Torah Pearls #7 – Vayeitzei (Genesis 28:10-32:3)

Torah Pearls Vayeitzei, Genesis 28:10-32:3, Bethel, dream, dreams, Jacob’s ladder, mandrakes, nehemia gordon, parashah, Parsha, parshas, parshat, stone of scone, Torah Pearls, Torah Portion, vayeitzeiIn this episode of The Original Torah PearlsVayeitzei (Genesis 28:10-32:3), everything old is new again as Gordon and crew release the vacuum-seal and allow the fresh air of language, history and context to inform Jacob’s time in Haran. Jacob’s servitude to his trickster father-in-law smells sadly familiar even in English, but the echoes of reciprocal justice appear most poignant in Hebrew.

Both the obvious and obscure perplexities of the Portion are examined: Leah’s eyes, Rachel’s thievery, Jacob’s breeding practices, his oblivious honeymoon and what it means to be “remembered” by God. We learn the myth of the Stone of Scone and that Bethel is not another name for Jerusalem.

Word studies include: “deceive,” “mandrakes,” “weak,” and “God’s camp.” The two names given to “pile of witness” reveal the first time a foreign language is spoken in the Tanakh. We also learn the meaning of the names of Jacob’s children—particularly Levi and its foreshadowing of a house of prayer for all nations—where everyone’s sacrifice will be accepted.

I look forward to reading your comments!

Download Torah Pearls Vayeitzei Transcript
Torah Pearls #7 – Vayeitzei (Genesis 28:10-32:3)

You are listening to The Original Torah Pearls with Nehemia Gordon, Keith Johnson, and Jono Vandor. Thank you for supporting Nehemia Gordon's Makor Hebrew Foundation. Learn more at NehemiasWall.com.

Jono: G’day to everybody listening wherever you may be around the world, thank you for your company. Joining me this hour is Nehemia Gordon and Keith Johnson. This week we are in Vayeitzei. Have I pronounced that correctly?

Nehemia: Va-yeitzei.

Jono: Thank you, Nehemia. Bereshit 28:10 to 32:2. We’re talking about Jacob’s vow at Bethel, his marriage to Leah and Rachel, his escape from Laban among other things. It begins this in verse 10 if I may kick it off. Here we go. It says here, “Now Jacob went out from Beersheba and went toward Haran. So he came to a certain place and stayed there all night, because the sun had set. And he took one of the stones of that place and put it at his head, and he laid down in that place to sleep.” It sounds like he used a stone for a pillow. I know there are some really bizarre myths about this particular stone. Are you guys familiar with any of those?

Nehemia: No. What are some of the myths?

Jono: Well, this stone is called, I believe it’s British-Israelism that refers to it as “the Stone of Scone,” I believe it’s pronounced.

Nehemia: Isn’t a scone a type of pastry? Maybe it’s a really hard pastry.

[laughing]

Jono: The Stone of Scone has been left out in the sun a little bit too long. No, there’s some bizarre stuff. British-Israelism, they believe that they actually have the stone, they’re in possession of the stone, and it is upon that stone that new kings and queens were crowned. And that it was brought over there by Jeremiah. There’s some really bizarre stuff about that. Anyhow, so there it is. But it continues on, “Then he dreamed, and behold, a ladder was set up on the earth, and its top reached to heaven; and there the angels of God were ascending and descending upon it.” This is the escalator of heaven, Nehemia?

Nehemia: Okay.

Jono: Well, isn’t it?

Nehemia: The escalator of heaven? I suppose.

Jono: It sounds like one of those shopping escalators where people are going up and down on them. And he’s laying there...

Nehemia: Basically, what you’re saying is that Bethel is the entrance to the mall?

Jono: Actually, isn’t that what Jacob says? Jacob says, “Hey, check it out.” I mean, “Behold,” it goes on to say, “Behold, Yehovah stood above it and said, ‘I am Yehovah Elohim of Abraham your father and the Elohim of Isaac; the land on which you lie I give to you and your descendants. Also your descendants shall be as the dust upon the earth; you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south; and in you and in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’” Of course, we’ve already touched on the fact that the NIV says “through,” as opposed to... Anyway, we’ll move on from there. “Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, I will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have spoken to you.” Then when Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely Yehovah is in this place, and I did not know it.” And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven!”

Nehemia: It really raises an interesting question. Here we have the story about Bethel, or Beitel in Hebrew. “Beit El” means house of God. At the end of the story, and that’s not the original name of the place, it tells us that originally the place was called Luz and Jacob renamed it Beitel, the house of God. Then in verse 22, he says, “And this stone which I have placed as a matzavah,” which is like a standing stone, “shall be the house of God.” Which really raises some questions. That stone was the house of God? Or it marks the place of the house of God? Either way, which house of God are we talking about? We think of the place called the house of God, that’s the Temple in Jerusalem, right?

Jono: Sure.

Nehemia: What’s the role of Beitel? We’ve got to remember that Jerusalem wasn’t actually proclaimed and chosen until an incident that happened in the time of David, and at that point, God said, “I choose this place forever.” But up until then, the place that God chose as the site of His Tabernacle was something that was dynamic. Wherever the cloud would land in the desert, that was the place they would set up the Tabernacle. Once they came into the land, the Tabernacle remained mobile and would be for a time at Shiloh, for a time it would be at Shechem, and then for a time it would be at Bethel, and possibly other locations, as well. So apparently, there was a time when it was at Beit El and you can actually see that later on in the Bible, you hear a little bit about that.

Jono: Sure. Keith?

Keith: My question is this: Is there anything that we know about Beit El that qualifies it more than any of those other places?

Nehemia: No, I wouldn’t say that it’s more qualified. I mean this is one of the places where the Tabernacle would later be set up before Jerusalem was chosen. The history of why that was a valid place for that is what happened with Jacob. I think that’s the point of the story. But when we read the story today it almost sounds anachronistic. We’re like, “Wait a minute, Beit El isn’t the spot anymore.” If you don’t remember, at one time, before Jerusalem was chosen, you hear this, and you’re like, “What’s going on? Beit El? That’s not the spot.” All the way to the point where you’ll have some people who will say, “Beit El - that’s just another name for Jerusalem,” which it’s not. It’s very clearly a different city. Jerusalem was called Shalem at the time, back then, and Beit El was called Luz. Two completely different cities.

Jono: Sure. Two totally different places.

Keith: That’s a Torah Pearl.

Jono: That’s a Torah Pearl.

Nehemia: In Judges chapter 1, Beit El is the place where everybody comes together to consult God, that’s in Judges 1.

Jono: “Then Jacob rose early in the morning and took the stone that he had at his head, set it up as a pillar and poured oil on top of it.” What is the significance of that?

Nehemia: He’s anointing it. This was the way you dedicated something in ancient times - you anointed it with oil. That’s why they poured oil on the head of the king. It was a way of dedicating him. The way they christen a boat today. What does it mean to christen a boat? It means they break a bottle of wine or champagne over it, and the liquid pours on it and that’s christening. Well, christen means to anoint. So he’s simply anointing it with oil.

Now, it is strange that he’s doing this. It’s so strange because in the book of Deuteronomy it tells us, “don’t set up these matzevoth,” these standing stones. So something that our ancestor Jacob did, and what we also see that Abraham did this, we’re later told in Deuteronomy, “Don’t do that anymore”. The reason is that the people were confusing the standing stone with what it represented. Here what it represented was marking the spot were Jacob had this vision. What happened is the people would come and then worship the stone. So God commanded, “Okay, just don’t even set up those stones anymore.” Here’s an example of something the forefathers did that we’re not supposed to emulate, which is kind of strange. So why are we being told the story? I guess we’re being told the story because it’s part of the history of how things came about.

Jono: Sure. “Then Jacob made a vow, saying,” and it seems conditional, doesn’t it? It begins with “If.”

Nehemia: Oh, definitely.

Jono: “If God will be with me, and keep me in this way that I am going, and give me bread to eat and clothing to put on, so that I will come back to my father’s house in peace, then Yehovah shall be my Elohim. And this stone which I have set up as a pillar shall be God’s house, and of all that...” now, here we see again, “and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You.” Now, this is the second time that we see a tenth, isn’t it?

Nehemia: Now, in my Bible, there’s a little English title before this section, which says, “Establishment of the Church.” No, I’m just kidding.

[laughing]

Keith: Well, in my Bible what it says – for me, what it says, “Establishment of me getting my ten percent.” “Why Keith is supposed to get ten percent.” So which one is it going to be here?

Jono: Come on, Keith, what does it mean? What do you think that means there?

Keith: Well, I think it’s pretty clear here. He says, “These are the things that I’m looking for. I’ve had this experience. I’ve had my dream. I’ve seen and heard the voice. And now, I’m about to go on a journey that says that if You’re going to go with me, here’s what I will do. You will be my god. And by the way, I’m going to give You a tenth.” Well, I guess the way it says it here is, “And of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to thee.” The question that I have is, how does he get it to Him?

Jono: Well, that’s right. And of what does he give? I mean everything that is his increase and how does he pass that on? Nehemia, how do we understand that?

Nehemia: We don’t know the answer to that. That’s a really good question. How does he dedicate that ten percent to Yehovah? He’s not giving it to the church or the synagogue or the temple, so what is he doing with it? Presumably, he’s offering it as some kind of sacrifice that he then consumes. I would imagine that’s what happened. Or maybe he gives it to the poor, because when we get to the Torah Commandments you have this ten percent that you have three different options and three different ways of using. You use it on your pilgrimage when you go up to the chosen place, at one time Beit El, at one time Jerusalem. The other option is you give it to the poor. The third option is you give it to the Levites who are essentially poor by design because they’re serving and doing God’s work. So he didn’t have... well, he had Levites because he had a son named Levi.

Jono: Sure.

[laughing]

Nehemia: Yes, I don’t think he gave it to his son. I think he probably offered it as a sacrifice or gave it to the poor. I would imagine, but we don’t know for sure. Good question.

Jono: It’s interesting...

Keith: I’m going to build...

Nehemia: You need a new denomination, Keith.

Keith: Jono, I’m going to build an entire teaching on this verse. I’m just letting you guys know now.

Jono: Hey, I’m looking forward to this. I’m looking forward.

Nehemia: That’s going to be a very lucrative teaching.

[laughing]

Keith: Yes, it will be.

Jono: “So Jacob went on his journey and came to the land of the people of the East.” And it goes on to say there were sheep, there were shepherds, he was talking to them there, there was a well. And he says, “Do you know Laban the son of Nahor?” And they said, “We know him.” So he said to them, “Is he well?” And they said, “He is well. And look, his daughter Rachel is coming with the sheep.” Enter Rachel. Here she is. And he said, “Look, it is still high day; it is not time for…” It goes on. She comes along with the sheep. He rolls the stone off the well and allows for the sheep to be watered. And this is beautiful, it says that they get talking, “Then Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s relative and that he was Rebekah’s son. So she ran and told her father.” I just think that’s beautiful. There she is.

Keith: Yes. And I think it’s cyclical, as we talk about what happened with Abraham’s servant in 24, and he goes there and he’s looking for the wife. Now here comes the son of Isaac who comes and he’s looking for the wife, and here she is, and it’s cyclical. And the one person is consistent in both stories is Laban in my Bible. And I think as soon as she comes to him and says, “Hey, there’s a guy who’s connected to the guy.” He’s like, “Oh, I remember the last time.”

Jono: “Oh, yes!”

[laughing]

Keith: He’s got a very good memory. There’s this wonderful thing that happens in this that just catches my attention, and it’s that Jacob is looking for his family and connection to his family, but he falls for Rachel. It says in verse 16, “Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the older was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel.” And then verse 17 is this thing I can never get it out of my mind. It says, “And Leah’s eyes were weak, but Rachel was beautiful of form and faith.”

Jono: It’s a bit rough, isn’t it?

Keith: I have this thing, Jono.

Jono: No, I want to say. Hang on, Keith. My New King James is a little bit kinder than that. It says, “Leah’s eyes were delicate,” Now, that’s a much nicer way of saying it.

Nehemia: But it actually says, it says, “weak.”

Jono: It says weak? Oh. I feel sorry for her.

Keith: Torah Pearl!

Nehemia: What it probably meant, in the context - I know Keith has his explanation - but what I suspect it meant is that she was a squinter. They didn’t have glasses and she probably didn’t see well and you could probably see her squinting all the time. They said that she has weak eyes - maybe, I don’t know.

Jono: Maybe. Keith?

Nehemia: Keith’s got his take on it.

Keith: So which is the parallel here in verse 17, “Leah’s eyes were weak but Rachel was beautiful of form and faith.” But it says in verse 18 that he loved Rachel. So he said, “I’ll do whatever I can to get her; I want the one with the strong eyes.”

Jono: Yes.

Keith: What did Laban say?

Jono: Well, “he said, ‘I will serve you seven years for Rachel your younger daughter.’ And Laban said, ‘It is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to another man. Stay with me.’ So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed only a few days to him because of the love he had for her.” I mean that is really romantic, isn’t it?

Nehemia: Am I the only one who thinks it’s weird that he’s exchanging his daughter for seven years of labor?

Keith: That’s what I was going to say.

Jono: I don’t know...

Nehemia: What’s that about?

Keith: It’s Middle-Eastern negotiations. Jacob comes and he says, “I would serve for seven years.” And he’s like, “It’s better for me if I give her to you.” It’s like Abraham when he’s talking to the folks about the Machpelah Cave and the ground, he’s like, “Look, what’s four hundred between us?” There’s a negotiation here. He’s like, “Yes, I’ll take your seven years.”

Nehemia: What’s interesting is, later on, they make the same comment in chapter 31 verse 15. Jacob is trying to convince Rachel and Leah to go with him back to the land of Canaan and leave their father. They say, “We were considered like foreigners to him. He sold us.” Meaning, we have no loyalty to him - he sold us like we were slaves. So they also perceive this as kind of a cold thing for a father to do. Rather than bless his daughters and send them away with some kind of a dowry, they sell them into slavery. That’s how they saw it.

Jono: Yes, we see later on, as well, that Laban says in verse 43 of 31, “And Laban answered and said to Jacob, ‘These daughters are my daughters, and these children are my children, and this flock is my flock and all that you see is mine.’” And he kind of seems to me to possibly be someone with what Proverbs refers to as an evil eye, is that possibly a fair speculation?

Nehemia: I think there’s definitely here a spirit of Laban. The spirit of Laban is unjust wages, changing the wage, withholding the wage, requiring unreasonable things from workers. I think in modern terms maybe we could call this - I might get in trouble for saying this - the spirit of Walmart. Okay, let’s move on.

Jono: But in any case, children, after Jacob had worked for Laban seven years, do you know what happened? Laban fooled him and gave him his ugly daughter Leah. So to marry Rachel, Jacob was forced to work another seven years, so you see children, the Bible clearly teaches us that you can never trust an employer.

[laughing]

Keith: Jono.

Nehemia: Well, not if he’s in the spirit of Laban you can’t.

Keith: Jono. First of all, it says...

Jono: Nehemia, hang on. Hang on. You know where that’s from, right?

Nehemia: That you can never trust an employer, where’s that from?

Jono: Oh, come on, my friend! It’s one of your favorite movies.

Nehemia: Oh, from Office Space? No, I have no idea. What movie?

Jono: Fiddler on the Roof.

Nehemia: Oh, when he says never trust an employer.

Jono: This is Perchik talking to the kids down on the river, and they ask him, “Is that what...”

Nehemia: Because he’s a communist.

Jono: Yes, that’s the one. “Is that what the Bible teaches us?” And he says, “Well, that is the lesson of the story of Jacob, if you interpret it correctly.” Keith?

Keith: She wasn’t an ugly daughter.

Jono: I know she’s not, but I feel sorry for her. Poor girl.

Keith: I don’t feel sorry for her because you know what’s amazing about this story?

Jono: What’s this?

Keith: Is that we see this issue of Laban, and we see this issue of Rachel, and we see this issue of Leah. Yet there’s this powerful section that gets in where God steps in. This is what I love about the Bible and the Torah portion. I love the Torah portion because it’s very human in its approach to these people’s interactions and then there’s this intervention. So there’s the interaction with the people then there’s the intervention. And there’s interaction with the people and the intervention, and we see this in this story. So let us continue.

Nehemia: I want to bring something from Deuteronomy 24 verses 14 to 15 because I think these are commandments. You know, we’re reading these stories but I think they’re more than just stories, I think they’re lessons for us to learn. And then later those, I think, are translated into various commandments.

For example, Deuteronomy 24:14-15 says, “You shall not oppress a hired worker, a poor person, or a pauper from your brother or for the sojourner in your land, in your gates.” What does that mean? The word “oppress” there is a word in Hebrew that implies to take advantage of, treat unfairly, to swindle. Any of those things is called to oppress somebody. Then it says in verse 15, “In his day you will give his wage. The sun shall not set upon him for he is poor.” Basically, “he needs it” is a rough translation. “That he not call against you to Yehovah and there be a sin upon you.”

What it’s saying here is, on the day that you’re - and they used to have day laborers, they still do in some parts of the world - so what it’s saying here, if you have a day laborer… most people in this ancient society, they worked for themselves. It was only somebody like Jacob, who was a foreigner, who didn’t have any property, who was essentially landless and homeless, that came to Laban and said, “Okay, give me a job.” It was only these poor people who needed to work for someone else. It’s saying somebody who’s in that sort of a situation that’s working for you, you have to treat him fairly, you have to treat him justly and you’ve got to give him his wage in a timely manner. If you withhold that wage, he’ll call against Yehovah and there will be a sin upon you. That’s actually a very serious commandment here, I think. One that I think in our Western society we don’t take very seriously. I don’t know that it has to be literally interpreted that you have to pay your workers every single day. If the agreement is to pay them at the end of every week, the point is you better pay them at the time that you’re supposed to pay them. If you don’t, that’s actually a very serious sin.

Keith: I want to say something Jono, and I’m leaving the farm here, I want to say it in advance. But there’s a book in the New Testament that Luther didn’t like and some of the other people didn’t like and that is actually the Book of James. There’s a section in the Book of James that it says this, it says, “Come now, you rich people, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. Your gold and your silver have rusted,” and then it says, “Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you, cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord Sabaoth, Yehovah Tzabaoth. And you have lived luxuriously.” And it tells this story.

If I read that, and like I said I’m leaving the farm a little bit, if I read that, I’m like, “Wow, James is really coming strong here,” but if I don’t read Deuteronomy and understand that’s where this actually was brought forth and James is simply pulling from Deuteronomy to remind the people that this is one of the teachings in the Torah, the Tanakh. I’m only bringing this example because I think one of the things that happens is that things get read in a vacuum sometimes. In my tradition, in the Methodist tradition, we’ll go over the New Testament, it’ll be completely read in a vacuum without understanding where it comes from. And what you just did, Nehemia, is you brought to my mind something I knew in James, but I didn’t know in Deuteronomy, as well. Now it makes complete sense. Thank you for that. We can get back to business.

Nehemia: All right.

Jono: No, I appreciate that. That’s right. He did what to put it at the back of the Bible, didn’t he? In fact, he wanted to leave it out altogether.

Keith: He didn’t want it in there at all.

Jono: He called it an “epistle of straw,” he called it that because it didn’t suit his theology. Anyhow, moving right along... Jacob said now... Of course, Laban did that - he didn’t pay the wages that he said that he would pay, and he gave him Leah instead of Rachel. He works another seven years. In the meantime - yes, he does he works another seven years, and he gets Rachel as his wife, finally.

Nehemia: He gets her after seven days, but he has to work seven years for her. I want to look… right, verse 25, it says, “And it came to pass in the morning, and behold, she was Leah; and he said to Laban ‘What is this that you have done? Did I not work with you for Rachel? Why have you deceived me?’” So my question is: how did he deceive him?

Jono: Well, I’m guessing because it says...

Nehemia: There are children listening so I’m not going to draw a picture but they consummated the marriage. How did he not know who he was consummating the marriage with?

Keith: Nehemia, I can tell you exactly why.

Jono: Go on.

Nehemia: They did it through a sheet?

[laughing]

Keith: No, listen. Nehemia, listen. So first of all, they’re not in a hotel room where there’s light. It’s dark. Here comes this woman. He’s obviously filled with wine from the celebration.

Jono: Yeah.

Keith: This woman comes in. He thinks it’s his wife. He hasn’t been with her before this. They get together. He wakes up in the morning and he’s like, “Whoa. What happened here?” I mean this seems perfectly clear to me what he did.

Jono: Pretty shifty.

Nehemia: Well, I mean I guess that’s what happened, but it definitely raises a question. What was wrong with him that he didn’t notice who he was having sex with? I mean, how do you not notice that? I’m sorry. He wasn’t talking to her? Come on, what is this?

Keith: No! It was in the nighttime. It was after they were drunk. They were celebrating.

Nehemia: Did her mother dress her with the skins of sheep when he felt her and she was hairy? I don’t understand how he fell for this.

[laughing]

Keith: Nehemia, look, the bottom line is...

Nehemia: I do understand, but it’s shocking that he fell for something like this.

Jono: Yes. I mean imagine waking up in the morning, and oh, my goodness. There’s no going back from that, right? There’s no going back. This is it now. So he ends up with two wives.

Nehemia: Yes, I guess you can’t undo that, huh?

Jono: I guess you can’t undo it. Now, just quickly...

Keith: He gets two for one.

Jono: Well, no because he’s got to work for another seven years. But now... everybody asks this question, now he has sisters for wives, and we know there’s a law against that, as well. Nehemia, how do you reconcile that?

Nehemia: That’s a really interesting question. Again, if you look in Leviticus chapter 18 verse 18 the specific commandment is, “A woman to her sister you shall not take to trouble to uncover her nakedness in addition to her in her lifetime.” This is understood in two different ways. I guess probably the more common interpretation is to say, “Well, it’s two literal sisters and you can’t marry two sisters that are both living.” If you were married to a woman and you had children with her and then she died, what would often happen is they would go and marry her sister so the new wife would take care of her nieces and nephews. So that’s when the woman isn’t living. Here it’s saying while she’s alive, you can’t marry two sisters because that troubles her.

The other understanding of this, which I tend towards, even though it’s probably less common, is that you have this phrase in various places in the Bible, “a woman to her sister,” which really means one and then another one. According to that understanding, this is simply saying you can’t marry two women while the first woman is alive because that’s troubling to the first woman. If that interpretation is true, of course, it raises questions like, why was Hannah married as a second wife?

Jono: Yes, sure.

Nehemia: David had lots of wives.

Jono: There are lots of examples.

Nehemia: There aren’t actually that many examples from the period of Moses and on. Actually, we have Hannah and we have the various kings, and then I think we’d be hard-pressed to find many more examples, there may be a few. Hannah specifically refers to the other wife as her troubler, using the exact same word that appears in Leviticus 18:18, which may indicate that Hannah’s husband was in violation of this commandment.

In any event, either way, I would tend to think that just as we have Laban as a picture of what we’re not supposed to do, and a commandment that then goes along with that. This is a commandment that then goes along with Jacob’s dysfunctional family, and that rather than being something we’re supposed to emulate, Jacob’s actually something we’re supposed to learn from as what not to do. I mean, look, that he had four wives and certainly the two main wives were at each other’s throat constantly, to the point where she’s pimping out her husband in exchange for some mandrakes - that’s horrendous. I think that’s there as an example of what we’re not supposed to do, and that this is a commandment that then formulates that. Meaning, this essentially formulates what it is we’re not supposed to do, whereas the actual vibrant example is the example of Jacob. That’s my take.

The more traditional explanation, by the way, is to say, well, that was before the Torah was given, so he was allowed to do that, which, okay, that’s a possibility. I like my explanation better.

Jono: Keith?

Keith: Well, the thing that hits me when I’m reading this story is I can’t read this story without thinking about Jacob’s life. And I can’t read this story without thinking of Isaac. I can’t read it without thinking of what happened before and how this smells like some of the same things. Specifically, I just want us to do one little Torah Pearl here if we can, if we have time.

Nehemia: Torah Pearl! Torah Pearl!

Keith: I want you to open up to 30 verse 25. When I read this verse I think about what happened with Jacob and his brother and what his brother said. It almost sounds exactly the same, but there is a little bit of difference that you don’t find in English, only in Hebrew. Verse 25 says, “So it came about in the morning that, behold, it was Leah! And he said to Laban, ‘Why is it that you have done this to me?’” I read and I think about the older brother, younger brother, older sister, younger sister. “Was it not for Rachel that I served with you? Why then have you deceived me?” Now, in English when we see “deceived me,” what do you think I think, Jono? When I hear him say, “Why have you deceived me?” what do you think I think about?

Jono: Well, the first thing that entered my mind was the situation where Jacob deceived his father.

Keith: Exactly, and what did his brother say about him?

Nehemia: “He’s deceived me twice.”

Keith: But what’s interesting in Hebrew, Nehemia, can you just tell us? Why is it a different word at the end of 25? Why doesn’t Jacob use his name? In other words, why does he use this word?

Nehemia: Because that is a very unusual word for “deceived,” the word “akev.” So this is probably a more common word, but there’s definitely a connection there that you reap what you sow.

Keith: That’s what I was trying to get.

Nehemia: How appropriate that the one who acted with deception then ended up getting deceived. We would say in Modern Hebrew “magiah lo,” he had it coming. But we see this throughout the Bible. We saw before that Lot tried to offer up his daughters for rape and he ended up getting raped by them; you have this poetic justice. In Hebrew it’s called, “midah keneged midah,” or reciprocal justice, they call it.

Keith: Well, what hit me, guys, was this. That here he takes the blessing from his older brother. In other words, he sets his older brother aside. He gets the blessing. And now, the older sister gets married to him. Like you say, it’s cyclical. I’m watching this happening and I’m like, “Man, does this not sound familiar?” He tries to get the younger to give her the blessing and he gets the older. Anyway, that was the verse I wanted to bring.

Jono: That’s brilliant, actually. That’s a really interesting connection. Verse 30, “Then Jacob also went in to Rachel, and he also loved Rachel more than Leah. And he served with Laban still another seven years. When Yehovah saw that Leah was unloved, He opened her womb.” Yehovah seems to look down...

Keith: There’s an intervention.

Jono: There it is. There’s that intervention that you were talking about. Because you do feel sorry for her, at least I do. I think that’s beautiful. “He opened her womb; but Rachel was barren. So Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben.” So what does Reuben mean, Nehemia?

Nehemia: Okay, let’s go through all these names. We have Reuben, and it says, “For she said Yehovah has seen my affliction, for now, my husband will love me.” And Reuben is two words: “re’u,” see, and “ben,” son. So literally “see a son,” and that’s connected to her saying that Yehovah has seen.

Then we have the next one is Shimeon or Simeon, it says, “For Yehovah heard that I was hated.” Shimeon is from the word “shamah,” to hear; Yehovah heard. Then we have verse 34, “This time my husband will join me for I gave birth to him three sons,” and the child was called Levi. And Levi is from the word “yelaveh,” he will join. Let’s bring one more name and we’ll talk about that. In verse 35, she says, “Odeh et Yehovah,” I will thank Yehovah. The child is called Yehuda, which is a combination of the words “odeh” and “Yehovah.” It’s actually both words, “Yeho’odeh,” I will thank Yehovah. Each of these names has an explanation, and the explanation is connected to what the word means.

Keith: Amen.

Nehemia: The word Levi, I guess we’ve got to talk about that because she says, “This time my husband will join me,” and I’ll ask Keith to talk about that. Keith, where else do we have a play on words related to the name Levi and joining?

Keith: Well, I think if you go to the verse, for those of us that are Methodists that are trying to find our way to connect with the God of Israel, short of having to put on a kippah in the traditional Orthodox movement, or are going to become converted in some other way. If I want to join myself, it says in Isaiah 56, I believe it is, that those who join themselves, the very word “join” is this very word that’s used for Levi.

So when we join ourselves, when we Levite ourselves to Him then we become a part of His covenant, a part of His time, His Torah, His name. That’s been my moneyball verse. That’s what I connect to all the time is that I’m joining myself to Him, and therefore, I’m connected to the God of Israel.

Nehemia: What Keith is talking about is Isaiah 56 verse 3 and then again in verse 6, it has this word “nilvah,” or “nilvim,” which is “those who join.” It says, “Hanilvim al Yehovah”, “Who join themselves to Yehovah to serve Him, to love the name of Yehovah, to be His servant. All those who keep the Shabbat from desecrating it and grab hold off My covenant.” Then He says in verse 7, “I will bring them to My holy mountain to make them rejoice in the house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices shall be accepted upon My altar.”

Now, a lot of people read this and they say, “Where did the burnt offerings and peace offerings come from? What’s that about?” This is a play on words with the word Levite, because normally a Levite brings, or actually the Kohanim, the priests who are a subcategory within Levi, they’re the ones who bring the sacrifices, and what the Israelites thought is, that a Gentile can’t bring a sacrifice. There’s a verse in Leviticus that was probably misunderstood, why they thought that, which is a whole separate discussion. When we get to that verse, we’ll talk about it.

But anyway, here He’s saying not only will they Levite themselves to Me, to Yehovah, but their sacrifices will be accepted. They’re going to present sacrifices like the Levites present sacrifices. Not to say that they’re going to be priests in the Temple, literally, but that you think that they can’t join themselves to Yehovah, that they’re separated, and you think they can’t bring sacrifices. Not only will they be joined, but their sacrifices will be accepted upon My altar, for My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations. Can I get an amen?

Jono: Amen.

Keith: Yes. And guess what else Jono?

Jono: Yes, Keith?

Keith: Now, that I’m a Levite and I’ve connected myself...

Nehemia: Here it comes.

Keith: I want ten percent.

[laughing]

Nehemia: Here it comes. Show me the money!

Keith: Please go to hishallowedname.com to the donate section and bring me my ten percent. I’m just kidding. You know what’s powerful about this, Nehemia? What’s powerful about this, and I think we see it in English, but it’s so powerful in Hebrew because these word connections, these word puns, they’re so powerful they just jump off the page. In English, we can see obviously that there’s something connected to becoming attached and Levi, and it says what it says. But boy, it’s such a blessing to have the ability to look right at the Hebrew language and to see these words jump off. It’s like watching 3D HD is the way I like to say it.

Jono: So here we are in chapter 30. That’s was a Torah Pearl.

Keith: Yes.

Jono: “Now when Rachel saw that she bore Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister, and said to Jacob, ‘Give me children, or else I’ll die!’” What’s with that? I mean that’s – anyway. “And Jacob’s anger was aroused,” fair enough, “against Rachel, and he said, ‘Am I in the place of God, who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?’ So she said, ‘Here is my maid Bilhah; go into her, and she will bear children on my knees, that I also may have children by her. So she gave him Bilhah.’” So this is not unusual. I guess we already see this with Sarah and Hagar that Sarah gives Abraham...

Nehemia: It’s certainly unusual to us, but apparently that was the custom in ancient times, that if you had a maidservant and you didn’t have children, she could have children for you. This is kind of like an ancient version of a surrogate pregnancy, except that it’s actually her child, genealogically, physically.

Jono: And so this effectively makes Bilhah his wife, right?

Nehemia: Yes. It says that.

Jono: Okay. So here’s wife number three. “And Bilhah conceived and bore a son. And Rachel said, “‘God has judged my case; and He has also heard my voice and given me a son.’ Therefore she called his name Dan.” She gets to call his name.

Nehemia: So here we have another series of names. We have Dan or Dan in English. Dan, which means, “he judged.” She says, “God judged me and also heard my voice.” And “judged me” is “danani,” so that’s really where you get the name, Dan. Then you have in verse 8, I’ll just go quickly through these names, we have Naphtali. Naphtali as she says, “naphtulei Elohim niphtalti.” Literally, you could translate it as, “The wrestlings of God I have wrestled with my sister and also prevailed.” That’s interesting, the phrase “wrestlings of God,” how does your English translation have it, out of curiosity?

Jono: I’ve got “Then Rachel said, ‘With great wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister, and indeed I have prevailed.’”

Nehemia: So they interpreted the word “God,” in this context, as “great.” That’s not wrong, that’s correct. Sometimes in Hebrew when it adds the word “God” to a phrase, it means like really, really, really great, because God is the greatest. So “immense wrestlings I’ve wrestled with my sister,” but literally, “divine” or “wrestlings of God,” is a literal translation. “I have wrestled with sister and also prevailed.” Then he was called Naphtali, which from the word wrestlings.

In verse 11, the child is called Gad because she says, “Ba gad,” “fortune has come,” which is very interesting, because what does that mean “fortune”? Our culture is so pagan that for us “fortune” is this mystical concept, you know, the god of fortune. That’s actually mentioned in the book of Isaiah, how they worshipped a god, a deity named Gad, named fortune. So Gad is the god of a fortune. Or later it’s taken to mean the god of fortune, I should say. Here I think it has the literal sense of fortune.

What happens is that pagans, what they do is that they personify everything. Meaning that they turn it into a living, thinking thing. So they’ll take rain and they’ll have the god of rain. In some cultures, it will just be called rain. Here we have Gad, which means fortune like we would say in English, “good luck,” but they turned luck into a god.

Keith: Right.

Nehemia: I don’t think that’s what she meant when she said, Gad. Now, then you have, of course, the sacred namers who will come along. I call those people the word police. They’ll say, “We can’t say the English word G-O-D, God, because there was a pagan deity called Gad,” gimel dalet or in English G-A-D. I’m like, well, wait a minute, in English the word God has nothing to do with fortune; it’s completely unrelated. I mean it’s ridiculous. But anyway that’s the word police.

Okay, in verse 13 she says, “The daughters will in my joy,” which is the daughters will make me rejoice. The word asher it comes to the word “rejoice.” Then we have the story of the mandrakes; I’ll stop there.

Jono: All right. Because does anybody know what a mandrake is? I’ve got no idea.

Nehemia: There is an opinion about what the mandrake is, it’s widely accepted by botanists. It’s some plant that has all kinds of medical properties that grows here in Israel, and it was believed at some point that it functioned as an aphrodisiac, or possibly to even cause...

Jono: A fertility aid.

Nehemia: Yes, a fertility aid. I don’t know that we really know what it is. I know there are definitely strong opinions about what it is. But it really leaves a question - why were these mandrakes so important? It was obviously something rare that they couldn’t grow domestically, and so he had to find it.

Keith: It’s obvious what they were. I have the answer.

Nehemia: What is it?

Jono: Give it to us, Keith.

Keith: No, I’m telling you. The mandrakes are the basis for why they have these present products right now for men. Jacob was getting tired. He needed the stamina. So the mandrakes helped him in his stamina so that he could be with his two wives to raise these children. This is exactly what happened.

Jono: Well, it seems that way because it’s like, “I’ve got mandrake, so come on. Tonight’s the night because I’ve got mandrakes. Here they are.”

Keith: Obviously. That’s what her point coming here saying, “Here’s what you need.” I mean obviously, that’s what it was, Nehemia.

Nehemia: But the one who ended up sleeping with him wasn’t the one who had the mandrakes; she’s the one who gave up the mandrakes.

Keith: I know she gave up the mandrakes, but that was what she used. My point is that you need these mandrakes. I need those mandrakes from you.

[laughing]

Nehemia: Okay?

Jono: There’s a market for that somewhere. There’s also a market for various rods, for animals. We’re going to get to that in a minute, in a similar sort of thing. “And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son.” Here we go! There are a few more names. This is Issachar.

Nehemia: Issachar in Hebrew, which comes from the word “sachar,” “reward.” Here is actually two names, she says, “God has given me my reward because I gave my maidservant to my husband.” Reward is “schari,” so therefore he was called Issachar. But then also she rented, or hired, her husband, which is “sachor sacharticha,” “I have surely rented you,” or “hired you.” So it’s a double meaning there.

What’s interesting about the name Issachar is its pronunciation. This was actually a debate between two families of scribes around 1,200 years ago. One of the families of Jewish scribes wrote the name as Issachar, and that’s actually what we have in our Bibles. That was called Ben Asher, by the way. The other family, which was called Ben Naphtali, their rivals, they wrote the name is Yissaschar. That was a difference that was preserved in these lists they had of the differences of the different scribal families. Issachar and Yissachar. But we say Issachar in Hebrew, according to Ben Asher. But it’s possible that it was Yissaschar. According to the Ben Asher version there’s a silent “Shin,” which is the only time in the Hebrew language you have that in this particular word.

Jono: Truly?

Nehemia: Yes.

Jono: Interesting.

Nehemia: A silent “Shin” in the middle of the world.

Jono: Zebulun, verse 20.

Nehemia: Oh, Zvulun. So Zvulun is “Yizveleni ishi,” she says, “my husband will live with me,” is a proper translation of that, or “will dwell with me.” Therefore he is called Zvulun, “dwelling.” Then we have the girl Dina, and it doesn’t say why she’s called Dina. So why is she called Dina? It’s kind of obvious in Hebrew. It comes from the word judgment. It’s actually the feminine of Dan, of Dan.

Jono: Ah, okay.

Nehemia: Yes, so he already gave that explanation didn’t need to repeat it. For Dan, it gave the explanation so here it didn’t repeat it.

Jono: There it is. Verse 22, “Then God remembered Rachel...”

Keith: It’s obvious, huh Nehemia?

Jono: It’s obvious. “God remembered Rachel”? What, had he forgotten her? She’s been forgotten?

Nehemia: Whenever it says God remembers someone, it means, as Keith would say, He’s interacting with them.

Keith: Before He wasn’t interacting with them.

Nehemia: Yes, before He wasn’t, I guess.

Jono: So He’s acting on her behalf. “And she conceived and bore a son, and said, ‘God has taken away my reproach.’ So she called his name Joseph, and said, ‘The LORD shall add to me another son.’”

Nehemia: So again, that’s a double meaning. Assaf means “God has gathered my reproach,” “assaf,” “gathered.” But then also she says, “Yosef Yehovah li ben acher,” “Yehovah will add for me another son.” So the name Yosef is Yehovah adds and also gathers. What’s interesting is the two names, Judah and Joseph, if I’m not mistaken are the first two names in history, somebody correct me here if I’m wrong, the first two names in history that have Yehovah, yud hei vav, incorporated into them. With Joseph, Yosef, it’s really the full form of his name appears elsewhere in the Bible as Yehosef with the Yeho and then Yehu. Why is it Yehu and Yehuda? That’s because you have really Yeho’odeh, and the Hebrew doesn’t like two O’s in a row and that becomes a U, which is kind of like a technical thing in Hebrew. But those are the first two names already in the children of Jacob; we have Yehovah’s name incorporated into them.

Jono: That is interesting.

Keith: What’s interesting about that, Nehemia, when you brought that up, is that the obvious first reading of that you don’t see that. What we can’t smell that anywhere - not until we get into Yehoshua do we see that.

Nehemia: I see it. Maybe you don’t see it, but I see it. I mean, I don’t know.

Jono: It’s obvious, right?

[laughing]

Keith: I’m helping the people that are listening.

Nehemia: No, it actually is obvious.

Keith: Nehemia, actually you’re going to realize I’m trying to help the people that are listening. So how would a person normally... In other words, if you’re reading and you just got through saying that there were changes in the letters for Judah. Can you just say that one more time regarding the name?

Nehemia: Well, it wasn’t that there were changes. There are certain things in language that languages don’t like. When a language doesn’t like something, it makes a change within the language and within a spoken language. Like, “cannot” becomes “can’t.” It’s a contraction. It makes it easier to pronounce when you say “can’t.” So there both forms exist, cannot and can’t.

In ancient Hebrew, you have Yeho’odeh, which is “I will thank Yehovah.” Then she calls his name Yehuda. Why does she call his name Yehuda, or Yehudah, actually? Why does she call him that? Because you have these two O’s in a row and in Hebrew that causes something called dissimulation, which then creates an “oo”.

You have that in other words like, there’s a guy named Jayu or Hebrew Yehu, which is really Yeho’ou. It doesn’t become Yohoo because that just doesn’t work in Hebrew. So through dissimulation, it becomes Yehu. It’s the same sort of thing as Yehudah. You have a “oo”, which displaces the O, in certain contexts.

Jono: “And it came to pass when Rachel had...”

Keith: This was a Torah Pearl.

Nehemia: That was a Torah Pearl.

Jono: That’s a Torah Pearl.

Nehemia: It’s kind of a technical Hebrew thing.

Keith: Jono, it’s a Torah Pearl.

Jono: It’s a Torah Pearl!

Nehemia: Yes.

Jono: “...borne Joseph, that Jacob said to Laban, ‘Send me away, that I may go to my own place, to my country. Give me my wives and my children for whom I have served you and let me go; for you know that I have served my service which I have done for you.’ And Laban said to him, ‘Please stay, if I have found favor in your eyes, I have learned by experience that Yehovah has blessed me for your sake.’”

Keith: What do you mean “by experience”?

Jono: Well, obviously, things were going good.

Keith: No, not by experience. It was through divination that he learned these things.

Nehemia: It’s what he says. He says that.

Jono: You’re kidding? What does it say that?

Keith: That’s what he says.

Jono: What does it say?

Nehemia: He says, “nichashti,” “I have divined and Yehovah has blessed me because of you.”

Jono: There it is.

Nehemia: What that means “divined,” is dripped oil into a cup or he did something like that and based on that he got the message that Yehovah has blessed me because of you.

Jono: Okay.

Nehemia: He was a Pagan. Pagans divine.

Jono: He was a Pagan.

Keith: Jono, you got to catch the pearls here. This is a pearl. It’s obvious to Nehemia. It’s not obvious to the rest of us.

Nehemia: I didn’t even know that was a question in English.

Keith: You heard Jono say, “I’ve learned through experience.” No! Not through experience.

Jono: By divination.

Keith: Go ahead, Jono.

Jono: And so it goes on and he says let’s stick around because it’s all good. Jacob says, “Give me the speckled and spotted sheep, the goats that are brown, and you can have all the white ones. It’s all good.” And here we go with a little bit of experimentation with some rods. “Now Jacob took for himself rods of green poplar and of the almond and chestnut trees, peeled white strips in them, and exposed the white which was in the rods. And the rods which he had peeled, he set before the flocks in the gutters in the water troughs where the flocks came to drink, so that they should conceive when they came to drink.” And so here’s another aphrodisiac, if you like.

Nehemia: This, I have to say, is one of the most bizarre passages in the Bible. The reason it’s bizarre is it really sounds like he’s performing some kind of magic. It leaves me wondering, what on earth, why is he doing this? What is the function of these sticks? Did he believe, and it sounds like it, it sounds like he believed that putting these sticks next to the sheep while they’re copulating is going to produce certain results in how their offspring come out. That’s not true. So the question is why was he doing it? Although, to be honest...

Keith: And there’s an answer.

Nehemia: What’s the answer?

Keith: We have the answer. The answer is in what this lovely little thing I love to say which is keep reading. The answer is in chapter 31 verse 11.

Nehemia: That the angel spoke to him, is that what you’re talking about?

Keith: And he says, and he tells him, “This is what you’re going to do,” and he doesn’t explain why. What I think is amazing about it is that in reading it the first time, and I remember Nehemia and I doing a study on this, too, and trying to figure out what was it the speckled and spotted. And you try to figure out why did this happen and why did that happen? And when you get to verse 11 and it says he had a dream and it says, “And he said, ‘Lift up now your eyes and see that the male goats which are mating are striped, speckled and modeled, for I have seen all that Laban has been doing with you. I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar…’” It’s like saying, “I’m going to enter into this situation. I’m going to let you see what’s going on and then I’m going to give you an opportunity to understand it without explaining.”

Nehemia: The dream he has with the angels is actually at the end of the 20 years when he’s about to leave, because the continuation of that dream is “Now go back to the land of Canaan.” Maybe an angel spoke to him before and interacted with him on these different types of sheep and spotted and speckled.

Keith: This is my guess.

Nehemia: Okay, but that’s a guess. It could be a correct guess, but it’s not explicit in the text. It’s definitely a valid question, what on earth is he doing with these sticks? Why is he peeling little strips in them and stripes in them? I don’t have an answer.

Jono: I always thought that perhaps he was putting them into the water and there were some properties about these sticks that enhance the fertility of the sheep and the goats. I don’t know, that’s how I read it.

Nehemia: What’s the significance of cutting the stripes in them?

Jono: It sounds like that would weep into the water, maybe.

Nehemia: All right. Could be.

Jono: It’s bizarre. “Jacob heard the words of Laban’s sons saying...”

Keith: Wait, Jono, why are you moving so quickly here? This is a chance for you to increase your goat flocks now. Don’t you understand?

[laughing]

Jono: Well, you know what...

Keith: Aren’t you going to do this or not?

Jono: You know, I have to admit, I do have a...

Nehemia: I think you need to do an experiment.

Jono: I’ll tell you what, I do have an almond tree outside, and I might do some experiments. I’ll get back to you in a few months on that one. Okay.

Nehemia: Okay.

Keith: Okay. Excellent.

Jono: “Now Jacob heard the words of Laban’s sons, saying, ‘Jacob has taken away all that was our father’s, and from what was ours, and he’s acquired it for himself,’ and Jacob saw the countenance of Laban, and indeed it was not favorable toward him.” And this begins the great escape, isn’t it?

Nehemia: Yes.

Jono: He’s got to get away. Which was, of course, followed by the pursuit.

Nehemia: Can I point out one thing in verse 3?

Jono: Go on.

Nehemia: We have here Yehovah speaking to Jacob, He says, “Return the land of your father, to your birthplace.” He says, “ve’ehiyeh imach,” and “I will be with you”. That phrase “And I will be with you,” “ve’ehiyeh,” is a play on words with the name Yehovah, He that is, He that was, and He that will be. We see that later in the story of Moses, that he keeps saying, “ehiyeh imach,” “ehiyeh imacha,” “I will be with you.” That’s something you could blur by really quickly, but in Hebrew, it jumps out that “ehiyeh,” “I will be,” is connected to the Father’s name.

Keith: It refers back to what did Jacob say. He said, “Listen, we’re going to do this deal. I’m going to give you the ten percent if you’ll be with me.” It’s like him being reminded again, “Yes, ehiyeh. I will be with you.” Of course, where was He going to be with him? He told him where He was going to be with him and He’s going to bring him back to that land. It’s the circumstances, again, of humankind, what’s going on, but do we not think orchestrator, maestro’s not behind it saying, “I’m going to get you to a place where you don’t settle in and say, ‘I’m going to stay here with Laban.’ I’m going to give you the motivation and the desire to leave.” And of course, this is according to His promise anyway.

Jono: So as you pointed out, Nehemia and Keith in verse 27, Laban had learned by divination, not by experience, but by divination. And we find out that in his pursuit when he finally catches up with Jacob, who had escaped with his wives, his children, and all of his herd and flock. He catches up and he says, “Now you’ve disappeared on me, but not only that,” in verse 30, “you’ve also taken my household gods, you stole my gods.” My teraphim, I think is the word, is that correct, Nehemia?

Nehemia: Right, teraphim, or actually t’raphim, yes. The question is why did Rachel steal these t’raphim? What was she going to do with them? I guess she was going to worship them.

Jono: What else is there to do with them?

Nehemia: Some historians who have struggled with this question have suggested that the belief in the ancient world was that if you possess the t’raphim, these teraphim, these household idols, that entitled you to the birthright of inheritance from your father. But there’s really not a lot of evidence for that in any of the ancient sources, and I think that’s kind of whitewashing why she did it. I think the reason she did it is she was used to praying to them, used to offering sacrifices to them, and didn’t want to be away from their protection. I guess old habits die hard is the lesson here. Later on, there’s a scene in a future section where Jacob takes all the idols that are in his household and he buries them under a tree.

Jono: Under a tree, yeah.

Nehemia: They left the land of Paddan Aram, the city of Haran, and they were influenced there, by this Paganism. When they came back to the land of Canaan, they had to shed that off of themselves. First, they returned to the land, and it was only after they returned that they had to shed off this layer of idolatry.

Jono: And it seems that she was able to hold on to them until that point, yes?

Nehemia: Yes, well, she’s sitting on them.

Jono: She’s sitting on them, and you don’t want to go there.

Nehemia: She used the oldest excuse in the book.

Jono: Yes. “Leave me alone.”

Nehemia: “I cannot get up in your presence because the way of women is to me.” We’ve heard that excuse before.

Jono: Yup. Keith?

[laughing]

Keith: Continue.

Jono: Continue?

Keith: Quickly. Quickly, Jono.

[laughing]

Jono: That’s probably what Laban thought, and he was out of there. Anyways, she got to keep them. “Laban answered and said to Jacob,” this is verse 43, “‘These daughters are my daughters, these are my children, this is my flock; everything you see is mine. But what can I do this day to these my daughters or to their children whom they have borne? Now, therefore, come, let us make a covenant, you and I, and let it be a witness between you and me.’” He gets a great stone and he sets it up as a pillar and then everyone sort of throws a whole lot of stones around it, makes it into a big heap, and Jacob calls it Galeed.

Nehemia: This is actually one of the most interesting verses in the Torah, verse 47 of Genesis chapter 31, and I’ll translate it literally. It says, “And Lavan called it Jegar Sahadutha and Jacob called it Galeed.” Now, what’s interesting about this is that Jegar Sahadutha and Galeed have the exact same meaning, except Jegar Sahadutha is Aramaic and Galeed is Hebrew.

Jono: That is interesting.

Nehemia: Galeed means “pile witness.” Gal is a pile of stones. And Jegar Sahadutha is “pile testimony”. They have, actually, not the exact same meaning, but a very similar meaning. This is the first time that we’re hearing somebody speak a foreign language, and that foreign language here is Aramaic, which makes sense because Laban lived in the city of Haran, which today is on the border of Turkey and Syria on the Euphrates River. The region that Haran was located in was called Paddan Aram. “Aram” is the word Aramaic, that’s where you get the word “Aramaic.” They had originally come from the city of Ur, which was in the land of Aram-Naharaim, Aram between the two rivers. That is what we call today Mesopotamia in Iraq between the Euphrates and the Tigris Rivers.

So they come from Aram-Naharaim, Aram between the two rivers, and they go to Paddan Aram, and Lavan still speaks that foreign language of the Aramaic language, of Aramea, whereas, Abraham is now speaking the language of, really, of his ancestors, which is the Hebrew, Ivrit, the language of Ever, the son of Shem. That was the original language before the flood, before the Tower of Babel. Whereas Aramaic is this bastardized form of Hebrew. It’s a form of Hebrew that was created at the Tower of Babel. It’s kind of a corrupt Hebrew. It has a lot of similarities, but it’s different enough where they can actually call it by a different name.

Keith: And with that, we’re going to end our Torah portion.

[laughing]

Jono: We’re not ending it there, Keith. I know you want to add something to that, surely.

Keith: No, no, I’m just joking. Can people understand why this has been so amazing to me? Here I’ve had ten years with Nehemia as a friend and as a study partner. He’s a walking treasure of pearls in the Torah chest. I just have to tell you, it’s been such a blessing.

Nehemia: Well, I think there’s also a paradigm here that we see later in Scripture, when Jeremiah, in chapter 10, has a prophecy for the Gentiles. He all of a sudden switches over to Aramaic, and he actually says that prophecy in Aramaic. What we see here in the paradigm, is that Jacob and his descendants speak Hebrew; the language of the Gentiles is Aramaic. That’s something we see repeatedly. We see that later also in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah. Aramaic becomes the language that they communicate to the Gentiles and with Aramaic letters…

Jono: It’s got to be significant. All right, we are rapidly running out of time, but I’m going to jump ahead to verse 53, “The God of Abraham, the God of Nahor, and the God of their father judge between us.” Jacob says to Laban. “And Jacob swore by the fear of his father Isaac.” What does that mean? What does it mean “to swear by the fear of his father?”

Nehemia: Well, fear is another way of saying “worship.” So Isaac’s worship of his God, of the God of Abraham.

Jono: Okay, good enough. And so he makes a covenant with Laban. And then finally Laban departed and returned to his place. That’s all over. We can move on. Here we are in a couple of verses by which the Torah portion ends, and it’s kind of odd. I want you guys to explain this to me. It says, “So Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him” - G’day, Jacob. “When Jacob saw them, he said, ‘This is God’s camp.’” I mean it sounds like a camp of angels; it sounds like a whole bunch of them. “And he called the name of that place,” what do we call that?

Nehemia: Mahanaim. Which is very interesting because Mahanaim means “the two camps”. So what were the two camps? I guess the one camp was the camp with the angels, and the other was Jacob’s camp, presumably. Or maybe there were two camps of God’s angels. I don’t know.

Jono: Perhaps.

Keith: All right.

Jono: That’s all we have to say on that one. You’re not going to elaborate there?

Nehemia: That’s all I got for now.

[laughing]

Keith: It’s the end of the portion.

Jono: It’s the end of the portion.

Nehemia: Well, I mean there’s stuff to talk about in the next verse, but then we’ll get to that next week.

You have been listening to The Original Torah Pearls with Nehemia Gordon, Keith Johnson and Jono Vandor. Thank you for supporting Nehemia Gordon’s Makor Hebrew Foundation. Learn more at NehemiasWall.com.

We hope the above transcript has proven to be a helpful resource in your study. While much effort has been taken to provide you with this transcript, it should be noted that the text has not been reviewed by the speakers and its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. If you would like to support our efforts to transcribe the teachings on NehemiasWall.com, please visit our support page. All donations are tax-deductible (501c3) and help us empower people around the world with the Hebrew sources of their faith!

SUPPORT NEHEMIA'S RESEARCH AND TEACHINGS!
Makor Hebrew Foundation is a 501c3 tax-deductible not for profit organization.

Subscribe to "Nehemia Gordon" on your favorite podcast app!
Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | 
Amazon Music
 | TuneIn
Pocket Casts | Podcast Addict | CastBox | iHeartRadio | Podchaser
 | Pandora

Share this Teaching on Social Media
Related Posts: Prophet Pearls - Vayeitzei (Hosea 12:12-14:9) Torah and Prophet Pearls Hebrew Voices Episodes Support Team Studies Nehemia Gordon's Teachings on the Name of God
  • Shirley says:

    So, if Aramaic is a corruption of Hebrew, and for Gentiles, why did Jesus speak Aramaic? Or did He?

  • shell says:

    I had been thinking about this recently, about when rachael gives her handmade to jacob to obtain children by her, and the same with sarai and hagar, and theres a verse that came to me:

    Exo 21: v4. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself.

    Do you think its possible that this is the legal means by which rachael obtains children?

    Oh, and about the mandrakes, if its of a sexual nature like that, and reuben knows how to find them, maybe that could be connected to reuben going up to his fathers bed?

  • Sonuahua Compton says:

    Concerning the streaked sticks, I like Jonah, have always assumed this, (as well as the mandrakes) concerned the medicinal properties in the wood to increase health and maybe the fertility and verility of the flocks, Laban filtered out all the specked before delivering them to Jacob as a deception. Jacob enriched the water for all the flock initially, but then separated the flocks as they reproduced and then only enriched the water of the ringstraked and spotted. He cared for all of them but only gave the Ovaltine to the speckled/etc to ramp up their health and wellbeing (supercharged).. so the solid were weaker, less likely to bring forth young (the term slow swimmers comes to mind).. eventually the best part of the Flock would be spotted. its not that he treated Laban’s badly, he just treated his own better…

  • Sonuahua Compton says:

    I wonder concerning instead of a Dateline where something is wrong or right, perhaps it is more of a wisdom line, where we should not only learn from our experience but also the experience of others, using discernment and wisdom… Perhaps if we could do that it would not be as necessary to make a commandment.. like the warning labels on McDonalds coffee “caution this is hot!” if we used discernment and wisdom the label would not be necessary. but because we don’t think, wisdom is downgraded to knowledge that we must learn from reading labels. My train of thought is that this is what Adam and Challah did in the garden .. was to exchange wisdom for knowledge..

  • Sonuahua Compton says:

    I understand paying daily especially during that time, a great many peoplelive day to day, if you wait a week to pay one who needs to buy daily bread, they may well become sick or starve and not return and you got free labor at the expense of a human.

  • Paige says:

    It is my first time to know that Aramaic is from Ur. Then Aramaic is the language of hometown of Abraham? Then Abraham speak Herews in Ur?
    God made Isreal to speak Aramic to gentiles. Then will the situation be turned back that the gentile speak herews to Isreal?

  • Victor Eubank says:

    Isn’t God declaring that wherever He is, with those He is enter-acting, that is a holy place?

  • Julie Gilbreath says:

    The NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible is helpful for understanding Genesis 34.

  • ann graham says:

    My view is there was never a marriage contract between leah and Jacob or their slave girls. the contract was with Rachel only. Rachel is the rightful wife, they was as good as married when Jacob and laban struck the 7 year deal. That is why leah says to Rachel later you took my husband, she is referring to their traditions. concubines.

    • Meira Montgomery says:

      Ann, originally the Contract was only with Rachel even after Jacob layed with Leah. Leah would be only a concubine. However, Jacob accepted the second marriage contract because Jacob got swindled by his father-in-law Laban and decided to work for Rachel twice. Whether the Contract is a lie and not fair is irevelant, it is still a Contract agreed by both parties. Ignorance doesn’t preclude you from a Contract. That is why there are so many Sheister Lawyers inside our Government and Country, because they can get away with murder.

  • donald murphy says:

    talking about joining himself to the God of Israel. how can he do that while following the Roman Empires religion(christianty)?

    • Meira Montgomery says:

      Your Churches won’t let you, since they dont want to believe that the Jewish sons of God are God’s children anymore. According to God in the Bible, He Sais, “my son Isaac is my firstborn.” Then He Said, I love Israel and Hate Esav, my lawless son. This is why the churches are in ignorant of so many things. Some Jews have it wrong also, but in this matter of not letting their people be part of God’s Holy Contract is a Gentile belief. You would have to convert and or become a Messianic Jew.

  • donald murphy says:

    they r wrong about not having more then 1 wive. a man can marry sisters. look at david or soloman and how many wives they may have had. the man would have to be wealthy.

    • Meira Montgomery says:

      Rachel, Leah, Raquel, Sarah, etc., came from a nation of Idolterers. The only reason Isaac told Jacob to get wives from his father’s house in Paran-Aram is that he knew the women we’re very submissive there. Like the Muslum women in todays society. Remember all their wives fathers even Sarah’s father had several Gods. The law of one wife came from our God, because God Told this to Moses in the marriage Contract to Marriages. The only exception of another wife was if a woman could not have a child. David and Solomon were major sinners. David got punished for it and so did Solomon. In their case, because they were Kings the whole Nation of Israel suffered reprocutions. Eve was Adam’s only wife even after their fall from Eden.

  • donald murphy says:

    all great comments.

  • Mary Davis says:

    great Pearls….I think the entire Powerful take Away for me: if you get it dishonestly, you wont keep it. Yehovah will see to that. Very comforting.

  • David says:

    Here’s my quandary. Jacob was 130 years old when he went to Egypt and Joseph was 39. This makes Jacob 91 when Joseph was born, at the end of the second period of seven years. Jacob was then 84 when he married Rachel and Leah, which explains why he may have needed the mandrakes. I’m confused though? Reuben could not have been more than four or five years old yet he is out in the field gathering mandrakes? How can he do that when he is so young?

  • Gnarlodious says:

    Regarding Genesis 30:37-43, it is not as superstitious as it seems. Jacob uses knowledge of aspirin in the willow bark (Salix caprea) to counteract Laban’s cheating. Aspirin is a curative for many diseases and a fertility enhancer. Coccidiosis is a disease most common in lambs aged four to eight weeks old and it is not common in animals over three months old. A 2004 thesis by Eileen McWilliam entitled “The Effect of Poplar (Populus spp.) and Willow (Salix spp.) Supplementation on the Reproductive Performance of Ewes Grazing Low Quality Drought Pasture During Mating” by the Institute of Veterinary, Animal and Biomedical Sciences in Palmerston North, New Zealand showed “poplar supplementation increasing ewe reproductive rate by approximately 20%”. The same study states: “One of the unexpected results of the experiments was an average 34% reduction in post-natal lamb mortality over three years, due to willow/poplar supplementation of ewes during mating”. Impressive numbers, 20% more births with 34% less mortality would have given Jacob a huge advantage. Jacob would have also used his knowledge of selective breeding to visibly and obviously mark which were his.

    • Thomas Garza says:

      Quite interesting. Thanks for sharing as I tire of the inference of some kind of magic in this instance.

    • Steve says:

      very interesting

    • Juan says:

      Finally a sense comment, Yehovah blessing was , is and will be acknowledged, since the first book first story was teaching us how nature works . All patriarch blessing was acknowledge , Abraham Isaac Yackov , Joseph, Moses , David, Salomon, Daniel and the other tree were blessed with acknowledge of how nature works, ( Science) . Science is the acknowledge of how nature works , that reject any religion , usually the lack of Understanding of Nature is what people call Gods ,

      When we completely remove all the religious thoughts our mind will understand the civilized way of Torah instructions.

  • Joy Mathew says:

    The prophet pearls was so powerful especially the part YHVH will heal , depending on ones intention and I thought this was what YHVH did when he changed Jacob’s name to Israel . The most important part is when he buried all the pagan idols and ear rings under the oak tree and that is when YHVH heals Jacob

  • When Joseph becomes ruler in Egypt, he is 30. When he brings his father to Egypt there are still 5 years of famine making him 39 (30+7+2). Jacob tells Pharaoh he is 130 making Jacob about 91 years older than Joseph. Joseph was born at the end of the 14 years of servitude to Laban for the two sisters. This means Jacob was around 77 years old when he stole Esau’s blessing, ran to Haran and met Rachel at the well. Did teenage maiden Rachel really want to marry such an old man? Incidentally, Jacob still outlived both sisters.

    Do we really think Jacob was a virgin at 77? He is the son of a wealthy man with hundreds of servants(slaves). We know he didn’t have a wife back in Canaan, but might he have had concubines and thus children by those concubines?

    Laban was an adult when Rachel left to go be Isaac’s wife and Jacob was not born for at least another 20 years. Laban had to be at least 120 (or more) when Jacob showed up and began the 20 years of work. I love the thought of 97 year old Jacob running across the land, with a 3 day head start, trying to stay ahead of 140 year old Laban bearing down on him. Do you think they walked with canes at their advanced age?

    The trip back to Canaan took a while so Jacob was nearing 100 at this point. He then wrestles down in the sand with God, and prevails! at almost 100 years old?

    There is an indication of why both Abraham and Isaac sent their sons back to Haran for wives from their own family. They were breeding. Abraham was called a mighty prince. Why? Not just because of his wealth (that’s the prince part) but because he was truly a mighty person. How could Abram with only 318 men of his own house (Abram lived in tents so this phrase probably means these men of his house were his direct descendants, via concubines) take on and defeat four kings with their armies? Yes, YHVH was with him but also Abram and his sons were big, strong, mighty men.

    Jacob was not only long lived but also very big and strong. He showed up at the watering well and they told him they couldn’t move the stone off the well until everyone gathered together (it took lots of men working together to move the stone) yet 77 year old Jacob performs this great feat of strength and does it by himself. Why didn’t Rebecca want her sons to marry Hittites? Because they were small, weak, short-lived people who would produce more of the same. Isaac and Rebecca wanted their sons to breed with big, strong, long-lived people and have children like themselves and the only place to find such women was in their own family back in Haran. It was a breeding program, and herdsmen like Abraham and Isaac understood about breeding.

    • Correction, Abraham did not send his son to Haran to get a wife, he sent to Haran for a wife for his son. A wife was the mother of an heir while a concubine was not. Isaac surely was not a virgin at 40 years old when Abraham sent home for a wife. Isaac must have had concubines by then.

  • As concerning the happening of Jacob getting Leah first. A couple of plausable explanations were put forth concerning marrying sisters etc. One comes to mind that was left out, yet the concept concerns the a critical redemptive thread, and that being the kinsman redeemer. Most folks I’ve encountered being spiritually minded, will except somewhat flippantly, the concept of “the soulmate” or that Yahovah is or should be directly envolved with choosing our prospective mates and if so,,,, the rather unknown legalities concerning this thing of soulmates and the resultant kinsman redeeming legalities, just may make a glaring appearance here in Jacobs life and as Brother Gordon (yes, I also believe that Nehemiah is a child of Almighty Father) points out, some things are just plain and open to those who have eyes to see. Again, applicable here? Consider this brothers; Jacobs elder brother married outside the parameters of Torah which is actually from everlasting, to the heartbreak of his parents. So if we hold that God has a mate for him somewhere, she is now left out in the lurch and if God Almighty will follow up with her, He will have to make some kind of “plan B” for her. Enter Jacob!!! The trickery of substituting the gals was, behind the scenes, God raising up children to Jacobs elder brother (now “dead” as far as Almighty God is concerned) according to the Torah law of the Kinsman Redeemer. Leah is actually Esaus’s true mate and Revkah is Jacob’s true mate. Still,,, things got messed up and convoluted through ignorance of what God was doing but Yahovah was and is working righteousness behind the scenes if we only have eyes to see! I believe that the law of kinsman redeemer is what was going on here and yet the particulars down through the ages of time seem far past finding out! These things will clear up a lot of issues we “wonder” about, such as; could Ruth the so called Moabite actually be a Hebrew decendent because of the prophets evil council to King Balek? These things are wonderous to consider, are they not? For most sadly, they will not ever stir a slight register. Blessing to all, me

  • Mandy says:

    I’m leaving a comment because you askwd us to…..
    So i would have to say that without a doubt in my 35 odd years of following YHVH , your teaching is next to none for history, context and language!!!!!!
    I can’t wait for new ones to be released every week and I love long car trips!
    I trvelled 7 hours (3.5 either way) every Sunday for a couple of months and listened with avid attention.
    I love how other scriptures just pop into my head as I’m listening. Witness after witness.
    I love how the pause button is so efficient in working so that I can veer off in a search of meaty matters to sink my teeth into and most of all, i love that at the end of the day that you don’t draw conclusions….unless the text says to…..you just present the information and let us draw our own conclusions.
    I discovered you guys just 3 short years ago and I am stoked (Aussie idiom meaning thrilled) to be a partner and supporter of this amazing ministry that YHVH has entrusted you with.
    SHALOM.

  • Sandra Young says:

    Vayeitzei
    Nehemia–Today I was listening to Torah Pearls, recorded last year. You were talking about Jacob’s treatment of his animals in Genesis 30:37-42. I have some thoughts on that. I am a traditional physician, but believe that our healing is supposed to come from every herb yielding seed and every tree which has fruit yielding seed. (Gen 1:29) and not from drug companies. I also believe that the Torah is wisdom, and therefore contains truths for healing that have been suppressed.
    Based on the passage, it appears that there are several healing properties in those branches. Peeling white stripes in them would release compounds that gave the animals the desire and ability to mate. So it would release an aphrodisiac, not only giving the desire but also the ability. It would strengthen joints, as the animals have to have strong legs and backs in order to mate. It would increase the ability to reproduce, most likely affecting hormone levels. It would also improve the mood of the animals. In humans, this would manifest as an aphrodisiac, an antidepressant, fertility agent, healing of arthritic joints (not just covering up the pain). There are probably other benefits you could name as well. Deer are known to strip the bark on trees, not just in the winter when there is nothing else to eat. So there is something there that they are seeking in their diet.
    Do you know what modern-day plants are represented in this passage—the poplar, almond and plane trees—as listed in the NASB. I would like to research them.
    Sandra Young MD
    Nov 29, 2014

  • David Despotovski says:

    Shalom haverim!

    I want to share a Torah pearl. 🙂
    Lea 3 times give names to her sons because YHVH saw HER, heard HER, HER husband will get close to HER, i. e. she is focused and preoccupied with herself, but somehow she realizes that is better to PRAISE YHVH so she names her 4th son, Yehuda. She is suddenly preoccupied with and focused on YHVH.
    So she is kinda an examle for us that there is better point to praise YHVH, than to be focused on our self.
    P.s. If it’s obvious to you why did she do that, please share 😀

    YHVH IMMAHEM!!!

  • David Espenlaub says:

    Thank you so much for the wonderful insights into the Inspired Word.
    It seemed like we rushed over v31:53 where ‘wordhip’ can be translated ‘fear’. Is this common usage or a special instance. Many people stumble over the command to fear Him, but if it is correct to understand this to mean worship Him…then it’s very clear.