shishi - Bereishis/Genesis - Parshas Vayeitzei 31:17-42

Yaakov got up and lifted his sons and his wives onto the camels. This means that Yaakov prepared to leave Lavan's house, taking his entire family with him. He made sure that both his sons and his wives were ready for the journey, placing them on the camels for travel. This was the beginning of Yaakov's departure from Lavan, taking his family and everything that belonged to him.

On the words Es Banav Ve'es Nashav (his sons and his wives), Rashi explains that Yaakov placed the males before the females, meaning he prioritized his sons before his wives when preparing to leave. In contrast, when the Torah later describes Esav's departure, it says, "Esav took his wives and his sons," putting the females before the males (Bereishis 36:6). This difference shows the distinction between Yaakov and Esav: Yaakov gave precedence to the males, while Esav gave precedence to the females.^א׳

He led all his livestock and all his possessions that he had acquired, the livestock that he had acquired in Paddan Aram, to go to Yitzchak his father, to the land of Canaan. This means that Yaakov took everything he owned—his animals, his property, everything he had gained while living with Lavan in Paddan Aram—and set out with the intention of returning to his father Yitzchak in the land of Canaan. The verse emphasizes that all of these possessions were things he had acquired during his time in Paddan Aram, and now he was bringing them back home.

On the words Mikneh Kinyano (the livestock of his acquisition), Rashi explains that this refers to what Yaakov had bought with his flocks—that is, what he acquired in exchange for his sheep: servants, maidservants, camels, and donkeys. Rashi is clarifying that the verse is not just talking about sheep, but about all the property and people that Yaakov had acquired during his years with Lavan. The source is Bereishis Rabbah 74:5.^ב׳

Lavan had gone to shear his sheep, and Rachel stole the terafim that belonged to her father. This means that while Lavan was away, occupied with shearing his sheep, Rachel took the opportunity to take the terafim—these were some sort of idols or objects used for idolatry—that belonged to her father Lavan. Rachel's act of stealing the terafim was significant, as it would later play a role in the story when Lavan comes searching for them.

On the words Ligzoz Es Tzono (to shear his sheep), Rashi explains that Lavan had given his sheep into the hands of his sons, and there was a distance of three days' journey between him and Yaakov. This means that Lavan was not nearby when Yaakov left, which made it easier for Yaakov to depart unnoticed. On the words Vatignov Rachel Es Haterafim (Rachel stole the terafim), Rashi explains that Rachel's intention was to separate her father from idolatry—she took the terafim so that Lavan would not be able to use them for idol worship. The source is Bereishis Rabbah 74:5.

Yaakov stole the heart of Lavan the Aramean, by not telling him that he was running away. This means that Yaakov left without informing Lavan of his plans, so Lavan was unaware that Yaakov was fleeing. The phrase "stole the heart" means that Yaakov acted in a way that deceived Lavan, keeping his departure a secret until he was already gone. This was necessary because of the difficult relationship between Yaakov and Lavan, and the fear that Lavan would try to stop him if he knew in advance.

He fled, he and all that was his, and he got up and crossed the river, and set his face toward Mount Gilead. This means that Yaakov, together with his entire household and all his possessions, escaped from Lavan. He crossed the river (the Euphrates) and headed in the direction of Mount Gilead. This was a significant journey, marking Yaakov's return to the land of Canaan and the next stage in his life.

It was told to Lavan on the third day that Yaakov had fled. The Torah specifies the third day because there was a distance of three days' journey between Yaakov and Lavan, since Lavan had set a three days' journey between himself and Yaakov (Bereishis 30:36). This delay is important for understanding how Yaakov was able to escape without Lavan's immediate knowledge.

On the words BaYom HaShlishi ("on the third day"), Rashi explains that there was a journey of three days between them. This means that the distance between Yaakov and Lavan was such that it took three days to travel from one to the other, which is why Lavan only found out about Yaakov's departure on the third day after he had left.

Lavan took his brothers with him and pursued Yaakov for a journey of seven days, and he caught up with him at Mount Gilead. The Torah describes how Lavan gathered his relatives—here called his 'brothers,' meaning his close kin or supporters—and chased after Yaakov. The pursuit lasted seven days, showing both the determination of Lavan and the distance Yaakov had managed to travel. The verse emphasizes that Lavan finally overtook Yaakov at Mount Gilead, setting the stage for their confrontation.^ג׳

On the words Es Echav ("his brothers"), Rashi explains that this refers to Lavan's relatives. Regarding the phrase Derech Shiv'as Yamim ("a journey of seven days"), Rashi elaborates that during the three days the messenger traveled to inform Lavan, Yaakov was already on his way, so by the time Lavan began his pursuit, Yaakov was six days' journey away. On the seventh day, Lavan caught up to him. This means that all the distance Yaakov covered in seven days, Lavan managed to cover in just one day, as the verse says, 'He pursued him a journey of seven days,' not that he spent seven days chasing, but that he covered the distance of seven days' travel in one day. The source is Bereishis Rabbah 74:6.

G-d came to Lavan the Aramean in a dream at night and said to him: 'Beware lest you speak with Yaakov either good or bad.' This means that Hashem intervened to warn Lavan not to harm Yaakov in any way, whether by threatening him or even by trying to persuade him with kindness. The warning is comprehensive: Lavan is not to attempt to influence Yaakov, neither with harsh words nor with promises or flattery.

On the words MiTov Ad Ra ("from good to bad"), Rashi explains that even the 'good' of the wicked is considered bad for the righteous. In other words, when Hashem tells Lavan not to speak to Yaakov from good to bad, it means that even if Lavan intends to speak kindly or offer something positive, it is still considered harmful from the perspective of a tzaddik like Yaakov. This is based on the Gemara in Yevamos 103b [יבמות ק"ג ע"ב].

Lavan caught up to Yaakov. Yaakov had pitched his tent on the mountain, and Lavan pitched his relatives' tents on Mount Gilead as well. The verse describes how both camps set up their encampments on the mountain, preparing for the confrontation that would follow. This physical separation also symbolizes the tension and the coming negotiation between Yaakov and Lavan.

Lavan said to Yaakov: 'What have you done? You have stolen my heart, and you have led away my daughters like captives of the sword.' Lavan accuses Yaakov of deceiving him and taking his daughters away as if they were prisoners of war. The phrase 'stolen my heart' means that Yaakov acted behind Lavan's back, without his knowledge, and the comparison to captives of the sword emphasizes Lavan's sense of loss and betrayal, as if his daughters were taken by force.

Rashi explains that the phrase "as captives of the sword" refers to all the soldiers who go out to war being called "the sword." In other words, the term "sword" here is used as a general term for the entire army that goes out to battle.

Lavan says to Yaakov: "Why did you hide and run away, and steal from me, and you did not tell me, so I could have sent you off with joy and with songs, with drum and with lyre?" Lavan is expressing his anger and hurt that Yaakov left secretly, without informing him, and claims that had Yaakov told him, he would have sent him off with celebration and music. The verse emphasizes Lavan's sense of betrayal and his attempt to portray himself as someone who would have acted kindly, despite his previous behavior.

Rashi, quoting Targum Yonasan, explains the phrase "and you stole me" to mean that Yaakov "stole my mind"—that is, he deceived Lavan, making him think one thing while doing another. The expression "stole my mind" is an idiom meaning to mislead or deceive someone.

Lavan continues: "And you did not let me kiss my sons and my daughters; now you have acted foolishly." Lavan is upset that he was denied the opportunity to say goodbye to his children and grandchildren. He accuses Yaakov of acting thoughtlessly or foolishly by leaving in this way, emphasizing again his supposed emotional pain and the impropriety of Yaakov's actions.

Lavan says: "It is within my power to do you harm, but the G-d of your father spoke to me last night, saying: 'Beware of speaking with Yaakov either good or bad.'" Lavan claims that he has the ability to harm Yaakov, but he was warned by Hashem not to do so. This refers to the dream Lavan had, in which Hashem told him not to harm or even threaten Yaakov in any way. Lavan is making it clear that he is restraining himself only because of this divine warning, not out of his own goodwill.

Rashi explains the phrase "yesh le'el yadi"—"it is within my power"—to mean that Lavan is saying he has strength and might in his hand to do harm. Rashi adds that whenever the word el appears in the holy tongue, it refers to strength and great power.

Lavan continues: "And now, you surely left because you longed for your father's house—why did you steal my gods?" Lavan acknowledges that Yaakov may have left out of longing for his family, but he demands to know why Yaakov took his household idols. This accusation sets up the next part of the narrative, where Lavan searches for his stolen idols.

Rashi explains the word "nichsafta"—"you longed"—to mean "you desired," as translated by Onkelos. Rashi brings other examples of this root in Tanach: "Nichsefa vegam kalta nafshi" ("My soul longs and even yearns"—Tehillim 84:3), and "Lema'aseh yadecha tichsof" ("You will long for the work of Your hands"—Iyov 14:15). These examples show that the word means to desire or yearn for something.

Yaakov answered Lavan and said, "I was afraid, because I thought, 'Perhaps you will take your daughters away from me by force.'" Yaakov is explaining why he left secretly, without telling Lavan. He was afraid that if he had told Lavan, Lavan might have forcibly taken his daughters—Rachel and Leah—away from him. This is Yaakov's response to Lavan's accusation that he led his daughters away like captives.

On the words Ki Yareisi (because I was afraid), Rashi explains that Yaakov is answering Lavan's earlier complaint, where Lavan said, "You led my daughters away." Yaakov responds to each of Lavan's points in order, addressing the accusation that he took Lavan's daughters away as if they were captives. Rashi points out that Yaakov is replying to Lavan's claims one by one, starting with the issue of taking the daughters.

Yaakov continues and says, "With whomever you find your gods, he shall not live. In front of our brothers, recognize what is with me and take it for yourself." Yaakov did not know that Rachel had stolen the terafim (the idols). He is so confident in his innocence that he declares that whoever is found with the idols should die. This is a very strong statement, and it is important to note that Yaakov was unaware that Rachel was the one who had taken them. He invites Lavan to search through all his possessions, in front of witnesses, to see if anything of Lavan's is in his possession, and to take it if so.

Rashi explains on the words Lo Yichyeh (he shall not live) that from this curse Rachel died on the way. Because Yaakov said, "Whoever is found with your gods shall not live," and Rachel was the one who had taken them, this statement resulted in her death later on the journey. On the words Mah Imadi (what is with me), Rashi brings from Targum Yonasan that it means: whatever is with me that is yours, you may take.

Lavan entered Yaakov's tent, and then Leah's tent, and then the tents of the two maidservants, but he did not find the idols. He left Leah's tent and entered Rachel's tent. The order here is significant: Lavan searches Yaakov's tent first, then Leah's, then the maidservants', and then went into Rachel's. (Rashi explains below that he actually went back to Rachel's tent before searching the maidservants' tents.) The Torah is emphasizing the thoroughness of Lavan's search, and the fact that he did not find what he was looking for.

Rashi explains that "Yaakov's tent" means Rachel's tent, because Yaakov was most often found with Rachel. This is why, later in the Torah, it says "the sons of Rachel, Yaakov's wife" (Bereishis 46:19), while of none of the others does it say "Yaakov's wife." Rashi also notes that when Lavan left Leah's tent, he returned to Rachel's tent before searching the tents of the maidservants. Why did he do this? Because he knew that she was a mishmeshanis—one given to handling (feeling and touching) things—so he suspected her most. The source is Bereishis Rabbah 74:9.

Rachel had taken the terafim (the idols) and placed them in the camel's cushion, and she sat on them. Lavan searched the entire tent but did not find them. Rachel was clever in hiding the idols and sitting on them, so that Lavan would not suspect or find them during his search.

Rashi explains that Bechar HaGamal (the camel's cushion) is related to the expression karim uchesasos (cushions and coverings), as the Targum translates: ba'avita degamla ("in the camel's saddle"). This is a kind of saddle that is made like a cushion. In Eruvin 16a, it says, hikifuha ba'avitin ("they surrounded it with saddles"), and these are camel saddles, called bastel (pack-saddle) in Old French. So, Rachel hid the idols in the camel's saddle, which is made like a cushion, and sat on them, making it impossible for Lavan to find them.

Rachel said to her father, “Let my master not be upset in his eyes, for I cannot rise before you, for the way of women is upon me.” Lavan searched but did not find the terafim (idols). Rachel was making an excuse for not standing up, claiming she was unable to rise because she was experiencing her monthly cycle. This was a way to prevent Lavan from discovering that she was sitting on the terafim, which she had hidden. Lavan searched thoroughly but was unable to find the idols.

Yaakov became angry and argued with Lavan. He answered Lavan and said, “What is my crime? What is my sin, that you have chased after me?” Yaakov was upset that Lavan had pursued him so aggressively, as if he had committed some terrible act, when in reality he had done nothing wrong. Yaakov was defending himself, questioning what he had done to deserve such treatment and why Lavan was so suspicious of him.

Rashi explains on the words dalakta — “you have chased” — that this means “you have pursued.” The Targum Onkelos translates it as “you have pursued,” and Rashi brings two examples: one from Eicha 4:19, “on the mountains they pursued us,” and another from Shmuel I 17:53, “from pursuing after the Philistines.” In both cases, the word means to chase or pursue. So here, Yaakov is saying, “What have I done that you have pursued me in this way?”

Yaakov continues, “Since you have searched all my belongings, what have you found from all your household items? Place it here before my brothers and your brothers, and let them decide between us.” Yaakov is challenging Lavan: after searching everything, if you found anything that belongs to you, put it here in front of everyone so they can judge who is right. He is confident that nothing will be found, and he wants the matter to be settled publicly, with witnesses from both sides.

Rashi explains the word veyochichu — “let them decide” — as meaning “let them clarify with whom the judgment lies.” Rashi adds the Old French word aprover, which means to prove or establish. In other words, let the brothers from both sides act as judges to determine who is in the right in this disagreement.

Yaakov says, “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.” Yaakov is defending his integrity as a shepherd. For twenty years, he cared for Lavan’s flocks, and during that time, none of the animals miscarried, and he never took even a ram from the flock for himself. He is emphasizing how careful and honest he was in his work, not taking anything that did not belong to him, and ensuring that Lavan’s property was well cared for.

Rashi explains on the words lo shiklu — “did not miscarry” — that this means the animals did not lose their offspring; they did not abort. Rashi brings examples from Hoshea 9:14, “a womb that miscarries,” and from Iyov 21:10, “his cow calves and does not miscarry.” On the words “the rams of your flock,” Rashi notes that from here the Sages say that even a one-day-old ram is called a ram, because otherwise, what is the praise? If Yaakov only refrained from eating adult rams but ate the young ones, he would still be considered a thief. Therefore, the praise is that he did not eat any rams at all, even the newborns. Rashi cites Bava Kama 65b for this.

Yaakov continues, “I did not bring you an animal that was torn by beasts; I would bear the loss myself. You would demand it from my hand, whether it was stolen by day or stolen by night.” Yaakov is saying that if any animal was lost to wild animals, he did not bring it to Lavan and say, ‘Here, it was lost in the normal course of events.’ Instead, he took responsibility and compensated for the loss himself. Even if it was stolen during the day or at night, Lavan would demand payment from Yaakov. This shows how scrupulous Yaakov was in his dealings, going above and beyond what was required, and not making excuses or shifting blame for losses that occurred while he was shepherding Lavan’s flocks.

Rashi explains the phrase "treifah" (torn) as referring to animals killed by a lion or a wolf, as Targum Yonasan translates. The words "anochi achatennah" (I bore the loss of it) use the same root as in the phrase "kolei'a ba'even el hasa'arah velo yachati" ("slings a stone at a hair and does not miss," Shoftim 20:16), where the root means to miss or fall short, and "ani uveni Shlomo chata'im" (I and my son Shlomo are lacking, Melachim I 1:21), meaning lacking or missing. So here, "anochi achasrenah" means "I would make up the loss"—if something was missing, I would pay for it; you would demand it from my hand. Rashi adds that the Targum of "anochi achatennah" is "d'havas shagya miminyana"—it was missing from the count, so it was lacking. This is similar to the phrase "velo nifkad mimenu ish" (Bamidbar 31:49), which Targum translates as "vela shega"—none were missing. Regarding "genuvti yom ugenuvti laylah" (stolen by day or by night), Rashi says whether it was stolen by day or by night, I paid for all of them, as Targum Yonasan and the Yerushalmi explain. The word "genuvti" is like "rabasi vagoyim, sarasi bamedinos" ("great among the nations, princess among the provinces," Eichah 1:1) and "mele'asi mishpat" ("full of justice," Yeshayahu 1:21), and "ohavti ladush" ("loves to thresh," Hoshea 10:11). In all of these the final yud is an added letter and does not mean "my"; so genuvti means simply "stolen"—what was stolen by day or stolen by night.

Yaakov describes his hardships: "What was my situation by day? The heat consumed me, and by night, the frost; my sleep wandered from my eyes." He is telling Lavan that he suffered greatly while tending the flocks—by day he was exposed to the burning sun, and by night to the freezing cold, and he was so vigilant in his work that he barely slept.^ד׳

Rashi explains: "achalani chorev"—the heat consumed me—uses the same language as "esh ochelah" (a consuming fire, Devarim 4:24). "Vekerach"—and frost—refers to what is written in Tehillim 147:17, "mashlich karcho" (He casts forth His ice), and the Targum translates it as "gelida" (ice). "Shenati"—my sleep—means literal sleep.

Yaakov continues: "This is twenty years that I have been 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." He is emphasizing to Lavan how long he worked for him—first fourteen years for Rachel and Leah, and then six years for the sheep. During all this time, Lavan kept changing the terms of his wages, making it difficult for Yaakov to ever get what was promised to him.^ה׳

Rashi explains: "You changed my wages"—meaning, you kept changing the conditions between us: from nakod (speckled) to talu (spotted), and from akudim (ringed) to berudim (flecked). Each time, Lavan would alter the agreement about which animals would belong to Yaakov, but Hashem always made sure that the animals born matched the new condition, so Lavan could not cheat Yaakov out of his rightful wages.

Yaakov says: "Had not the G-d of my father, the G-d of Avraham, and the Fear of Yitzchak been with me, surely now you would have sent me away empty-handed. My affliction and the toil of my hands, G-d saw, and He rebuked you last night." Yaakov is telling Lavan that if not for Hashem's protection—the G-d of Avraham and the Fear of Yitzchak—Lavan would have sent him away with nothing. But Hashem saw Yaakov's suffering and hard work and intervened, rebuking Lavan in a dream the previous night, warning him not to harm Yaakov.^ו׳

Rashi explains why Yaakov refers to "the Fear of Yitzchak" rather than "the G-d of Yitzchak": He did not want to say "the G-d of Yitzchak," because the Holy One, blessed be He, does not attach His Name to tzaddikim during their lifetimes. Even though, when Yaakov left Be'er Sheva, Hashem said to him, "I am Hashem, the G-d of Avraham your father and the G-d of Yitzchak" (Bereishis 28:13), that was because Yitzchak's eyes had become dim and he was considered as if he were dead (see Midrash Tanchuma, Toldos 7). Yaakov was therefore afraid to say "the G-d of Yitzchak," and instead said "the Fear of Yitzchak." On the words "vayochach" (He rebuked), Rashi notes that this is a language of rebuke, not of proof, as Targum Yonasan translates.