Difficult Family Dynamics...

Torah Study with Rabbi Marder 23 June 2012 

Aviva Zornberg, Genesis.  The Beginning of Desire (Pages 207-208).  Jacob is first lover in bible, an all-consuming love of Rachel, not just from marriage as was the relationship between Isaac and Rebecca (24:67).  But that love is complicated by presence of Leah, Bilhah, and Zilpah.  The “love” has elements of taboo, a passion, a feeling that love is almost illicit in a polygamous household.

“[Jacob] will love [Rachel] but his love will generate jealousy and hatred in his household, now and in generations to come. And ultimately, they will be buried apart. “The knowledge that full unity cannot be achieved is like a sword between.  It is in this sense that Jacob is the first lover in the Torah in the European, romantic sense, in which a central components of passion is unattainability.  From the tales of courtly love, knightly adventures engaged in for the sake of the beloved, a notion of self-validation through love has emerged. Prominent in such tales is the theme of the impossible, even, illicit, love, whose fire burns stronger for the taboo.  Both themes—work for the sake of love and frustration as a catalyst of passion – inform the story of Jacob and Rachel.”

Norman Cohen, Self, Struggle & Change, (page 137, referencing Alter, page 186). Rachel’s demands mirror those of Leah and others as a literary theme.  For Rachel’s barrenness, Jacob blames God and is callous to his wife.  The barrenness causes tension in the household.

“Until now, we know … nothing of Rachel’s feelings.  Perhaps she is totally devoid of them … Yet having experienced the birth of her sisters’ four sons, and realizing that she has not provided Jacob with any children, she became envious of Leah and demanded of her husband, ‘give me children or I shall die’ [30:1].  All Rachel can see is that her sister is fertile and presented her husband with four sons, and that as a result, her relationship with Jacob is in jeopardy. If we did not know better, we might have thought that it was Leah who mouthed these words.  Here Rachel sounds just like her sister prior toe birth f her children.  Rachel, too, seems insecure, jealous and self-deprecating.  Only through bearing children can she feel whole and fulfilled.”

• 30:2. And Jacob became angry with Rachel, and he said, "Am I instead of God, Who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?"
• Ramban cites Midrash Rabbah, where Jacob is rebuked.  An example of what should be in the Torah: Jacob should not have been so callous to Rachel.

Genesis Midrash Rabbah 71:6 [including footnotes in Kleinman edition]

Ramban Blinder, Yaakov.  The Torah: With Ramban’s Commentary Translated, Annotated, and Elucidated.  Bereishis/Genesis Volumes 1, II.  Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications. 2004.

The midrash reprimands Jacob for his sharp response to Rachel.  He was oblivious to her true intent, to have Jacob pray for her.  Abraham also did not comprehend Sarah’s underlying motive in 16:2 to cohabit with Hagar; Sarah really wanted Abraham to pray for her.  Abraham complied with her request but Sarah was not rebuked. What prompted Jacob’s response?  The Midrash imagines the following conversation [reading this with a Yiddish accent makes it fun but belies its seriousness]. Rachel: did you father Isaac not pray with great intensity for your mother Rebecca? Jacob: I am not like my father.  He did not have sons and I do. Rachel: But your grandfather had sons with Hagar and still Abraham prayed for Sarah to have children.  [Actually, there is no proof text for this, but the sages argue that this must have happened because Abraham was so righteous]. Jacob: Can you do what my grandmother did? Rachel: What did she do? Jacob: She brought her rival wife [Hagar] in the house, an unusual merit [to carry on Abraham’s line] Rachel: Then I offer my handmaiden Bilhah with which you may consort.

Jacob’s rebuke was for Rachel’s manner of requesting the he pray for her [not the request itself]. It is inconceivable that Jacob would not pray for Rachel, who he loved dearly, but was barren.  He did pray but God did not accept the prayer.  After Rachel complained about his lack of success [a less intense prayer?], he responded sharply that acceptance or rejection of prayer was in God’s hands, not his.  Isaac’s prayer for Rebecca was successful because of Isaac’s righteousness, suggesting that Isaac was more righteous than Jacob.  Furthermore, God had already promised that Abraham’s legacy would be carried out by Isaac and Jacob; Jacob already had that legacy through Leah.

Akedat Yitzhak (Isaac ben Moses Arama, 15th century Spain) – two dimensions of womanhood [see below and Isaiah 56:5 above at 16 June 2012] Rachel shouldn’t reduce herself to a childbearing machine.  People have other claims to identity than just being a mother or father.	The first, which teaches that woman was taken from man, stresses that, like him, she may understand and advance in the intellectual and moral fields.  This was evidenced in the matriarchs, other prophetesses and in many righteous women, and it reflects the literal meaning of Proverbs 31 about the ‘woman of valor’ (eshet chayil).  The second alludes to the power of child bearing and rearing, as is indicated by the name of Eve – the mother of all living. A woman deprived of the secondary power of childbearing will be deprived [only] of the secondary purpose but will be left with the ability to do evil or good, just like a man, who is barren” [italics added].  Yaakov expressed anger toward Rachel “in order to reprimand her and make her understand this all-important principle – that she was not dead as far as their joint purpose in life simply because she was childless, just as it would be true in his case if he had been childless”
The Akeidat Yitzchak (Rav Yitchak Arama of the 15th century), speaks compellingly of the need for women to contribute to the world in roles beyond that of mothering. Indeed, he remarks that Yaakov’s angry response to Rachel’s “Give me children or else I die” (Genesis 30:1) can be explained in the following way: “The two names – ‘woman’ (isha = from man) and ‘Eve’ (chava = mother of life) – indicate two purposes.
Akeidat Yitzchak, Breishit Sha’ar 9. English Translation by Nehama Leibowitz, New Studies in Bereshit, Jerusalem, Israel. p. 334); as cited in http://klalperspectives.org/abby-lerner/ accessed 24 June 2012.

• Aviva Zornberg [The Beginning of Desire, pages 209-210] – anger replaced fulfillment  (a love triangle).  Frustration and denial drive Jacob and Rachel’s passions.
• Jacob loves Rachel; Rachel wants children; Leah loves Jacob. Jacob loves Leah less; [no indication of Rachel loving Jacob.]  In other words, each of the three characters compulsively desires something the other has.
• Paraphrasing Rashi and midrash: emotionally, poverty and childlessness are two conditions akin to death.  The result is often a paradox of desire and frustration.

	Desire	Frustration	Resolution
Jacob	Prosperity	Poverty	Works for Laban and becomes prosperous
Rachel	Children	Barrenness	Surrogate wife in Bilhah; successful prayer for fertility
Leah	For Jacob to love her	Jacob’s apparent indifference; he loves Rachel more.	Expresses gratitude to God (not Jacob) for fertility,

• 30:3. So she said, "here is my maidservant Bilhah; come to her, and she will bear [children] on my knees, so that I, too, will be built up from her." 

A child placed on mother’s knees is sign of his/her legitimacy, in this case, when Rachel’s child is placed on Jacob’s knee, paternity is established.  The practice was widespread in the ancient [Mediterranean] world, such as the Hittite culture, Greece, Rome [Nahum Sarna, JPS Torah Commentary.  Genesis, page 207].

• Other places in bible where child is placed on or near the knees: Genesis 48:12, Genesis 50:23, Job 3:12.
• Knees are regenerative members – perhaps a euphemism for sexual organs or procreative power.  Since Bilhah was a surrogate mother, this symbolic gesture was appropriate [Sarna].
• Latin for “knee” is “genu” or “genuflect,” from which is derived “genuine.”
• “…so that I, too, will be built up from her" means that Rachel will no longer be dead.  Some relate וְאִבָּנֶה, from בנה, the root for build or stone, to בנים children.
• Women’s Torah Commentary, page 166 on “here is my maidservant Bilhah” 
• “Rachel performs a kind of imitative magic:” get Bilhah pregnant so that Rachel will get pregnant, like symbolic act of pouring water on the ground to cause rainfall.  In effect, Bilhah would become an extension of Rachel’s body.  Surrogates, parents, and midwives work together as a collective female effort to procreate
• Another way of seeing this phenomenon is that it’s a shameless method of exploiting the servants’ bodies.
• In Margaret Atwood A Handmaiden’s Tale, this verse is in frontispiece.
• Plot summary: "In the world of the near future, who will control women's bodies? Offred is a Handmaid in the Republic of Gilead. She may leave the home of the Commander and his wife once a day to walk to food markets whose signs are now pictures instead of words because women are no longer allowed to read. She must lie on her back once a month and pray that the Commander makes her pregnant, because in an age of declining births, Offred and the other Handmaids are only valued if their ovaries are viable. Offred can remember the days before, when she lived and made love with her husband Luke; when she played with and protected her daughter; when she had a job, money of her own, and access to knowledge. But all of that is gone now.... " [from http://www.luminarium.org/contemporary/atwood/handmaid.htm, accessed 24 June 2012]
• Genesis 30:1-3 is one of several passages that make clear that in patriarchal Hebrew times it was perfectly legitimate for a man to have sex and even beget children by his servants (slaves), particularly if his wife was infertile. It is unknown how widespread was the custom described here, of having the infertile wife embrace the fertile maidservant as she gave birth to symbolize that the baby is legally hers. Atwood extrapolates outrageously from this point, as is typical of dystopian writers: it is highly unlikely that the puritanical religious right would ever adopt the sexual practices depicted in this novel; but she is trying to argue that patriarchal traditions which value women only as fertility objects can be as demeaning as modern customs which value them as sex objects [from http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/science_fiction/handmaid.html accessed 24 June 2012]
• 30:4. So she gave him her maidservant Bilhah for a wife, and Jacob came to her.
• Is Bilhah a wife (אִשָּׁה) or a concubine (פִּילֶגֶשׁ)? The difference is that the latter has no bride price.
• In this verse, she’s a “wife;” in 35:22, she’s a “concubine.”  
• Nahum Sarna [JPS Torah Commentary. Genesis, page 208] - over time, the two statuses became effaced, because the terms appear to be interchangeable.

30:5 And Bilhah conceived, and she bore Jacob a son.  30:6 And Rachel said, "God has judged me, and He has also hearkened to my voice and has given me a son"; so she named him Dan.

• Rachel names the new son Dan.  This name is derived from dayan, judge.
• Rashi on “God has acquitted and forgiven her:”  He judged me, declared me guilty, and then declared me innocent. — [From Genesis Rabbah 71:7].
Commentary to the Midrash (71:7, citing Eitz Yosef) further states that although Rachel claims Dan to be her son, it was really Bilhah’s and Rachel remained barren.  However, because Rachel raised the child in effect, he’s Rachel’s.  Hence the wording, “[He] has given me a son.”
• The word, “Jacob” is prominent in the sentence so as to emphasize Bilhah bore a son to Jacob and that there is no doubt of paternity, as might be the case with a handmaiden’s pregnancy. [Sarna, page 208]

30:7 And Bilhah, Rachel's maidservant, conceived again and bore Jacob a second son. 30:8 And Rachel said, "[With] divine bonds I have been joined to my sister; I have also prevailed"; so she named him Naftali.

• The name Naftali, נַפְתָּלִי,is from the root פתל. There are various translations of 30:8, suggesting that there is no consensus on the meaning of this root.
• 
  
• Why are we told that Bilhah is Rachel’s maidservant again?  To demonstrate that Bilhah remained a respectful servant after giving birth as a surrogate parent, unlike Hagar.
• This is real-life story about dysfunction, not a fairy tale of romanticism.  The relationships among the parties are not idyllic.  In literature, there are few stories (if any) about perfectly functioning families; if there were no problems or abnormalities in the family, there would be no plot (Tolstoy).

Naomi Rosenblatt, Wrestling With Angels, page 279.  Neither Rachel nor Leah feels “whole.”  People who look great on the outside are unknown on the inside; healthy skepticism is warranted.  Jacob thinks he has a good thing going; but his wives think otherwise, they do not want to be locked into a single role.

People today “grapple with the same dichotomies of female identity [beauty-homely; barren-fertile; lover-mother] … Each is miserable because she covets what the other possesses.  Neither feels whole.” “One certain recipe for unhappiness, as we learn from Rachel and Leah, is to constantly measure ourselves unfavorably against other women who appear to have it all.  When imagining the happiness and contentment levels that other people enjoy, a bit of healthy skepticism is warranted.  The story of Rachel and Leah also teaches us that when we typecast ourselves within a relationship, we’re asking for trouble. No woman wants to be pigeonholed exclusively as mother or lover, careerist or housewife.  Every mistress craves a family of her own, and every matron dreams of a romantic weekend getaway awash in flowers and her mate’s undivided attention.  Likewise, no man wants to be identified merely as a good provider of simply as a sexual athlete.  We all want the flexibility to in inhabit a variety of personas,” something achievable sequentially, not simultaneously, with today’s long life spans.

Today, the dichotomies are primarily motherhood vs career; naturally full-bodied vs unnaturally slim; needs of children vs needs of spouse or community.  Such choices are not supposed to be agonizing, but a way to count blessings of the current age.

• What about Bilhah?   After Dan [and presumably Naftali] was born, Rachel held him, washed him, sang to him; all the while imagining that the boy knew who was his real (biological) mother.  She feared that some day, Dan would return to his slave mother and leave Rachel alone. 
“Can you imagine Bilhah’s eyes as she watched Rachel wash her own infant?  A slave is a slave and cannot change the course of events, but she must know pain.  There is no way that a slave cannot long for her own flesh and blood, and bitter she must have been the moment she place him on Rachel’s lap.”  [Anne Roiphe, Water from the Well, pages 213-214]