Lot

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

My good cyberfriend Catholic Dude asked me, on another thread (
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=586021#post586021) here at CAF, as follows:

6)Why did Lot stay in such an evil city. On Jewishencyc, it says that he was given into greed, lust and neglected his daughters, so why did God save him? It says that his life was spared because he didnt betray Abraham, but none the less Lot was a bad guy who should have deserved a punishment. I always thought that he was spared because he was God fearing and by showing hospitality to the Angels.

People who see the Bible as an adult version of a first grade reader, i.e. with everything very simply/simplistically laid out & spelled out, no depth, no use of simile, metaphor & allegory, no layers of meaning, and with shallow, uncomplex, made-out-of-cardboard characters who never have mixed motives, will break their teeth on Lot. Lot fascinates me precisely because he is complex, tragic and because he can teach us a great deal, even though he was a fairly minor supporting player.

We met first meet Lot towards the end of Genesis 11 where he is depicted as having been taken along by his grandfather Terah, on the latter’s journey from Ur to Canaan. He next appears in Genesis 12. Terah has died & Lot’s Uncle Abram is now looking out for him:

So Abram went, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him; and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son…

Lot dutifully trudges along with his uncle. There is yet no hint of the trouble that is to come. When do we get that first hint that something is going awry, that a minor rift, which will soon become an unbridgeable chasm, has appeared?

Lot next appears in Genesis 13:1

And Abram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him, into the South. And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold…

Ah, here it is, that first sign that Lot is veering off the path. Previously, in Genesis 12:4, the Hebrew word translated as “with” (as in “Lot went with him”) is et. But here, in 13:1, the Hebrew word translated as “with” (as in “and Lot with him”) is im. Pharoah had made Abram rich (actually, Abram was rich to begin with, Pharoah just made him even more rich). Our Sages teach that Lot looked at Abram’s wealth and thought All of this wealth, it will all be mine one day. Abram & Sarai are old and childless. I’m their nephew and, as such, their heir. All Uncle Abram’s wealth will one day be mine. The conflict that would soon break out into the open (between Lot’s shepherds & Abram’s shepherds) first manifested itself in Lot’s heart, whetted as it was by greed, as they returned from Egypt.

Regarding the clash between the shepherds, our Sages say that Lot’s herdsmen were encroaching on the grazing areas that Abram’s herdsmen were using, and that Lot’s people said: “Your master * is an old mule (mules, of course, are sterile). All that belongs to him will one day belong to our master, so we’ll just help ourselves now since it’s going to be ours anyway.”

Abram sees this conflict and bids that he & his nephew separate. Our Sages notice that after God spoke to Abram in Genesis 12:1-3, He didn’t speak to him again until after he and Lot had parted ways (in Genesis 13:14, “And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him: 'Lift up now thine eyes…”). One of my rabbis writes:

One commentary says that although Avra[h]am knew that his spirituality was compromised by Lot’s presence, he nonetheless did not chase Lot away until he had no choice. Avra[h]am felt a moral obligation to take care of Lot (including saving him after they parted) even though he knew that G-d was “keeping His distance” with Lot around. There are some interesting ramifications for us, of this behavior of Avra[h]am’s. How to we view time spend doing chessed [acts of kindness]; and kiruv [drawing non-religious Jews towards our faith], at the expense of personal growth. Think about it.

Abram bids Lot to choose where he will go. Lot sees the wealth of Sodom and its environs and moves to Sodom.

Lot wanders, first with grandfather Terah from Ur to Haran, then with Uncle Avram from Haran to Canaan to Egypt & back to Canaan gain. Then he goes off to Sodom. Then he is taken captive and rescued by Uncle Abram. Then he goes back to Sodom. Then he is forced to leave Sodom. His physical wandering is matched by his spiritual wandering. Lot’s not at home with godly Uncle Abram because there’s too much of ungodly Sodom in him. But neither is Lot really at home in ungodly Sodom there’s too of godly Uncle Abram in him. Lot is torn & is at home nowhere.

(cont.)*

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

Rabbi Ari Kahn writes:

Lot, the nephew of Avraham, is a strange and tragic figure. His uncle was the greatest man of the age, yet Lot was unable to get along with him. We are taught that after Lot’s father passed away, Avraham adopted him and took him under his tutelage. The childless Avraham must have had a special place in his heart and home for his orphaned nephew, yet Lot was unable or unwilling to work on this relationship. Even after Lot and Avraham part ways, Avraham remains concerned and leaps into action when Lot gets into trouble and is kidnapped.

The most famous and tragic story of Lot is his part in the destruction of Sodom. Lot escapes, though not unscathed, as his adopted city crumbles behind him. His behavior in Sodom, and the manner in which he takes leave of the city, draw our attention; viewing this episode in its chronological context may afford us insight to its inner meaning.

(…).

Lot’s practice would be more difficult to explain. We could say that as a follower of Avraham he simply mimicked Avraham’s lofty deeds. Let us return to the text:

And there came two angels to Sodom at evening; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom; and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face to the ground. And he said, ‘Behold now, my lords, turn in, I beseech you, to your servant’s house, and remain all night, and wash your feet, and you shall rise up early, and go on your way.’ And they said, ‘No; we will stay in the street all night’. And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in to him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and baked matzot

, and they ate. (Genesis 19:3)

Lot’s behavior requires analysis: First of all, he sits at the gate of the city. This is reminiscent of Avraham sitting in the opening of his tent. As Avraham waits for guests to serve, so does Lot. The main difference is that Avraham lives alone while Lot lives in a most inhospitable city. A second connotation to the gate of the city is a common reference in the Torah to the gates of a city as the place of judgment, or the locale of the Judges.4 In fact, later on in the narrative Lot is attacked by his neighbors for placing himself as judge upon them.

And they said again,

‘This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he wants to be a judge; now will we deal worse with you than with them.’ (Genesis 19:9)

Here we have the first clue to the tragedy of Lot. Rather than be second to Avraham, Lot strikes out on his own. He craves “top billing” as a leader in Sodom, and not just leader but judge. While it is true that to be a judge is an honorable position, judge of Sodom does seem to be an unfortunate career choice, at best. It must not have been easy to be constantly and totally over-shadowed by his illustrious uncle; Lot decided to make it on his own, and while he tries to be like his uncle, he always seems to fall short. With guests entering his (empty?) courtroom, Lot has an opportunity to be like Avraham. Here is a chance to extend hospitality and kindness. There is only one problem: the people of Sodom will not tolerate this type of behavior, and Lot knows it. Time is of the essence. We hear it in his words; he welcomes his guests, and he discusses their departure before they even agree to stay.

And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I beseech you, to your servant’s house, and remain all night, and wash your feet, and you shall rise up early, and go on your way.

Lot wants to do the right thing; he wishes to perform chesed . The text indicates that these visitors were angelic. He knows what he has to do, but he sounds scared. He wants them to leave before they step in the door. This is why he makes them matzot - it is the fastest type of bread! Unleavened bread - doesn’t even have time to rise. Based on the narrative, that would seem to be the sad reason that Lot gives his guests matzot: Not because he is celebrating the Passover Seder, but because he is scared and he wants them out as quickly as possible.

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

On the other hand, Lot did rise to the occasion. He convinced them to stay; he made a feast. Soon enough, there was knocking on the door.

But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, surrounded the house, both old and young, all the people from every quarter. And they called to Lot, and said to him, ‘Where are the men who came in to you this night? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.’ (Genesis 19:4,5)

Maybe taking them home was not the best idea; not in Sodom, not even for the judge. Make no mistake: the mob outside was not the ‘chesed committee’ welcoming guests. This was a group of Sodomites, looking for a “good time”. They wanted to get to “know” them better (keep in mind that this is the Bible, making it superfluous to say that they wanted to know them in the Biblical sense). Lot was now in trouble. His celestial guests were about to be abused in his front yard. He probably wondered what Avraham would do in a situation like this.

Lot acts heroically yet tragically; he offers the men a better deal:

And Lot went out the door to them, and closed the door after him, and said, I beg you, my brothers, do not do so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters who have not known man; let me, I beg you, bring them out to you, and do to them as is good in your eyes; only to these men do nothing; seeing that they have come under the shadow of my roof.’ (Genesis 19:6-8 )

Lot’s interpretation of chesed took a remarkable wrong turn: Rather than endanger his guests he offers his virginal daughters to the mob. “Do what you wish” he tells them, “just don’t harm my guests”. Something seems terribly wrong. This is not what chesed is supposed to be about. Lot’s behavior is morally outrageous. Then again, Lot was never more than a pretender to Avraham’s greatness. He paled in comparison to Avraham, which is why he came to Sodom in the first place. Now, the judge of Sodom makes a most injudicious decision that sets the stage for an exodus.

And when they angels come to save him from the impending annhilation of Sodom, Lot lingers, such that the angels had to grab him and throw him out of the being-destroyed city (why did they do this? Because, as Gen. 19:16 tells us, God had mercy on him).

Rabbi Kahn writes:

The aftermath of Lot’s liberation is particularly sordid and tragic:

And Lot went up out of Zoar, and lived in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to live in Zoar; and he lived in a cave, he and his two daughters. And the firstborn said to the younger, ‘Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the earth. Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.’ And they made their father drink wine that night; and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. And it came to pass on the next day, that the firstborn said to the younger, ‘Behold, I lay last night with my father; let us make him drink wine this night also; and you go in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.’ And they made their father drink wine that night also; and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father. And the firstborn bore a son, and called his name Moab; the same is the father of the Moabites to this day. And the younger, she also bore a son, and called his name Benammi; the same is the father of the Ammonites to this day.

The connection of this episode to the exodus from Sodom is not immediately clear. Are we being given insight into the lasting moral effects of life in a corrupt society upon the younger generation? Lot is anything but an impressive character: He drinks himself into a stupor and commits incest (though unaware, which is not a glowing testimonial, either!). Are the children solely to blame? Perhaps Lot himself was not fully aware of the repercussions his choice of neighborhood would have on his family, and eventually on the history of nations. Here, then, is a completely different type of plague of the firstborn.

(…).

One eventual result of this tryst is the birth of David: King David, the chosen, progenitor of the Messiah. Long before the enslavement in Egypt, God prepared the building blocks for the Messianic redemption.

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

But, as Samson says, from the bitter comes forth the sweet. There was a spark of Abrahamic holiness in Lot. In order for the Children of Abraham to be whole, in order for their redemption to be complete, this spark had to be reunited. Lot was the ancestor of Moab and Ammon. The latent, hidden, spark of Abrahamic holiness in Moab was embodied in Ruth, the great-grandmother of King David. The latent, hidden, spark of Abrahamic holiness in Ammon was embodied in Naamah, the wife of King Solomon & mother of Rehoboam. Between them, Ruth and Naamah, the descendants of irresolute, wandering Lot, are the mothers of the Messiah.

Lot, the bit player, still has his part to play.

A postscript about Mrs. Lot:

Rabbi Eytan Feiner writes:

Unfortunately, one of Abraham’s relatives was unable to abandon a life of no upward spiritual growth and it cost her dearly. Sodom was deserving of complete destruction because of the depraved and utterly corrupt lifestyles of its inhabitants. There was no hope for a possible turnaround since the people of Sodom had no interest whatsoever in altering the status quo. In the merit of their righteous relative, however, Lot and his family are miraculously saved before the city crumbles in the engulfing flames. But Lot’s wife errs egregiously. She simply cannot restrain herself and glances back upon the city against the explicit command of her saviors. Her punishment? She is transformed into a pillar of salt.

Why specifically salt and why a pillar and not a “salt shaker,” are two questions Rabbi Moshe Eisemann (of Yeshivat Ner Yisroel) attempts to resolve.

Salt is a preservative, administered into food to preserve the freshness while simultaneously preventing bacteria and the like from entering. In other words, salt serves to maintain the status quo of the food. A pillar symbolizes the stagnant lifestyle, the desire to remain permanently idle, again echoing the same idea of preserving the status quo.

Lot’s wife could not tear herself away from the abhorrent lifestyle of Sodom. A lifestyle with no spiritual demands whatsoever, with no incentives for even a smidgen of personal growth, was a lifestyle that had caught her irrevocably in its strangling snare. Even with her life now on the line, she was simply unable to separate herself from her past. What more befitting a punishment, therefore, than being transformed into a motionless pillar, and specifically a pillar consisting totally of salt – a double emphasis on her desire to preserve things just the way they were.

The completely destroyed city of Sodom itself, we might add, would forever be replaced by abundant salt, serving perhaps as an apt reminder to the very essence of what that corrupt city was all about. And just as its inhabitants were never interested in growing, the ground of their now infertile city would never again be capable of growth as well.

Be well!

ssv

 

[Joysong]

Dear Zve,

I always enjoy sitting at the feet of my elders when they explain the scriptures. You have done a wonderful job enlightening us about Lot, and I thank you for taking so much time to type it all out for our benefit.

There are many spiritual lessons we can learn from from reading it, depending on where God would have us focus. This jumped out for me:

How do we view time spent doing chessed [acts of kindness]; and kiruv [drawing non-religious Jews towards our faith], at the expense of personal growth. Think about it.

http://forum.catholic.com/images/smilies/ani/love.gif Carole

 

[reen12]

Hi, stillsmallvoice,

As expected, a fine, fine effort on your part.

One question that occurred to me as I read, was:
If I have a tooth extracted, I use a little salt and
warm water after some time passes, to sooth
and aid healing. I don’t know why this seems
to “work” but it does for me.

Is there someway we can see the pillar of salt
within this reality?

Best,
Maureen [reen12]

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Carole, that section of my post that you cited (

How do we view time spent doing chessed [acts of kindness]; and kiruv [drawing non-religious Jews towards our faith], at the expense of personal growth. Think about it.

) has, 3 days before Passover (jewfaq.org/holidaya.htm), reminded me of something.

There is so much symbolism in every part of the Passover Seder (jewfaq.org/seder.htm) & it always amazes me how every year we (I at least) still manage to learn something more, something different. The number four (see ou.org/chagim/pesach/numberfour.htm) runs throughout the Seder. We drink four cups of wine, recall four promises God made to us, ask four questions & discuss four sons, who are considered archtypes: The Wise Son, the Wicked Son, the Simple Son and the Son Who Doesn’t Know How to Ask (in that order). There is lots of meaning to the Four Sons (ou.org/chagim/pesach/foursons.htm is a good place to start). Two years ago, I heard a comment on the four Sons, which the citation you pulled from my post has suddenly reminded me of. While there are plenty of comments, lessons, meaning, etc. on each of the sons individually (see the above link), this remark that I heard (from a member of our synagogue) looks at the order in which they are presented. My fellow congregant says that order The Wise Son, the Wicked Son, the Simple Son and the Son Who Doesn’t Know How to Ask) is a rebuke to the one who comes first, the Wise Son. It is as if someone were telling him: “You may be wise and good, but are you so wrapped up in yourself, in your own little world, that you haven’t noticed that you have a brother who is wicked, a brother who is simple and a brother who doesn’t know how to ask? Have you tried to help your brothers and be a good influence on them or have you been too closed up within yourself to notice what is happening in your own family?” With such wisdom and goodness as we might be blessed with comes the responsibility to set a good example, to teach and to help spread that wisdom & goodness around even at the expense of personal growth.

Maureen, you’ve stumped me!

On a semi-related note, another unsung Biblical character who fascinates me is Eli. His whole life/career is fascinating, from his meeting with Hannah, to his dressing down by the “man of God” (whom our Sages say was Elkanah), to his rather unpleasant end. But the episode that really touches me is in I Samuel 3.

And Eli perceived that the Lord was calling the child. Therefore Eli said unto Samuel: “Go, lie down; and it shall be, if you are called, that you shall say: ‘Speak, Lord; for Your servant hears.’”

As the text tells us, Eli perceived that the Lord was calling the child and not himself and he wasn’t jealous, envious or resentful. We learn more a few verses later on. The child Samuel, not surprisingly, is afraid to tell Eli about God’s prophecy of doom on him and his house, but Eli is persistent & after hearing Samuel’s report, says:

“It is the Lord; let Him do what seems good to Him.”

What mature faith! Not only does Eli calmly accept God’s judgement but he understands that the torch is being passed (as it were) to someone greater than himself and he is not jealous, envious or resentful. What a lesson there is here!

Be well!

ssv

 

[reen12]

Hi, stillsmallvoice,

I think I stumped myself!

I realized that what was in my mind was Jesus
saying “Salt is good, but if the salt loses it’s
flavor…” Mark 9:50

I was zeroing in on “Salt is good…” [for the healing
tooth extraction, anyway!]
Salt as seasoning, as well as a preservative, salt
as a soothing agent in some settings.

Just two different ways to look at salt.

Salt as a symbol of preserving a wretched
status quo, as in Lot’s wife turning into
a pillar of salt, was greeted by me with
rejoicing, because I always wondered
what the significance of salt was in this
account.
[It also occurs to me that “sowing the fields
with salt” was an action taken to render such
fields unusable…not a very nice thing to do.]

I suppose, like so many things in life, a
substance can be used for good or for ill.

Thanks, too, for the insight into Eli’s behavior.
reen12:tiphat:

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

On our way down south Friday to spend the first day of Passover with DW’s relatives, we drove along the western shore of the Dead Sea & went slightly out of our way to see the only person mentioned in the Tanakh who can be still be seen today by anyone, 24/7/365! It is, of course, Mrs. Lot! See her at travelmania.com/gallery/albums/9/52.aspx. Da Boyz (who are 4.5 and 8.5) were *very *impressed!

Be well!

ssv