Yaakov said to Rachel and Leah: "Now you have known that it was with all my might that I served your father, yet your father mocked me and changed my wage a hundred times" (Bereishit 31:6-7). Our discussion last week revolved around the verse "grant truth to Yaakov" Micha 7:20) - Yaakov Avinu as the symbol of Man of Truth. Yaakov's honesty was not limited to the words he spoke but extended to his actions as well. We find Yaakov Avinu telling Lavan: "these twenty years I have been with you, your ewes and she-goats never miscarried, nor did I eat rams of your flock. That which was mangled I never brought you - I myself would bear the loss, from me you would exact it, whether it was stolen by day or stolen by night. This is how I was: by day scorching heat consumed me, and frost by night" (Bereishit 31:38-40). Yaakov demonstrated truth in his actions - he took upon himself the task of guarding Lavan's sheep, and this is what he did - he devoted his whole body, heart, and soul to fulfillment of this endeavor.

The Torah describes Yaakov's working an additional seven years for Lavan - "vayaavod imo od sheva shanim acherot" "and he worked for him yet ("od") another ("acherot") seven years" (Bereishit 29:30). The two expressions used in this pasuk have conflicting implications. On the one hand "od sheva shanim" implies that the additional seven years were similar if not equivalent in nature to the initial seven. The term "acherot", on the other hand, suggests that the latter seven years were different in nature from the first. The term "acher" in general has the connotation of something different, not equal to the other subject matter discussed. (For example "and she left his house and went and married a different ('acher') man" (Devarim 24:2). Chazal comment: "Scripture calls him 'different' ('acher') to say that this second husband is not the equal of the first, this first man removed a wicked person from his house, and this second man brought a wicked person into his house" (Gittin 90b). Had the two men been equal, the Torah would have used the word "sheni" to denote another man rather than "acher". "Sheni", second, implies a similarity to the first, whereas "acher" implies dissimilarity. For examples of "sheni" connoting a similarity see Yoma 62b).

How are we to resolve the conflicting implications of this pasuk? The answer is that from Yaakov's perspective, this was "od", an additional seven years similar in nature to the initial seven. From Lavan's point of view, however, these seven years were "acherot" - different in nature. The first seven years were part of the contract that Yaakov had signed with Lavan - the agreement was that Rachel be given over to Lavan in exchange for seven years of labor. It was not fitting to extort such a high price for one's daughter, especially if the prospective son-in-law is Yaakov Avinu, yet an agreement is an agreement and Lavan "earned" Yaakov's labor for seven years. The latter seven years, however, were not earned honestly - they were founded on total deceit. Thus the pasuk stated that they were seven other, different "acherot" years - they were not earned in an honest manner the way the first seven were.

From Yaakov's perspective, however, these were simply "od sheva shanim" - an additional seven years identical to the first seven - "just as the first ones were carried out in good faith, so, too, the latter ones were carried out in good faith" (Rashi Bereishit 29:30). Despite Lavan's extracting these seven years in an underhanded deceitful manner, Yaakov served Lavan during these seven years as faithfully as he had the first seven. In fact, during the additional six years that Yaakov worked in exchange for the flock, Yaakov was deceived time and again. Lavan changed the terms of Yaakov's wages one hundred times (see Rashi Bereishit 31:7). In spite of all this, Yaakov Avinu remained the ever-faithful worker "These twenty years I have been with you, your ewes and she-goats never miscarried, nor did I eat rams of your flock. That which was mangled I never brought you - I myself would bear the loss, from me you would exact it, whether it was stolen by day or stolen by night. This is how I was: by day scorching heat consumed me, and frost by night" (Bereishit 31:38-40). Although Chazal tell us "the righteous are permitted to act deceitfully when others are trying to deceive him, as it says 'with a pure person you act purely and with a crooked person you act crookedly' (Shmuel II 22:27)" (Megilla 13b), the only deceptive way Yaakov was to provide Rachel with signs so that he could protect himself against Lavan's ways (see Megilla there and Rashi Bereishit 29:25). We do not find Yaakov actually deceiving Lavan - despite all that Lavan had done to him, he did not retaliate during the entire twenty years of his employ.

Yaakov's work was with such devotion and faithfulness that it became the measuring stick for generations to come, as to how much trouble a "shomer" (one who safeguards another's property) must go to (see Baba Metzia 93b). This type of straight, faithful, and honest behavior is required of all of us. The Messilat Yesharim (see chapter 11) on this subject, quotes the pasuk "Hashem, are Your eyes not toward truth?" (Yirmiyahu 5:3). Hashem demands and expects of us to be trustworthy - not only towards Hashem but towards our fellow man. We must act with each other in an honest and upright manner in business transactions. Not only must the employee be above suspicion, but this applies to the employer as well. In the case of Yaakov Avinu, the worker was as straight as can be, while the employer was a liar and a cheat who took advantage of his employee's good nature.

In order for us to know the words of the Torah we must first receive it. Our holy forefathers amassed Torah knowledge without it being given to them, as we learn: "Avraham Avinu fulfilled the entire Torah before it was given" (Kiddushin 82a), presumably this applies to Yitzchak and Yaakov as well. From where did they know the Torah prior to its being given? Chazal tell us: "Avraham's two kidneys became as two pitchers of water and were flowing with Torah" (Bereishit Rabba 95:3). What is the meaning of this? This means that the Torah is the natural desire of the soul from the time of its creation. Man was created in the image of G-d and the Torah is Hashem's wisdom and desire. As much as the "image" resembles the original, the more this physical "image" is able to absorb this G-dly wisdom - the wisdom and the desire of the "image" resemble that of G-d. For this reason Avraham Avinu who was a true image of Hashem was able to attain the Torah on his own, as were Yitzchak and Yaakov.

Why have we not been able to achieve knowledge of the Torah on our own, as our forefathers did? Were we not also created in Hashem's image? The answer is found in the pasuk: "G-d has made man simple, but they sought many intrigues" (Kohelet 7:29). Hashem created man straight and simple. If man were to remain with the same straightness, he would have arrived at a mastery of the Torah on his own, as did Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. Our forefathers in fact were referred to as "Yesharim" - straight ones (see Avoda Zara 25a), they were careful to remain on this straight path their entire lives without ruining it. In fact Sefer Bereishit which describes the lives of the forefathers is referred to as Sefer HaYashar. They were therefore able to attain the Torah on their own and within themselves without the need to receive it externally. Other people are not on that level - they were created in a straight manner, but afterwards they start seeking "many intrigues". It was not the pure Torah they were after, they did not honestly wish to know what is Hashem's will, but rather what is good and worthwhile for me. The story is told of a merchant who was asked: "what is two times two?" To this he responded: "that depends - if I am purchasing then it is three, if I am selling then it is five!" When one calculates in this fashion, with prior intent to reach a particular conclusion that is good for me, then of course it is impossible to arrive at the truth.

Someone with a true desire for Torah will not sit and ponder whether learning Torah is worth his while. Adam HaRishon was forbidden to eat from the etz hadaat tov vara - "the Tree of Knowledge of good and bad." (Bereishis 2:9) Would it have been so terrible if Adam and man in general had known how to differentiate between good and bad? Does Hashem wish us all to remain ignorant of the ways of the world? The Rambam explains that before Adam's sin, man was able to distinguish between truth and falsehood. After the sin, man became calculating - he began to make decisions based on what was good and bad for him.

The greatness of Avraham Avinu was that he did not make such calculations: "You found his heart faithful before You." (Nehemiah 9:8) Of Moshe Rabenu too, Hashem Himself testifies, "In My entire House he is the trusted one," (Bamidbar 12:7). He does what Hashem wishes and not necessarily what is good for him. We may not be on the level of our forefathers, but our goal must be to come as close to that level as possible. If this is truly our goal, we can merit receiving the Torah and the G-dly light of the Next World.

The Torah commands us: "You shall do what is fair and good in the eyes of Hashem" (Devarim 6:18).  The Gemara learns several halachot from this pasuk. One example is if you wish to sell your field and there are two potential buyers - one a neighbor and one someone else, then better sell to the neighbor for that will provide him with the option of expanding his property by connecting his field and the newly purchased field.

I recently saw a sign posted stating that one should be careful in a particular situation not to take what is someone else's for it is forbidden to steal. What a terrible state we are in that someone has to hang up a sign that it is forbidden to steal! We have already been told at Har Sinai that we cannot steal. The Rav (HaRav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach) zt"l once told me that even in situations where the precise halacha permits stealing from a non-Jew, one should not do so. In my humble opinion even if it is permitted, it is not in keeping with the dictates of the above-cited pasuk: You shall do what is fair and good in the eyes of Hashem" Stealing, even if permissible, is an action that corrupts one's soul. One should not only weigh whether or not this is halachically permitted, but whether it is good for one's character. Stealing from a non-Jew, even in cases when permitted, can eventually lead to stealing from Jews.

In addition to stealing being a corrupting influence, the Sma"g offers an additional reason why one should not steal from a non-Jew. The ultimate redemption will be a source of Kiddush Hashem, as it says "vekidashti et shmi hagadol hamechulal bagoyim asher chilaltem betocham" "I will sanctify My great Name that is desecrated among the nations, that you have desecrated among them" (Yechezkel 36:23). The redemption will take place in any event, but if the Jewish people are perceived as people who steal from non-Jews, the other nations will claim that Hashem redeemed a nation of thieves. The redemption, rather than being a Kiddush Hashem, will G-d forbid be a source of chilul Hashem. The same can apply to deceiving a non-Jew, which the Rambam says can destroy one's soul. It does not take much to see how corrupt one can get, when it begins with stealing from non-Jews, from the state, or anything else. Furthermore, we are commanded vehalachta bidrachav "go in His ways" (Devarim 28:9).

One common situation is with regard to shidduchim - many try to hide information. Imagine a couple getting married based on lies. In Sheva Brachot we wish the couple that they live with ahava ve-achva shalom vereiut, how in such a situation of untruths is it possible to live such a happy life?

Of course, there are situations when the truth could be altered slightly, such as to keep the peace as we discussed last week regarding Sarah saying her husband was old and Hashem altering that statement slightly when speaking to Avraham.

I received a phone call from a young woman - I do not know who she is.

She told me that she was nineteen years old but had the appearance of being younger. The question she asked me was whether she was permitted to use a youth card (a discounted price for those under the age of eighteen) when riding the bus. What did she actually think? Does it say anywhere on the card that the price is based on one's physical appearance? If the bus cards were given out based on one's appearance then she would be permitted to ride as one under eighteen, although I cannot say this for sure, perhaps it is only she and no one else who views herself as looking younger. Is the fact that one appears young sufficient reason for using a youth ticket? She proceeded to argue the point with me and claimed that a "chareidi" woman told her it was fine. I do not know what defines the woman as "chareidi" (G-d fearing) she certainly is not "chared", fearing, of Egged (the bus company). She did not accept my ruling, claiming that I was too "machmir".

May we merit always following in the path of Torah, following the examples of our forefathers and other gedolim.