And he removed that day the he goats that were ringstreaked and spotted, and all the she goats that were speckled and spotted, [and] every one that had [some] white in it, and all the brown among the sheep, and gave [them] into the hand of his sons.
35. into the hand of his sons ] Laban in accepting Jacob’s offer determines to make the very best of the new arrangement. Any parti-coloured goats, and any black sheep in his flock, “he removed that day,” and put into the keeping of his own sons, so that they might not afterwards be claimed by Jacob. Jacob will begin the new term of service with nothing in his favour. All the sheep that he will tend will be white, and all the goats black.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 35. The he-goats that were ring-streaked] hatteyashim haakuddim, the he-goats that had rings of black or other coloured hair around their feet or legs.
It is extremely difficult to find out, from Ge 30:32 and Ge 30:35, in what the bargain of Jacob with his father-in-law properly consisted. It appears from Ge 30:32, that Jacob was to have for his wages all the speckled, spotted, and brown among the sheep and the goats; and of course that all those which were not party-coloured should be considered as the property of Laban. But in Ge 30:35 it appears that Laban separated all the party-coloured cattle, delivered them into the hands of his own sons; which seems as if he had taken these for his own property, and left the others to Jacob. It has been conjectured that Laban, for the greater security, when he had separated the party-coloured, which by the agreement belonged to Jacob, see Ge 30:32, put them under the care of his own sons, while Jacob fed the flock of Laban, Ge 30:36, three days’ journey being between the two flocks. If therefore the flocks under the care of Laban’s sons brought forth young that were all of one colour, these were put to the flocks of Laban under the care of Jacob; and if any of the flocks under Jacob’s care brought forth party-coloured young, they were put to the flocks belonging to Jacob under the care of Laban’s sons. This conjecture is not satisfactory, and the true meaning appears to be this: Jacob had agreed to take all the party-coloured for his wages. As he was now only beginning to act upon this agreement, consequently none of the cattle as yet belonged to him; therefore Laban separated from the flock, Ge 30:35, all such cattle as Jacob might afterwards claim in consequence of his bargain, (for as yet he had no right;) therefore Jacob commenced his service to Laban with a flock that did not contain a single animal of the description of those to which he might be entitled; and the others were sent away under the care of Laban’s sons, three days’ journey from those of which Jacob had the care. The bargain, therefore, seemed to be wholly in favour of Laban; and to turn it to his own advantage, Jacob made use of the stratagems afterwards mentioned. This mode of interpretation removes all the apparent contradiction between Ge 30:32 and Ge 30:35, with which commentators in general have been grievously perplexed. From the whole account we learn that Laban acted with great prudence and caution, and Jacob with great judgment. Jacob had already served fourteen years; and had got no patrimony whatever, though he had now a family of twelve children, eleven sons and one daughter, besides his two wives, and their two maids, and several servants. See Ge 30:43. It was high time that he should get some property for these; and as his father-in-law was excessively parsimonious, and would scarcely allow him to live, he was in some sort obliged to make use of stratagem to get an equivalent for his services. But did he not push this so far as to ruin his father-in-law’s flocks, leaving him nothing but the refuse? See Ge 30:42.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The he-goats that were ring-straked, which had lines or strakes like bands about them of diverse colours from the rest of their body.
Every one that had some white: this word some is oft understood in other texts of Scripture, and here it is so necessarily; as appears both from the thing itself, as it is related, and from the phrase; for he saith not that was white, but that had white in it, to wit, mixed with other colours.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And he removed that day the he goats that were ringstraked and spotted,…. That had strakes of a different colour from the rest on their shoulders, thighs, logs, or feet, or in any part of the body: the word here used stands in the room of that before translated “speckled”; this Laban did, as the context shows; he went about it immediately at the motion of Jacob, with which he was pleased:
and all the she goats that were speckled and spotted; so that there might be neither male nor female of those mixed colours; this he did to prevent any generation of them:
[and] everyone that had [some] white in it; any white spot in it, as the Targum of Jonathan; that is, everyone of the brown or black colour, that had any white in it:
and all the brown among the sheep: that were entirely so:
and, gave [them] into the hands of his sons; not the sons of Jacob, as some in Aben Ezra; for they were not fit for the care of a flock, the eldest son, Reuben, not being seven years of age; but the sons of Laban, who were now grown up and fit for such service.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
35. And he removed that day. From this verse the form of the compact is more certainly known. Laban separates the sheep and goats marked with spots from the pure flock, that is, from the white or black, and commits these to his sons to be fed; interposing a three-days’ journey between them and the rest; lest, by promiscuous intercourse, a particoloured offspring should be produced. It follows, therefore, that, in the flock which Jacob fed, nothing remained but cattle of one color: thus but faint hope of gain remained to the holy man, while every provision was made for Laban’s advantage. It also appears, from the distance of the places, in which Laban kept his flocks apart, that he was not less suspicious than covetous; for dishonest men are wont to measure others by their own standard; whence it happens that they are always distrustful and alarmed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(35) And he removed.The question has been asked whether it was Jacob or Laban who made the division, and whether Jacob was to have all such sheep and goats as were parti-coloured already, or such only as should be born afterwards. The authors of the Authorised Version evidently thought that Laban himself removed all speckled sheep and goats, and kept them; but the Hebrew is by no means so much in favour of this view as their own translation. Thus, in Gen. 30:32 they insert of such in italics; the Hebrew distinctly says, And it shall be my hire: that is, every one speckled or spotted shall be mine, the singular number being used throughout. Next, in Gen. 30:33 they translate, in time to come: according to this, if the particoloured sheep and goats at any time produced white or black lambs, as they generally would, such would revert to Laban; the Hebrew says, My righteousness shall answer for me to-morrow. Jacob was to make the selection at once, but the next day Laban was to look over all those put aside, and if he found among them any white sheep, or black or brown goats, he was to regard them as stolenthat is, not merely might he take them back, but require the usual fine or compensation.
And gave them into the hand of his sons.It has been assumed that these were Labans sons, on the ground that Jacobs sons were not old enough to undertake the charge; but as Reuben was twenty-six, this was not the case. Jacobs flocks would have fared but badly if they had been entrusted to Labans sons, nor could he, six years later, have escaped, had his property been in their keeping, without Laban being immediately aware of it.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
35. Gave them into the hand of his sons Here note the overreaching and imperious disposition of Laban . He does not leave Jacob to divide the flocks, but does it himself, and then removes Jacob’s part three days distant . Jacob was bound to look after Laban’s flock, (Gen 30:31,) and the latter takes every advantage of that fact .
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
he removed: From this it appears, that, as Jacob had agreed to take all the parti-coloured for his wages, and was now only beginning to act upon this agreement, and consequently had as yet no right to any of the cattle, therefore Laban separated from the flock all such cattle as Jacob might afterwards claim in consequence of his bargain, leaving only the black and white with Jacob.
the hand: Gen 31:9
Reciprocal: Gen 30:32 – of such Gen 31:16 – which God Gen 34:5 – now his Gen 46:34 – Thy servants’
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gen 30:35-36. He gave them into the hands of his sons To be fed apart by themselves, lest Jacob should get any of them to mix with those of one colour. He set three days journey betwixt himself and Jacob Such journeys as flocks are able to make, that they might not so much as see one another. Between this and the 37th verse, the Samaritan copy inserts a paragraph about the angels appearing to Jacob in a dream, which is not found in any other version; but is related by Jacob himself in the following chapter, Gen 30:11, as a thing which had happened to him, and which justifies the policy which the subsequent verses represent him as using.