<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2>*************************************************************<BR>
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]<BR> In Memory of
Rabbi Abraham Leibtag<BR> Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem
Leibtag<BR>*************************************************************</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2>
PARSHAT VAYERA</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=765480111-09112006> </SPAN> It is very comfortable
to think of Sedom as a city of thugs and perverts. After all, is that not
the reason why God decided to destroy it? And certainly, most of our own
societies are nowhere as bad - we should hope.<BR> Yet, a more
careful study of the Torah's presentation of these events (as we will soon
demonstrate), could lead to the opposite conclusion - that Sedom was a city with
a culture not very different from our own.<BR><SPAN
class=765480111-09112006> </SPAN> In the following shiur we‘ll
examine this possibility, as we study how the Torah tells the famous story of
Avraham and the 'three angels'.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>INTRODUCTION<BR><SPAN
class=765480111-09112006> </SPAN> Our series on Sefer Bereishit has
been following the theme of 'bechira', i.e. God's choice of Avraham Avinu to
become the forefather of His special nation. In last week's shiur, we
discussed why God chose Avraham Avinu - i.e. to create a nation that will bring
the Name of God and His message to all mankind. <BR><SPAN
class=765480111-09112006> </SPAN> But how will this nation ultimately
be able to achieve that goal? In this week's shiur, we'll attempt to show
how the Torah answers this question in its presentation of the story of God's
consultation with Avraham Avinu before He destroys Sedom.<BR><SPAN
class=765480111-09112006> </SPAN> We begin our shiur by paying
attention to the lack of any 'parshia' divisions in this entire
narrative.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>AN EXTRA LONG 'PARSHIYA'<BR> Even though a
'parshia' break in Chumash is most similar to a 'paragraph break', there are
times when a single 'parshia' is extraordinary long. When this does
happen, we would expect it to be thematically significant, especially when that
'parshia' contains more than one story.<BR> And that is
exactly what we find at the beginning of Parshat Vayera, where the 'parshia'
that begins in 18:1 continues all the way until the end of chapter 19, yet
contains two unrelated topics:<BR> 1) The news that Sarah will give
birth to Yitzchak;<BR> 2) The story of God's destruction of Sedom
(& Lot's rescue). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> By including both of these
events in the same 'parshia', the Torah is already alerting the reader to search
for a thematic connection between these two events.<BR> One could suggest
that these events are recorded together for the simple reason that the same
"mal’achim" [angels or messengers] are involved in both stories. However,
this itself raises the same question from a different angle, i.e. why are the
same "mal’achim" who are sent to destroy Sedom - first instructed to inform
Avraham about the forthcoming birth of Yitzchak?<BR>[If we adopt Rashi's
position (see 18:2) that each angel was assigned only one mission, then we would
re-phrase our question: Why must all three travel together, or why doesn't each
angel travel directly to fulfill his own mission?]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>THE DEEPER 'CONNECTION'<BR> The
answer to this question can be found (right where we would expect) - at the
transition point between these two stories. <BR> As you review
these psukim, note how the first topic, i.e. the tiding that Sarah will have a
child (18:1-16), clearly concludes in 18:16 - while the story of God's
destruction of Sedom doesn't begin until 18:20. Hence, by default,
18:17-19 form the transition between these two stories.<BR>
Let's take a careful look at this 'segue', noting how it forms a 'parenthetical
comment' to the reader - before Chumash continues with the story of Sedom
:<BR>"And God said: Shall I hide from Avraham what I am about to do? For
Avraham is to become a great nation ["goy gadol"], and through him, all other
nations will be blessed ["ve-nivrechu bo..."] <BR> For I
have 'come to know him' in order that he will instruct his children and his
household after him to keep the way of God by doing what is just and right... -
in order that I shall bring upon Avraham all that I have spoken about him."
<BR> (See Breishit 18:17 19)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Review these psukim once again
(in their context), noting how it explains why God must first consult Avraham
before destroying Sedom; and hence, it forms an appropriate transition between
these two stories.<BR> However, these psukim appear to allude
to a much deeper thematic connection - especially when we consider their obvious
textual parallel to the first three psukim of Parshat Lech Lecha:<BR>"...
ve-e'escha le-goy gadol - and I will make you a great nation - and bless you and
you will be a blessing [to others] -"ve-nivrechu becha kol mishpechot ha-adama
/ - and through you all the nations will be blessed" (see
12:1-3).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Review these psukim once again, while
comparing them to 18:18. Clearly, the wording of 18:18 highlights how God
had originally chosen Avraham Avinu to become the forefather of a great nation -
but now 18:19 provides us with the underlying reason for why he was
chosen:<BR>"...in order that he will instruct his children and his household
after him to keep the way of God by doing "tzedek u'mishpat" - what is just and
right..." (see 18:19)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> First, Chumash explains to the
reader (in verse 18) that Avraham Avinu had been chosen to become a nation that
would be a blessing for all nations - and then (in verse 19) God explains how
this will happen - for Avraham will teach his children (and those children their
children, etc.) to do tzedaka u-mishpat! <BR> In other words, Avraham
is expected to initiate a family tradition - that will create a society
characterized by acts of tzedaka & mishpat [social justice]. In this
manner, they will truly serve as God's model nation. [See also Devarim
4:5-8 for a very similar explanation. See also Yeshayahu
42:5-6.]<BR> As Avraham is commanded to pass on (and teach) this
destiny to his son - Yitzchak, it makes sense that the Torah would inform the
reader of this destiny, immediately after the story of God's promise to Avraham
concerning the birth of Yitzchak.<BR> With this background, we
can suggest a reason for why the Torah records both stories in the same
'parshia'.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>PREVENTING FUTURE CITIES LIKE
SDOM<BR> According to 18:18-19, God had chosen Avraham to become the
forefather a 'model nation' that would be know for its heritage of "tzedaka
u'mishpat". Should that nation fulfill that destiny, then it would be able
to save societies such as Sedom, for they will serve as a 'model nation' from
whom corrupt nations could learn from. <BR> If this interpretation is
correct, then it also explains why the Torah records Avraham's petition that God
spare the doomed city. Avraham does not ask that God save only the
righteous men in Sedom; instead, he begs that God should save the entire city -
for the sake of those tzaddikim! [See 18:26.] - Why? <BR> Because -
hopefully - those righteous few may one day, by setting an example, influence
the people in Sedom towards proper behavior, just as the nation of Avraham is
destined to lead all mankind in the direction of God.<BR> This also
explains when Avraham's petition ends. After God agrees to save the city
for the sake of 50 righteous men, Avraham continues to 'bargain' for the sake of
45, 40, 30, etc. - until he reaches ten (see 18:23-32). He stops at ten,
for there is little chance that such a small number would ever be able to exert
a serious influence upon an entire community.<BR>[This may relate to the concept
of a 'minyan' - a minimum amount of people capable of making God's Name
known. Note as well the influence the ten 'spies' have on the entire
nation in the incident of the 'meraglim', and how Chazal learn the number ten
for a minyan from that incident!]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> It is God's hope that, in the
future, Avraham's nation would prevent the emergence of 'future Sedoms' - by
creating a model society established on acts of "tzedaka u-mishpat". As
Yitzchak is the son through whom this tradition will be transmitted, it is
meaningful that the same angels assigned to destroy Sedom must first 'plant the
seeds' for the prevention of future Sedom's - by informing Avraham concerning
the birth of Yitzchak.<BR> The Torah goes out of its way to record how
Avraham makes this gallant effort to save Sedom, for it reflects the very
purpose for why he had been chosen. Despite his futility of his efforts at
this time, it will be this tradition that he must pass on to his son Yitzchak,
and later to all future generations of the Jewish people. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>AVRAHAM VS. SEDOM<BR> Even though at this
point in the narrative, we are not yet aware of the precise sin of Sedom, this
'prelude' certainly suggests that it must relate in some manner to a lack of
"tzedek u-mishpat".<BR> Now, we will attempt to determine more precisely
what their sin was, and how it represents the antithesis of everything for which
Avraham stands.<BR> Chapter 18 is not the first time in Sefer Breishit when
Sedom is mentioned. As we explained in our shiur on Parshat Lech Lecha,
Lot's decision to leave Avraham and move to Sedom (13:1 18) reflects his
preference not to be dependent on God and to dissociate himself from his
uncle. It is in that context that we are told: "The men of Sedom were very
wicked to God" (see 13:13).<BR> Furthermore, after rescuing Lot from the
'four kings' (see chapter 14), Avraham refuses to keep any property belonging to
Sedom which was recovered in that victory. Although he rightfully deserves
his 'fair share' of the spoils from the battle which he himself fought and won,
Avraham Avinu, expressing his opposition to anything associated with Sedom,
prefers to completely divorce himself from any resources originating from that
city:<BR>"Avram said to the King of Sedom: I swear to the Lord, God Most High,
Creator of heaven and earth: I will not take so much as a thread or a shoe strap
of what is yours, so you can not say: It is I who made Avram rich"
(14:22 23).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Based on this backdrop, it would
be safe to assume that the sin of Sedom must relate in some manner to a lack of
" tzedek u-mishpat". Therefore, we must read that ensuing story (in
chapter 19) in search of that theme.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>A GOOD HOST<BR> Review the first three psukim
of chapter 19, noting how the Torah goes out of its way to describe how
insistent Lot is to provide these two 'unknown travelers' with a place to
stay:<BR>"And the two mal’achim came to Sedom towards evening, and Lot was
sitting by the gate of the city, as he saw them he approached them... And
he said - <BR>'Please come stay at your servant's house, for lodging and washing
up, then you can continue on your way in the morning'; <BR>but they
declined. But Lot very much insisted, so they came to his house; he gave
them to drink and baked for them matzot [wafers] to eat." (see
19:1-3).<BR> <BR> Clearly, the Torah is emphasizing Lot's very own
"hachnasat orchim" [hospitality] as the opening theme of this narrative.
<BR> Furthermore, it seems that this is precisely how the 'angels' planned
to 'test-out' the city to see if it deserved to be destroyed. Recall how
God originally told Avraham:<BR>"The crying out from Sedom is too great... I
shall go down and see whether they deserve destruction or not..."
(18:21)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> God sends these two 'angels' not only to
destroy Sedom, but first to determine if indeed the city deserves to be
destroyed (and if there are any "tzadikim" who deserved to be saved). By
pretending to 'sleep on the street' (see 19:1-2), they are testing if there is
any hospitality in Sedom - a test which Lot passes (see 19:3), and the rest of
the city failed terribly (see 19:4-6).<BR> In fact, one could suggest that
this same theme of hospitality and the lack of "tzedek u'mishpat" continues in
the Torah's description of the city's reaction to Lot's harboring of his two
guests. To explain how, let's carefully follow the narrative:<BR>"..They
[his two guests] had not lain down yet when the townspeople, the men of Sedom,
gathered outside his house - from young to old - all the people until the edge
[of the city]. And they protested [outside his house] and shouted: 'Where
are those men who came to visit you this evening? Take them out of your
house so we can know them [ve-nei'da'em]" (see 19:4-5).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Most of us are familiar with Rashi's
interpretation, that this gathering consisted of merely a small group of the
lowest social and ethical stratum of Sedom, who wanted to 'know them' in the
Biblical sense (i.e. sodomy, based on 19:8 and 4:1).
<BR> However, read this pasuk in its original Hebrew very
carefully, noting how the Torah only states that the demonstrators wanted to
'know them', which is open to a wide range of interpretation.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>NO GUESTS ALLOWED<BR> Ramban (and Rasag)
advance a totally different interpretation, explaining that the entire town did
indeed join in this protest (as the simple reading of this pasuk implies), for
they had all gathered outside Lot's house, demanding to 'know' who these guests
were.<BR> Why are they protesting, and what they
demanding?<BR> As Ramban explains so beautifully (see
his commentary on 19:5), the people of Sedom are protesting against Lot's
hospitality to these strangers - as they would call for a mass protest anytime
there was a fear that someone in their town was 'harboring'
guests!<BR> According to Ramban, there appears to have been a strict law in
Sedom of: No guests allowed! As the people of Sedom didn't want to ruin
their exclusive [suburban] neighborhood, they did everything possible to keep
away 'transients'. It was their terrible fear that should Lot accommodate
guests this evening, tomorrow night more guests may come, and by the end of the
month, the city streets could be flooded with transients and beggars.
Should the word get out that there is 'free lodging' in Sedom, their perfect
'country club' would be ruined. <BR>[One could even find a warped ideology
in this 'policy'. For example, one could reason in a similar manner that
no one should help the needy, for if everyone agreed not to take care of them,
then they would ultimately learn to take care of themselves.]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Hence, should any citizen of Sedom bring home
a guest ['chas ve-shalom'], the city's 'steering committee' would immediately
call for a public protest. [See also Sanhedrin 109a.]<BR> There may
have been "mishpat" in Sedom - a standardized system of laws and ordinances -
but it was terribly warped. Not to mention the fact that "tzedaka" had no
place whatsoever in this bastion of immorality. <BR>[Chazal remark in Pirkei
Avot that the social norm of 'sheli sheli, shelcha shelcha' - what is mine is
mine, what is yours is yours - is a 'custom of Sedom'. The attribution of
this social philosophy to Sedom reflects this same understanding (see Pirkei
Avot 5:10 - 'arba midot ba-adam...').]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>TZEDEK U-MISHPAT VS. SEDOM<BR> This
interpretation explains why, throughout Nevi’im Acharonim, Sedom is consistently
associated with the absence of "tzedek u-mishpat". In fact, the three most
famous of the Nevi’im Acharonim - Yeshayahu, Yirmiyahu, and Yechezkel - all of
whom foresee and forewarn the destruction of the first bet ha-mikdash, compare
the corrupt society in Israel to that of Sedom, and see therein the reason for
their own forthcoming destruction.<BR> As we will show, in every instance
where Sedom is mentioned by the prophets, it is always in reference to a society
lacking social justice, and never in reference to illicit sexual behavior - such
as 'sodomy'.<BR> The simplest proof of this point is found in Sefer
Yechezkel, as he states explicitly that this was indeed the sin of Sedom (i.e.
the very same point discussed above concerning "hachnasat orchim"):<BR>"...Your
younger sister was Sedom... Did you not walk in her ways and practice her
abominations? Why, you are more corrupt than they in all your ways... This
was the sin of your sister Sedom - she had plenty of bread and untroubled
tranquillity, yet she did not support the poor and the needy. In her
haughtiness, they sinned before Me, so I removed them, as you saw..." (see
Yechezkel 16:46-50). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> In Yeshayahu, the direct connection between
the lack of "tzedek u-mishpat" and Sedom is even more explicit. As we all
recall from the Haftara of Shabbat Chazon, Yeshayahu compares Am Yisrael's
behavior to that of Sedom & Amora:<BR>"Listen to the word of God - you [who
are like] officers of Sedom, pay attention to the teachings of our God - you
[who are like] the people of Amora. Why should I accept your many
offerings... Instead, learn to do good, devote yourself to justice, aid the
wronged, uphold the rights of the orphan, defend the cause of the widow... How
has the faithful city, once filled with mishpat tzedek, now become a city of
murderers..." (Isaiah 1:10-21, see also 1:3-9!)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Recall also how Yeshayahu
concludes this nevu’a:<BR>"Tzion be-mishpat tipadeh, ve-shaveha bi-tzedaka -
Zion will be redeemed by our doing "mishpat"; her repentance - through our
performance of tzedaka.<BR> In chapter five - Yeshayahu's famous 'mashal
ha-kerem' [the parable of the vineyard] - the prophet reiterates God's initial
hope and plan that Am Yisrael would perform tzedaka u-mishpat, and the
punishment they deserve for doing exactly the opposite:<BR> "va yikav
le mishpat ve hiney mispach"<BR> [God had hoped to find justice, and
found instead injustice],<BR> "li-tzedaka ve-hiney tze'aka."
(Yeshayahu 5:7)<BR> [to find "tzedaka," and instead found
iniquity]<BR> [note amazing parallel with Breishit
18:19-21!]<BR> (See Isaiah 5:1-10, as well as 11:1-6.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Perhaps the strongest expression of this
theme is found in Yirmiyahu. In his powerful charge to the House of David
[whose lineage stems not only from Yehuda but also (& not by chance) from
Ruth the Moabite, a descendant of Lot!], Yirmiyahu articulates God's precise
expectation of the Jewish king:<BR>"Hear the word of God, King of Judah, you who
sit on the throne of David... Do mishpat u-tzedaka... do not wrong a stranger,
an orphan, and the widow.." (Yirmiyahu 22:1 5).<BR> [See
also 21:11-12.]<BR> Later, when Yirmiyahu contrasts the corrupt king
Yehoyakim with his righteous father Yoshiyahu, he admonishes:<BR>"... Your
father (Yoshiyahu)... performed tzedaka u-mishpat, and that made him
content. He upheld the rights of the poor and needy - is this not what it
means to know Me [la-da’at oti], God has said! But you (Yehoyakim) - on
your mind is only your ill-gotten gains..." (see 22:13-17)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Note that Yirmiyahu considers doing tzedaka
& mishpat as the means by which we come to 'know God' ['la-da’at et Hashem'
- (compare with Breishit 18:19, see also Yirmiyahu 9:23)]!<BR> Finally,
when Yirmiyahu speaks of the ideal king who will bring the redemption, he
emphasizes this very same theme:<BR>"A time is coming - Hashem declares - when I
will raise up a true branch of David's line. He shall reign as king and
prosper, and he will perform mishpat and tzedaka in the land. In his days,
Yehuda shall be delivered and Israel shall dwell secure..." (23:5-6). [See
also Zecharya 7:9; 8:8, 16 17, II Shmuel 8:15!]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> This reason for the choice of the Kingdom of
David corresponds with the underlying purpose behind God's choosing of Avraham
Avinu. As we have explained numerous times, God's designation of Avraham
came not in reward for his exemplary behavior, but rather for a specific
purpose: to establish a model nation - characterized by tzedek u mishpat - that
will bring all mankind closer to God. For this very same reason, God
chooses a royal family to rule this nation - the House of David. They too
are chosen in order to teach the nation the ways of "tzedaka u-mishpat".
<BR> But even when there is a lack of proper leadership, this charge to
follow the 'way of God' to do "tzedka u'mishpat" remains an eternal challenge
for every individual. To prove this point, and to summarize this theme, we
need only quote one last pasuk from Yirmiyahu (not by chance, the concluding
pasuk of the Haftara for Tisha Be-av): <BR> "Thus says the
Lord:<BR> Let not the chacham [wise man] glory in his wisdom;<BR> Let
not the gibor [strong man] glory in his strength;<BR> Let not the ashir
[rich man] glory in his riches.<BR> - But only in this should one
glory:<BR>Let him be wise to know Me [haskel v-yado’a oti] -For I the Lord act
in the land with chesed [kindness], mishpat, and tzedaka - for it is this that I
desire, says the Lord." <BR> (see Yirmiyahu 9:22-23, see also
Y. 22:13-20). <BR>[See also the Rambam's concluding remarks to the last
chapter of Moreh Nevuchim!] <BR> Once again we find that knowing God
means emulating His ways, acting in accordance with the values of tzedek
u-mishpat. Should the entire nation act in this manner, our goal can be
accomplished.<BR> Thus, what appears at first to be simply a parenthetical
statement by God (concerning Avraham) before destroying Sedom (in Breishit
18:19) unfolds as a primary theme throughout Tanach!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>LA-DA’AT - THE KEY WORD<BR> It is not by
chance that Yirmiyahu (in the above examples) uses the Hebrew word 'la-da’at' in
the context of following a lifestyle of tzedek u-mishpat. As we have
already seen, the shoresh 'daled.ayin.heh' has been a key word throughout the
narrative concerning Sedom. First and foremost in a positive context: "ki
yeda’tiv lema’an asher... la'asot tzedaka u-mishpat..." (18:19), but also in a
negative context: 've-im lo eida’a' (see 18:21!). However,
this same word also surfaces in a rather ambiguous manner later on in the
story. As noted briefly earlier, Rashi and Ramban dispute the meaning of
've-neida otam' (see 19:5 - when the protesters demand that Lot surrender his
guests). From this pasuk alone, it is not at all clear what this phrase
implies.<BR> Rashi explains that the men of Sedom wanted to 'know them' in
the Biblical sense (i.e. to 'sleep' with them 'mishkav zachar' - see 4:1 &
Chizkuni on 19:5 - and hence the English word for this act: 'sodomy').
Ramban contends that they wanted to 'know' their identity in order to 'kick them
out of town,' in accordance with their city ordinance that prohibited visitors.
<BR> Clearly, Ramban takes into consideration the psukim from Yechezkel
(which he cites explicitly, and most probably also took into account Yeshayahu
chapter 1) that clearly identify Sedom's [primary] sin as their unwillingness to
help the poor and needy. In light of the direct contrast drawn between
Avraham's devotion to tzedek u-mishpat and the character of Sedom (as in
18:17-19), we can readily understand why Ramban preferred to interpret 've-neida
otam' in relation to 'kicking out' these unwanted guests. <BR> Rashi (and
many other commentators) argue that ve-neida otam implies mishkav zachar
(sodomy). This opinion is based primarily on Lot's reaction to the
protestors' request of offering his two daughters instead of his guests, and his
comment, 'asher lo yad’u ish' (see 19:8 / note again the use of the same
'shoresh'). <BR> Had it not been for the psukim in Yechezkel
16:48-50, and the special 'prelude' to these events in Breishit 18:19, then
Rashi's explanation would seem to be the most logical. However, the wider
context of these events certainly supports Ramban's approach.
<BR> To bring additional support for Ramban's approach, let's
examine the story a little more carefully, as we will try to show the entire
story may center around "tzedek u'mishpat", and it could be that Lot really
never intended to give over his daughters to that crowd.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>WHO HAD GATHERED OUTSIDE THE HOUSE?<BR> The
most obvious problem with Rashi's explanation (that the protestors are
interested in sodomy) stems from their sheer number. According to 19:4, it
appears that the group that gathers outside Lot's house includes the entire
city, most likely hundreds if not thousands of individuals, young and old - the
entire city! If they are simply interested in sodomy, pardon the
expression, how could two guests 'suffice'?<BR>[Rashi, in light of this problem,
offers a somewhat novel explanation for 19:4, that only the 'thugs of Sedom'
('anshei Sedom' implying a specific group and not the entire city) banged on
Lot's door. The Torah mentions the rest of the population - 'from young to
old' - only in regard to the fact that they did not protest the gang's depraved
behavior. Rasag (on 19:4) disagrees, proving from 19:11 that both young
and old had gathered outside Lot's house.]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Ramban combines both explanations, i.e. he
criticizes Lot's own character for foolishly offering his two daughters in
exchange so that he could continue to provide proper hospitality for his
guests. However, this explanation of 19:8 is also quite difficult, for how
(and why) should this offer appease this mass crowd who claim (according to
Ramban) to be interested only in expelling unwanted guests!<BR> One could
suggest an explanation for Lot's remarks that solves all of the above questions,
thus leaving Lot's character untainted, while keeping the focus of these events
entirely on the lack of tzedek u-mishpat in Sedom.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>GIVING MUSSAR<BR> Any attempt to understand
Lot's bizarre offer of his daughters must take into consideration not only the
context, but also the crowd's reaction. Let's take a closer look at how
the crowd responds to Lot's 'proposal':<BR>"And they said to him:
<BR> Go away [gesh hal'ah - i.e. move a far
distance]<BR> You have just (recently) come to dwell (in our
city) -<BR>and now you judge us!<BR>Now we will deal with you worse than with
them..."<BR> (see 19:9, read carefully).<BR> What was there in Lot's
offer that prompted this severe response and censure? If Lot was seriously
offering his daughters, why couldn't they just say: No, we prefer the men!
Instead, they threaten to be more evil with Lot than with his guests. Does
this mean that they want to 'sleep' with Lot as well?<BR>It seems more likely
that they are now threatening to throw Lot out of town!<BR> One could
suggest that when Lot pleads: "My brothers, don't do such evil [to my guests],
here are my two daughters..." (see 19:6); he is not seriously offering his
daughters at all. Rather, he makes mention of them as part of a vehement
condemnation of the people. In a sarcastic manner, Lot is telling the
crowd that he'd sooner give over his daughters than his guests - even though he
has no intention whatsoever of actually doing that. <BR>[Note how Reuven's
statement to Yaakov that he would kill his own two sons... etc. (see Breishit
42:37) could be understood in a similar manner; i.e. not that he would do that,
but he makes this bizarre offer to emphasize his seriousness to his
father.]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Furthermore, as we mentioned
above, if indeed the entire town has gathered, how could two women 'appease'
such a large crowd! Instead, it would make more sense to explain that Lot
is making this harsh statement as a form of rebuke, emphasizing how important it
is that they allow him to keep guests. It is at though he was saying: "I'd
sooner give you my daughters than my two guests."<BR>[Note as well that Lot does
not bring his daughters with him when he makes this so-called 'offer.' In
fact, he actually closes the door behind him (see 19:6) - and only afterward
leaves to negotiate with the rioters. Had Lot been truly serious about his
offer, he should have taken them outside with him! Also, the conclusion of
the story suggests that Lot's daughters were actually married (see 19:14/ unless
we assume that Lot had more than two daughters).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> This explains why the crowd becomes so
angered by Lot's remarks. They are taken aback by his harsh rebuke of
their 'no guest' policy.<BR> Based on this interpretation [that Lot is
'giving them mussar' and not 'making a deal'], we can better understand the
mob's response to Lot's offer (19:6-8). They neither accept nor reject
Lot's proposal. Instead, they express their anger with Lot's rebuke:
<BR>"One has just come to live by us - va-yishpot shafot - and now he is judging
us; now we will deal more harshly with you than [we planned to deal] with them!"
(see 19:8-9).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> What do people mean by "you are judging
us"? Apparently, there is something in Lot's response that suggests a type
of character judgment - but is it only his request that they 'not be so evil'
(see 19:7)? <BR> One could suggest that they consider Lot's sarcastic offer
of his daughters instead of his guests as a moral judgment of their 'no-guest'
policy; a reprehension of their unethical social system. If so, then this
is exactly to what 'va-yishpot shafot' refers to. They are angered for Lot
has 'judged' their character. <BR> As no one likes
being told what to do, especially by 'newcomers' - they react in very
threatening manner.<BR> In other words, the crowd is saying:
'HEY, you're just a newcomer here in our town, and you already think you can
tell us how we should act! Now - we're going to kick you & your guests
out of town!<BR>[This interpretation of 'shafot' in relation to rebuke (or being
'judgmental') is found elsewhere Tanach: For example, see Shmuel I 7:6,
where Shmuel (at Mitzpa) rebukes the entire nation for their behavior. We
find a similar use of the verb 'lishpot' in I Shmuel 12:7, when Shmuel rebukes
the nation for not appreciating God's salvation when asking for a king to lead
them instead! See also Yirmiyahu 1:16, and its context.] <BR> If
our interpretation is correct, then it may be that Sedom's sin related solely to
the lack of social justice (as Yechezkel 16:48-49 implies), and had nothing to
do with 'sodomy' at all! And for this reason alone, God found it necessary
to destroy that city.<BR> Agreed, that there are many other ways to explain
these events, but the very possibility that the entire story of Sedom deals
exclusively with the lack of social justice certainly must be considered not
only when we contemplate our own values and lifestyle, but even more so when
deciding our community priorities.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> shabbat
shalom,<BR> menachem<BR>=====</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>FOR FURTHER IYUN<BR>1. See Rambam in Sefer Zra'im,
Hilchot Matnot Aniyim, chapter 10, the first halacha. Note how he explains
that the mitzva of tzedaka requires the highest priority, and he supports his
statement from Breishit 18:18-19, as we discussed in our shiur.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2. In Parshat Ki Tetzeh (see Devarim 23:4-5), the
Torah forbids the marriage of a Jew with a 'mo’avi ve-amoni' [Moabite or
Ammonite], the descendents of Lot. But note the reason, "for they did not
greet you with bread and water when you were traveling through the
desert...".<BR> Once again we see the theme of hachnasat orchim in relation
to Sedom and Lot. Note as well how Ruth the Moabite does return one
strain of Lot back into Am Yisrael, which will later lead to David
ha-Melech. However, in that story, Ruth's entry is replete with incidents
relating to acts of tzedaka.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>