Parshas Lech Lecha
Avraham, Lot and the Roots of Jewish Monarchy
By Rabbi Yitzchak Etshalom
I
THE NO'ACH-AVRAHAM CONNECTION: AN ALTERNATIVE PAIRING
Conventional wisdom holds that the T'nakh deliberately situates No'ach as an
early, less refined prototype of the righteous man - a role ultimately
filled capably by Avraham. The frequent comparisons between No'ach and
Avraham - found as early as the Midrash Tanhuma at the beginning of Parashat
No'ach (cited by Rashi), which notes that No'ach is considered "righteous in
his generations" because "had he lived in the generation of Avraham, he
wouldn't have been considered anything special". This comparison may be
rooted in several literary associations made between the two (e.g. "No'ach
was a just man and *Tamim* [perfect] in his generations" [6:9] and "When
Avram was ninety nine years old, YHVH appeared to Avram, and said to him, I
am the Almighty God; walk before Me, and be *Tamim* [17:1]), or it may be
based on the parallel number of generations which separated Adam from No'ach
and No'ach from Avraham (cf. Mishnah Avot 5:2).
In any case, although these two heroes share some noble qualities, the
presentation of the T'nakh reveals someone else who is closely paired with
No'ach.
Note that until we are introduced to No'ach (5:28), we have gone through a
brief recap of the "begats" which link Adam (via Shet) to Lemekh, No'ach's
father. In each case, we are told the name of the patriarch, how long he
lived before giving birth to his first son, how long he lived after that
event and that he had sons and daughters. We are then given his entire
lifespan - and then move on to that son's progeny, in like fashion. For
instance:
And Enosh lived ninety years, and fathered Cainan; And Enosh lived after he
fathered Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years. and fathered sons and
daughters; And all the days of Enosh were nine hundred and five years; and
he died. (5:9-11)
Suddenly, there is a broadening of the information provided:
And No'ach was five hundred years old; and No'ach fathered Shem, Ham, and
Yaphet. (5:32)
Instead of being told about No'ach's firstborn, we are told about all three
of his sons.
At a later point in the text, when we are about to begin the second set of
"begats" (linking No'ach to Avraham), we are again introduced to these three
sons - with a curious addition:
And the sons of No'ach, who went out of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and
Yaphet; and Ham is the father of K'na'an. (9:18)
Why are we told about K'na'an, the son of Ham?
The answer to this is quite clear, once we read further (9:18-29). As the
story there evolves, we learn that as a result of either Ham or K'na'an's
violation of No'ach, K'na'an was cursed to be a slave to his brothers - so
it is important for us to be aware of the relationship between Ham and
K'na'an at the outset.
One more anomaly about No'ach - he gives birth to his children at a much
more advanced age than his forebears. Following the generations listed in
Chapter 5, Adam's first sired a son at age 130 (Kayyin and Hevel are not
part of this accounting); Shet was 105; Enosh was 90; Keinan was 70,
M'halalel was 65; Yered was 62, Hanoch was 65; Metushelach was 87 and Lemekh
was 82.
Noa'ch was significantly older than any of his ancestors before having
children: "And No'ach was five hundred years old; and No'ach fathered Shem,
Ham, and Yaphet."
There is one later member of the Noachide family who is presented in
curiously similar terms - but it isn't Avraham. Avraham's descendants are
not listed within the "begats" list - it ends with his birth. The birth of
Yishma'el, the miraculous birth of Yitzhak, the children of his old age
(25:1-5); none of these are presented as part of a chain of generations.
Note, however, the unusual introduction of Terach's family - at the end of
the second "begats" list:
Now these are the generations of Terach; Terach fathered Avram, Nahor, and
Haran; and Haran fathered Lot. (11:27)
Why is Lot, the grandson, introduced immediately along with Terach's sons?
The next few verses seem to indicate a reason:
And Haran died before his father Terach in the land of his birth, in Ur of
the Chaldeans. And Avram and Nahor took wives; the name of Avram's wife was
Sarai; and the name of Nahor's wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the
father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah. But Sarai was barren; she had no
child. And Terach took Avram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his grandson,
and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth
with them from Ur of the Chaldeans, to go to the land of K'na'an; and they
came to Haran, and lived there. And the days of Terach were two hundred and
five years; and Terach died in Haran. (11:27-32)
Nevertheless, if all we needed to know was why Lot was accompanying his
grandfather - and later ended up with Avraham in K'na'an, he could have been
introduced in v. 31 ("And Terach took Avram his son, and Lot the son of
Haran his grandson..."); subsequent to the news of his father's death (v.
27), we would have understood his participation in the Terachian (and, later
Avrahamian) migration. Why did the Torah introduce Lot in this fashion?
To further strengthen the parallel between Terach and No'ach, note the ages
when the patriarchs of the second "begats" list (linking No'ach to Avraham)
first had children. Shem was 100; Arpach'shad 35; Shelach was 30; Ever was
30; Peleg was 30; R'u was 32; S'rug was 30; Nahor was 29.
"And Terach lived seventy years, and fathered Avram, Nahor, and Haran."
(11:26) With the exception of Shem (who was delayed in establishing a family
on account of the flood), Terach waited at least twice as long as any of his
(recent) ancestors before having children. When placed against the
background of numbers like 35,32,30 and 29, 70 suddenly seems very old, indeed.
In summary, we have noted that although the parallels (and comparisons -
some highly unfavorable to No'ach) between No'ach and Avraham are legend,
the text-presentation actually aligns No'ach much more closely with Terach.
One of the critical points of this comparison is the introduction of Lot,
Avraham's nephew. I would like to suggest that the purpose of the
No'ach-Terach comparison (especially the unusual presentation of one
grandson among the three sons) is designed to teach us about Lot - who he
was and the critical role that his progeny will play in the unfolding
history and destiny of the B'nei Yisra'el.
Lot is presented in terms reminiscent of K'na'an (the grandson of No'ach).
In spite of his close relationship with Avraham, the first real hero in the
T'nakh, we already sense that Lot is destined to fail.
We will devote the rest of this shiur to an analysis of Lot and his
descendants - with a critical "detour" into the book of Ruth, via a link to
B'resheet made by the Midrash.
II
"I FOUND MY SERVANT DAVID..."
In relating the story of Lot's fleeing from S'dom, the messenger tells Lot:
"Arise, take your wife and your two daughters who are found here
(*haNimtza'ot*)..." (19:16)
This curious turn of a phrase - *haNimtza'ot* - leads the Midrash to
associate this verse with a (seemingly unrelated) verse in T'hillim about David:
"I have found (*Matza'ti*) David my servant; with my holy oil have I
anointed him," (T'hillim 89:21).
The Midrash states: "R. Yitzhak says: 'I have found (*Matza'ti*) David my
servant' - where did I find him? In S'dom" (B'resheet Rabbah 41:4)
What is the connection between David and S'dom? How was David "found" in
S'dom? Certainly, the Midrash is not just connecting David to S'dom due to
the common root M*Tz*A found in reference to both.
In order to answer this question, we have to turn a lot of pages in our
T'nakh - from the early parts of Sefer B'resheet to the middle of the Five
Megillot. The shortest of those Megillot is Sefer Ruth, chronologically
placed during the days of the Judges (1:1). What is the purpose of Sefer
Ruth? Why is this story about loyalty included in our T'nakh?
At the end of this short Sefer, we learn of this progeny of Ruth (the
protagonist) and Bo'az:
"Now these are the generations of Peretz; Peretz fathered Hetzron, And
Hetzron fathered Ram, and Ram fathered Amminadav, and Amminadav fathered
Nach'shon, and Nach'shon fathered Salmon, and Salmon fathered Bo'az, and
Bo'az fathered Oved, and Oved fathered Yishai, and Yishai fathered David."
(4:18-22)
In other words, the final statement of this Sefer is the "yichus" of David -
and, via this story, we learn about his roots (pun intended). Keep in mind
that Ruth was a Moabite woman.
Where does Mo'av come from?
We turn back to Sefer B'resheet, in the immediate aftermath of the
destruction of the cities of S'dom, and learn of their origins...
"And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God
remembered Avraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he
overthrew the cities in which Lot lived. And Lot went up out of Tzo'ar, and
lived in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to live
in Tzo'ar; 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 Mo'av; the same is the father of the Mo'avites 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." (19:29-38)
In other words, these two daughters, who were *Nimtza'ot* in S'dom,
conspired to bring two nations into the world, one of whom would provide an
extraordinary woman who would help develop David - who God *Matza* (found).
(The other would provide him a daughter-in-law, as Shlomo’s wife Na’amah,
mother of the next king Rehav’am, was an Ammonite)
So far, we have explained why the Midrash made this connection - the unusual
phrase relating to Lot's two daughters shows up again in reference to David,
and these two daughters and their misunderstanding about the destruction of
S'dom and their subsequent raising of two nations which led to the birth of
David.
Let's ask a more fundamental question here: Why does the T'nakh establish a
Lot-Ruth-David connection, if only by word-association? In other words, is
the T'nakh merely trying to stress the fact that David is descended from
Lot? I would like to suggest that the development of Jewish monarchy through
the seed of Lot, through Ruth, was a very deliberate and necessary process.
In order to understand this, we'll need to address the central issue in this
week's Parashah - the selection of Avraham and his role in the world. First,
a brief summary of the first two Parashiot, as regards the development of
Avraham.
III
CHAPTERS 1-11: A BRIEF RECAP
When God created mankind, He called him "Adam" - since he was from the
"Adamah" (earth - note the last phrase in B'resheet 2:5). Indeed, man was so
much "of the earth" that his failures caused the earth to be cursed (3:17).
This tie was further severed when his son committed the first murder. Not
only was he "cursed from the ground that opened its mouth to receive the
blood of your brother", but he was uprooted and made to wander (4:11-12).
When humanity continued to descend into a storm of moral depravity and
violence, God decided to wipe them out (6:7) - and to begin the process anew
with Noach (note the similarities between the charge given to Noach upon his
exit from the Ark in Chapter 9 and those given to Adam in Chapter 1).
Just as the name "Adam" implies a symbiotic relationship with the earth,
implying a static harmony with nature, similarly the name "Noach" implies a
type of respite and calm amid the storm of corruption around him. The Torah
provides this explanation for his name, crediting his father, Lemekh, with
this prayer/prophecy (6:29). Noach was to be "at rest" (a close literal
translation of his name) and, indeed, that is how he behaved. While the
storm of corruption - and, later, the storm of Divine justice - swirled
around him, he was calm and at rest. From the Divine perspective, there was
every reason to utilize this method of "starting over"; since not only every
corrupted being was wiped off the face of the earth, but even the memories
of their sinful behavior were eradicated. There was every possibility for a
"fresh start". The worldview behind this perspective is that if man is
created with goodness, then, if he remains "at rest", (status quo), he will
continue to be good and upright.
This approach, as we know, did not succeed. No'ach, who was to be the
"second chance" for mankind, did not live up to his potential exhibited
earlier, when he was described as a "righteous and perfect."
Almost immediately after coming out of the Ark, No'ach descended into
becoming a "man of the earth" (9:20; the intent is clearly pejorative - see
B'resheet Rabbah ad loc.) After his drunken interaction with Ham (or
K'na'an) and the subsequent curse, his progeny continued to behave in an
unworthy manner - culminating with the scene at the Tower of Shin'ar, when
Mankind was dispersed throughout the world.
IV
THE TOWER AT SHIN'AR: THE BACKDROP AGAINST WHICH TO VIEW AVRAHAM
At the beginning of Ch. 11, we meet the builders of the great tower at
Shin'ar. We know that their behavior was considered sinful - for why else
would God disrupt it - but what was their terrible sin?
The "P'shat" (straightforward) reading of the text reveals only one crime:
"Come, let us build a tower with its spire in the heavens and make a name
for ourselves, lest we be spread throughout the land." (11:4)
God had commanded Noach and his children (in the same manner as He had
commanded Adam) to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth...spread
throughout the earth and multiply in it" (9:1,7). The Divine purpose would
be met by mankind's populating the earth, settling the many lands and
creating many diverse civilizations. These sons of Noach chose to do the
exact opposite -and the build a tower that would support their ill-fated unity.
As is well know, however, the Rabbis read much worse intentions into their
behavior - understanding that they desired to compete with God, to fight
against Him etc. Where are these ideas in the text? (not that they need be;
but it is always more impactful to identify textual allusions which support
Midrashic threads). Truth to tell, we can only identify these textual
allusions after our introduction to Avraham, as we shall see.
It was onto this particular stage of humanity, a species which desired
nothing but to avoid spreading out and preferred to "sit still", that this
great hero, Avraham Avinu, made his powerful entrance. In a world where
everyone was satisfied to stay put, Avraham unquestionably and immediately
accepted God's call to: "Leave your land, your birthplace and your father's
house..." Not only did he leave - he continued his wanderings long after
reaching "the place that I will show you." Everywhere he went, he built an
altar and called out in God's Name (whatever that may mean; prayer,
education, declaration). He was clearly a "mover and shaker" in the most
literal sense of the phrase: He moved from place to place in order to shake
the people from their spiritual and intellectual complacency. Note how
S'forno (12:8-9) explains Avraham's route (north and south, between Beit-El
and Ha'Ai) - "between these two large cities, in order that many people
would come to hear him call out in God's Name... when he traveled from place
to place as is the custom of the shepherds, he didn't go from east to west,
in order not to abandon either one of these cities where some of the people
were already drawn to him."
We now understand Avraham's greatness which earned him (and we, his progeny)
the great blessings promised throughout his life: When God told him to
wander, he took it upon himself to go against the lifestyle in which he grew
up, to fight the complacency and "status quo" of the world around him - and
to tirelessly bring the word of God to those around him.
V
OLAM HESED YIBANEH
How was Avraham going to fulfill his mission, to restore humanity to its
former nobility and to help Mankind actualize the "image of God" in which it
was created?
" 'And he called there on the name of YHVH, the Everlasting God'. Resh
Lakish said: Read not 'and he called' but 'and he made to call', thereby
teaching that our father Avraham caused the name of the Holy One, blessed be
He, to be uttered by the mouth of every passer-by. How was this? After
[travelers] had eaten and drunk, they stood up to bless him; but, said he to
them, 'Did you eat of mine? You ate of that which belongs to the God of the
Universe. Thank, praise and bless Him who spoke and the world came into
being." (BT Sotah 10a-b)
It was through his unending kindness, opening his tent to all passersby and
demonstrating deep and passionate concern for everyone (including entire
communities devoted to decidedly un-Avrahamic behavior), that Avraham was
successful in influencing people. His constant movement, from north to
south, east to west, attracted many adherent because he personified the
attribute of lovingkindness - *Hessed*.
There are several types of Hessed - altruistic, self-serving, parochial,
universal etc. For our purposes, let's note that there is Hessed which
obliterates valuable boundaries and blurs the truth. Often, people will, in
the name of love, ignore harsh realities and embrace and even encourage
immoral, unethical and even felonious behavior. Although motivated by noble
instincts, this sort of Hessed is often self-destructive as well as
counterproductive.
Avraham's brand of Hessed, on the other hand, was "Hessed shel Emet" -
lovingkindness which doesn't compromise truth (note how these two concepts
"balance" each other in Mikhah 6:8, Zekharyah 8:18 and Esther 9:30). An
example of this is related in Parashat Vayera:
And Avraham reproved Avimelech because of a well of water, which Avimelech's
servants had violently taken away. (21:25)
Note the Midrash's inference from this verse: "Any love without reproving is
not [genuine] love".
In short, Avraham's mission - to be a source of blessing for all of humanity
(B'resheet 12:3) by teaching them and bringing them close to the way of God
- was to be accomplished by synthesizing impassioned Hessed with
uncompromising Emet.
VI
AND THEY SEPARATED...
This model of Hessed and Emet, so inspiring to myriad followers, was not
entirely successful in actualizing it within his own family. After the
near-tragedy in Egypt, Lot accompanied Avraham and Sarah back to K'na'an -
and both nephew and uncle were "very rich in cattle, in silver, and in
gold". Unfortunately, that very wealth led to disputes between their
shepherds (see the Rishonim at 13:7 for various explanations as to the
nature of those disputes) - and Lot and Avraham separated. Avraham offered
Lot his choice of land, and Lot chose the (then-) fertile valley of S'dom.
Lot's choice of S'dom is odd. The closest relative and protege of Avraham,
the man of Hessed, chooses a city whose very name reeks of selfishness:
"Behold, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom...she did not strengthen
the hand of the poor and needy." (Yehezqe'el 16:49)
Lot's emigration to S'dom, away from Avraham, was, at the very least, a
serious obstacle in the path of the Avrahamic mission. How could he use
Hessed to teach the world when his own nephew opted to live in the
"anti-Hessed" city?
Something about the loving-kindness of Avraham remained incomplete as a
result of this separation.
In the meantime, we find that the uncompromising characteristic of Emet was
"diluted" in the generations following Avraham. Although we will address
this topic at length in a few weeks, I'd like to briefly point out that
there are a number episodes involving deceit in the Ya'akov and Yehudah (and
Yoseph) narratives (e.g. Lavan's deceit of Ya'akov, the brothers' deceit of
their father with Yoseph's tunic).
In other words, by the time we encounter the third generation of the
Avrahamic tribe, both Hessed and Emet, the crowning characteristics of
father Avraham, have been taken down at least a few pegs and are in need of
restoration.
Curiously, each of these losses resulted in the birth of two boys: As a
result of Lot's separation, he ended up in that cave with his two "found"
daughters - and that's where Ammon and Mo'av came into the world.
Yehudah's deception in the Tamar episode (Ch. 38) is clearly linked to the
earlier episodes of deceit (more on that in a later shiur) documented in
B'resheet. As a result of this interaction, Peretz and Zerach are born to
Yehudah.
VII
BACK TO MEGILLAT RUTH...
What was Ruth's crowning characteristic? We'll let the Midrash tell us:
"R. Ze'ira says: This Scroll [of Ruth] has no [laws of] impurity and purity,
prohibition and permission - so why was it written? To teach you how great
is the reward of *Gom'lei Hassadim* (people who perform acts of lovingkindness).
Ruth's Hessed is legendary (see Ruth 1:8); her devotion to her mother-in-law
is one of the most inspirational stories in all of our literature.
The fidelity, honesty and guilelessness (Emet) which typify both Bo'az and
Ruth throughout the story are surely indicative of a reversal of the
disruptive developments in Sefer B'resheet.
Now, let's take a quick look back at the genealogy of David at the end of
Megillat Ruth:
"Now these are the generations of Peretz; Peretz fathered Hetzron, And
Hetzron fathered Ram, and Ram fathered Amminadav, and Amminadav fathered
Nach'shon, and Nach'shon fathered Salmon, and Salmon fathered Bo'az, and
Bo'az fathered Oved, and Oved fathered Yishai, and Yishai fathered David."
(4:18-22)
VIII
...AND BACK TO LOT
Near the beginning of the shiur, I proposed that the presentation of Terach
in parallel form to the presentation of No'ach was aimed at setting up Lot
as a latter-day K'na'an. I also proposed that it was necessary for David to
be a descendant of Lot - that the foundation of Jewish monarchy had to come
from that wayward nephew of Avraham.
By noting the effects of Lot's separation from Avraham on his mission - and
the later diminution of uncompromising Emet in Avraham's family - we
understand how the Avrahamic task could not be completed until they were
properly returned to the fold. It was in the person of David, the product
of that union of Emet and Hessed (Bo'az and Ruth), that these were restored
to the B'nei Yisra'el. This king was the person most appropriate to continue
the Avrahamic task - to be a blessing for all families of the earth.
Bo'az is a direct descendant of Peretz, the product of deceit; Ruth is the
child of Mo'av, the product of rejection. Together, they give birth to the
seeds of Jewish monarchy and, ultimately, the Mashiach.
Text Copyright © 2010 by Rabbi Yitzchak Etshalom and Torah.org. The author is Educational Coordinator of the Jewish Studies Institute of the Yeshiva of Los Angeles.
|