Manipulation: Posing the Question

20 Kislev 5773

"And G-d said to Jacob, 'Return to the land of your fathers and to your birthplace and I will be with you.' And Jacob sent and called Rahel and Leah to the field, to his sheep. And he said to them, "I see your father's face that it is not unto me as it was yesterday and two days ago, and the G-d of my fathers is with me...And an angel of G-d said to me in a dream...'now rise, leave this land and return to the land of your birth.'"
Genesis 31:3-13

If G-d revealed Himself to you today and asked you to do one thing, would you do it?
Of course you would.
Yet when G-d tells Yaakov to get himself out of a situation that Yaakov himself qualifies as being terrible, rather than simply do it he first consults with his wives regarding the matter.
If they had said they didn't want to go, what would he have done?

As I see it there are three ways of looking at Yaakov's proposal:
1) He really thought they had an option.
2) He knew that he was obligated, but didn't feel that he could impose that obligation on others.
3) He thought they didn't have an option but wanted to break the news to them in a way that would make them agree.

In the first case Yaakov consults with his wives sincerely, in order to determine how they felt about leaving. Presumably, if they had said that they did not wish to leave their father he would have acquiesced.

In the second case Yaakov is generous. To be fair, G-d did phrase the command in the singular, so it could have been that Yaakov himself was required to leave, but his wives and his children weren't. Had they not wanted to go with him he would have had to separate from them, and he makes this clear to Rahel and Leah by keeping the imperative of 'to leave' in the singular. He even conceals the fact that he received this command from G-d Himself, claiming instead that he received direction from an angel, perhaps in order to ensure that Rahel and Leah not feel obligated by the will of G-d to go with him. Yaakov makes it clear that he must go and is inviting them to join him.

The third option is the one that is both most likely and most disturbing to me. In this situation, Yaakov knows that his wives and children are bound to follow him, like as not, so he presents the facts to them in such a way as will influence them to agree with him. He presents it to them as though they have a choice so that the decision feels autonomous, rather than imposed, making them more open to it. In addition to this he spends four verses (6-9) abusing their father and presenting G-d as a saviour to him in the face of the abuse he suffered at their father's hand.
It seems that Yaakov is very carefully and subtly manipulating his wives.

This presents a most difficult moral dilemma: Is is appropriate to manipulate a person in order to fulfill a greater good, even be it the will of G-d?

Obviously this is a loaded question, and to answer it would require deep analysis of the moral nature of manipulation, and its effects upon free will and human respect.