Underestimating a Scammer
And Yaakov told Rachel that he was the brother of her father and that he was the son of Rivkah. And she ran and told her father. (Beresheit 29:12)[1]
Torah and business ethics The Torah does not present only a religion. The term “religion” is generally understood to refer to a system of worship. The Torah includes a system of Divine service but this is only a part of its message. Beyond this system of worship, the Torah provides regulations and an orientation that extends to virtually every element of communal, national, and personal life. It regulates conduct within the family. It presents a system of adjudication and measures for social welfare. It includes also a sophisticated system of laws and ethics that govern commercial and business conduct. Our parasha features the first extensive treatment of business relations. This is communicated through comparing the business ethics of Yaakov to those of his father-in-law, Lavan.
Yaakov is Lavan’s brother Yaakov travels to Haran. He comes to a well and meets Rachel, the daughter of Lavan. In our pasuk, Yaakov introduces himself to Rachel. He tells her that he is her father’s brother. Rashi is bothered by the obvious question. This was not an accurate description of his relationship to Lavan. Yaakov was not Lavan’s brother. He was Lavan’s nephew. Yaakov’s mother – Rivkah – was Lavan’s sister.
Rashi offers two explanations. The simple interpretation is that Yaakov did not describe himself as Lavan’s brother in the literal sense. He meant that they were kin. Rashi notes other instances in which the term “brother” is used to denote kinship.
Rashi offers another explanation. He introduces it with a question. Yaakov provided two descriptions of himself. He said he was the brother of Lavan and the son of Rivkah. It would have sufficed for Yaakov to describe himself as Rivkah’s son. Why did Yaakov describe himself, also, as the brother or relative of Lavan? Rashi responds that there was a message communicated in this description. Rivkah was an honest, straightforward individual. In contrast, Lavan was a dishonest conniver. Yaakov compared himself to both his mother and uncle, communicating that he was the equal of both. He was as honest as Rivkah but capable of being as shrewd as Lavan. He could be Lavan’s brother in cleverness.[2]
It seems that Yaakov was saying that he was prepared to act dishonestly! If Lavan should attempt to treat him unfairly, he will retaliate by treating Lavan in the same manner. Is Yaakov arguing that it is sometimes appropriate to be than less fair and honest?
And Yaakov loved Rachel and he said: I will work for you seven years for Rachel, your younger daughter. (Beresheit 29:18)
Yaakov suspects Lavan Our pasuk tells us that Yaakov loved Rachel and wished to marry her. He asked her father for his approval of the marriage and offered to work for Lavan for seven years in exchange for the opportunity to marry her. He described Rachel as “Rachel, your younger daughter.” Once again, Yaakov adopts a rather elaborate description when a simpler description would seem adequate. Lavan knew who Rachel was. Yaakov did not need to describe Rachel as Lavan’s younger daughter.
Rashi explains that Yaakov was fully aware of Lavan’s deviousness. He did not describe the woman he aspired to marry as “Rachel”; Lavan might substitute another girl with the same name. Also, Yaakov was not satisfied in describing his wife as “Rachel, your daughter.” Lavan might switch the names of his daughters and then substitute Leyah – the newly named Rachel – for the real Rachel. In order to preclude these possibilities, Yaakov described his chosen very carefully as “Rachel, your younger daughter.” But Rashi explains that despite this precaution, Lavan succeeded in deceiving Yaakov and substituted Leyah for Rachel.[3],[4]
This raises two questions. Yaakov claimed that he could be Lavan’s equal in shrewdness. Apparently, Yaakov was very wrong! First, why did Yaakov assume he could match Lavan? Second, where did he make his mistake?
Yaakov’s confidence in his wisdom Let us begin with the first question: Why did Yaakov assume he could match Lavan? Yaakov believed that he was just as smart as Lavan. He knew that Lavan was very shrewd. But he assumed that his wisdom was a match for Lavan’s shrewdness. Yaakov was correct. He described Rachel with such precision that he succeeded in precluding the legitimate substitution of Leyah, or any other woman, for Rachel. It is true that Lavan substituted Leyah for Rachel. But Lavan never claimed that he had fulfilled his bargain. He admitted to breaching their agreement.
Now, we can understand Yaakov’s intention in describing himself as Lavan’s equal. He did not mean that it is appropriate to be dishonest or unfair and that he could and would match Lavan in dishonesty. He meant that his wisdom was a match for Lavan’s shrewdness. He claimed that with this wisdom he would be able to foresee and forestall any attempt by Lavan to be devious. HHeHeHeeSo, what was Yaakov’s mistake?
And Lavan said: This is not done in our place – to give the younger daughter before the elder daughter. (Beresheit 29:26)
Lavan’s unanticipated deceit Yaakov discovers that Lavan substituted Leyah for Rachel. He confronts Lavan. Lavan does not deny the substitution. Instead, he explains that the substitution is justified. Leyah is the elder daughter. It is not appropriate to give the younger daughter in marriage before the elder.
In this passage, the Torah tells us how Lavan succeeded in deceiving Yaakov. Yaakov realized that Lavan would use any legitimate means to substitute Leyah, or some other woman, for Rachel. He assumed that stating their agreement in precise terms would remove all the opportunities for a substitution. In other words, Yaakov’s concern was that Lavan would defend a substitution with the contention he had kept the terms of their agreement as he understood them. Therefore, Yaakov painstakingly detailed the terms of the agreement, eliminating any potential claim by Lavan that he had misunderstood the bargain. However, he did not realize that Lavan would rationalize an overt abrogation of their agreement. Through relying on the rationalization that Leyah was the elder daughter, and should therefore be married off before her younger sister, Lavan completely ignored the terms of their agreement. In other words, because Yaakov underestimated Lavan’s deviousness, he was deceived. He assumed that Lavan would rely on his shrewdness to defend an interpretation of their arrangement to his own advantage, and to Yaakov’s detriment. But he did not expect an open breach of their agreement.
Of course, this raises another question. Yaakov recognized that Lavan was a cheat. He knew he was devious. Yet, he did not predict that Lavan would rationalize an open breach of their agreement. Why was Yaakov unable to foresee the extent of Lavan’s dishonesty?
And he came also to Rachel. And he loved Rachel more than Leyah. And he worked with him another, additional seven years. (Beresheit 29:30)
Yaakov’s response to Lavan Lavan agrees to give Rachel to Yaakov as a wife after Yaakov’s marriage to Leyah. Yaakov and Lavan make a new deal. In exchange for Rachel, Yaakov will work for Lavan for an additional seven years. Our pasuk tells us that Lavan gives Rachel to Yaakov and Yaakov fulfills his part of the bargain by serving Lavan the additional years.
The wording of the passage is problematic. The pasuk says that Yaakov worked for Lavan “another, additional seven years”. The phrase “another, additional” is clearly redundant. It would have sufficed to use either term – “another” or “additional”. Why does the Torah use both? Rashi explains that the intent is to equate this second seven years with the first seven years of labor that Yaakov provided. During the first seven years, Yaakov worked under the assumption that Lavan would respect their agreement and provide him with Rachel as a wife. However, the second seven years began after Lavan cheated Yaakov. This second set of seven years was a direct result of Lavan’s dishonesty. Nonetheless, the service that Yaakov provided during these seven years was indistinguishable from his service during the first set. During the first set, Yaakov was a dedicated and honest employee. During the second set, he provided the same level of service. [5]
There is an important ethical lesson here. Yaakov entered into this agreement as a result of Lavan’s dishonesty. Nonetheless, he scrupulously observed its terms. Unlike Lavan, he did not resort to rationalization. He did not breach his agreement and reduce the quality of his service. Despite the disagreeable circumstances that motivated him to enter into this agreement, Yaakov did not deceive himself into justifying cheating Lavan.
Righteousness and anticipating evil Now, we can explain Yaakov’s error at a deeper level. Yaakov was confident in his own wisdom. He correctly considered it the match for Lavan’s shrewdness. But Yaakov was handicapped in his capacity to foresee the extent of Lavan’s corruption. As a fundamentally honest person, he could not appreciate the ability of human beings to rationalize unmitigated dishonesty. Lavan resorted to behavior with which Yaakov could not identify and because this behavior was so alien to him, he could not foresee or predict it. His own goodness led him to underestimate the human ability to rationalize open dishonesty. In other words, naiveté can cause problems but in Yaakov it reflected his righteousness.
[1] Originally printed as Thoughts 5768, “Yaakov’s Understanding of Lavan”. Reprinted with minor revisions.
[2] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 29:12.
[3] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 29:18.
[4] It should be noted that there seems to be a contradiction in Rashi’s comments. Our Rashi explains that Lavan succeeded in deceiving Yaakov. However, according to Rashi’s comments later in the parasha, this is not the case. According to these latter comments, Yaakov and Rachel agreed to a signal that they would use in order to assure that the woman Yaakov married was indeed Rachel. This signal should have prevented Lavan from making a substitution. However, when Lavan made the substitution, Rachel provided Leyah with the signal, rather than expose her sister to embarrassment. According to these comments, Lavan did not succeed in out-maneuvering Yaakov. Instead, Rachel’s complicity led to Yaakov’s marriage to Leyah. It is possible that this apparent contradiction can be resolved through assuming that Lavan suspected that Yaakov and Rachel had arranged some signal, but he depended on Rachel’s loyalty to and compassion for Leyah to undermine Yaakov and Rachel’s precaution.
[5] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 29:30.