Génesis 31:33 Comentario: Rashi, Chizkuni, Ramban & Ibn Ezra

באהל יעקב INTO JACOB’S TENT — This was Rachel’s tent also, for Jacob was constantly with her. For the same reason Scripture says (46:19) “the sons of Rachel Jacob’s wife”, whilst in the case of the other wives it does not state “Jacob’s wife” (Genesis Rabbah 74:9).

ויבא באהל רחל “he came into the tent of Rachel;” Rashi on these words (basing himself on Bereshit Rabbah 74,12) says that Lavan now went back to the tent of Rachel once more after having already searched the tent of Leah, before proceeding to the tents of the other matriarchs, because he considered her a thief. What is the reason that prompted Rashi to accept this interpretation, i.e. that Lavan searched the tents of the matriarchs last? I believe it is based on the words: ולא מצא “and he had not found” in our verse, after having told us that he searched the tents of Yaakov and the matriarchs. Clearly this had to refer to the tents of the matriarchs which would have been the logical starting point for the search. On the one hand, seeing that Rachel was Yaakov’s favourite wife and he spent most of his time with her, the reference to the tent of Yaakov could be understood as including searching Rachel’s belongings. Rachel’s personal tent, presumably used by her only while experiencing her menses, and therefore ritually impure, was located in the centre of the whole camp. The entrances of the tents of the matriarchs opened to public paths on the one side and to Rachel’s tent on the other. Some commentators argue that we must follow the sequence of the text, i.e. that Leah’s tent was in the centre Rachel’s tent adjoining, and the other two matriarchs’ tents adjoining that of Rachel. Only Leah’s and Rachel’s tents also had an entrance facing a public path, so that Yaakov could not go out to the public domain without the knowledge of either Rachel or Leah. Lavan was therefore forced to return to the tent of Leah, and subsequently to that of Rachel. [Lavan searched in the order of who he thought had most to gain by stealing his teraphim, commencing with Yaakov. Ed.]

IN THE TENT OF JACOB AND IN THE TENT OF LEAH. Rashi comments: “In the tent of Jacob — this was Rachel’s tent, for he was constantly with her. And so also Scripture says, The sons of Rachel Jacob’s wife,²¹⁷Further, 46:19. while in the case of the other wives it does not say ‘Jacob’s wife.’ And he entered into Rachel’s tent. When Laban left Leah’s tent he returned again to Rachel’s tent before he searched the tent of the two maid-servants. And why did he feel compelled to do all this? Because he knew her to be inclined to touch everything.” But in line with the plain meaning of Scripture, it is not correct for the same tent to be called by two names, [i.e., “the tent of Jacob” and “the tent of Rachel”] in one verse.
And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that Laban entered into the tent of Jacob, the tent of Leah, and the tent of the two maid-servants [the singular form “tent” being used] since one tent served both. Afterwards he came back a second time to Leah’s tent, and after that he entered into Rachel’s tent. But this too is incorrect.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra further wrote: “The feasible interpretation appears to me to be that Scripture followed here a way of brevity and delayed mentioning the tent of Rachel in order to state concerning all of the others, but he found them not, as they were not there. Scripture then returns and explains that when he went out of Leah’s tent he came into Rachel’s tent where the teraphim were.” That is the correct interpretation.
It is true that there were separate tents for all of the wives for this was due to the righteous man’s regard for modesty. Thus each one of the wives²¹⁸The above mentioned opinion that one tent served the two maid-servants was that of Ibn Ezra; Ramban however differs. had a separate tent so that one should not know when he came to the other. It is also a matter forbidden by Torah law, as the Sages have mentioned in Tractate Niddah.²¹⁹17a. And Jacob had a special tent, in which he would eat at his table with his children and people of the household. And the reason why Scripture mentions Jacob’s wife²¹⁷Further, 46:19. in connection with Rachel in my opinion, according to its simple sense, is that she is mentioned in that chapter among the concubines. For this reason Scripture does not say so in the Seder Vayishlach Yaakov,²²⁰Further, 35:23-26. for there it mentions Leah and Rachel and then the maid-servants.