Print Version of http://www.darchenoam.org/articles/web/parsha/ar_lech.htm
Copyright 2003 Darche Noam Institutions
“Lot
lifted up his eyes and saw how lush the whole plain of the Yarden was, before
G-d destroyed Sodom and Amora, like the Divine garden, like the land of Egypt,
going towards Tzoar (Heb. boacha Tzoar).”
Rashi
: " Until Tzoar": The Midrash explains this [reference to Tzoar -- later on the
scene of Lot’s incestual relations with his daughters] in a derogatory way. Lot actually chose to live among them
{the people of Sedom) because they were steeped in immoral sexuality.
Doesn’t
the simple meaning of the verse already tell us why Lot picked the area -- because
of its fertile land?! Why did the
Sages introduce this new, much darker, element into Lot’s intentions? The Torah
explicitly tells us why he picked Sodom -- for economic reasons?
This
and other midrashim can be explained by understanding the Sages' general approach
to human motivations and the human psyche. Just like there is “Pardes” (acronym
for 4 levels of understanding, Peshat, Remez, Derach and Sod) with regards to
the Torah -- multiple layers of meaning starting from the straightforward and
reaching to allusions and hidden meanings -- so there is “Pardes” with regards
to a person. Underlying a person's
thoughts and speech are his inner motivations. The person himself may not even
be conscious of these motivations, hidden in the recesses of his being.
This
approach is at the heart of many comments by the Sages. For instance, when the people of Israel complained about life
in the desert, they said, “We remember the fish we used to eat in Egypt for
free . . . ” (Bemidbar 11:5). The Sages see the fish as a reference to Egypt’s
sexual immorality. Why not just
say they were reminiscing about the food -- the fish, onions and garlic?
Why introduce sexual immorality into the picture?
Chazal are speaking of subconscious motivations. Given the wonderful picture the Torah
paints about the manna, it is difficult to say that they had such nostalgia
about fish, onions, and garlic. Even though the Jews were actually talking about
fish -- and also thinking about it -- there must be an inner side to their complaint.
Through the Sages’ understanding of people or their mystical wisdom,
they comment that Israel was really reminiscing about Egypt’s immorality.
The
Sages understood Lot’s choice in a similar way.
How could Lot think of distancing himself from Avraham? Could money really be the motivation?
Did he not initially become rich through his contact with Avraham (see Rashi
on 13:5)?! There must have been more to it, even
though Lot himself was consciously thinking about the fertility of the Jordan
plains. In fact, the rest of the
story bears out their comment, for the Torah’s narrative about Lot later focuses
on sexual immorality -- the people of Sodom demanding the guests and the episode
of Lot and his daughters.
This
verse teaches a a powerful lesson about the severity of machloket.
Later
on in the parsha, we see that when Lot was captured, without any hesitation
Avraham went to battle to save him against tremendous odds. Furthermore, we find after the war that Avraham was afraid
(G-d had to reassure him, saying, “Be not afraid, Avraham”). Rashi explains that after experiencing
the great miracle of his victory in battle, Avraham was worried that he lost
his portion in the World to Come. Avraham
was willing to risk both his physical and spiritual life for Lot.
See
how terrible a machloket is. Despite
the powerful connection between Lot and Avraham, when Avraham saw that a fight
was brewing between himself and Lot he immediately suggested to Lot that they
should separate in order to avoid dispute. He viewed the evils of machloket
as more severe than the positive side of their connection.
from
Classic Divrei Torah on Parshat Shavua
Print Version of http://www.darchenoam.org/articles/web/parsha/ar_lech.htm
Copyright 2003 Darche
Noam Institutions