Parashat Vayera, Genesis 18:1-22:24

This week's parashah is generously sponsored by Mal Sacks in memory of Solomon Sacks.

Abraham had three days to ponder what he was going to do; Mrs. Lot had to make a split second decision.

Some songs are associated with one singer. Others have been embraced by different performers who have made it their own. One such song is "Just One Look" recorded by a variety of artists from the Hollies, to Martha and the Vandellas, Anne Murray and Linda Ronstadt; each artist shaping the song in a personal manner. The words of this song, and the different interpretations, echo through my mind as I read the chapters of this week's parashah: "Just one look, that's all it took."

So much in Vayera has to do with sight. Not only seeing, but how things are seen. The very name of the parashah, Vayera refers to God "appearing" to Abraham (Genesis 18:1). Abraham then "lifts his eyes" and "sees" three messengers who will announce the birth of his son (Genesis 18:2). Towards the end of the parashah, Abraham is instructed to offer his son on a mountain that God will "show" him (areka). On the third day, Abraham "lifts his eyes" and sees the mountain (Genesis 22:4). Ascending the mountain with Isaac, Abraham informs his son that God "will see to the sacrificial lamb" (Genesis 22:8). Isaac's life is spared when Abraham "lifts his eyes" and "sees" the ram (Genesis 22:13). Abraham names the site of the akedah Adonai-yireh, which according to Genesis 22:14 means "on the mount of the Lord there is vision." The emphasis on "seeing" is covered in a previous commentary on this portion. In all these instances, Abraham perceives something beyond mere sight; he is displaying an inner vision.

Sight plays a significant role in a second story found in Vayera: the plight of Sodom and Gemorrah. The messengers who have visited Abraham "turn their gaze"(vayashkifu) to the city of Sodom (Genesis 18:16). God goes down to see what is taking place in the city (Genesis 18:21). The end of the story finds Abraham gazing (vayashkef) (Genesis 19:28) at the site, using the same root that began this tale of horror and destruction. Here, "gazing" means to observe, or to look down from above. Implicit in it is a sense of judgment. Rabbi Alexandri teaches in Midrash Tanhuma that every place we find the term hashkafa, sorrow occurs and the one doing the hashkafa will create the sorrow. Another example can be found in Exodus 14:24 where God looks down upon the Egyptian army from a pillar of fire and cloud, throwing the Egyptian army into panic. We know the catastrophe that awaits the Egyptian army at the Sea of Reeds.

Within the city, the Sodomites are struck with a blinding light (Genesis 19:11). Lot, fleeing with his family from the destruction of Sodom, are warned not to look back (al tabit) (Genesis 19:17), but a few short verses later, Lot's wife does look back (va-tabait) and is turned into a pillar of salt. There are two other instances of "looking back" or "looking behind" in the Bible. After the incident of the Golden Calf, Moses goes into the Tent of Meeting and the people look after him as he goes in (Exodus 33:8). In I Samuel 24:8, Saul looks behind him and discovers David bowing down. David, who had been hiding, could have assassinated Saul but chose rather to show that he would never do such a thing. The common element in all these situations is the danger underlying what is seen: the destruction of Sodom, the punishment of the people after the Golden Calf, and an opportunity to murder the king.

Commentators have a different take on "looking back," much of which is summarized in a previous commentary and which is used to explain what happened to Lot's nameless wife. The common view is that Mrs. Lot was punished. "Looking back" is interpreted as looking past her husband, meaning after he has died. Lot's wife is concerned with her own welfare. Or else she is being punished for being stingy with her possessions. Her focus was self-preservation, not helping others survive. Therefore, her punishment was that she ended up being "preserved" with that ancient preservative, salt.

I take the accusations heaped on Mrs. Lot with a "grain of salt." (Sorry, I couldn't resist.) The role of salt is more than a physical preservative, it is a ritual cleanser. Just ask any sumo wrestler who scatters salt around the arena before the match in a tradition that dates back to the 17th century. Other ritual uses of salt are even older:

Salt was to the ancient Hebrews, and still is to modern Jews, the symbol of the eternal nature of God’s covenant with Israel. In the Torah, the Book of Numbers, is written, “It is a covenant of salt forever, before the Lord,” and later in Chronicles, “The Lord God of Israel gave the kingdom over Israel to David forever, even to him, and to his sons, by a covenant of salt.”

On Friday nights Jews dip the Sabbath bread in salt. In Judaism, bread is a symbol of food, which is a gift from God, and dipping the bread in salt preserves it—keeps the agreement between God and his people.

Loyalty and friendship are sealed with salt because its essence does not change. Even dissolved into liquid, salt can be evaporated back into square crystals. In both Islam and Judaism, salt seals a bargain because it is immutable. Indian troops pledged their loyalty to the British with salt. Ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans included salt in sacrifices and offerings, and they invoked gods with salt and water, which is thought to be the origin of Christian holy water.

In Christianity, salt is associated not only with longevity and permanence but, by extension, with truth and wisdom. The Catholic Church dispenses not only holy water but holy salt, Sal Sapieintia, the Salt of Wisdom.

Bread and salt, a blessing and its preservation, are often associated. Bringing bread and salt to a new home is a Jewish tradition dating back to the Middle Ages.

Mark Kurlansky, Salt: A World History

Salt, the physical preservative, takes on a symbolic role. The use of salt makes the commitment binding.

Keeping this in mind, let's get back to Mrs. Lot; is she "worth her salt?" How does she compare with her peers? Lot is willing to sacrifice his daughters to save his guests. Abraham too is willing to offer his son as he travels to a yet-to-be-revealed sacrificial location under God's direction. Mrs. Lot also travels under God's guidance as she and her family flee Sodom, though a midrashic reading of Genesis 19:14 informs us that her two married daughters remained in the city. Imagine this mother's turmoil as she leaves the city: What is to become of her children? How could she not look back, hoping to see them saved?

Perhaps it would be fairer to compare her to other Biblical women. In chapter 21, Hagar and her son Ishmael are sent into the wilderness and soon run into trouble. When the water was gone from the skin, she left the child under one of the bushes, and went and sat down at a distance, a bowshot away; for she thought, "Let me not look on as the child dies." And sitting thus afar, she burst into tears. (Genesis 21:15-16) But help is at hand, and here too, vision plays a role: Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. She went and filled the skin with water, and let the boy drink. (Genesis 21:19) To quote the Hollies: "Just one look, that's all it took."

Sarah too reacts to the mortal danger faced by her child. Rashi quotes a midrash that says Sarah dies of shock when she hears about the akedah. Sarah's thoughts are revealed in a modern poem:

I am a woman and this is my child
And my love for him is greater than fear;
And my sorrow surrounds me with knives
And I am bitter in my doubts.

Lillian Elkin, Sarah Talks to God

Like Hagar, Mrs. Lot knows what is in store for her children. How could she live with that knowledge? It would be rubbing salt into her emotional wound. Unlike Hagar, Mrs. Lot would not look away as her children were about to perish. What salty tears she must have cried knowing the fate of her daughters! The words put into Sarah's mouth can apply here as a well: "I am a woman and this is my child And my love for him is greater than fear." Mrs. Lot, far from being a cruel, selfish individual, possesses a love that is greater than fear, and she is sacrificed on the altar of concern. As Linda Ronstadt would say "Just one look, that's all it took." There is no happy ending here. Life is unfair.

Reading Vayera we assume that Isaac is the offering. To a certain extent, Lot's daughters may be considered an offering because their father is willing to sacrifice them to the men of Sodom in order to protect his divine guests. In actuality, the sacrifice in Vayera is Lot's wife. Abraham had three days to ponder what he was going to do; Mrs. Lot had to make a split second decision. "Just one look, that's all it took" and she became the embodiment of the covenant of salt, eternally binding herself to her doomed daughters' fate.

Significantly, with that one look Mrs. Lot is transformed into a netsiv melach, a pillar of salt. Netsiv, (pillar) has the same root as nitsavim to "stand over," or to "stand before." This verb is found at the very beginning of our parashah, describing God's messengers as they enter Abraham's sight. The same verb is used in Deuteronomy 29:9 to describe our standing in God's presence ready to enter into God's covenant. There is a holy aspect to this type of standing. Far from being punished, Mrs. Lot has performed a holy act, her courageous action commemorated for all eternity.

Shabbat shalom,
MS

Parashat Re'eh, Deuteronomy 11:26-16:17

This week’s parasha is in memory of Al Potts, father of Adrienne Rosen, Myra White and grandfather of Alana and Sally.

Our dependence on sight overwhelms our other senses and challenges our ability to believe in an invisible God.

I always thought that Shylock got it wrong when he began his famous speech with "Hath not a Jew eyes." After all, from a Jewish perspective it is not the eyes that are important, it is the ears. The words that we set upon our hearts are sh'ma yisrael, "Hear O Israel" (Deut. 6:4).

Then again, Shakespeare may have read this week's parasha which begins with the word re'eh, "See I set before you this day blessing and curse" (Deut. 11:26). If Billy the Bard knew Hebrew, he would notice the grammatical problem in this verse. The first word re'eh ("see") is in the singular, but the word for "before you" lifneykhem, is plural.

What's going on? The 11th century scholar Bachya ibn Paquda explained that the commandments were placed before the entire people, hence the plural; but the choice of fulfilling the mitzvot is left to the individual's free will.

Writing in The Call of the Torah, Rabbi Elie Munk delves more deeply into the issue of sight: "To clearly understand the problem of free will, one must be able to see into his own conscience. And so the Torah begins its considerations regarding this problem with the verb re'eh, see, which goes much deeper than the verb sh'ma, hear. Whereas hear implies an impression of external factors affecting one's life, see suggests an internal perception, penetrating deep into one's soul."

The idea of sight is woven throughout the parasha; and it is clearly intended to shift the focus from physical sight toward inward perception. Deuteronomy 12:2-3 instructs us to tear down the visible sites (unintentional pun) of other gods, as well as to cut down their images. Chapter 13:2 talks about false prophets who might arise giving us ottot u-moftim, “visible signs and portents,” in addition to the particular prophetic vision arising from dreaming dreams. (Interestingly, Onkelos who provides the Aramaic translation for the Bible, renders the word re'eh as hazei, related to the Hebrew word for a vision –hazon.)

Sight also affects behavior. We are instructed to be visibly different from others (Deut. 14:1). Visible signs also set apart slaves unwilling to go free (Deut. 15:16-17). Even much of the food that is declared kasher, fit to eat, is readily determined by looking at an animal's features (Deut. 14:6-7, 10).

Yet Re'eh also highlights a problem with sight. It has a powerful hold over us and so we are cautioned about each one of us doing what is "right in one’s own sight" (Deut. 12:8). This is the tension that brings us back to the very beginning of the parasha. While God sets the commandments before all of us, each one of us must make an individual choice. Doing what seems right to the individual can end up being harmful to the community. What is "right in one’s own sight" can lead to tunnel vision.

Sight – or lack thereof – plays a pivotal role in a number of important events in the Torah. Eve saw that the fruit was good for eating and "a delight to the eyes" (Gen 2:6). After Eve's snack, which she shared with Adam, "the eyes of both of them were opened" (Gen 2:7). Abraham lifted his eyes, seeing the ram and saving Isaac's life. Isaac's lack of sight meant that Jacob got the eldest's blessing. God uncovered Balaam's eyes, which eventually led him to bless Israel "with eyes unveiled" (Num. 24:4-5).

Sight can also be an obstacle. Most people rely on their eyes more than on any other sense. Yet we Jews believe in a God we cannot see. Our dependence on sight overwhelms our other senses and challenges our ability to believe in an invisible God. Even Moses, on top of Mount Sinai, closer to God than any other human, still requests to see God (Ex. 33:18-23). If Moses is so short-sighted, what hope is there for the rest of us?

The path from sight to perception to insight is the key to the parasha and to the lesson we uncover in it. "See, this day I set before you blessing and curse: blessing, if you obey the commandments of Adonai your God that I enjoin upon you this day; and curse, if you do not obey the commandments of Adonai your God, but turn away from the path that I enjoin upon you this day and follow other gods, whom you have not experienced" (Deut. 11:26-28). Everything is clearly spelled out for us. Seeing is the first step to experiencing; experience leads to internalization, which results in a visible behavioral change. In the words of Isaac Abravanel "Things seen will move the heart more than things heard."

Shabbat shalom,
MS