February. Take ink and weep

February. Take ink and weep,
write February as you’re sobbing,
while black Spring burns deep
through the slush and throbbing.

Take a cab. For a clutch of copecks,
through bell-towers’ and wheel noise,
go where the rain-storm’s din breaks,
greater than crying or ink employs.

Where rooks in thousands falling,
like charred pears from the skies,
drop down into puddles,
bringing cold grief to the depths of eyes.

Below, the black shows through,
and the wind’s furrowed with cries:
the more freely, the more truly then,
sobbing verse is realised.

“I have a dream”

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we’ve come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we’ve come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the “unalienable Rights” of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked “insufficient funds.”

But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we’ve come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.

We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God’s children.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro’s legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.

But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone.

And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.

We cannot turn back.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, “When will you be satisfied?” We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating: “For Whites Only.” We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until “justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”¹

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest — quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.

Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.

And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of “interposition” and “nullification” — one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; “and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together.”2

This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.

With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

And this will be the day — this will be the day when all of God’s children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country ’tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim’s pride,

From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:

Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!

Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!3

I haven’t blogged in a few months…

so a brief update:

1. I have a new job and I totally dig it. I’m a receptionist in an insurance office.  Turns out you could play “six degrees to Jill Nelson” with  my new bosses.  We know a lot of the same people.  weird.

2. I discovered the show criminal minds and LOVE IT.  I have to be careful to remind myself that Spencer Ried is a fictional character and he’s not going to fall in love with me.

3. I had a beagle who shed a lot. I gave him to a girl I work with and I think hehas a better home.

4. I’ve decided to be vegetarian.  I’m shooting for 89% accuracy in 2010.

5.  I’ve also decided to learn piano. I’m in the market for a reasonable keyboard to learn.

6. I live alone now and enjoy it most of the time.

7. I think I can add about three more people to my “close friends” list.

8. I bought a new skirt and I can’t wait til it’s warm enough to wear it.

9. I now own The Hangover (thank you, sister) and I love love love love love love it.

10. I’m presenting a paper for the regional meet in Dallas of the Society of Biblical Literature.

COMMENT! 

FEMME discussion

This is something i wrote for the women’s group at my church. A little less formal of a writing style on this one. enjoy!

Before you read this, I suggest reading Genesis 29:1-30:24. If you feel ambitious, read the entire “Jacob cycle” (27-35); it’s interesting stuff.
The story of Rachel and Leah is an interesting, and often overlooked, one. The part of their story I want to focus on details the births of the first eleven sons and the one daughter. Many commentators have read this story and celebrate the birth of the tribe’s of Israel. In most Bibles, the caption for this passage is something along the lines of “The Birth of Jacob’s Sons.” While this is true, it immediately puts the reader in a position to read with blinders on, so to speak, ignoring what can be learned from Leah and Rachel. The names they give their children tell the hidden story of the sisters, and it is this story from which I think we can learn.
After the debacle that is the Leah-Jacob-Rachel wedding triangle, the story moves us into the birthing narratives. First to conceive is Leah. This is an interesting twist in the story. As one might guess, motherhood was highly valued in ancient Israel, and a wife that was not bearing children could be reconsidered, to put it delicately. So it is quite interesting that, after we are told that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah, Leah is the first to bear children. As the first wife, Leah was chief wife (polygamy was a common practice and seemed to be more concerned with protection and survival than “love” in the way we think of it); as the wife producing children she was the wife with social status. But notice how she names her children:

Reuben: “Because the Lord has seen my affliction, now surely my husband will love me.” Her first son is conceived through God’s direct intervention (this is why you should have your Bible close by…). But Leah assumes God is intervening to bring Jacob closer to her.

Simeon: “Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also.” Her thoughts are still on her unloving husband, not on the work of God in her life.

Levi: “Now this time my husband will be joined to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Levi is the only son she bears whose naming does not acknowledge God at all. For a moment, Leah seems to lose her awareness of God’s work with her attention solely on Jacob’s approval.

Judah: “This time I will praise the Lord.” This naming is, for me, the most interesting. Jacob is not even alluded to. Interestingly, Matthew’s gospel traces the genealogy of Jesus to the tribe of Judah. The one child born in pure praise to God is the ancestor of Jesus. I find this beautiful (albeit a digression on my part).

After this sequence of births, we get a rare glimpse into the domestic life of Rachel and Jacob. Rachel becomes envious of Leah and demands that Jacob give her children lest she die. It is evident by the multiple children borne by Leah that the fertility problem does not lie with Jacob (though even if it did, no one would ever know; women were thought of as “incubators” so any problem with reproduction was because of the incubator, not the seed). Her demand for children is followed by one of the most darkly ironic statements in the Bible: “or I shall die”. Genesis 35:16-18 reports that Rachel died during the birth of her son Benjamin.

Jacob’s response to Rachel is very important. He told her that it is God who has withheld children from her. I think this indicates two things about their relationship: that Jacob longed to give Rachel children and that Jacob trusted in God’s timing (though some have read this as Jacob pushing the “blame” on God). Unfortunately Rachel was too caught up in her competition with Leah to trust God. This is evidenced by the next portion of the text.

Rachel recruits her maid Bilhah to bear children for her (it always amazes me how quickly the Sarah/Hagar story is forgotten). “So that she may bear on my knees” is interesting. Some think it was a sort of adoption ritual. Others, myself included, think it was a kind of fertility wish. The birthing mother would stand while giving birth and the mid-wife would lie on her back with her knees up to catch the child as it was born. It was thought to magically increase fertility in the midwife. Note the children’s names:

Dan: “God has judged me, and has also heard my voice and given me a son.” Naphtali: “With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister, and have prevailed.”

Rachel feels in some ways vindicated (by God and in front of Leah) in having these children, but the reality is that Leah still had more kids and they were from her own womb. Regardless of her obvious advantage, Leah is provoked to jealousy. She volunteers Zilpah for childbearing to Jacob. She conceives and names them:

Gad: “Good fortune!” Asher: “Happy am I! For the women will call me happy.”

Note the difference between how Leah names these children and how she names her natural borne children. With the first four sons, Leah recognizes the role of God in the birth though she may be confused as to why God was involved. Here Leah is solely concerned with herself. She has “good fortune” and she will be called happy by the other women.

It is interesting that for Leah(29:31, 30:17) and Rachel(30:22) God opens their wombs so that they can conceive. With Bilhah and Zilpah (the maids) God is not said to open their wombs. The children borne of Bilhah and Zilpah are borne of the works of Rachel and Leah.

The next scene is full of as much manipulation and dehumanizing usage as the scene with Zilpah and Bilhah. Only this time Jacob is the pawn in the sisters’ struggle with one another. Rachel asks Leah for the mandrakes Reuben brought her. This seems innocent enough, but Rachel likely understood mandrakes to be a powerful fertility drug. Leah’s response is bitter and jealous: “Is it a small matter that you have taken away my husband? Would you take away my son’s mandrakes also?” Rachel agrees to let Jacob “lie” with Leah that night in exchange for the mandrakes. When Leah informs Jacob of the agreement, he silently complies.

God again opens Leah’s womb and she conceives two more sons and one more daughter:

Issachar: God has given me my hire, because I gave my maid to my husband.” It is possible that Leah was trying to aggravate Rachel with this. If “bearing on my knees” is a fertility wish, then it did not work for Rachel. Leah was the first to conceive.

Zebulun: “God has endowed me with a good dowry; now my husband will honor me, because I have borne him six sons.” Notice that she claims to have given Jacob six sons, ignoring the two borne of Zilpah. Leah here refuses responsibility for what she has given another. She has also gone back to square one, hoping Jacob will give her the acknowledgement she deserves for the children she has produced.

After this, Leah gives birth to Dinah, who unfortunately is given no naming speech. This is followed by God opening Rachel’s womb for no apparent reason. We are told that God remembered Rachel and she gave birth to Joseph saying “God has taken away my reproach; may the Lord add to me another son!” Rachel is still unsatisfied with her lot. Bilhah’s children were not enough, and neither is Joseph. She does eventually have another son, and dies in childbirth, naming him Ben-oni (son of my sorrow). Jacob calls him Benjamin.

What can we learn from these two sisters and their struggle with one another? First, I think it is quite obvious that neither celebrates the work of God in their life. They see the birth of their children as a means to an end and not an end in itself. They, being unsatisfied in their situation, refused to enjoy and appreciate the happiness God was giving them. Leah’s constant struggle for the love of Jacob, endlessly threatened her relationship with her sister. Rachel’s incessant need for children, most likely for social gain, threatened her marriage. Both sisters, instead of rejoicing that God had opened their wombs, craved more so that they could attain what they wanted: love and approval from those around them.

This happens in our life as well. We live in a society that judges us on performance, but we fortunately do not serve a God that does so. If we base our judgments of those around us on how well they perform and not on what God says about them, we sin. Those who regarded Leah highly because she bore Jacob many children were wrong to do so. They allowed the societal standards to determine her value. Had Jacob divorced Rachel because of her infertility, he would have been wrong to do so. He would have judged her worth on her function. We cannot allow ourselves to judge another on performance. We must trust what God has said about us and live as though that were the reality. And this is not easy.

We also learn what jealousy can do between two people. We cannot allow ourselves to be envious over what God is doing in another. Leah could not be content that God knew she was unloved and blessed her with many children. Rachel could not accept that the love of Jacob was enough and craved something that was not for her. Their jealousy led them to use their maids as objects to attain more children. They played God and ultimately dehumanized others. I have heard it argued that it was socially acceptable to provide a surrogate in the event of infertility to continue the family lineage (and I am convinced of a few instances where perhaps it is), but in this story I do not believe it is. Jacob has his heir; the lineage is intact. Bilhah and Zilpah are used to gain a want, not a need. They are ignored as soon as their function is performed; Rachel and Leah are still unsatisfied. Attempts to attain what God has for you outside of God’s timing, though seemingly fruitful, are ultimately futile and dissatisfying.

I think we can learn a lot more from these two sisters, but this is a start. Here are some questions to help guide your response:

1. In what ways are you viewing the work of God in your life as a means to an end, and not rejoicing in the work itself?

2. How have you judged those on your life? On performance or on truth? How do you change the tendency toward performance-based judgment?

3. How has jealousy over God’s work in others hindered you from growing into who God would have you to be? How can you rejoice in the growth of others without allowing jealousy to blind you to your own growth?

4. How have you dehumanized and used others (even in socially acceptable ways) to attain what you want?

On poverty

I was speaking with a friend last week about the gospel, poverty, and activism. One of the things he said was “The best way to fight poverty is to make the poor uncomfortable in their own poverty.” I am trying to remember that what I think of when I think of poverty is not always what other people think. I assume he was thinking of the poor as those who take advantage of government programs and people’s hospitality, not an Iraqi family living in the midst of a war (a new report just came out saying that one in four Iraqis live under the poverty level). Regardless, I think this statement is telling of many people today, and I have a few responses.

1. I highly doubt that those who are truly living in poverty find it comfortable.

2. We are so distanced from the poor that we blame them for their circumstance instead of reflecting on our own greed and critiquing those systems of government and religion that systematize oppression.

3. We have believed a lie and ignored the gospel’s call.

What are your thoughts. I have many more, but it would end up being a rant.

oy vey.

This was my first week of 40 hours at starbucks plus 9 hours of babysitting…. I am exhausted! I thought you should know.

I’m back!

so…just to catch you up:

1. I “graduated” but i still have to write my thesis
2. my thesis is only 75 pages…no biggie.
3. I’m having to work full time at Starbucks plus babysitting.
4. this means i have no life.
5. I might kill my dog if he keeps chewing up my books.
6. i really like lists.
7. i’m in the market for a reasonable carpet cleaning service…suggestions?
8. I have made new friends.
9. Zoe called me on Chris’ phone by accident and recognized my voice
10. did i mention my thesis is 75 pages?
11. Oklahoma has dumb weather.
12. Moore OK is dumb. this is the street exit order: 12th, 5th, 4th, 19th????? what the…?
13. I am swapping crockpots with Mandy for a while.
14. I graduated with honors!
15. Peter Abelard was not an actual heretic…

Bouyancy

Love has taken away my practices
and filled me with poetry.

I tried to keep quietly repeating,
No strength but yours,
but I couldn’t.

I had to clap and sing.
I used to be respectable and chaste and stable,
but who can stand in this strong wind
and remember those things?

A mountain keeps an echo deep inside itself.
That’s how I hold your voice.

I am scrap wood thrown in your fire,
and quickly reduced to smoke.

I saw you and became empty.
This emptiness, more beautiful than existence,
it obliterates existence, and yet when it comes,
existence thrives and creates more existence!

The sky is blue. The world is a blind man
squatting on the road.

But whoever sees your emptiness
sees beyond blue and beyond the blind man.

A great soul hides like Muhammad, or Jesus,
moving through a crowd in a city
where no one knows him.

To praise is to praise
how one surrenders
to the emptiness.

To praise the sun is to praise your own eyes.
Praise, the ocean. What we say, little ship.

So the sea-journey goes on, and who knows where!
Just to be held by the ocean is the best luck
we could have. It’s a total waking up!

Why should we grieve that we’ve been sleeping?
It doesn’t matter how long we’ve been unconscious.

We’re groggy, but let the guilt go.
Feel the motions of tenderness
around you, the bouyancy.

-Rumi

New Afghan Law legalizes marital rape?

The Associated Press released a report today that Afghan officials (some say without a discussion by Parliament) that would effectively legislates a couples sexual activity in the home.  The following is from the article:

“As long as the husband is not traveling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night,” Article 132 of the law says. “Unless the wife is ill or has any kind of illness that intercourse could aggravate, the wife is bound to give a positive response to the sexual desires of her husband.”

One provision also appears to protect the woman’s right to sex inside marriage saying the “man should not avoid having sexual relations with his wife longer than once every four months.”

Many critics are saying this is a step back for women’s rights in Afghanistan (a critique with which I agree).  What do you think?  What’s the best way for our current administration to encourage and work alongside Afghan officials to promote civil rights?  What are a person’s “rights” in a marital relationship?  Is it appropriate for this law to be in place, making it possible for men to take legal action against their wives if they are not “obedient”?  What should be the church’s response?  

 

Here’s the link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090402/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_women

III: Leah and Rachel

1. Introduction

2. The Backdrop

3. Leah’s first four naming speeches

“Now the Lord saw that Leah was unloved” (sane’).  This word is used only seven times in Genesis.  Twice it is used in the Rebekah/Isaac narrative, twice referring to Leah, and three times referring to Joseph.  Based on the uses within the Joseph/brothers story[1], I suggest that the term does not necessarily mean rejected or unloved, though that may be part of it.   

In the Joseph narrative, the brothers “hate” Joseph.  He is arrogant and acting as if he were the oldest of the sons.  They first hate him when they see that Jacob loves him more (37:4), they hate him more when Joseph tells the brothers his dream (37:5), and they hate him even more when they realize that the dream means Joseph will have dominion over them (37:8). 

Within this context, at least, this word seems to mean more than an emotional response, though not completely separate from it.  Joseph is hated because he is a younger son acting as if he is the eldest.  He’s operating in a position that, at least in his brothers’ minds, does not belong to him. 

Taking this into consideration, the problem in the Leah/Jacob union is not Leah.  The problem is that Leah is not Rachel.  The problem, then, lies truly in Jacob.  Leah is the first wife, the chief wife.  She is also the wife that is producing offspring.  Jacob worked fourteen years for Rachel.  Rachel is the woman he wanted from the moment they met.  Jacob was tricked into marrying Leah.  It comes as no surprise that Jacob despises Leah since she is in the position Jacob wishes for Rachel. 

Whatever this meant for the couple sexually is unclear.  What the text does reveal about their marital relationship is two-fold. First, she bore him six children, presumably within the (second set of) seven years he was working for Laban to “earn” Rachel.  This indicates the fertility of Leah.  Secondly, Leah did not have the same control of Jacob’s sexual activity as Rachel did.  This is indicated in 30:15 when Rachel gives Leah permission to lie with Jacob (to which I will return). 

In Leviticus 12, the days of ritual uncleanness after the birth of a child are laid out for women based on the sex of the child.  It is unlikely that Jacob and the women would have practiced such strict guidelines, as this story is set in a time prior to the giving of the law.  Regardless, of the amount of time spent after the birth of one child and the conception of the next, it is evident that Leah spent very little of her first years of marriage without being pregnant (she had seven children in seven years!).  Leah’s perpetual pregnancies may be the cause of minimal sexual activity between the couple.  Genesis 30:9 says that “Leah saw that she stopped bearing,” but the text gives no indication that it is due to a sexual abstinence with Jacob.  What the text does indicate is that, regardless how many children Leah were to bear for Jacob, he would never satisfy Leah’s desire for him.  This is evident in the speeches that accompany the naming of her children.

There could be several reasons why Jacob did not rid himself of Leah.  Perhaps he was afraid of what Laban might do if he divorced her.  Perhaps he felt an obligation toward his kinswoman that would not allow him to forsake her completely.  Or perhaps he realized that she was the wife that would provide the children to carry on his lineage.  The text does not indicate any reason why Jacob did not divorce Leah.  In his setting, there was no Torah to define his actions.  There was something that kept Jacob bound to Leah, but whatever that something is, the author either takes it for granted or finds it to be of little import for the purpose of this narrative.

 

Leah is the first to become pregnant, and the narrative sets Leah’s fertility and rejection by Jacob in contrast with Rachel’s barrenness and favor.  ”When the Lord saw that Leah was unloved, he opened her womb; but Rachel was barren” (29:31).  Leah bears four children consecutively in 29:31-35.  The first three naming speeches are all linked to her relationship with Jacob, and three of the four are connected to her belief in God. 

“Leah conceived and bore a son, and she named him Reuben; for she said, ‘because the Lord has looked on my affliction; surely now my husband will love me’” (29:32).  Reuben is her first-born.  His name literally means “see, a son.”  Her speech is two-fold.  She first acknowledges the favor that God has shown her.  God has indeed seen her affliction and allowed her to bring forth a son (see 29:31).  She concludes that since she has given Jacob his firstborn son, “surely now my husband will love me.”  The narrator quickly moves on to the conception and birth of Leah’s next son, which, though not explicitly stating it, assumes the paternal role of Jacob.[2]

“She conceived again and bore a son, and said, ‘Because the Lord has heard that I am hated, he has given me this son also’; and she named him Simeon” (29:33). Leah’s naming of her and Jacob’s second son indicates that the birth of Reuben did not solve her problem as she thought it would.  “The name Simeon is associated with the term sm’, literally, ‘he who hears.’[3]”  Leah believes that God has heard that she is unloved, and has therefore given her Simeon also.  She does not mention Jacob in this speech, but he may be understood as the one that hates her.  Perhaps she views Simeon as a means of making up for the fact that she is hated, or as a means (as she hoped with Reuben) of gaining Jacob’s love.  The text is ambiguous at best.  Regardless of the way Leah interpreted the birth of Simeon, it was not enough to satisfy her longing for her husband, as is evident with the birth of her third child.

“Again she conceived and bore a son, and said ‘Now this time my husband will be joined to me, because I have borne him three sons’; therefore he was named Levi” (29:34). For the first time, Leah recognizes Jacob as a father.   She does not mention God in this speech, and it is the only one of her naming speeches for her own sons that does not.  Levi’s name is connected with the word yillaweh, which literally means “he will be joined[4].”  Leah is still not satisfied with her lot.  She has three children and boys at that, giving her a place in her society, but she does not have her husband’s love.

“She conceived again and bore a son, and said, ‘This time I will praise the Lord’; therefore she named him Judah; then she ceased bearing” (29:35).  With the birth of her fourth child, Leah’s attitude seems to shift.  Her first three sons encouraged her hope that Jacob would love her, but there is no mention of her relationship with Jacob in this speech.  Leah simply says, “This time I will praise the Lord.”  Judah’s name has an “association with the term ‘odeh, literally ‘I will praise.’[5]”  There is no clear reason why she changes with the birth of Judah.  Perhaps she recognized that, despite being rejected by her husband, she was favored by God.  Or she may have, only momentarily, felt as though Jacob’s attitude toward her had changed.  Or she may have been grateful simply for having another son.  Whatever her reasoning, Leah is resolved, if not content, to praise God.  Rachel is another story.

---

[1] I will use this text as it deals with family relationships and not that of nations as in 24:60 with Rebekah.

[2] Joan Ross-Burstall. “Leah and Rachel: A Tale of Two Sisters,” Word and World Vol 14, no 2 (1994). pg. 169

[3] ibid., pg. 170

[4]Ibid., pg. 170

[5] Ibid., pg. 170

---