Spiritual and
Ethical Issues in the Historical Books of Tanach;
SPIRITUAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN THE BEREISHIT STORIES These four books ostensibly are merely the history of Israel from the entry into the Promised Land until the destruction of the Temple and the temporary loss of independent statehood. In fact they are actually, in a specifically Jewish sense, the most deeply religious and spiritual books of the Bible. One does not have to be specifically Jewish to see or feel the religion and spirituality in the revelations of the prophetic writings or in the words of the Tehillim. They speak to all people, as evidenced by the fact that the Bible is still the world's bestseller and there are millions of non-Jews who regularly recite the Psalms. However, it is specifically and intrinsically Jewish to understand that G-d is revealed in the prosaic material, in the political, social and military events in the lives of ordinary men and women, kings and leaders that are described in the Nevim Rishonim. Here are described the ideology and religious thoughts in Judaism, while in Chronicles we have the purely historical. Lot Rejects the Abrahamic Way [2] Lot did not do this. Instead he took his flocks and herds and made his way to the cities of the plain of the Jordan, that was then as well watered and as fertile as the trees planted in Gan Eiden and like Egypt the granary of the world. The verse in B'reishit (13: 11) "and Lot traveled East", is usually translated as East from Ai and Bet El where he and Avraham were encamped to Sodom and Gomorrah that lay on the Eastern banks of the Jordan. Chazal teach that he journeyed away from Kedem that is from the Eternal One, by separating himself from Avraham, the beloved of Hashem, saying, "I want neither Avraham nor his G-d". This is not semantics but clearly spelt out by the text. "And Lot lifted up his eyes and saw", this is lust for sexual immorality, even as it is written regarding Potiphar's wife "And she lifted up her eyes upon Yosef", or "And Shechem saw Dinah and took her" (Nazir 23a)]. What did Lot see? He saw Sodom and its people about who the Torah writes that they were evil and sinful before G-d, exceedingly; yet he used the right of first choice given to him by Avraham, to choose Sodom. "They were evil to each other, [bein adam l'chavero] and sinful sexually [bein adam la Makom]" (Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 10:3). The people of the generation of the Tower of Bavel were evil against Hashem but loved one another and were kind to each other; therefore they were only punished with dispersion, whereas the people of the cities of the plain had to be totally destroyed. "Rabbi Yehuda says that when the verse mentions 'before G-d', this refers to idolatry and 'exceedingly' refers to their bloodshed and murders. The Rabbis taught, they were evil in monetary dealings, as it is written referring to a lender who is reluctant to lend because of the impending annulment of debts in the impending Shmita year, " And you look with evil on your poor brethren" (D'varim 15:9); furthermore they were sinful sexually, as it is written [Yosef's words of rejection to Potiphars wife], "lest I sin before G-d" (B'reishit 39:9). However, Rabbi Yehuda refers evil to sexual immorality and sin to money, as it is written regarding delayed payment of oaths, "and you will sin" (D'varim 23: 22)" (Sanhedrin 109a). "One who says, 'What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours, this is a mediocre nature; others say this is the characteristic of Sodom (Avot 5:10). At first glance, this does not seem such a particularly terrible attitude that it should be the nature of Sodom. Such a person is not stealing or damaging others property, all they want is to have what is legally theirs while expecting others to do the same. However, in Judaism that is not sufficient, it is only a mediocre nature or alternatively a midat Sodom. The moral problem lies in their refusal to use their wealth to help others or to shoulder the social costs of assisting the poor, the weak, the old and strangers. Since Judaism is action orientated, its way of militating against the egoism of Sodom is not left to preaching and moralizing but rather made halakhically mandatory. Furthermore, like in other areas of life it is not left to the individual's choice to be practiced according to his or hers kindness and good nature. Rather, the Bet Din has the obligation to prevent a person from this midat Sodom. "The Gemara has a number of ways of enforcing anti-Sodom behavior. For instance, according to the halakhic dictum of one has a benefit and the other does not have a loss, anyone may fish in the Kinneret even though it belongs to the tribe of Naftali, since the removal of a fish does not constitute a loss to them and is a favor to the others. Similarly, Reuven can use Shimon's empty courtyard or dwelling that he is not in the habit of renting out, provided it is not thereby damaged in any way. There are some opinions that the owner can force him to leave, without being able to claim payment. However, even they agree that to do so is a midat S'dom and Chazal expelled such a person from the camp. One who is able to wave his legal rights in cases of 'one has a benefit while he has no loss', is righteous like the Chafetz Chaim but unlike the people of Sodom" (Daat Torah, Harav Levovitch, Masgiach Yeshivat Mir). Egoism is the antithesis of the Abrahamic nation: "One who refuses to do his fellow a favor with his wealth, it is doubtful that he is of the descendants of Avraham". Yet Lot settled in Sodom. This is the 100th installment in Dr. Tamari’s series on “Tanach and its messages for our times” [The
Parshat Ha'azinu Homepage]
|
