Just Because You're You

By Rabbi Joshua (selectively known as The Hoffer) Hoffman

In this week's parsha we are told of the destruction of Sodom and most of it inhabitants. Only Lot and part of his family survive the devastation. In the aftermath of this event, Lot's daughters, thinking that the rest of the world has been destroyed, cohabit with their father in order to have children who will repopulate it. The Ramban writes that Lot's daughters intended, through their actions, to rebuild the world based on chesed, or kindness. These acts of cohabitation, then, were yet another attempt to rebuild the world, following a number of previous attempts at earlier stages of world history.

As we noted last week, after the flood Noach was to rebuild the world based on chesed, but failed. Ten generations later this task fell upon Avraham, who was called upon by God to uproot himself from his previous surroundings, relocate and start over again. The midrash, in fact, tells us that chapter 89 of Tehillim, which contains the verse "the world is built on chesed" was said in reference to Avraham. We do not, however, find anything similar said in regard to Lot. Even though, as we have seen, Lot's daughters had good intentions in mind, the actions of Lot himself in this episode, are severely criticized by the rabbis, despite the fact that eventually King David, and ultimately the messiah, would descend from Lot's son Ammon. The entire episode can, perhaps be seen as the coda of Lot's skewed version of his uncle Avraham's approach to chesed. We need, then, to understand where Lot went wrong in this area, and in what way he deviated from the approach of Avraham.

The Sefas Emes writes that Lot accompanied Avraham from Charan as a result of the act of self -sacrifice performed by his father Haran.When Nimrod ordered Avraham into the fiery furnace for having fought against idolatry, his brother Haran took a wait and see approach, planning to react in the following manner- if Avraham came out alive he, too, would enter the furnace, but if Avraham was burned to death then he would not resist Nimrod's idolatry. When Haran saw that Avraham emerged unscathed, he entered the furnace himself, but was not saved, because he did not display the proper attitude to warrant the performance of a miracle on his behalf. Still, says the Sefas Emes, because Haran was killed because of his defiance of idolatry, a sense of self-sacrifice for God was transmitted to his son Lot. This trait, however, was intermingled with a certain degree of self -interest, as was the act of Haran. Avraham's submission to being cast into he furnace was done out of complete conviction and a readiness to give up his life. His approach reflected an underlying love for God and a willingness to sacrifice everything for Him, unconditionally, without any self-interest.Haran's devotion to God, although commendable, was not on the same level as that of Avraham.

The difference in attitude to self-sacrifice for God between Avraham and Lot carried over into their respective approaches to chesed, as manifested in the contrasting ways in which they welcomed guests into their homes. As we noted last week, the highest degree of chesed is to love doing chesed, just as God does. Rashi tells us that Avraham,sitting at the entrance to his tent on the third day after his circumcision, was distressed that it was too hot for any prospective recipients of his chesed to show up.He loved to do chesed, to act kindly towards God's creations, simply because they were created by God.When guests-angels in human guise- finally did appear, Avraham offered them his hospitality,entreating them to partake of it 'because you have passed your servant's way.' This statement really encapsulates Avraham's attitude to chesed.As explained by Rav Yitzchak Arieli in his work Midrash Ariel, Avraham was saying that he wished to bestow chesed upon them simply because he perceived them as human beings who had happened to cross his path.In this way Avraham was following in the ways of God, Who bestows chesed on his creations simply because they are His creations.

When we examine Lot's treatment of his guests however, we find an approach different from Avraham's. As the rabbis tell us, Lot did learn the importance of receiving guests from his uncle Avraham, and, therefore, he was the only person in Sodom willing to take guests into his home. His attitude to these guests, however, differed from that of Avraham to his guests.This difference is perhaps best brought out in the response of Lot to the people of Sodom who, upon hearing about Lot's act of hospitality, surrounded his house and demanded that he give his guests over to them. Lot answered by offering his two daughters in place of the guests. As Rav Aharon Soloveichik recently pointed out, this offer exhibited Lot's proprietary attitude towards his daughters, viewing them as his chattel. Viewing them as such, it naturally followed that he would feel no compunction in offering them to others to be used at their discretion.

Lot's attitude to his daughters displayed a general fault in his attitude toward people. This can be discerned from the argument he made when he pleaded with the people of the city not to harm his guests. He asked them to leave his guests alone "as they have come under the shelter of my roof" (Bereishis, 19,8). This statement is in striking contrast with the statement we have seen made by Avraham upon offering hospitality to his visitors. Whereas Avraham saw within each of his guests the image of his Creator, and offered them his hospitality for that reason alone, Lot saw his visitors as his property, relative to acts of hospitality.He had learned from Avraham the formal act of acting kindly toward others, but had not assimilated the underlying theory behind it. Kindness, at root, consists of one's attitude toward his fellow human being, the rest flowing from there. Lot adopted, from his uncle, only the formal act of hospitality, but not the underlying theory and attitude. His selection of only the external part of Avraham's heritage led to a distortion of it. Perhaps it is in this sense that we can understand the concept, explicated in kabbalistic works, that sparks of holiness exist among the nations of the world. Elements of Avraham's heritage have been adopted by them, and it is perhaps our task, in our exile, to try to elevate them, thereby bringing them back to their pristine level.