Genesis 30

Updated
2001-05-26; 14:31:39utc

In chapter 30 the jealousy between Rachel and Lea reaches a peak. Since by this time Lea has four children, Jacob must have been married at least four of five years. Suspicion arises that Rachel may be barren. Now it turns out that Jacob's love for her is not enough to satisfy her. She realizes that she needs motherhood in order to be completely fulfilled. God made her that way and I believe that God makes most women that way, if not all. For a man, fatherhood brings great joy, but it is not of vital importance to his wholeness as it is for a woman. I wonder what kind of tensions a woman goes through in a marriage where the couple has decided not to have children. It is obvious that God intends people to get married for the purpose of having children. In cases where this turns out to be impossible, it usually creates tensions and hurt. Adoption is a solution, but it certainly does not dissolve all the problems. Sometimes it creates even more.

It sounds like Rachel blames her childlessness on Jacob; which is unreasonable, since he has given proof that he is not infertile. She makes Jacob angry with her cry: "Give me children, or I die." Jacob bounces the ball back to her. He tells her that God kept her from having children, implying that He may have had His reason for doing so.

Rachel had some things in common with her aunt Rebekah, who did not have children until her twentieth year of marriage. But at least Isaac and Rebekah turned to the Lord with their problem. Rachel does not give any indication of knowing the Lord at all. The idea that life would not be worth living unless certain conditions were met seems to have run in the family also. At least at one point, maybe two, Rebekah makes remarks like that. In Ch. 27:46 she says: "I'm disgusted with living because of these Hittite women." And in Ch. 25:22 "Why is this happening to me?" may have this meaning. The RSV translates her words with: "If it is thus, why do I live?" Whether Rachel made threats to Jacob that she would end her life, or whether she even seriously considered this, we do not know. It could be that she made threats in order to pressure Jacob into her scheme of using Bilhah as a substitute mother. Since Jacob's grandmother, Sarah, had done this before, we could conclude that this kind of procedure, to use slaves as substitutes, was not uncommon at that time. The body of the slave was considered to belong to the owner, to be used in whatever way was deemed necessary.

The main purpose for Rachel's act seems to have been to get even with her sister. She was more bent on the satisfaction of revenge than on fulfillment for her own life. Adam Clarke quotes Prov 14:30 "Envy the rottenness of the bones." (KJV) And he says also "Jealousy is cruel as the grave," a quote I have been unable to find in the Bible.

Jacob seems to be the willing victim in Rachel's scheme, much as he had been in the deception of his father at his mother's instigation. One wonders whether his conscience bothered him at all. He had intended to marry Rachel and now he finds himself with his third wife. Calvin remarks in connection with Jacob's attitude: "Whence we gather that there is no end of sin where once the Divine institution of marriage is neglected."

It seems to me that the first mistake Jacob made was to fall in love with Rebekah at first sight. His whole behavior was governed by his being in love. He evidently never bothered to ask the Lord if Rebekah was the girl he was to marry. In retrospect we know that Lea bore him Judah, the son through whom the Messiah was eventually born. So God probably intended him to marry Lea. But he never asked as far as we know. He must have presumed that it could never be God's plan for him to marry the girl with ugly eyes and reject a beauty such as Rachel. But evidently it was. How different Jacob's life would have been had he rejected Laban's proposal to marry Rachel the week after he married Lea! The fact that God makes all things work together for good does not make bad things good to start with.

Bilhah gets pregnant with Jacob and Rachel, accepting the child as her own, calls him Dan, which means "judge." Both the KJV and the RSV translate verse 6 as " God hath judged me, and hath also heard my voice, and hath given me a son: therefore called she his name Dan." The NIV says: "God has vindicated me; he has listened to my plea and given me a son." Because of this she named him Dan." There is no doubt in my mind but that Rachel uses the Name of the Lord in vain in this instance. She ascribes the success of her plot to God, whereas in reality God had nothing to do with it. How could God bless the ugly vindication of a jealous woman over her sister? Rachel must have had very little idea Who she was talking about.

It also becomes clear that the vindication was not sufficient. We get the impression that it was because of Rachel's prodding that Jacob kept on sleeping with Bilhah. Bilhah's second pregnancy becomes a wrestling match between Rachel and her sister. It would be funny if it were not so tragic!

Verse 9 tells us that Lea does not accept defeat that easily. She fights back and pressures Jacob into taking Zilpah as his fourth wife. The situation has completely gotten out of hand now. Jacob could have found an excuse to accept Bilhah from Rachel, but there is none for his taking Zilpah. He must have known that he was the tool of his wives' jealousy, but evidently he does not care. Through Zilpah Gad and Asher are added to the family.

Lea seems to have given up on God now. While she praised the Lord at the birth of Judah, she does not ascribe the birth of Gad to divine intervention. The name Gad means "change" or "good luck." Maybe she is more honest than her sister at this point, by leaving God out of it all together. She may have felt some conviction of sin for letting Jacob marry Zilpah. After all she had four sons of her own already and Jacob's relationship with Zilpah moved him one step further away from her.

When Asher is born the only thing that seems to matter is public opinion; what other women will say about Lea. Evidently she has given up on her husband's affection.

In verse 14 the plot thickens. Reuben finds some mandrake plants and shows them or gives them to his mother. We do not know how old the boy is here.

Jacob had eight sons at this stage, but since they are not from the same women, there is no way of telling Reuben's age by calculation one year per birth. Reuben was problem to young to understand the importance of the plants for his mother or stepmother. He may have entered his puberty already. The mandrakes, however, become an important point of contention between Jacob's wives.

We do not know what mandrakes are. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible says: "The rendering of the Heb. duda'im, by a popular etymology connected with Heb. dod (beloved, love). The plants were supposed to act as a love philter (Ch. 30:14-16; in R.V. marg., love apples). They are odoriferous (S. of Sol.7:13). The mandrake (Mandragora officinarum) is a handsome plant of the salanaceous (nightshade) order. It has wavy leaves and pale-violet, white, or deep-blue flowers. Its fruit is small and yellow. The forked root bears a

slight resemblance to the human body. It is found in the Jordan Valley and along the rivers running into it, in the plains of Moab and Gilead, and in Galilee."

Why Rachel would need mandrakes is a mystery. She was the only one to whom Jacob had shown genuine affection. It could be that more was attributed to the plant than just the ability to work as a love potion. She probably believed that the plant could help to make her pregnant. Ironically, it seems to have had that effect upon her!

When Rachel asks Lea for the fruit she incurs the full wrath and venom of her sister. We read in verse 15: "But she said to her, 'Wasn't it enough that you took away my husband? Will you take my son's mandrakes too?' 'Very well,' Rachel said, 'he can sleep with you tonight in return for your son's mandrakes.'" From the deal the ladies make we conclude that Jacob's love for Rachel had not diminished. She was still the one he stayed with habitually. The deal itself seems like a ridiculous manipulation of a man who has no voice in the matter.

Verse 16 says: "So when Jacob came in from the fields that evening, Leah went out to meet him. 'You must sleep with me,' she said. 'I have hired you with my son's mandrakes.' So he slept with her that night." We get the impression that Jacob had fallen rather low at this point. He did not really care any longer. Lea becomes pregnant again. She must have prayed at this point, since we read in verse 17 "God listened to Leah, and she became pregnant and bore Jacob a fifth son." It is doubtful, though, whether Lea interprets this correctly. She says in verse 18: "God has rewarded me for giving my maidservant to my husband." I find it hard to accept that God would have blessed either Rachel's plan or Lea's to use their slave girls as substitute mothers. Lea had come to the point where she thought she could use God for her own purposes. She was not the only one who made this mistake. People who do this have lost sight of who God really is. The almighty God is not the kind of Person one can make deals with.

So she named him Issachar, which means, according to The Pulpit Commentary, "there is reward." With her next pregnancy Zebulon is born. His name may be translated "Dwelling." Her comment upon Zebulon's birth is: "God has presented me with a precious gift. This time my husband will treat me with honor, because I have borne him six sons." (Verse 20). The Hebrew word used here, according to Adam Clarke, is "Yizbeleni." What is literally meant is "God has given me a dowry." Hope has been rekindled in her that Jacob would forsake all his other marital relationships and live exclusively with Lea. Lea never came to the point where she accepted the situation, which she had helped create in the first place.

After her sixth son, Lea gives birth to a daughter Dinah, which is the female form of Dan. On the basis of Ch. 37:35, where Jacob's sons and daughters are mentioned, The Pulpit Commentary believes that Jacob may have had more than one daughter. However, the term daughters may very well have indicated Jacob's daughters-in-law.

It seems that at this point Rachel finally turns to the Lord, because we read in verse 22 "Then God remembered Rachel; he listened to her and opened her womb." Rachel's pregnancy could hardly be attributed to the mandrakes, since Lea had given birth to two sons in the meantime. We suppose that the story is told in chronological order. Rachel must have called upon God, because nothing else helped. It was good she did, but she should have done it earlier.

Rachel names her son Joseph, expressing the hope to have another son in due time. Her wish would be fulfilled in the birth of Benjamin, in chapter 35:18, which would end her own life. The name Joseph may either mean "he takes away," or, "he shall add," according to The Pulpit Commentary. The "he takes away" would refer to the removal of Rachel's reproach among women for not having had any children of her own. So Rachel recognizes that it was in dependence upon Yahweh that she had conceived a son and not by her own manipulation.

Vs.25-43 tell the strange story of how Jacob acquired his wealth. There is a mixture of craftsmanship and craftiness, honesty and deceit.

The time factor has to be noted here. If Jacob comes to the conclusion that it is time to leave, because his contract of seven years of labor as a bride price for Rachel, is finished, it means that he had twelve children, eleven sons and one daughter, in the time span of seven years. Of course, the children were born of four different mothers, but still it shows that the succession of births went much more rapidly than the story would suggest. There is the possibility that Dinah, whose birth is mentioned in the context of this chapter, was actually born at a later date.

Jacob approaches Laban with the request for permission to leave. He had fulfilled his contract, thus paying for his two wives. As before, after the first seven years of service were concluded, it was Jacob who had to remind Laban of the agreement made. It seems doubtful that Laban had lost count. It is more likely that he was not ready to let his son-in-law go. He had in Jacob an irreplaceable help.

There is no reason why Jacob would have to ask Laban to give him his wives and children, as seems to be indicated in vs.26. They were rightfully his. But Laban seems not to have come to grips with this truth, because later, when Jacob actually does leave, Laban claims his daughters and grand children as his own. We read in chapter Gen 31:43 that Laban says to Jacob: "The women

are my daughters, the children are my children, and the flocks are my flocks. All you see is mine. Yet what can I do today about these daughters of mine, or about the children they have borne?"

Laban is bent upon keeping Jacob. Things are going too well to let him go at this point. Laban sounds almost too humble in his approach to Jacob. Verse 27 tells us that Laban said: "If I have found favor in your eyes, please stay. I have learned by divination that the LORD has blessed me because of you." "I have learned by divination" is the translation of the Hebrew word "Nichashti," which, according to Adam Clarke, comes from "nachash," "to view attentively, to observe, to pry into." The KJV says: "I have learned by experience." That translation may sound differently to our twentieth century ears than was originally intended. It may have meant, "I have learned by experiments." The LB paraphrases it as "for a fortune-teller that I consulted told me..." It is difficult to decide whether Laban is talking about some supernatural information he has acquired or whether he speaks about his own

common sense. It would seem that he would not have mixed his idols and Jehovah so easily in the same sentence.

Anyhow Jacob is entreated to stay and receive a salary. He accepts, but not without rubbing it in to Laban that he truly was the instrument through which God blessed Laban. Jacob seems to reject the offer of wages, but instead indicates that he wants to depend upon the blessing of the Lord. He wants to build his flock with the rejects of Laban's that is with the striped and spotted and dark colored sheep and goats.

It is not too clear what happens next. Adam Clarke writes the following about these verses: "It is extremely difficult to find out, from the thirty-second and thirty-fifth verses, in what the bargain of Jacob with his father-in-law properly consisted. The true meaning appears to be this: Jacob had agreed to take all the partly colored for his wages. As he was now only beginning to act upon this agreement, consequently none of the cattle as yet belonged to him; therefore Laban separated from the flock, v.35, all such cattle as Jacob might afterwards claim in consequence of his bargain; therefore Jacob commenced his service to Laban with a flock that did not contain a single animal of the description of those to which he might be entitled; and the others were sent away under the care of Laban's sons, three days' journey from those of which Jacob had the care. The bargain, therefore, seemed to be wholly in favor of Laban; and to turn it to his own advantage, Jacob made use of the stratagems afterwards mentioned. This mode in interpretation removes all the apparent contradiction between the thirty-second and thirty-fifth verses, with which commentators in general have been grievously perplexed."

It seems to me, though, that Laban may have broken the agreement as soon as it was made. Jacob clearly asks for all the speckled and spotted animals that are in the heard at that moment. Before he has a chance to gather those animals Laban takes them out and sends them away, thereby leaving a flock to Jacob with only white sheep and goats. That way it would be humanly impossible for Jacob to acquire the kind of herd he proposed. This interpretation seems to agree with what we read in Ch. 31:41 where Jacob tells Laban: "It was like this for the twenty years I was in your household. I worked for you fourteen years for your two daughters and six years for your flocks, and you changed my wages ten times." Laban had gone back on his word over and over again.

Again we see in Jacob's attitude the tendency to give a hand to God, so that it would not be so humanly impossible for the Lord to fulfill His promise. Jacob had told his father-in-law that he wanted to trust the Lord for his sustenance and that he was willing to start with a disadvantage, although not the disadvantage that Laban left him with. The Lord confirms to him at one point that He will bless him in the acquisition of his herd. In Gen 31:10-12 he tells his wives about a divine revelation he had received. We read: "In breeding season I once had a dream in which I looked up and saw that the male goats mating with the flock were streaked, speckled or spotted. The angel of God said to me in the dream, 'Jacob.' I answered, 'Here I am.' And he said, 'Look up and see that all the male goats mating with the flock are streaked, speckled or spotted, for I have seen all that Laban has been doing to you."

Yet, in spite of the divine revelation, or maybe prompted by it, Jacob devises a stratagem to make the animals of his herd have streaked, speckled and spotted offspring. It could very well be that Jacob started to use mechanical means with the conviction that it would benefit him, but that the Lord revealed to him at a later date that it was because of His intervention that his wealth increased. The Pulpit Commentary remarks here: "The fact is said to have been frequently observed, that particularly in the case of sheep, whatever fixed their attention in copulation is marked upon the young. That Jacob believed in the efficacy of the artifice he adopted is apparent; but the multiplication of partly-colored animals it will be safer to ascribe to Divine blessing than to human craft."

The disturbing part, of course, is the fact that Jacob used deceit. Whether the method worked or not is irrelevant. His ploy fits into the pattern of his life, by which he cheated Esau out of his birthright and stole his father's blessing. So he obtained by devious means what God would have given him anyhow. In Psalm 127:2 we read: "In vain you rise early and stay up late, toiling for food to eat; for he grants sleep to those he loves." Actually it says: "He grants it to those he loves, while they sleep." And Prov.10:22 says: "The blessing of the LORD brings wealth, and he adds no trouble to it." Although the psalms and proverbs had not been written yet at Jacob's time, he could have known these truths. What Jacob did was in line with Abraham's giving in to Sarah's prompting to marry Hagar, so it would be easier for God to give him the heir that was promised.