The Jacob-Rachel-Leah Story
It is recommended that the series “A New Way to View The Women of the Bible,” “Women are Equal to Men,” and “Jacob and Esau Birthrights and Blessings” be read before reading the posts in this series.
Review of the previous post.
The previous post, post number 5 of 8, presented a discussion of God’s part in this story.
Preview of this post.
This post, post number 6 of 8, continues the discussion of God’s part in this story with a discussion which includes a suggestion that a barren woman can still be a “wife”.
- God’s part in this story
(2) A barren woman can be a “wife”.
Yet another explanation is that God began teaching the patriarchs that He wanted a man to have one wife at a time who is his partner at least as early as Abraham – “whatever Sarah tells you, do as she says” (Gen. 21:12), and continued it through Isaac and Rebecca. God wanted marriage to be based on love, fidelity, honesty and respect between two equal partners. He did not want marriage to be based solely on ritual or on the production of progeny. Although these are important and in some instances necessary elements of a marriage, God did not deem them to be critical components and a good marriage can occur even if they are absent so long as the other components are present. The story of Jacob’s “bigamy” and its results highlights and continues this lesson.
Consider what happened to the three people after the marriages. Even though Rachel is barren for a considerable stretch of the marriage, Jacob continued to love her, and it never appears that Jacob professed his love to Leah in spite of her fecundity[1]. In fact, when faced with danger from Esau, Jacob placed Rachel and Joseph behind Leah as if to have Leah in harm’s way with respect to Rachel and Joseph – Looking up, Jacob saw Esau coming, accompanied by four hundred men. He divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and the two maids, putting the maids and their children first, Leah and her children next, and Rachel and Joseph last (Genesis 33:1-2)[2]. The names Leah chose for her children (Reuben –‘ the Lord has seen my affliction, now my husband will love me’ (Gen. 29:31); Simeon – ‘this is because the Lord heard that I was unloved, and has given me this one also’ (Gen. 29:33); Levi – ‘this time my husband will become attached to me’ (Gen. 29:34); and Judah – ‘this time I will praise the Lord’ (Gen. 29:35)) indicate that she understood that Jacob did not love her the way he did Rachel. Leah and Rachel seem to be polar opposites to each other: one is beautiful, one is not; one is fecund, one is not; one is loved, one is not; one is young, one is not. Furthermore, after Rachel’s death, Leah nearly completely fades from the story. Leah is not mentioned as a comforter of Jacob when he learns of the “death” of Joseph, nor is Leah mentioned in any significant way during the family’s sojourn in Egypt. The opposite characteristics serve to contrast these two women and it is Jacob’s treatment of these two contrasting women which explains why Jacob “got away” with bigamy.
The contrast between the ways Jacob treated the two women illustrates what God wanted from marriage. Even though Leah and Jacob underwent the formal rituals of a marriage ceremony and Leah bore Jacob many sons, Jacob did not treat her as his “wife” according to the meaning of the term desired by God. This shows that God wanted marriage to be more than adherence to a formalistic ritual and the production of sons. On the other hand, Rachel was barren for many years, yet Jacob loved and respected her. This shows that sons were not critical for God’s view of marriage. God’s view of marriage is far more than formulas and progeny: even though a woman is barren, she can still be a beloved wife.
Jacob did not “get away with” bigamy, his “bigamy” was used to continue God’s lessons on what He wants for marriage. Rachel and Leah serve a dual purpose: they provide a source for the tribes of Israel and they show what God wants for a marriage. The bigamy allowed the story to use the contrast in Jacob’s treatment of Rachel and Leah to emphasize the moral points made by the narrative.
Preview of the next post.
The next post, post number 7 of 8, discusses Rachel’s theft of Laban’s idols.
[1] This triangle seems to be a mirror of the Hannah/Peninnah/Ramathaim story in 1 Samuel 1:1-8 where one wife, Peninnah, bears children and the other wife, Hannah, is barren. It is clear in this story that Hannah is loved even though she is barren. The story of the Mandrakes also seems to support this. After bearing four sons (Ruben, Simeon, Levi and Judah Gen 29:31-35), Leah stopped bearing (Gen 29:35). About this time, Ruben discovered mandrakes (an aphrodisiac) and brought them to Leah. Rachel struck a bargain with Leah: her night with Jacob to Leah in exchange for the mandrakes. Since Leah was in possession of the mandrakes, this seems to indicate that Rachel was the one in charge. Leah lay with Jacob and immediately, in quick succession bore more sons and a daughter (Dinah). Just prior to the mandrake episode, Rachel had complained to Jacob about her barrenness (Gen 29:1). Jacob rebuked her. The timing the return of Leah’s fecundity so soon after Jacob’s rebuke of Rachel’s complaint seems to indicate that Leah’s barrenness was not her fault but Jacob’s refusal to lay with her. The mandrakes were merely the trigger for the action rather than the source of any fecundity. This appears to indicate that it was Rachel and Jacob who were driving the action, which seems to support the theory proposed in this essay.
[2] Rashi: “The further back, the more dear,” Commentaries, 1:373n2.