פרשת ויצא תשכ"א - חלום יעקב

And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south. And in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee whithersoever thou goest, and will bring thee back into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.’

Bereshit Rabbah 68 relates a strange parable. Jacob is asleep, angels ascending and descending the ladder. He is compared to a baby sleeping in its crib. The crib is surrounded by flies. When the baby's nursemaid arrives the flies scatter. Similarly, the angels scatter as soon as G-d appears on top of the ladder. Just as there are times when our imagination has to discount or even ignore its own figments, such as when the latter cannot be reconciled with reality, so our mind and our logic sometimes have to ignore their own conclusions when confronted with the more absolute truths that G-d reveals to His chosen from time to time, and such as the entire Jewish people experienced at Mount Sinai. Were it not a demonstrable fact, we could never imagine that the antipodes do not fall off the face of the earth, since our imagination is limited to matters our senses have experienced. This is so in spite of the fact that we can combine in our imagination things that could never be combined in real life. We can draw a horse with wings, because we know what a horse is and we know what wings are. We cannot, however, imagine the power of gravity, it being something that cannot be demonstrated in our world in a manner recognizable by our senses. Similarly, the criteria employed even by the most understanding minds may prove faulty when coming face to face with the superior logic of the Almighty. The prophets Samuel and Nathan are good examples of great minds being deceived. Samuel would have chosen Eliav as Saul's successor, since he belonged to the right family and possessed the physical attributes that distinguished Saul, whose physical attributes had been a factor in his selection as king. Samuel had to be reminded that whereas he looked only at the exterior, it was reserved for G-d to look into the heart of a person. At that particular time, physical attributes no longer mattered in the choice (Samuel I Chapters 10 and 16). Our so called logic is capable of rendering a distorted view of reality just as the eye that beholds an object partially submerged in water observes distortions in the shape of such object, though in reality such distortions have not occurred. The prophet Nathan's first reaction to David when the latter expressed the wish to build a temple, was affirmative. He had to be told by G-d that David was not the one who would be permitted to do this, but that his son Solomon would be chosen for that task. Here too, Nathan's mind without G-d’s revelation to him was inadequate to its task. In fact, G-d describes the very idea that it could have been David who would build the temple as quite inconceivable, seeing he had been a man of bloodshed (Chronicles I Chapter 22). Since the words that David was a man of bloodshed are put in his own mouth, i.e. are not reported as the reason given to Nathan by G-d, we can infer that Nathan's entire thought process was considered as faulty. David's request was perfectly reasonable; it was the prophet's reaction based on reasoning of a purely human nature that was faulty (compare version in Samuel II Chapter 7). In Kings I Chapter 22, we find another example of a prophet being misled by his own mind. It is clear then that the conclusions arrived at by a human mind need confirmation of its findings by G-d before they can be considered reliable. Our sages tell us that when Yitro advised his son-in-law Moses about the kind of judiciary system Moses was to introduce, he told him to consult with G-d in order to obtain confirmation. "If the Lord will so command you, you will be able to endure" (Exodus 18,23). If the unreliability of our mind is a fact concerning matters that the mind has been specifically equipped to deal with, how much more is this true when the mind is confronted by heavenly visions, to understand which it even lacks basic yardsticks? Moses asked G-d to provide him with such yardsticks, but was told that the human intellect must subordinate itself to heavenly instructions to the point where we apply the words of Isaiah 55,8, "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are My ways your ways." Quite frequently this may result in objective truth being the very reverse of what we think it is. Sometimes, the very willingness to subordinate one's mind makes that mind receptive to matters undreamed of. Jacob is an example of such an attitude. After his dream, he was able to exclaim, "Indeed the Lord is in this place, although such a thought had been furthest from my mind" (Genesis 28,16 approx). This newfound insight had been contradicted by Jacob's thought processes on several accounts. A) The assumption that G-d is subject to physical dimensions as we humans use the term had been quite alien to Jacob. He was amazed to learn that G-d has a permanent residence on earth. B) The idea that G-d moves from place to place accompanying people, would never have occurred to him, had this fact not been revealed to him. C) The thought that G-d’s movements, as it were, could be brought about by outside influences, i.e. were not completely self-induced, had likewise been beyond Jacob's wildest imagination. In theology, the points just mentioned were thought completely impossible; Jacob would not have dared think of the Creator in those terms. G-d did not mean to demolish the theories Jacob had believed in; He wanted merely to broaden Jacob's spiritual horizons. The concept of hashgachah peratit, personal Providence by G-d, was the idea conveyed to Jacob in his dream. Philosophy, though it succeeds in arriving at many valid conclusions about G-d, about His uniqueness, His existence etc., nevertheless misses a great deal, as discussed in Chapter seven and forty-eight. Isaiah Chapter 66 verse 1 summarizes the lesson Jacob was taught in his dream in the following words, "Thus says the Lord; the heavens are My throne and the earth is My footstool." On the one hand, the infinite dimensions of G-d are described in a manner that precludes us from imagining G-d as bound by space, since anyone who can consider the whole earth as His footstool can hardly be contained by man-made structures such as the temple. On the other hand, if such a Being exceeds the whole earth in size, how can such a Being move from place to place since it already occupies more than all the space available? Also, how could such a Being be in need of anything, seeing it has proclaimed, "Mine is the universe and all that is therein" (Psalms 50,12)? Therefore, G-d asks, "What kind of house can you possibly build for Me?" G-d asks rhetorically, "Why did I command building a temple to dwell therein? Surely not for My need, but for your sake!" Man's logic would not have dared presume all this, had it not been revealed to him. When a king moves his residence away from the capital to one of the country's rural centers, he does so for the benefit of his subjects in that region who will reap economic and cultural advantages by harboring royalty in their midst. However, it is important that his subjects realize what is being done for them, and that they be made aware of their former inferior status. This is the reason G-d says, "I will look towards the poor and low-spirited who relate to My word with a feeling of awe," (Isaiah 66,3) "the ones who are aware of their limitations and wish to uplift themselves, deserve My special attention." Only when we realize the limitations of our powers of perception, grieve over it, and long to expand our spiritual horizons, will G-d grant us greater insights. How does all this relate to Jacob's dream? Over a period of time, Jacob had acquired concepts of the grandeur of G-d, His uniqueness, His power, His being the prime mover of history, to the extent that an unassisted human intellect is able to perceive all this. At the end of Parshat Toldot, we have already read that Jacob went to Padan Aram. We hear now that he first went to Beer Sheva, to inform us, as our sages relate, that he spent fourteen years studying, preparing himself to the extent that such preparation is possible without Divine inspiration. Then he came to a place where the world was simply boarded up (Bereshit Rabbah 68). Our sages explain that this simply means that further cognitive progress came to an abrupt end. Therefore, again following a Midrash, Jacob prayed to be granted further insights. He then experienced a contraction of the earth-- according to a Midrash in Chullin— i.e. he was now granted a new perspective. These three Midrashim then describe the phenomena Jacob experienced when he lay down. He had been forced to lie down because "the sun had set," i.e. the source of his natural enlightenment had exhausted itself. "He took from the stones of the place" (Genesis 28,11), i.e. he used all the bricks that made up his philosophy so far to use them as a foundation for further enlightenment. When our sages describe the stones as fighting amongst themselves to become Jacob's cushion, they allude to the various pillars of his philosophy, each of which wanted to serve as the stepping stone to higher insights. The stones discussed are representative of three disciplines; theology (the metaphysical), science (the physical), and mathematics, the theoretical abstract aspect of physics. When after awaking, Jacob combined the stones, anointing them as a single unit, he demonstrated thereby that all these disciplines represented an integral unit without which new insights would not have been possible. As he lay there, he began to dream; in his dream the ladder was firmly rooted to the ground but extended all the way to heaven. Jacob realized that the three worlds, i.e. disciplines he had studied, were capable of such close inter-relation that in fact they could be joined. He observed that malachey elokim, i.e. human beings who had attained perfection in matters of the spirit by means of their studies and efforts, could climb the ladder. They would reach the threshold of heaven, i.e. the gateway to understanding. Their ascent could be described as like the progress from known phenomena=effects, towards the unknown, i.e. the cause of all known effects. This cause is represented by G-d standing on top of the ladder. Conversely, once the ultimate cause had been perceived as purely abstract and spiritual, this insight descends downwards to become more and more part of our physical world. The path man travels in acquiring understanding then is as follows: 1) Observed physical phenomena for which we seek causes. 2) Arrival at the ultimate cause of all human comprehension. 3) Re-evaluation of what had been observed previously in light of the newly gained insights. The "angels" descending the ladder, then, are the minds of the enlightened, returning to earth to add the new found dimension, and to incorporate it in their philosophy. Our sages conveyed this concept by pointing out that the numerical value of the words sulam, ladder, and the word sinai are identical. Moses also first climbed the mountain, then descended, paralleling Jacob's dream. The revelations each received were similar, if not in degree, at least in their respective nature. Our sages teach that until the revelation at Mount Sinai, the sphere of the tachtonim, the lower mortal beings were kept separate from the elyonim, the upper immortal beings. That concept was taught to Jacob in the dream via the vision of the ladder. Another way of expressing the lesson is this: Only after mastery of the lessons of ma-aseh bereshit, the workings of the physical universe, can one hope to gain insights into ma-asseh merkavah, the workings of celestial relationships. The fact that Jacob's dream represented only the beginning of Divine revelations at its lowest level, is attested to by the following: 1) After G-d’s promise to Jacob in the dream, Jacob's statements and vow prefaced by the words "if G-d will be with me," shows that, to Jacob, the message had not been so clear. 2) Jacob is portrayed as being like the servant who serves his master for the sake of the reward. He promises to give tithes if things go well, hardly the stature prophets are made of. 3) Jacob constantly seems fearful during the coming years. 4) Even when Jacob prays to G-d immediately prior to his encounter with Esau, he does not even once refer to the promise made to him by G-d in this dream. 5) Jacob's unaccountable delay in fulfilling his vow, even after G-d said to him, "I am the G-d to whom you have vowed at Bet El, go and keep your vow." Jacob, not yet having returned home safely, seems in no hurry to fulfil this vow. In view of all this, and in view of the statements of our sages that the gift of prophecy is bestowed only on persons who are possessed of certain qualifications, one of which is personal wealth, we must reject the view of those commentators who see in this dream revelations going beyond anything experienced by either Abraham or Isaac. It is significant that Jacob is described as dreaming, and that even after awakening from his "sleep,” the ladder is not called "a vision." Other people who had visions during their sleep, are usually described as waking from a "dream," not from "sleep." Compare Pharaoh in Genesis 41,8 or Solomon in Kings I 3,15. Based on Maimonides in Moreh Nevuchim Part two, Chapter forty-five, we are entitled to assume that in our case we do not deal with a prophetic vision. On the other hand, Jacob's own statement that "G-d is in this place," seems to indicate that Jacob at least considered the possibility that what he had dreamed was a vision. Perhaps Jacob's doubt about the significance of what he had dreamed stemmed from the fact that he had been inadequately prepared to become the recipient of prophetic insights. Abraham, who had gone to sacrifice Isaac, an irreversible act should he have misunderstood what he believed to be Divine instructions, was obviously certain that the source of that command was not a figment of his imagination. We can understand the conditional nature of Jacob's vow then as stemming from this very uncertainty about whether in fact he had been granted prophetic insight. The monument that he erects is built on the premise that he may have been granted a vision. He vows that if all the conditions in that message will be fulfilled, he will view this as confirmation that he had indeed been the recipient of a communication from heaven. Only after the events in Shechem (Genesis Chapter 34), when G-d tells him to go up to Bet El, does Jacob become convinced that the dream of the ladder had indeed been a revelation. In retrospect then, that dream looms larger than ever. During all the years when he had difficulties with Laban and Esau, he had been far from certain that he had been granted a revelation at that time already. When finally, in Chapter thirty-five, Jacob refers to G-d as elokim, instead of as hereafter eyl shaddai, this indicates that he had now come to the resolution of his former doubts about the matter. The flies mentioned in the parable quoted at the outset, may be viewed as the spontaneous outgrowth of a churning mind; such a mind, while unassisted by Divine inspiration of revealed teachings such as Torah, is, however, like a dead-end street, its products like the products of a cadaver. Only when guidance is provided from above, can the outgrowth of our mind's activities assume valid and enduring dimensions. The Yalkut Shimoni in Isaiah 2 describes the different ways Abraham, Isaac and Jacob understood the mikdash, temple concept. Abraham referred to the temple as "mountain," Isaac referred to it as "field," whereas Jacob referred to it as "house." These three terms reflect the respective perceptions each one of the avot had of the way G-d works on earth. Abraham, having worked out by his power of reasoning that there must be One G-d, considered this G-d as manifesting His Presence from time to time; these episodes he referred to as "mountain," i.e. highlights. Visible evidence of the presence of the shechinah occurs only at rare intervals. Isaac, having experienced hashgachah peratit, Personal Providence, on more frequent occasions than his father, sees this shechinah presence like a "field," something more commonplace. Jacob, who witnessed G-d’s Presence almost daily during the long years he spent at the house of Laban, calls it "house," i.e. he considers its presence on earth as something permanent. Therefore, he chooses the name Bet El. According to the Midrash, this is the reason the prophet Isaiah in Chapter 2,3 refers to the eventual temple as "the house of the G-d of Jacob,"since until the revelation granted Jacob, the true dimension of the hashgachah peratit concept had not even been appreciated by the other ancestors. Part Two Jacob's service for Rachel etc. teaches the lesson that the effort made to secure an objective indicates the value of the objective in the eyes of the person who makes such an effort. "And Jacob served seven years for Rachel" In Proverbs 6, King Solomon teaches that by observing the behavior of the ant, which though not subject to external pressure makes provisions for the oncoming winter by laying in a food supply during the summer, we can learn the value of diligence. It is a sad commentary on the behavior of man, the most intelligent creature, that he must be reminded to learn such lessons from the lowly ant. It is even more saddening to observe man spend most of his life amassing values which will not accompany him beyond the grave, and neglecting to lay in a store of provisions that will stand him in good stead once he leaves this material world. In the chapter just mentioned, Solomon condemns laziness. The fact that most people fail to make provisions in time for the amassing of eternal values, reflects their mistaken concepts about which things in our life deserve priority and exertion on our part. Midrash Rabbah Deuteronomy 25, describes seven kinds of indolence, laziness. The worst of the seven categories described is called that "of Moses." The meaning is that nothing is worse than failure to study the Torah, seeing that it is written concerning Torah, "for she is close to your heart and mouth to do" (Deut 30,14). If the Torah were in heaven or otherwise difficult of access, excuses for not studying it might be acceptable. But the very accessibility of Torah is such that it is practically being spoonfed to us and yet we are too lazy to swallow it. It is true, as stated in Berachot 5, that the three gifts G-d gave to Israel are acquired only through trials and afflictions. They are: Torah, Eretz Yisrael, and Olam Haba, the world to come. It is in the nature of lofty ideals that they cannot be attained without exceptional effort. Only three vessels in the tabernacle were constructed of hammered gold and silver respectively. They are the candelabra, the trumpets, and the cherubs on the lid of the holy ark. They symbolize Torah, Eretz Yisrael and Olam Haba respectively. The fact that these three vessels were made of hammered materials, indicates that the three objectives which they represent are not easily attained. When contemplating the tremendous expenditure of energy and the suffering of untold hardship that Jacob underwent during the twenty years he stayed at Laban (see his own testimony in Genesis 31,38-42), we must ask what prompted him to spend that much effort on the acquisition of what appear to be merely material goods. In view of the many complimentary comments about Jacob throughout the Bible, it is clear that Jacob's motivation lay in his endeavor to found the house of Israel with its twelve tribes (compare Bereshit Rabbah on "Laban had two daughters"). This leads to another interpretation of the parable quoted at the beginning of our chapter. The flies surrounding the baby's crib represent the motives that could have been imputed to Jacob by onlookers who judged his activities superficially. Such onlookers see the malachey elokim olim veyordim, the actions of Jacob alternately being motivated by lofty (olim) or material (yordim) reasons, until the midwife arrives, i.e. until G-d suddenly assumes His position on top of the ladder. There is suddenly no more room for speculation as to the motives that fuelled Jacob's lifestyle. Some problems in the text: 1) How can seven years of service appear "like a few days," when experience teaches that waiting for a loved one makes seven days appear like seven years, or at least like a long period of time? The psychology underlying our question is confirmed by our sages' commentary on Exodus 2,23. 2) Why does Jacob use coarse sounding language when asking for his wife at the end of the seven-year period? How could Leah have spent an entire night with Jacob without the latter realizing who he was with? Since Laban's answer seems wholly unsatisfactory, why does Jacob accept it? 3) When Rachel called Bilha's son "Dan," meaning G-d has judged me, did she mean she had been found guilty or did she mean that G-d had exonerated her in that judgment? 4) Why did Leah use her maidservants after she stopped having children? Why did she call "Issachar" by a name which indicated that he was G-d’s reward for what she had done? What had she done to deserve a reward? 5) Why the play on words when Joseph is named? What shame was there that had to be removed? 6) Why did Jacob want to go home afer Joseph had been born? Why did he not wait till Benjamin would be born? 7) After Laban said to Jacob, "Determine your wages for me!" Jacob responded by asking, "When can I do something for my own household?" Surely after Laban had offered to negotiate a deal, this question had become redundant? 8) Why did Jacob impose such conditions upon himself that a single speckled sheep found amongst his flock would stamp him as a thief? 9) Jacob's tactics in firing the sheep's imagination prior to their mounting the females seem strange. Surely Laban must have been aware of such practices, and for Jacob to describe these maneuvers as Divinely inspired borders on the ridiculous. 10) Why does the Torah call the mere failure to convey one's intention geneyvat daat as a kind of deceit? 11) Why did G-d forbid Laban to speak to Jacob either harshly or in a friendly manner? Surely, He could have protected Jacob against anything Laban had to say. Besides, why did Laban ignore G-d’s warning about not speaking to Jacob harshly? 12) Why did Laban boast about his power to harm Jacob when he had been warned by G-d that he had no such power and had even revealed to Jacob that he had received such a warning? 13) When Jacob justified his conduct he seems to go into more detail than necessary. Why? (1) Jacob served the full seven years meticulously, as if he had contracted for a period of a few days' service, a contract which is easy to fulfill meticulously. Because Jacob felt that seven years’ service for a girl like Rachel was a real bargain, he was able to serve out the whole period, fulfilling every little detail of the contract. (2) Jacob had requested a home of his own prior to his getting married, so that he would be able to come home to his wife instead of to a bachelor's quarters. After the wedding, having fulfilled the act of consummation, he presumably separated from his bride in accordance with the laws of ritual purity. When he observed Rachel next morning in her father's house, acting like an unmarried girl, and he found Leah and Zilpah in his own house, he realized that he had been tricked. He had been misled, partly because the younger servant maid, i.e. Rachel's, had been assigned by Laban to Leah instead of to Rachel. Laban's answer clarified that he had never agreed that Rachel should be married first, all he had agreed to had been to give Rachel to Jacob rather than to a stranger. It had never occurred to Laban that the younger Rachel should get married before her older sister. Now, if Jacob were agreeable, after a week's wait, he could also marry Rachel-- on credit as it were-- in return for another seven years of service to be performed henceforth. All this had been ordained by G-d, so that Jacob would in fact marry these four women and the promise to expand in four directions would be fulfilled. The barrenness of the matriarchs had been pre-ordained in order to demonstrate G-d’s love for their eventual children, none of whom would ever have seen the light of day except for G-d’s personal intervention, enabling their respective mothers to conceive and give birth to them. Jacob committed two errors that contributed to the delay in Rachel becoming pregnant. When Sarah and Rebecca had found themselves barren, they had either offered their servants to their husbands in the hope of vicarious motherhood, or they had prayed, in the case of Rebecca. Rachel, having reacted to her misfortune by becoming angry, compounded her own problem. When G-d saw that Leah was hated by her husband, He steppd in to enhance Leah in Jacob's eyes by having her bear him sons. Thus Rachel's pregnancy had to be delayed, pending Leah gaining the consideration from her husband that was her due. Rachel's jealousy of her sister was a further impediment, since instead of being jealous, she should have prayed for children. We do not observe Hannah being jealous of Peninah; rather we observe her praying to G-d for a male child (Samuel I 1,9). After Jacob had made it plain to Rachel that instead of her angry outburst directed at him, she should have addressed herself to the source of her misfortune, i.e.to G-d, Rachel began to copy Sarah who had given Hagar to Abraham. (3) Rachel acknowledged the heavenly judgment. As soon as she realized that acting like Sarah produced results, she also admitted that she had been judged fairly. (4) When Leah, who had attributed all her fortunes and misfortunes to G-d, realized that despite her robust health she appeared to have become sterile, she saw in this some kind of punishment by G-d, and proceeded to give her maidservant Zilpah to her husband. The name "Gad," as "Bagad" (betrayed), indicates she had become aware she had committed a betrayal of her sister when she had gone along with Laban's trick of palming her off on Jacob instead of Rachel. The name Asher reflects that she was happy that Zilpah had born children from Jacob, that she was not jealous of that fact. When, she resumed bearing children herself after a while, she viewed this as proof that her atonement had been completed and expressed this by naming the child Issachar. The Torah describes Rachel's physiological problems by describing her as having a narrow womb. Medical science teaches that women with narrow wombs experience difficulties in giving birth. Rachel was aware of her problems; when Joseph was born she experienced no special discomfort due to G-d having expanded her womb on that occasion. No such special intervention by G-d occurred when she gave birth to Benjamin. (5) Once Joseph had been born, Rachel felt justified concerning her previous marital relations with her husband up to that time. As long as she had considered herself as unable to give birth to a live child and herself survive the birth, she had entertained doubts about the morality of having sexual relations with her husband, since the sole justification for that was the attempt to have children. Her "shame" had been removed therefore. Referring to future marital relations with her husband, she exclaimed "may G-d give me another son" (Maimonides, More Nevuchim, Section three Chapter 49). (6) Bereshit Rabbah 63 quotes an ancient tradition according to which the descendants of Esau will be defeated only by the offspring of Rachel. Now that Rachel had offspring, Jacob felt that the ground had been prepared for the eventual defeat of Esau. He therefore felt encouraged to go home and face Esau. Laban was interested in giving Jacob a fixed amount of wages. In this manner, should Jacob be found in possession of total wealth exceeding his wages less his expenses, his honesty could justifiably become suspect. (7) Jacob emphasized from the beginning that it had been his intention to take his wife and children back to Canaan with him. He had foreseen that six years later Laban might accuse him of stealing his daughters and grandchildren. Jacob said to Laban in effect, "You are aware that during the years I have served you, you have become far wealthier than you could have anticipated. This was due to the help of my G-d, who has enriched you for my sake. The time has now come to make myself a little richer." Laban wants Jacob to stay, in order to prove to himself if his new riches were due to the G-d of Jacob, or if this was part of his own mazzal. Jacob responds that such a request is phony, since Laban knew full well what his newfound wealth was due to. Secondly, Jacob, knowing that blessings do not descend on numbered items, rejects the idea of fixed wages. He also does not want Laban to be in a position to suspect him of amassing wealth in a fraudulent manner, as outlined. (8) The statement that Laban is to remove all speckled sheep etc. from the flock at this point, is to give him a chance to point to his own unassailable honesty. If he started out without even a single sheep of the skin-pattern discussed, Laban would never be able to claim that Jacob's new wealth was due to a nucleus Laban had provided. Jacob especially did not want an assist from Laban, since the latter did not even acknowledge that his own wealth was due to assistance from Jacob's G-d. (9) Jacob never used the peeled sticks to fire the sheep's imagination except to start a new flock. Since G-d’s blessings are applicable only to items which already exist (as we know from the impoverished widow whose minute supply of oil was dramatically increased by Elisha, Kings II Chapter 4), there had not been any reason for Jacob to apply that strategy either for Laban's flocks or for his own flock, once such a flock existed. Jacob himself explains to his wives that his success was in exactly the reverse ratio to Laban's attempts to cheat him (compare the Jewish population increase in Egypt resulting from the Egyptians' efforts to curtail Jewish population growth, Exodus 1,12). Although Jacob had used the rods due to his own initiative, he gave credit to G-d for His assistance without which all his efforts would have come to nought. The dream in which he saw the sheep (Genesis 31,11-13) confirmed his feeling that he had enjoyed heavenly assistance. Rachel had stolen her father's terafim already well prior to Jacob's departure as can be seen from the sequence in the story. This she did in order to prevent Laban from having an inkling of Jacob's intention to depart. (10) Jacob taught his family to ride. All these preparations qualified for the description geneyvat da-at, deception. G-d’s stricture to Laban not to speak to Jacob even "good" refers to the kind of "good" Laban would employ, i.e. something that sounded good but was designed to harm Jacob. (11) In other words, Laban was warned not to harm Jacob either directly or indirectly. Laban, in typical fashion, attempts to tell Jacob that he had acted foolishly by giving Laban an excuse to harm him. He quotes G-d’s message to him, meaning that he had only been forbidden to talk, not to act against Jacob. (12) Therefore, he stresses his ability to harm Jacob. Jacob answered that all the subterfuge employed had only one purpose, namely to prevent Laban from stealing back his daughters. Concerning the terafim, since Jacob had been unaware that Rachel had taken them, he agreed that whoever had taken them ought to die. Had Jacob been aware of the true motive for this theft, he would not have condemned the thief to die for this deed. (13) The main reason that Jacob goes into details when defending his conduct is to contrast it with Laban's behavior; he says in effect, that whereas he might have been remiss in good manners when he departed from Laban's town, his lack of manners compared favorably with the behavior Laban had just displayed. Laban had invaded both his own and his family's privacy by physically searching all their respective quarters, all of this despite the fact that in twenty years of devoted service, Jacob had not once given the slightest reason for being accused of dishonesty. He lists the many temptations that existed to make use of Laban's property to enhance his personal comfort, be it to warm himself by night or to cool himself by day etc. He had never been guilty of neglect which resulted in any loss to Laban. In view of all this, he felt outraged at the mere suspicion that he would have stolen something held dear by Laban. Jacob does agree to a reconciliation to be confirmed by the building of a monument and stone heaps. We observe at the end of the Parshah that as soon as Jacob was no longer within the immediate vicinity of the idol worshipping Laban, he is once more surrounded by angels.

And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said: ‘Surely the LORD is in this place; and I knew it not.’

And Jacob vowed a vow, saying: ‘If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,

אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, to remove from me all the pressures which I am under, pressures which prevent man from giving his attention to matters which should receive his attention, i.e. to G’d and what He expects from man. What troubled Yaakov was what our sages in Eyruvin 41 described as the three problems which are liable to unbalance someone’s mind as well as his relationship to his Creator. They are: gentiles, being involved personally in natural disasters, and excessive poverty.

אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, to remove from me all the pressures which I am under, pressures which prevent man from giving his attention to matters which should receive his attention, i.e. to G’d and what He expects from man. What troubled Yaakov was what our sages in Eyruvin 41 described as the three problems which are liable to unbalance someone’s mind as well as his relationship to his Creator. They are: gentiles, being involved personally in natural disasters, and excessive poverty.

והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, then G’d will be a judge, and He can examine to see if I did not fulfill my vow to the best of my ability. The letter ו at the beginning of the word והיה, [where we would perhaps have expected Yaakov to use an ordinary future tense such as יהיה, Ed.], may be in lieu of the word הנה, meaning that Yaakov would already from now on act on the assumption that G’d would provide him with the necessities he had asked for and therefore he was willing to be judged by the attribute of Justice, not relying on the attribute of Mercy.