Parshas Vayera

15 Chesvan 5754
Saturday, October 30, 1993

Dedicated by:
Rabbi and Mrs. Yitzchok M. Goodman ,
Far Rockaway, New York
Mr. and Mrs. Boris Katz,
Brooklyn, New York
Mr.a nd Mrs. David Schur,
Chicago, Illinois

Sponsored by UMB Bank and Trust Company -- America's only Shomer Shabbat Bank

Guest Rabbi:
Rabbi Dov A.Brisman
Young Israel of Elkins Park, Pennsylvania

Unwelcome Guests

"And his wife looked behind him and became a pillar of salt." (19:26)
Rashi comments, "with salt she transgressed and with salt she was punished. Lot would ask his wife to give salt to the guests and she would reply, do you also wish to introduce this evil practice?!"

It seems that guests were invited into Lot's house and were served meals. This does not concern Lot's wife at all, she only commented and criticized when it came to the salt. How do we understand this?

In the manuscripts of my great-grandfather and namesake, the Rosh Bet-Din of Kolno (Poland), I found the following interpretation.

Lot had grown accustomed to the mitzvah of Hachnasat Orchim (welcoming of guests) in the house of his uncle, Avraham Avinu. Even in S'dom he did not part easily with this mitzvah. However, Lot's wife strongly disapproved of this practice and attempted to abolish it entirely. Knowing that Lot would never discontinue welcoming guests, Lot's wife devised a clear plan. She allowed the guests into her house and served them bland meals. Even salt was not provided. Thus guests would feel most unwelcome and unwanted in Lot's home and, eventually, word would spread that guests were not truly welcome in Lot's home; just brought into the home as a matter of habit. Eventually, nobody would frequent Lot's home and Hachnasat Orchim would become a thing of the past.

I only pray that HaShem instill in us such tact and cunning in our out-reach endeavors. Success would surely be guaranteed.

Pre-Conceived Accidents

As we examine the incident of Sarah's "abduction" by Avimelech, and the intense wrath of the Al-Mighty towards him, the following issues beg clarification. Why was this considered a heinous action? Avimelech was totally unaware of Sarah's marital status, and had he known that she was married, he would never have "taken" her. Furthermore, Avimelech immediately returned Sarah to her husband. Why is Avimelech faulted so gravely for having acted innocently based upon misinformation?

Avimelech attempts to exonerate himself before the Al-Mighty by declaring (20:4) "will You also execute a righteous nation?" Rashi explains that Avimelech implied that the Al-Mighty "wiped out" righteous people during the flood and Tower of Babel periods. This comment requires elucidation, for how can Avimelech - a prophet - even entertain a notion that the aforementioned were righteous? Was he unaware of the rishus (evil) of the peoples of these periods?

In the "vidui" (confession) service of Yom Kippur we state "on the transgression that we have transgressed before you by accident and willingly." HaGaon Rav Dovid Kronglas ZT"L (Mashgiach and Ram of Ner Israel-Baltimore) was bothered by this statement. The Gemora constantly states that the Torah exempts us from punishment for accidental violations. Why, then, is it necessary to confess for an accident?

The Mashgiach, ZT"L, explained the vidui based on a remark from the Ibn Ezra. In Parshat Naso we learn about the "nazir" who makes a vow to lead a life in which he is precluded from consuming grape-derivatives and from defiling himself to the dead. If there is sudden accident in which he becomes defiled to a dead body (tumat-mait), the nazir must bring a special sacrifice which consists (in part) of a "Chatat"- sin offering. The Ibn Ezra explains that this atonement is necessary because the occurrence of an accident is indicative of a sin that was previously committed. Had no previous iniquity occurred, then one's "spiritual guard" would not have been "lowered," and, hence, no accident would have taken place.

In this light, the Mashgiach, ZT"L, explained the significance of the vidui. Our confession to accidental violation(s) refer(s) to the fact that we have sunk spiritually to the extent that accidental violations can actually occur. If our over-all spiritual performance would have been superior, the Al-Mighty would never have allowed a situation of accidental transgressions to occur.

Perhaps this is what is meant in Psalms (79) and in the Tachanun service, "do not remember for us the original iniquities", for the initial violations may have caused a spiritual decline which lead to situations beyond our control. Therefore, we request that such a
responsibility be lifted from our shoulders.

It seems to me that the case against Avimelech was not primarily for the "abduction" of Sarah. That was indeed an accident based on misinformation. However, only base behavior and an immoral life-style can lead to such errors. This is what Avraham Avinu meant when he explained to Avimelech that a guest should first be indulged with matters of comfort (i.e. food, lodgings, etc), not interrogated about his wife. If an "innocent mistake" results from an immoral approach, surely the perpetrator must assume the responsibility. For this reason, Avimelech (especially as a king and leader) was indeed to be faulted.

Now we can understand the seemingly incomprehensible charge of Avimelech that the Al-Mighty sought retribution for naught against the generations of the flood and the Tower of Babel.

Avimelech understood that these
were generations of base and corrupt people. However, his claim was that there inevitably must have been a great many individuals that were pressured by force of environment to transgress. They had no evil intentions so how could you punish them on equal par with the real villains and perpetrators of evil? So, too, I was a mere victim of circumstances and, thus, your wrath against me is unjust.

However, the flaw in Avimelech's reasoning lies in the above. True that we mortals cannot judge or punish others who sin by accident but the Al-Mighty knows which situations were catalysted by previous negligence and lack of prevention. The Al-Mighty obviously understood that each and every individual in those generations was not a total "innocent." An ounce of prevention might have extricated them from difficult situations.

Let us hope that the Al-Mighty spare us from all errors so that we may serve Him to the maximum.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Four Great Chains in Jewish History

"But he tarried.." (19:16) The musical note over this verb is a SHALSHELET, used only three times in Bereishit. It creates a long, drawn out sound that rises and falls three times and actually sounds like lingering or stalling. Obviously, it fits perfectly in our text! Its next appearance is in Chapter 24, when Eliezer stands at the well in Charan, about to begin the search for Yitzchak's bride. The final one is in Chapter 39, where Yosef refuses to be enticed into adultery by Potiphar's wife and starts to explain why.

Remembering that shalshelet means a "chain" in Hebrew, I think there is an excellent way to connect all three appearances:

In each instance, the very chain of Jewish survival and continuity is at stake. Lot may wish to linger because of his doubts, but the Higher Will of G-d demands that he be
saved; not for his "righteousness" but because he is destined to produce the ancestor of Dovid HaMelech - an indispensable link in the Jewish "chain"! So, too, Eliezer is about to help forge the next vital "chain" in Jewish history as he finds Rivkah at the well and brings her home to wed Yitzchak. When Portiphar's wife attempts to lead Yosef astray, little does she realize that, if she succeeds, she would, Heaven forbid, change the entire course of Jewish history. Of course, Yosef resists and remains one of the great tribes of Yisroel.

A final Shalshelet is found in Chumash Vayikra (8:23) when the ram (AIL HAMILU-IM)) which consecrates Aharon and his sons as our kohanim forever is slaughtered. Here, too, a "chain" - of the priesthood of Aharon and his descendants - is forged and fashioned for all time to come.

The above is excerpted from "There Shall Be Light", a volume on Bereishit by Rabbi Dr. Yitzchok M. Goodman of the Young Israel of Far Rockaway, New York. Distributed by Feldheim Publishing Company, it is available in your local bookstore or can be ordered by sending $20 to the National Council of Young Israel, 3 West 16th Street, New York, New York 10011.