Commentaire sur La Genèse 31:43

מה אעשה לאלה WHAT CAN I DO UNTO THEM — How could it enter my mind injure them, my daughters!

AND TO MY DAUGHTERS, WHAT CAN I DO TO THESE TODAY? Commentators have said²³⁶Ibn Ezra and R’dak. that it is as if it were written, “And to my daughters, what could I do to them today?” and the word “them” constitutes additional clarification. Likewise, As we both of us have sworn,²³⁷I Samuel 20:42. [the word “we” serving as additional clarification]; We, our sons and our daughters,²³⁸Nehemiah 5:2. [the word “we” is here too mentioned for the greater clarity].
But it appears to be more correct that this is said in a compassionate way: “And to my daughters, what can I do to these who are before me, for I am deeply stirred for them, or unto their children, who have been born in my house, and they are to me as my children?” This is also the meaning of whom they have borne. Laban thus said this as if defending himself against Jacob’s words by claiming: “I have come after you to see my daughters, and to determine what favor I can do for them or their children. Now I can do them this good by seeing that you make me a covenant that you will not afflict them and will take no other wives in addition to them.”²³⁹Verse 50 here.

מה אעשה, how can I possibly harm them?

והצאן צאני, if I had indeed changed your wages or sent you home empty-handed I would not have taken anything from you, seeing that it all originated from me. You only acquired it by deceit and deviousness, not legally.

ויען לבן, Laban replied, etc. The word ויען is meant as the answer to Jacob's challenge to display and identify items Laban considered that Jacob had stolen from him. He said that he did not want to embarass his sons and daughters and would not conduct legal proceedings. His own children could testify to Jacob's trickery; however he did not think it seemly to involve his children in testifying against their husbands and father.

ויען לבן...לי הוא, for all of this originated from my possessions.

ולבנותי מה אעשה לאלה, “as to my daughters, what (harm) should I do to these?” We must understand this as if he had said ולבנותי מה אעשה להן,. “what could I possibly do to my daughters?” Nachmanides explains the whole expression as one expressing pity, i.e. Lavan when looking at his daughters and grandchildren is overcome, and exclaims: “how could I possibly be cruel enough to cause any harm to my own family?” This is why he added the words אשר ילדו, “the children that they have given birth to in my own house?” He says this in the form of an apology to Yaakov who had accused him of pursuing him with evil intent. He asks Yaakov rhetorically how he could accuse him of harming them when all he wanted was to see his grandchildren, and kiss them! He now wants to do them a favour by making Yaakov promise that he would not marry any additional wives, depriving his grandchildren of part of their inheritance.

“How could it enter my heart to cause them any harm?” [I.e.,] it cannot mean that Lavan asked Yaakov, “What do you want me to do to them?” because Yaakov never asked him [to do anything].

הבנות בנותי והבנים בני והצאן צאני, Lavan deliberately bent the truth when he said: “and the sons are mine.” A grandfather cannot say of his grandchildren by his daughters that they belong to him. What our sages meant when they said that “grandchildren are like children (Yevamot 62) referred only to the grandsons who are sons of sons, not to grandsons who are children of one’s daughters. He also twisted the truth when he said that the flocks (of Yaakov) were his (Lavan’s) flocks. He had first given them to Yaakov as compensation for his labour. Lavan was similarly legally wrong when he added: וכל אשר אתה רואה לי הוא, “all that you (Yaakov) see is really mine.” This is what Yaakov had in mind when said to him in verse 37: “when you checked out and rummaged in all of my things, what did you find that belonged to you?” Lavan had not replied to this. The entire situation reminds one of what ben Haddad had said to Achav King of Israel, (Kings I 20,3) “your silver and gold are mine, your wives and children who are good are mine.” Achav had replied (verse 7) that Ben Haddad’s words revealed that he was bent on doing harm and did not have a legal argument to support his claim. Lavan also had no legal claim so that he was forced to reply to Yaakov’s challenge “why did you chase after me?” “I came to see my daughters, who are my daughters.”

Es ist zweifelhaft, in welchem Sinne diese Antwort Labans zu verstehen wäre. Es scheint das Hervortreten eines menschlichen Gefühles zu sein. Wenn ich auch die Macht und das Recht habe, und Gott es mir nicht verboten hätte, ich hätte euch doch nichts Leides tun können, da ja alles, was ich um mich sehe, selbst bis auf die Tiere hinab, von mir und den Meinigen stammt.

?ולבנותי מה אעשה, “Lavan is beginning to become more conciliatory by saying that he could not bring himself to harm his daughters [all four matriarchs were his daughters, though not from the same mother. Ed.]

ולבנותי, it actually belongs to my daughters as a dowry.

?מה אעשה לאלה; he said “to these,” after having previously said: “and to my daughters.” He meant that to daughters such as these what am I able to do? How can I allow myself to be separated from them?

He also hinted that the challenge of identifying household goods by mentioning specific details placed him at a disadvantage versus Jacob; the latter would certainly be far more familiar with them and be able to identify any special marks seeing the users were his own daughters who by virtue of using them knew more about them than he, Laban did.

מה אעשה לאלה, even though I could take all of it away from you, what would I do afterwards in order to provide for them.

As to Jacob's charging that the manner of the search was demeaning, all that he Laban had done was examine things which were possessions of his own daughters, i.e. he felt at home in the tents of his daughters. Jacob had no reason to get upset about this.

ולבנותי מה אעשה לאלה, "As to my daughters, what can I do to these?" The word לאלה appears to have no meaning. Perhaps it refers to the words: "all that you behold?" The verse then would mean this: "Since they are my daughters, what can I do to these possessions seeing they are also their children's?" Or, Laban may have meant that though my daughters describe themselves as strangers today, the fact is that I still consider them as my daughters. "What can I do about the way they feel?" We would have to read the words לאלה היום, as belonging together; "today they are called "these" in view of the actions they have committed against me although nominally they are still my daughters."

לבניהם אשר ילדו, to their sons whom they bore. He made a point of saying: "whom they bore," in order not to identify the children with their mother. He only called them their sons since they were biologically their mothers' children. He hoped that they did not share their mothers' character traits. Although the Torah puts these words in the mouth of the wicked Laban, the Torah teaches us something of legal significance at the same time. This is the lesson that in Jewish law the term "family" is determined by the father and not by the mother. We find a similar lesson that the Torah teaches by using Laban as an illustration when the latter espoused the principle of אין מערבים שמחה בשמחה, that one does not celebrate two joyful events simultaneoulsy. Laban had used this rule when he delayed Jacob's and Rachel's wedding by a week so that Leah could have a full week of wedding celebrations with her husband (compare Jerusalem Talmud Moed Katan chapter 1).