(All scripture from the World English Bible, ebible.org, all rights reserved)
“Laban said to Jacob, “Because you are my relative, should you therefore serve me for nothing? Tell me, what will your wages be?” Laban had two daughters. The name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. Leah’s eyes were weak, but Rachel was beautiful in form and attractive. Jacob loved Rachel. He said, “I will serve you seven years for Rachel, your younger daughter.””
(Genesis 29:15-18)
After working with his uncle for a month, Laban told Jacob it was about time he earned some wages. Should he take advantage of his nephew? Very honourable and above board speech. It did not reveal his character. Did he not want to impose on Jacob, or had Jacob proved himself of value and Laban didn’t want to lose his services? After all, Jacob was looking for a bride. He wasn’t looking for a permanent stay. He assumed his mother would contact him relatively soon and once she did he was heading home. Perhaps Laban was trying to make staying attractive.
When Rachel was introduced, her work ethic and capabilities were the first thing that was mentioned. THEN her beauty. She was a capable young lady. She was trusted. Perhaps Laban wasn’t the richest man, but he would have prized what he did have. He trusted her with it. Rachel was painted with a good character. Leah is introduced here and her best quality were her eyes. This does NOT mean she was dumpy, ugly, or bad looking. In fact, once you get farther you realise that she and her sister had to be VERY similar physically. The difference is that Rachel was outwardly capable. Leah was inwardly capable. The Hebrew word (rakkowt) means tender, soft, and delicate. She had soft eyes. Doe-eyed. She was compassionate. There was a sweetness about her. A naivety. She had an inner beauty that her sister lacked. They were equal in looks, but not equal in temperament or outlook on life. I think Rachel and Laban shared a LOT of the same qualities.
Jacob, for whatever reason, had chosen Rachel. Perhaps she was more outgoing and he knew her better. Maybe she held a spot in his heart because she was the first person he saw when he came looking for his family. Maybe he felt they shared a lot of interests, both being good workers and able to care for an enterprise like sheep. We don’t know. But we DO know that he picked her over her more sensitive, more feeling sister. It was customary to pay a price for your bride. Jacob had nothing, so he offered to work off the ‘debt’. It was a good plan from his point of view and would be a great benefit for Laban who would get free labour.
Jacob was seventy-seven years old. It is unknown how old the sisters were, but we can assume a large age gap.
The sage Ramban writes: ‘IS IT BECAUSE THOU ART MY BROTHER, THAT THOU SHOULDEST SERVE ME FOR NOUGHT? Scripture did not relate that Jacob served Laban. It is possible that from the time Scripture stated, And he watered the flock of Laban his mother’s brother, the flock never left his care, for when he saw that Rachel was a shepherdess, Jacob had compassion for her and desired that she no longer tend the sheep. So, out of his love for her, he tended them. It is also possible to say that Laban spoke with cunning. First he said to him that he is his bone and his flesh, and that he will have compassion for him as a man has compassion for his own bone and flesh, but when he saw that Jacob tarried there, supporting himself from Laban’s belongings, he said to him, “Is it because thou art my brother, that thou shouldest serve me for nought? For I know that you will henceforth serve me for you are an ethical man, and you will not support yourself from the property of others. Nor do I desire that the labor you perform for me be free without full compensation. Therefore tell me what you want for your hire, and I will give it.” Jacob then discerned Laban’s mind, and he told him that he would serve him for seven years for Rachel. Undefined, “serving” here means tending the sheep, for this is what was needed and this was the subject of their conversation.’
The Torah: A Women’s Commentary writes: ‘Now Laban had two daughters. In the pasture Rachel had been identified as a shepherd, but at home she is marked as the younger of two sisters. When Leah is introduced, Rachel’s beauty becomes a cause for further distinction in the face of Leah’s “weak eyes” (v. 17). Jacob has fallen in love with Rachel and soon attests to his willingness to sustain the love for seven years (v. 18). In the ensuing scenes, the focus falls on Rachel and Leah; Laban’s sons are not mentioned until they voice their resentment at Jacob’s success (31:1). Leah and Rachel are described as different in appearance. Earlier, the text had contrasted Jacob and Esau also on the basis of their respective occupations (25:27, where yoshev ohalim seems to mean “raising livestock”; compare 4:20). “seven years for your younger daughter.” In the social world of the Bible, a bridegroom or his family needed to compensate his bride’s household. Apparently, part of this payment would normally accrue to the bride herself. (See Chayei Sarah, Another View, and at 31:15.) . Two biblical motifs are evident here: of love directed to a younger child (Rachel), and of seven (years) as a number of wholeness.’
The sage Rav Hirsch writes: ‘V. 15. Again a characteristic trait of Jacob. He had worked for him for the whole month gratuitously. Jacob did not like to accept charity. And his work must indeed have been valuable if even a Laban, who undoubtedly had reckoned out what the cost of “board and lodging for such a hefty fellow” had been for a month, still could not help calling it working for nothing, and preferred to try and tie him down by a wage rather than risk losing such a capable worker. V. 17. Instead of saying Leah was not so beautiful, it very delicately just praises her good points. Her eyes were soft and tender whereas Rachel was altogether beautiful.’
Leave a Reply