HIS BRETHREN — really his sons, who were like brothers to him since they were standing by him in trouble and in battle (Genesis Rabbah 74:13).
Ramban
AND JACOB SAID UNTO HIS BRETHREN. I.e., to Laban’s brothers mentioned above, here. who had accompanied him, as Jacob did not want to say it to his father-in-law whom he treated with respect. Likewise, the verse, And he [Jacob] called his brethren to eat bread, here. also refers to Laban’s brothers, and he did not invite Laban to eat bread as an act of respect, as if everything is under his authority and is all his. A similar case is the verse, And Pharaoh said unto his brethren: What is your occupation? [which means he said it to Joseph’s brethren]. But Rashi explained: “And Jacob said unto his brethren — to Jacob’s brothers, [meaning, his sons, who were like brothers to him since they stood by him in trouble and in battle].” However, those that came with Laban, whom Scripture calls “his brethren”, were really his friends and companions. It is possible that that which is said concerning Laban, And he took his brethren with him, here. refers to his kinsmen, members of his family from the seed of Nahor the brother of Abraham. He did this because he did not want to bring against Jacob strangers lest they fight with him intensely, or covet, rob and steal his belongings. Thus these men were kinsmen to Jacob just as to Laban, and therefore they are called “brethren” of both. And some say that Jacob ethically referred to them as “my brothers,” just as he said to the shepherds, My brethren, whence are ye? And in Bereshith Rabbah, the Sages have said:11. “And Jacob said unto his brethren — these are his sons, whom, in a respectful manner, he called his brothers.” However, with respect to the verse, And he called his brethren to eat bread, here. the Midrash did not explain [that “his brethren” refers to his sons]! The correct interpretation is the one I wrote at the outset. AND THEY DID EAT THERE UPON THE STONE-HEAP. They ate a little there as a remembrance. Perhaps it was customary for both of those who made a covenant to eat from one bread as a sign of love and companionship. After having entered into an oath and a covenant, they offered sacrifices and made a great feast. It is possible that the verse stating, and they did eat there upon the stone-heap, refers to the offerings mentioned below, here. for he said to them, “Gather stones here. and we will make a heap to eat thereon, and it will also serve as a witness when we make the covenant,” and afterwards they ate the offerings upon it. And the meaning of the verse, And they did eat bread, here. is that Jacob made them a great feast, and not just a party, in order that they should tarry with him all night.
Ibn Ezra
"A heap" (גַּל) — that they should roll stones there until they accumulated. He also called it Mitzpah.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויאמר יעקב לאחיו לקטו אבנים, “Yaakov said to Lavan’s brothers: gather stones.” The word לאחיו in Genesis 47,3 where the Torah writes: “Pharaoh said to his brothers:(לאחיו) what is your trade?” also refers to Joseph’s brothers not to Pharaoh’s. According to Bereshit Rabbah 74,13 the word אחיו must be a reference to Yaakov’s sons; he called them “brothers” as they were all of an imposing physique as well as righteous just as he was. Another approach: Seeing that Yaakov himself had proven capable of lifting a stone which became a monument as we know from verse 45, he then called upon Lavan’s brothers to gather stones and make a monument also. However, Lavan’s brothers made a mound instead of a monument to the G’d in heaven. The word גל which is part of the word גלגל, planet, (in particular the sun) is an indication that the brothers of Lavan did not mean to make an undertaking vis-a-vis the G’d in heaven. They were sun-worshippers and the word גל is repeated in the paragraph to leave no doubt of its idolatrous connotation. The Torah could easily have written in our verse ויאכלו עליו, “they ate there,” instead of repeating the word גל once more. When Lavan said in verse 48 הגל הזה עד ביני וביניך, “this mound is a witness between me and between you,” the word גל was meant to link up with the first word גל in verse 46 and to form the name of the deity sun, i.e. גלגל. The five words גלגל חמה אלוהו שהזמינו לעד, “the sun-god which Lavan and his sons called upon as their witness” amount to the numerical value of the words יגר שהדותא, i.e. the official name Lavan gave to this stone-mound. When Lavan had proposed making the stone-mound he had said to Yaakov that it would serve as witness and he used the word והיה, i.e. letters which are the letters of the Ineffable Name. Had he not done so they would have had a difficult time agreeing on what belief they had in common which should be represented by the mound-monument. By referring to the word והיה, Lavan had wittingly or unwittingly referred to the two attributes (י+ה) which between them were the attributes G’d used when He created the universe. This was what Rashi referred to in his commentary. He added that the words יצף ה' ביני וביניך in verse 49 mean that the reason for calling the mound-monument מצפה was that each of the stones which formed part of it would remind one another of their function to be a witness to this mutual understanding Yaakov and Lavan had reached there. In reiterating the function of the tower or mound, Lavan first mentioned the attribute of Mercy when he referred to his part of the bargain. He said: “may the merciful G’d keep watch between me and you.” When it came to Yaakov’s part of the bargain however, Lavan invoked the attribute of Justice saying: ראה אלוקים עד ביני וביניך, “see here the attribute of Justice is witness between me and you.” Having referred to the G’d of Yaakov as well as to the deities he himself worshiped he was able to say afterwards: (verse 53) “may the G’d of Avraham or the god of Nachor judge between us.” When the Torah uses the word אלוהי in connection with Nachor, the word is not sacred and may be erased (according to Jewish law). Phenomena which appear in the sky are referred to as גל or גלגל which is a reference to height. Seeing these phenomena appear high above us their common name is גלגל. This is why Zophar said to Job in Job 11,8 referring to the planets גבהי שמים מה תפעל, “higher than heaven, what can you do?” The reason the word גל is repeated when we refer to planets, i.e. גלגל, is to describe the vast scope of the orbits of these planets.
Tur HaArokh
ויאמר יעקב לאחיו, “Yaakov said to his brothers” A reference to Yaakov’s sons, seeing that the people accompanying Lavan were all his supporters, members of his immediate family, as well as members of Nachor’s family generally. Yaakov’s sons were like brothers to him. Lavan had refrained from bringing strangers with him, people who for one reason or another might side with Yaakov in the approaching confrontation. Some commentators believe that Yaakov did speak to Lavan’s supporters asking them to help collect stones. His addressing them as “brothers,” was intended to be a rebuke, i.e. they ought to behave like brothers and not like opponents. Nachmanides also interprets the word לאחיו as applying to Lavan’s brothers. He did not want to ask for such assistance from his father’s-in-law directly, as he related to him with respect. He wanted to avoid giving the impression that everything was under his sole control. The situation is similar to Pharaoh’s enquiring from Joseph’s brothers what their occupational skills were in Genesis ויאכלו שם על הגל, “they ate there next to the heap of stones.” There, as a symbolic gesture cementing the conclusion of the covenant, something that was customary when any pact or alliance was concluded between two or more parties. The point was that both the parties involved ate from the same loaf of bread as a sign of friendship. Having partaken of that symbolic meal, they swore to one another to maintain that agreement and not to breach it. It is also possible that they had the meal described in verse 54 next to this monument to their reconciliation. In that event, the purpose of the collecting of stones may have been to erect tables and seating arrangements around which the meal would be consumed.
And Laban called it Jegar-sahadutha; but Jacob called it Galeed.
verse value 1996 — ל֖וֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 33 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (ל֖וֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֖וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "called·it" (וַיִּקְרָא־ל֣וֹ, 7 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "Yegar" (יְגַ֖ר), "sahadutha" (שָׂהֲדוּתָ֑א). The root קרא appears 2 times in this verse. 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "called·it" (root קרא, 123x in Genesis); "to·him" (root לו, 68x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'sahadutha', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיִּקְרָא־ל֣וֹ [called·it] (353) + לָבָ֔ן [Laban] (82) + יְגַ֖ר [Yegar] (213) + שָׂהֲדוּתָ֑א [sahadutha] (716) + וְיַֽעֲקֹ֔ב [and·Jacob] (188) + קָ֥רָא [named] (301) + ל֖וֹ [to·him] (36) + גַּלְעֵֽד [Gal-ed] (107) = 1996.
Onkelos
Laban called it Yegar-sahadutha, and Jacob called it Gilead.
Rashi
יגר שהדותא This is the Aramaic of גלעד. גלעד — is really two words — גל עד heap of testimony.
Ibn Ezra
"The Aramaic translation of Gal-eed" — [is] Yegar Sahaduta.
Sforno
He therefore called its name Galeid. He called it by the name that Yaakov had given it, but he explained it in his own way.
And Laban said: "This heap is witness between me and you this day." Therefore was the name of it called Galeed;
verse value 1613
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 43 letters. The shortest word is "witness" (עֵ֛ד, 2 letters) and the longest is "called·its·name" (קָרָֽא־שְׁמ֖וֹ, 6 letters). The root בין appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "between·me" (root בין, 146x in Genesis); "the·day" (root יום, 126x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·day', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 3 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֣אמֶר [and·said] (257) + לָבָ֔ן [Laban] (82) + הַגַּ֨ל [the·mound] (38) + הַזֶּ֥ה [this] (17) + עֵ֛ד [witness] (74) + בֵּינִ֥י [between·me] (72) + וּבֵינְךָ֖ [and·between·you] (88) + הַיּ֑וֹם [the·day] (61) + עַל־כֵּ֥ן [therefore] (170) + קָרָֽא־שְׁמ֖וֹ [called·its·name] (647) + גַּלְעֵֽד [Gal-ed] (107) = 1613.
Onkelos
Laban said: This mound is a witness between me and you today. Therefore he called its name Gilead.
Ramban
AND LABAN SAID, THIS STONE-HEAP IS A WITNESS. After Jacob had called it Galed, here. Laban spoke in Jacob’s language, This stone-heap is a witness, and therefore its name was called Galed, for they mutually agreed upon this name. It may be that Laban’s words are translated into the Sacred Language, [but he himself did not use the term Galed].
Sforno
ויאמר לבן הגל הזה עד, he humbled himself to refer to it in Hebrew, Yaakov’s language, after having named it in Aramaic first. He meant that the pile of stones would serve as a witness to what he was about to say.
Tur HaArokh
ויאמר לבן הגל הזה עד, “Lavan said: “this pile of stones will be witness.” After Yaakov had named this pile of stones “Gilad,” (a pile of stones that is testimony), Lavan adopted Hebrew for the sake of confirming the agreement, seeing that they were able to agree on a mutually acceptable name for the monument in question. Alternatively, the Torah renders what Lavan said in Aramaic in Hebrew for the sake of the readers who do not understand Aramaic.
and Mizpah, for he said: "Hashem watch between me and you, when we are absent one from another.
verse value 2706 — יְהֹוָ֖ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 42 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "that" (כִּ֥י, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·Mizpah" (וְהַמִּצְפָּה֙, 6 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·Mizpah" (וְהַמִּצְפָּה֙), "may·watch" (יִ֥צֶף), "he·is·hidden" (נִסָּתֵ֖ר). The root בין appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "that" (root כי, 167x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·between·you', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְהַמִּצְפָּה֙ [and·Mizpah] (226) + אֲשֶׁ֣ר [which] (501) + אָמַ֔ר [said] (241) + יִ֥צֶף [may·watch] (180) + יְהֹוָ֖ה [Hashem] (26) + בֵּינִ֣י [between·me] (72) + וּבֵינֶ֑ךָ [and·between·you] (88) + כִּ֥י [that] (30) + נִסָּתֵ֖ר [he·is·hidden] (710) + אִ֥ישׁ [man] (311) + מֵרֵעֵֽהוּ [from·the·other] (321) = 2706.
Onkelos
And Mizpah — for he said: May the Word of Hashem watch between me and you, when we are hidden from one another.
Rashi
והמצפה אשר אמר AND MIZPAH (literally, the Mizpah); BECAUSE HE SAID etc. — The word והמצפה and the Mizpah must refer to some well-known place bearing this name (for there are several places named Mizpah) it refers to the Mizpah which is in Mount Gilead — as it is written (Judges 11:29) “and he passed over Mizpah of Gilead”. Why was it also called Mizpah? Because each of them said to the other, “The Lord watch (יצף) between me and thee that thou shouldst not violate this covenant”. כי נסתר WHEN WE ARE ABSENT, and shall not see (be able to watch) one another.
Ramban
AND MITZPAH. Rashi comments that the meaning of the verse is: “And the Mitzpah which is on Mount Gilead, as it is written, And he passed over Mitzpah of Gilead. Why was it called Mitzpah? Because each of them said to the other, The Eternal ‘yitzeph’ (watch).” And if so, Mitzpah is the name of a high place on top of the mountain. In my opinion, however, Mitzpah is the stone which Jacob set up for a pillar here. and is connected with the above verse: Therefore was the name of it called Galed, here. and he also called it the Mitzpah because he said, The Eternal watch between me and thee. It is possible that this stone is Mitzpah of Gilead, for the place was always called by the name of this stone.
Ibn Ezra
"And the meaning of 'may Hashem watch'" — it is like "Hashem will see" (Genesis 22:14); and similarly: "a watchman I have set you" (Ezekiel 3:17). "For we will be hidden" — from one another, so that each of us will be far from the other and cannot see him — Hashem sees him. The meaning of "that he said" refers back to Laban. Jacob named it Mitzpah because Laban said to him: "may Hashem watch."
Sforno
והמצפה also the name מצפה itself was to serve as a witness. This was because immediately prior Lavan had said יצף ה' ביני ובינך, “may G’d watch between me and you.” אשר אמר, previously.
Rabbeinu Bahya
והמצפה אשר אמר, “as to the watchtower he spoke of;” this line is a continuation of the word קרא in verse 48. The Torah explains the reason for the tower being called מצפה, “lookout, or watchtower.”
Tur HaArokh
והמצפה אשר אמר, “he also called it mitzpah, (lookout) as he said.” According to Rashi this mountain which appears by that name in Judges 11,29, got its name from the fact that that both Yaakov and Lavan had said to the other that G’d would look down upon this monument to ensure that neither party would breach the agreement. Nachmanides, on the other hand, claims that if Rashi were correct there must have been a high platform on top of this pile of stones. In view of the unlikelihood of this, he believes that our verse is a continuation of verse 47, which had been interrupted by Lavan in verse 48. The words ויעקב קרא לו גלעד והמצפה על כן, must be read as a single sequence, i.e. Yaakov called the pile of stones “Gilad” as well as “hamitzpah.” The reason he did so was because he invited G’d to supervise the agreement which had been sealed between him and Lavan, and to protect him against any attempt to violate that agreement. Ibn Ezra writes that the words אשר אמר, (verse 49) refer back to Lavan, so that the meaning of the line is: “Yaakov called the pile “Mitzpah” because Lavan had said to him: “may G’d look upon (יצף) this monument, etc.”
If you shall afflict my daughters, and if you shall take wives beside my daughters, no man being with us; see, God is witness between me and you."
verse value 4010 — אֱלֹהִ֥ים = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 57 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִ֥ים) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "witness" (עֵ֖ד, 2 letters) and the longest is "if·you·ill-treat" (אִם־תְּעַנֶּ֣ה, 6 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "if·you·ill-treat" (אִם־תְּעַנֶּ֣ה), "and·if·you·take" (וְאִם־תִּקַּ֤ח), "besides·my·daughters" (עַל־בְּנֹתַ֔י). The root בת appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "God" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "man" (root איש, 153x in Genesis); "wives" (root אשה, 148x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'with·us', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 5 words. Full calculation: אִם־תְּעַנֶּ֣ה [if·you·ill-treat] (566) + אֶת־בְּנֹתַ֗י [my·daughters] (863) + וְאִם־תִּקַּ֤ח [and·if·you·take] (555) + נָשִׁים֙ [wives] (400) + עַל־בְּנֹתַ֔י [besides·my·daughters] (562) + אֵ֥ין [not] (61) + אִ֖ישׁ [man] (311) + עִמָּ֑נוּ [with·us] (166) + רְאֵ֕ה [see] (206) + אֱלֹהִ֥ים [God] (86) + עֵ֖ד [witness] (74) + בֵּינִ֥י [between·me] (72) + וּבֵינֶֽךָ [and·between·you] (88) = 4010.
Onkelos
If you afflict my daughters, or if you take wives in addition to my daughters, though no man is with us — the Word of Hashem is witness between me and you.
Rashi
בנתי... בנתי The word is written twice, referring once to Leah and Rachel and the second time to the handmaids, because Bilhah and Zilpah were also his daughters from a concubine (Genesis Rabbah 74:13). אם תענה את בנתי IF THOU SHALT AFFLICT MY DAUGHTERS by refusing them thy companionship (Yoma 77b).
Ibn Ezra
"If you afflict my daughters" — the Gaon [Saadia] interpreted this as: if you do not lie with your wives. But this is a foreign usage not heard anywhere else in Scripture; and even if it were taken at face value, what harm would that do? The meaning rather is that he should not treat them badly nor compel them in anything against their will.
Sforno
ראה אלוקים עד, look that G’d will punish you if you do not treat my daughters properly, seeing He is a witness The whole line may be understood as analogous to Leviticus 5,21, ומעלה מעל בה', where the trespass against G’d is considered as something that only G’d is aware of, there being no human witnesses at hand to testify against the sinner. G’d is always the third party when two people have a disagreement, seeing He knows the true facts of the situation.
Chizkuni
אם תענה את בנותי, “if you were to maltreat my daughters;” Lavan refers to the possibility of Yaakov forcing marital intercourse on his daughters against their will. If he were to argue that in the event of their refusing him he would marry additional wives, he would consider this as if his daughters had been denied their legitimate entitlement to their marital rights. אין איש עמנו, even though this understanding is private, not having been confirmed by witnesses, he calls upon G-d as his witness it.
And Laban said to Jacob: "Behold this heap, and behold the pillar, which I have set up between me and you.
verse value 2165
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 48 letters. The shortest word is "Laban" (לָבָ֖ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·said" (וַיֹּ֥אמֶר, 5 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "I·have·set·up" (יָרִ֖יתִי). The root בין appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 604x in Genesis); "which" (root אשר, 313x in Genesis); "to·Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·Jacob', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 9 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֥אמֶר [and·said] (257) + לָבָ֖ן [Laban] (82) + לְיַעֲקֹ֑ב [to·Jacob] (212) + הִנֵּ֣ה [behold] (60) + הַגַּ֣ל [the·mound] (38) + הַזֶּ֗ה [this] (17) + וְהִנֵּה֙ [and·behold] (66) + הַמַּצֵּבָ֔ה [the·pillar] (142) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [which] (501) + יָרִ֖יתִי [I·have·set·up] (630) + בֵּינִ֥י [between·me] (72) + וּבֵינֶֽךָ [and·between·you] (88) = 2165.
Onkelos
Laban said to Jacob: Here is this mound, and here is the pillar that I have set up between me and you.
Rashi
יריתי I HAVE SET UP (by casting stones down); the word has the same meaning as (Exodus 15:4) “He cast (ירה) into the sea”. Laban speaks like a person who casts (יורה) one arrow (Midrash Rabbah has “one spear”) and boasts of his prowess.
Ibn Ezra
"Which I have cast" (אֲשֶׁר יָרִיתִי) — he and his kinsmen threw stones, from the root of "He cast into the sea" (Exodus 15:4), and they hurled them to one place.
Rashbam
יריתי, “I erected.” Yaakov erected it at the suggestion of Lavan. The verb ירה occurs in a similar meaning in Exodus 15,4 ירה בים. [a very unusual translation. Ed.]
This heap be witness, and the pillar be witness, that I will not pass over this heap to you, and that you shall not pass over this heap and this pillar to me, for harm.
verse value 4199
Insights
Verse structure: 18 words, 79 letters. Verse gematria: 4199 is divisible by 13, the value of echad ('one') and ahavah ('love'). The shortest word is "witness" (עֵ֚ד, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·the·pillar" (וְאֶת־הַמַּצֵּבָ֥ה, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 439: the·mound, the·mound. 7 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·witness" (וְעֵדָ֖ה), "if·I" (אִם־אָ֗נִי), "I·will·not·cross" (לֹֽא־אֶעֱבֹ֤ר). The root גל appears 3 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·you" (root אל, 242x in Genesis); "this" (root זה, 76x in Genesis); "and·if·you" (root אתה, 73x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·pillar', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 13 words.
Onkelos
This mound is a witness and the pillar is a witness, that I will not cross to you past this mound, and that you will not cross to me past this mound and past this pillar, for harm.
Rashi
אם אני THAT I WILL NOT — Here the word אם is used in the sense of אשר “that”, as (Genesis 24:33) “until that (אם) I have spoken my words”. לרעה FOR EVIL — For evil you may not pass, but for trading purposes (as e. g., with a caravan) you may pass (Genesis Rabbah 74:16).
Ibn Ezra
"I will not cross" — [I will not transgress] this covenant of the heap, as in: "they transgressed… a statute" (Isaiah 24:5). The meaning of "for evil" is to do harm. Some say: you shall not cross over to me to harm me, nor shall I do so to you — each one said: may the God of our fathers judge between us. Jacob invoked the God of Abraham, and Laban invoked the god of Nahor his grandfather, who was an idolater — as Joshua testified (Joshua 24:2).
Chizkuni
אם אני לא אעבור עליך, “I will not cross this stonepile with hostile intent against you. Lavan undertakes not to join anyone bent on attacking Yaakov in return for Yaakov’s promise not to do this in the event that he will be attacked.
Rabbeinu Bahya
עד הגל הזה ועדה המצבה, “both the mound and the monument are to serve as witness, etc.” After Lavan had already said in verse 50 that G’d is a witness, etc., why did Lavan have to repeat here “This mound or monument is a witness?” Lavan did so only in order to make both heaven and earth his witness. We find that the prophet Samuel did something similar when he made the Jewish people take an oath (Samuel I 12,5 and again in verse 6 of that chapter) when he said to them: “the Lord is witness and His anointed is witness, etc.” אם אני לא אעבור אליך, “that I may not cross over in your direction,” he meant that just as his crossing this watchtower must not be motivated by any hostile intent, so your crossing must not be motivated by hostile intent either. The word “for hostile purposes,” is spelled out at the end of the verse, i.e. לרעה. This is not the only place where the expression העברה is used in the sense of crossing a demarcation line with hostile intentions. We find In Leviticus 26,6 וחרב לא תעבור בארצכם, “and a sword will not traverse your land.” The covenant which Lavan and Yaakov concluded here was not to cross into each other’s territory. The land of Gilead is considered the boundary of the Holy Land as we know from Deut. 34,1 “and G’d showed Moses the whole country, the Gilead as far as Dan.” This is also why Lavan added at the end of our verse לרעה, “for a harmful purpose.” Our sages are at pains to emphasise the restrictive nature of the word לרעה, when they said (Bereshit Rabbah 74,15) “crossing was forbidden only for hostile purposes, not for the purpose of trade and commerce.” When the wicked prophet (Sanhedrin 105) Bileam who was a descendant or even reincarnate of Lavan commenced to violate this covenant as is recorded in Deut 23,5 “who hired Bileam son of Be-Or from Aram Naharayim to curse you,” his birthplace is mentioned to show that in coming to where the Israelites were encamped he had crossed the line with hostile intent. Another such violation of this covenant occurred when Cushan Rishatayim (Judges 3,8) invaded the land of Israel. He too came from Aram Naharayim. At that point the prophet had written: “and G’d had become angry at Israel.” Had the Israelites not first caused G’d to become angry at them, He would not have allowed Cushan Rishatayim to get away with such an invasion for eight years. On the other hand, we find that David established an Israelite garrison in Damascus (Aram Naharayim) in Samuel II 8,6 because the people of Aram Naharyim had come to the assistance of Haddadezer. This was in the nature of a punitive expedition. The reason the town is called Aram Naharayim, “Aram of two rivers,” is because the city is located at the confluence of two rivers (Amana and Parpar) mentioned by Naaman the Syrian General cured by submerging himself in the Jordan and the blessing of Elisha (Kings II chapter 5). Eliyahu had also been told by G’d to go to Damascus and to crown Chazzael as King (Kings I 19,15) ostensibly to wage war against the Northern Kingdom of Israel at whom G’d was angry.
Tur HaArokh
עד הגל הזה, “this pile of stones is a witness, etc.” This is why Bileam (re-incarnate of Lavan) had his foot squeezed against the wall by the she-ass when he was on the way to curse the descendants of Yaakov, the “wall” described in Numbers The “wall” is a euphemism for this pile of stones, Bileam, being the re-incarnate of Lavan. [this may account for the fact that when Bileam arrived at Balak he was limping. Ed.] אם אני לא אעבור אליך את הגל הזה ואם אתה לא תעבור אלי את הגל הזה ואת המצבה הזאת לרעה. “that I will not pass this pile of stones and neither will you pass this monument with hostile intent.” According to Ibn Ezra the words את הגל הזה are not to be taken literally, but are a symbol for the agreement confirmed by both Yaakov and Lavan when they erected the pile of stones and ate a sacrificial meal together to seal the covenant. The word אם here has the same meaning as the word אשר, “that.” The word תעבור, too, does not refer to walking past an imaginary line, but is a euphemism for action, i.e. hostile action. Other commentators see in the verse a mutual promise to cross this symbolic boundary in order to come to the assistance of the other party when this is called for. It is a boundary only to prevent hostile invasion of the other party’s realm. Still other commentators believe that Lavan did not want to say something offensive, negative, hence he couched it in a manner that describes it as an inactivity, although the final word לרעה strictly speaking, only makes sense if the opening words had been אם אעבור, instead of to אם לא אעבור. Still another opinion understands the negative opening as a hint that Lavan agrees that when either one of them is in difficulties which the other party can save him from, that in such a situation it is, of course, in order to cross this new boundary between their respective realms. This would be in line with other agreements called ברית, alliance, when either party promises the other to assist them when the need arises.
The God of Abraham, and the god of Nahor — the God of their father — shall judge between us. And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac.
verse value 2138
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 59 letters. The shortest word is "God·of" (אֱלֹהֵ֨י, 4 letters) and the longest is "between·us" (בֵינֵ֔ינוּ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 46: God·of, God·of. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "may·they·judge" (יִשְׁפְּט֣וּ), "in·the·Fear·of" (בְּפַ֖חַד). The root אלה appears 3 times in this verse. 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "God·of" (root אלה, 301x in Genesis); "their·father" (root אב, 196x in Genesis); "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'their·father', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 5 words. Full calculation: אֱלֹהֵ֨י [God·of] (46) + אַבְרָהָ֜ם [Abraham] (248) + וֵֽאלֹהֵ֤י [and·god·of] (52) + נָחוֹר֙ [Nahor] (264) + יִשְׁפְּט֣וּ [may·they·judge] (405) + בֵינֵ֔ינוּ [between·us] (128) + אֱלֹהֵ֖י [God·of] (46) + אֲבִיהֶ֑ם [their·father] (58) + וַיִּשָּׁבַ֣ע [and·swore] (388) + יַעֲקֹ֔ב [Jacob] (182) + בְּפַ֖חַד [in·the·Fear·of] (94) + אָבִ֥יו [his·father] (19) + יִצְחָֽק [Isaac] (208) = 2138.
Onkelos
The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor — the God of their father — shall judge between us. Jacob swore by the One whom his father Isaac feared.
Rashi
אלהי אברהם GOD OF ABRAHAM — Here the word אלהים is holy (i.e. it is the Divine Name). (Genesis Rabbah 74:17) אלהי נחור THE GOD OF NAHOR — Here the name is non-holy (i.e. it is a designation for an idol) (Genesis Rabbah 74:17). אלהי אביהם THE GOD OF THEIR FATHER — Here the name is non-holy (Genesis Rabbah 74:17).
Ibn Ezra
"And Jacob swore by the Fear of his father" — by the One whom his father feared. Some say this Fear is an allusion to the day of the Binding [of Isaac]; and that is not implausible.
Sforno
אלוהי אביהם, Lavan meant that Yaakov could not take offence at Lavan pairing Nachor’s god and Yaakov’s G’d in a single expression. He had chosen Nachor to underline that Nachor’s god was also the god of Terach, who was the father of both Avraham and Nachor. וישבע יעקב בפחד אביו יצחק. He chose someone who was not the son of Terach to make certain it was understood that his oath was only to the G’d of Yitzchok. Only this G’d was entitled to judge him.
Chizkuni
ישפטו בינינו, “will judge between us;” who of us is at fault.he will be attacked. אלוקי אביהם, “the gods of their father.” The word for deity in this verse may be understood as sacred when referring to Yaakov’s deity, or secular when referring to Lavan’s deities. (based on Bereshit Rabbah 74,14.) וישבע יעקב בפחד אביו, “Yaakov swore by his father’s G-d; Yaakov was unwilling to refer to his G-d after Lavan had already mentioned his own deities as part of the same reciprocal oath, as he would have considered it as blasphemy; this is why he used a pseudonym, i.e. pachad, when referring to his father’s G-d. We find numerous examples of such kinnuyim, pseudonyms, being used in the Talmud when the sages wanted to avoid having to profane the holy name of G-d by using it unnecessarily. Onkelos also renders it literally, to avoid using the name of G-d when Yaakov had made a strenuous effort to avoid same. An alternate exegesis: he wished to remind Lavan of the fright that had overcome Yitzchok when he had become aware that but for the intervention of Rivkah and himself he had almost bestowed the power to bless on wicked Esau, and thus become guilty of risking losing his share in the world to come. (27,33)
Rabbeinu Bahya
אלוהי אביהם, “the gods of their father.” The meaning of this verse may be: “the respective gods of Terach the father of both Avraham and Nachor.”
Tur HaArokh
אלוקי אברהם ואלוקי נחור ישפטו בינינו, “the God of Avraham and the gods of Nachor may judge who between us is righteous.” We have to understand this verse as each of the two parties saying what he said as applicable only to the deity that he worshipped. Yaakov certainly did not accord the gods of Nachor legitimacy by considering them as fit to judge anything. Each of the parties mentioned the deity worshipped by their respective grandfathers, something Yaakov also did when he swore in the name of Avraham, who was his grandfather. This was a courtesy, Yaakov actually only swearing by the G’d of his father, i.e. בפחד אביו יצחק.
And Jacob offered a sacrifice on the mountain, and called his kinsmen to eat bread; and they ate bread, and lodged on the mountain.
verse value 1440
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 50 letters. Verse gematria: 1440 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "sacrifice" (זֶ֙בַח֙, 3 letters) and the longest is "to·eat·bread" (לֶאֱכׇל־לָ֑חֶם, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 207: on·the·mountain, on·the·mountain. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "sacrifice" (זֶ֙בַח֙). The root זבח appears 2 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Jacob" (root יעקב, 180x in Genesis); "to·his·brothers" (root אח, 164x in Genesis); "and·called" (root קרא, 123x in Genesis). First appearance of the root זבח ("and·offered·up") in Genesis. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·eat·bread', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיִּזְבַּ֨ח [and·offered·up] (33) + יַעֲקֹ֥ב [Jacob] (182) + זֶ֙בַח֙ [sacrifice] (17) + בָּהָ֔ר [on·the·mountain] (207) + וַיִּקְרָ֥א [and·called] (317) + לְאֶחָ֖יו [to·his·brothers] (55) + לֶאֱכׇל־לָ֑חֶם [to·eat·bread] (159) + וַיֹּ֣אכְלוּ [and·ate] (73) + לֶ֔חֶם [bread] (78) + וַיָּלִ֖ינוּ [and·lodged] (112) + בָּהָֽר [on·the·mountain] (207) = 1440.
Onkelos
Jacob offered a sacrifice on the mountain and called his kinsmen to eat bread. They ate bread and lodged on the mountain.
Rashi
ויזבח יעקב זבח AND JACOB OFFERED A SACRIFICE — he slaughtered cattle for the feast לאחיו HIS BRETHREN — those of his friends who were with Laban (cf Targum Jonathan) לאכל לחם TO EAT BREAD — Any article of food is termed לחם bread, as (Daniel 5:1) “made a great feast (לחם רב)”, and (Jeremiah 11:19) “Let us destroy the tree with the fruit thereof (בלחמו)".
Sforno
ויקרא לאחיו, of Lavan. There was no need to invite Lavan himself seeing he was like a father to Yaakov’s children.
Targum Yonatan
And Jakob slew sacrifices in the mount, and invited his kinsmen who came with Laban to help themselves to bread, (or strengthen themselves with bread,) and they helped themselves to bread, and lodged in the mount.
And Laban arose early in the morning, kissed his sons and daughters, and blessed them; and then Laban went and returned to his place.
verse value 3202
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 55 letters. The shortest word is "Laban" (לָבָ֜ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·his·daughters" (וְלִבְנוֹתָ֖יו, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 82: Laban, Laban. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Genesis. Unique to this verse in Genesis (hapax): "and·his·daughters" (וְלִבְנוֹתָ֖יו), "them" (אֶתְהֶ֑ם). The root לבן appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·his·sons" (root בן, 248x in Genesis); "and·his·daughters" (root בת, 92x in Genesis); "and·returned" (root ישב, 72x in Genesis). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'them', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיַּשְׁכֵּ֨ם [and·rose·early] (376) + לָבָ֜ן [Laban] (82) + בַּבֹּ֗קֶר [morning] (304) + וַיְנַשֵּׁ֧ק [and·kissed] (466) + לְבָנָ֛יו [to·his·sons] (98) + וְלִבְנוֹתָ֖יו [and·his·daughters] (510) + וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ [and·blessed] (238) + אֶתְהֶ֑ם [them] (446) + וַיֵּ֛לֶךְ [and·went] (66) + וַיָּ֥שׇׁב [and·returned] (318) + לָבָ֖ן [Laban] (82) + לִמְקֹמֽוֹ [to·his·place] (216) = 3202.
Onkelos
Laban arose early in the morning and kissed his sons and his daughters and blessed them. Then Laban went and returned to his place.
Ibn Ezra
"His sons" — these are the sons of his daughters.
Sforno
ויברך אתהם. Our sages have already told us not to belittle the value of a blessing pronounced by a layman, a person of low social standing. (Megillah 15) The reason why the Torah tells us of Lavan’s blessing to his daughters is to remind us that when a father blesses his sons he does so wholeheartedly, with his material and spiritual faculties. We know that Yitzchok blessed with all his soul from his own words (27,4) When the one bestowing the blessing himself reflects the image of G’d he had been created in, then such a blessing is likely to be correspondingly more effective.
Tur HaArokh
וינשק לבניו, ”he kissed his grandchildren.” His daughters children.
Onkelos
Rashi
Ibn Ezra
Sforno
Kli Yakar