"Thus the two daughters of Lot came to be with child by their father."

(Breishit 19:36)

 

"They had not yet lain down, when the townspeople... shouted to Lot and said to him, 'Where are the men?'" We learn from here that when Lot separated from Abraham and settled near the Jordan River, he was heading towards Sodom. Lot saw that they were participants in sexual deviations and he chose to act as they did. How do we know this? He says to the Sodomites, "I have two daughters," - In the rest of the world, a man would die defending his wife or daughters and would kill or be killed in their defense, and here he offers up his daughters to be defiled by them. God says to him to save them for himself, rather than give them over to save his life, and in the end they have his offspring.

(Midrash Tanchuma, Veyera)

 

"And came to be with child... "This conception was contrary to nature, as we know it is impossible to be impregnated from the first intercourse, particularly, since scholars of nature also said that one cannot conceive while one is inebriated. There was divine providence because in the future two great nations would descend from them, one of them being the Moabites who exist until this very day.

(Malbim, ibid)

 

Abraham as a Universal Religious Figure

Yehonatan Chipman

In these parshiyot (Lekh Lekha and Vayera), Abraham is presented in a double role. On the one hand, he appears as father of the Jewish nation - hence, inter alia, his migration to the Land of Israel, and the various "tests" which serve to sharply define his identity and the circle of those closest to him. On the other hand, he is manifested as a universal religious figure - a teacher of what might be called "pre-Sinaitic Torah."¹ This is expressed in our parashah in the first verse of the passage in which God tells Abraham of His plans for Sodom: "for I have know him, that he might command his sons and his household after him, to observe the way of the Lord, to perform righteousness and justice, that God might bring upon Abraham that which He has spoken of to him" (Gen 18:19).

The key words here are: (1) that God has known Abraham, a word implying a close and even intimate relation; and, (2) "to observe the way of the Lord, to perform justice and righteousness" - that is, that the "way of the Lord" entails universal values which are the cornerstone of any decent human society.

Rambam, in Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim Ch. 1, depicts Abraham as going about in the world, teaching everyone h e meets the basic religious truth of the one God. Indeed, he elsewhere (Sefer ha-Mitzvot, Mitzvat Aseh 3) describes this activity, intended to make God's name beloved by others, as an essential part of the mitzvah of "love of God."

All this raises the interesting question of our relationship to other faith communities, and particularly to the great monotheistic faiths, such as Christianity and Islam² - an activity known today as "interfaith dialogue." But before turning to a discussion of this question in the context of the contemporary world, I would like to recall an event from the middle Ages, whose 750^th anniversary was commemorated this past summer.

I refer to what was arguably the most dramatic event in the life of one of the great figures of medieval European Jewish life, R. Moses b. Nahman (Ramban) - namely, the Barcelona disputation, which occurred between July 20^th and 24^th 1263, early in the Hebrew month of Av, 5023. At the behest of church figures from the Dominican order, King James I of Aragon asked the Ramban, as the outstanding representative of the Jews of his kingdom, to defend their faith and to explain why they refused to accept Christianity and the belief in Jesus as the Messiah. Ironically, the main spokesman for the Church and the Christian position was an apostate Jew, Pablo Christiani. (In fact, many of the most outspoken and even vicious opponents of Judaism in those days were former Jews who were no doubt motivated by personal bitterness and whose intimate and "insider" knowledge of the Talmud and other Jewish sources were useful for the Church's Anti-Judaic polemics. Thus, in a similar debate held in Paris in 1239, which concluded, tragically, with the burning of priceless Talmudic manuscripts, the apostate Nicholas Donin opposed R Yehiel of Paris.)

A large part of the debate in Barcelona was devoted to the Christian claims that the Messiah had already come, in the form of Jesus, and specifically to the verse "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the judge's staff between his legs, till Shiloh shall come" (Gen 49:10). Was this verse fulfilled? Does it refer to Messiah? And does it allude specifically to the figure of Jesus? As Jews and Christians held a shared belief in the sanctity of the same Scriptures, the exegesis of such significant passages was a major point of polemic between them.

Ramban also marshaled a series of other arguments against Jesus' messiah-hood. Particularly striking is his appeal to reason and intellect, and to plain common sense. Messiah, he emphasizes, is not some rarified spiritual concept, existing in celestial spheres removed from this concrete world, but concerns the earthly here and now. He emphasized that the Messiah is a mortal human being, neither God nor some eternal, supernal apotheosis of the Divine, and that he will bring about concrete changes in the real world. He noted, with some irony, that the Messiah, if he has come, has not yet initiated an age of universal abundance and peace, in which armies and solders are no longer necessary - as was clearly known to the king.

At the end of the debate, the king and his entourage were forced to admit that Ramban had indeed spoken cogently (even if, from their point of view, in defense of an incorrect position). The king was greatly impressed and, as a sign of his admiration, gave Ramban a gift of 300 gold coins. Eight days later, on Shabbat Nahamu (Vaethanan), Ramban delivered a major sermon in the main synagogue of Barcelona, attended by the king and other non-Jewish notables - a sermon known as Torat Ha-Shem Temimah, which serves as a major exposition of his concept of Torah and of the Ten Commandments (see Kitvei Ramban, Chavel ed., I: 139-175).

But this was not the end of the story. Shortly after the debate Nahmanides set down the things said there in a small booklet entitled Vikauh or Milhamot ha-Shem (Kitvei Ramban, Chavel ed., I: 299-320).

These things aroused the ire of the Dominicans and other Church leaders, including the pope, who insisted that Ramban be tried for blasphemy - even though one of the preconditions of the debate was that he be allowed full freedom to speak what he thought - and he was sentenced to two years of exile. In wake of these events he realized his life-long dream of coming to Eretz Yisrael, living briefly in Jerusalem, where he established the Ramban Synagogue in the Old City, and then settled in Akko, where he spent the last years of his life writings his monumental Torah Commentary. He died there in 1270, at the age of 75.

* * *

It is interesting to contrast the atmosphere and attitude towards other religions at the time of the Barcelona Disputation with today's "inter-faith dialogue." In medieval times, such debates were attempts to convince the other side of the truth of one's own position, each side being convinced of being in possession of the exclusive truth which, at least from the Christian side, was perceived as indispensable for one's spiritual welfare. Today, such meetings - which are not thought of as debates, but as "dialogues" - are by and large conducted in an atmosphere of mutual respect and acceptance of the truth of the other (at least on the subjective level). My sense is that one reason for this change is that modernity has involved a process in which "truth claims" are somehow less important than previously. There is a kind of tacit agreement that these are matters of personal "faith," which can never be proven objectively. Indeed, there are those theologians, among both faiths, for whom there is no single, absolute truth: our knowledge of God is always approximate, a translation into human language of the ineffable and unknowable. Moreover, many churches - the liberal, so-called "mainstream" Protestants, as well as many in the Roman Catholic Church - seem to have eschewed the notion that "There is no salvation outside of the church" - a point reconfirmed in recent statements by Pope Francis. As I understand it, the Second Vatican Council of the 1960's, convened by Pope John XXIII, already greatly modified the concepts of "super secessionism" or "replacement theology," according to which the Church has replaced the Jews as God's covenantal partner. On the Jewish side, there are theologians, beginning with Franz Rosenzweig and including such contemporary figures as Yitz Greenberg, who have responded in kind with various "two covenant" theories. On the other hand, the evangelical and other fundamentalist churches still adhere to traditional Christian theology; ironically, among these groups are those that most enthusiastically support Israel and even the West Bank settlements - but due to reasons related to their own imminent eschatological scenario.

In conclusion, let us return to the figure of Abraham our Father. Were he to live among us today, would we perceive Christianity as a pagan cult against which one must wage a holy war, or would he have been among the advocates of "interfaith dialogue" which attempts to implant love and brotherhood between former enemies and thereby help build a world of peace and understanding among different people? It is of course impossible to answer such a question with any certainty, but I tend towards the latter view.

1.   There is an important debate within Judaism as whether or not the patriarchs fulfilled the Torah before it was given and, if so, whether they observed the mitzvot as such, as we know them today, And, if so, how does one explain such deviations from the halakhah as Abraham serving the angels with butter and meat, or Jacob marrying two sisters? Or might they have had a direct relation with God, unmitigated by specific mitzvot. According to some Hasidic books, by means of their "secular" actions in the world - such as Yitzhak digging wells and Jacob placing the sticks before the sheep - they accomplished the same yihudim as post-Sinai Jews do through wearing tefillin or observing Shabbat. See Arthur Green, Devotion and Commandment: The Faith of Abraham in the Hasidic Imagination (Cincinnati: HUC Press, 1989).

This position was once explained to me by the late Father Marcel Dubois (one of the great lovers of Jewry within the Catholic Church) as follows: "The Godhead is one; and He is three; and how both these things can be true is a mystery."

2.   I "bracket" the question as to whether the Christian faith in the Trinity ought to be regarded as monotheistic or not. Clearly, it is not polytheistic (or "tri-theistic") in any simple sense; some of the rishonim state that it is permitted for a Noachide to believe in a shituf (multiple Godhead) of this type. This position was once explained to me by the late Father Marcel Dubois (one of the great lovers of Jewry within the Catholic Church) as follows: "The Godhead is one; and He is three; and how both these things can be true is a mystery."

Rabbi Yehonatan Chipman is a professional translator. He writes a weekly parasha commentary called Hitzei Yehonatan in English. Anyone interested in received it may write to yonarand@internet-zahav.net

 

Now God appeared to him by the oaks of mamre as he was sitting at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day.

"Appeared to him" - to visit the sick.

Said R' Chamma bar Chaninah: It was the third day since his circumcision,

and The Holy One, Blessed Be He, came to inquire as to his welfare.

(Rashi Bereishit 18:1)

 

You Shall Walk in His Ways

Said R' Chamma son of R' Chaninah: What is the meaning of "You shall follow the Lord your God" (Devarim 13)? Is possible for man to follow the Shechinah? Is it not written (Devarim 4) "For the Lord your God is a consuming fire"! But [the meaning is] "follow the attributes of The Holy One, Blessed Be He; just as he clothes the naked, as is written (Bereishit 3) "The Lord God make for man and his wife garments of skin and they wore them," so should you clothe the naked; The Holy One, Blessed Be He, visits the sick, as is written (Bereishit 18) "And the Lord appeared to him at the Oaks of Mamre"­, so should you visit the sick; The Holy One, Blessed Be He, consoles the mourners, as is written (Bereishit 25) "After the death of Avraham, the Lord blessed his son Yitzchak", so you should console the mourners; The Holy One, Blessed Be He, buries the dead, as is written (Devarim 34) "He buried him in the valley", so you should bury the dead.

(Bavli, Sotah 14a)

 

It was taught in a Brayta: Visitation of the sick has no limits. What does "has no limits" mean? Said Abaye: Even an adult should visit a child. Rabba said: Even a hundred times a day. R' Acha bar Chaninah said: Whoever visits a sick person, takes away one sixtieth of his sorrow.

 (Bavli, Nedarim 39b)

 

Our Rabbis taught in a Brayta: We are to support the indigent gentile along with the Jewish poor, and we visit the gentile sick with the Jewish sick, and we bury the dead of the gentiles along with the Jewish dead - for the sake of peace.

(Bavli, Gittin 61a)

 

Expulsion Has Its Price

"Drive out this slave woman and her son" - ["Drive out" appears] thrice in the Bible: "Drive out this slave woman", "Drive out the scoffer" (Proverbs 22:10), "When he sends you free, it is finished - he will drive, yes, drive you out from here" (Shemot 11:1) - Drive out this slave woman and her son, and then you will have driven out the scoffer, and because Sara drove Hagar out of her home, she was punished, and her descendents were enslaved and had to be driven out of Egypt.

 (Baal Haturim, Bereishit 21:10)

 

Yishmael, Son of the Slave Woman, Remains Son of Avraham

"The matter was exceedingly bad... because of his son" - Even though he was the son of the slave woman, he was his son, and he loved him, because he was his firstborn and he had pity upon him as a father pities his children, and he walked in a good path, for he grew up with him and he taught him the way of God, for even others did he teach and guide in the right path, all the more so to his son, and it was bad in his eyes that he be driven from his house; he did not admonish his wife out of considerations of peace in the home, as we wrote regarding Hagar (Bereishit 16:6), and he was saddened over the matter and he tolerated his wife's quarrel until the matter came before him.

(Radak, Bereishit 21:11)

 

"He said to her: What ails you, Hagar? Do not be afraid, for God has heard the voice of the lad there where he is."

"There where he is": He is judged according his current behavior, not in consideration of his future behavior.

The ministering angels were complaining: "Master of the Universe, one whose descendents are destined to kill your children with thirst, and you bring forth for him a spring!?"

He replied: "What is he now, a tzaddik or a wicked man?"

They answered: "Tzaddik".

He said to them: "According to his present behavior do I judge" and this is what is meant by "there where he is."

(Rashi, Bereishit 21:16)

 

"What Is Mine Is Mine, and What Is Yours Is Yours, This Is a Characteristic of Sodom."

The people of Sodom rebelled against the Omnipresent because of all the good showered upon them, as is written (Job 28): "Earth, out of which food grows... Its rocks are a source of sapphires... No bird of prey knows the path to it..." The people of Sodom said: Inasmuch as food comes out of our earth and silver and gold comes from our earth, and precious stones and pearls come out of our lands, we have no need for people to join us - they will lessen our fortunes. Let us stand, and deny their presence among us. Said The Holy One, Blessed Be He: When I am good to you, you forbid others from joining you. I will cause you to disappear from the earth. What is the scriptural source for this? "He carves out channels through rock, his eyes behold every precious thing" (Ibid.) and "Robbers lie untroubled in their tents..." and "As I live - declares the Lord God - your sister Sodom and her daughters did not do what you and your daughters did...Only this was the sin of your sister Sodom: arrogance! She and her daughters had plenty of bread and untroubled tranquility, yet she did not support the poor and the needy (Ezekiel 16).

(Tosefta Sotah 3:3)

 

 

For a US tax deductible donation, the New Israel Fund may be used as the conduit. Contributions should be marked as donor-advised to OzveShalom, the Shabbat Shalom project, with mention of the registration number 5708.

If you wish to subscribe to the email English editions of Shabbat Shalom, to print copies of it for distribution in your synagogue, to inquire regarding the dedication of an edition in someone's honor or memory, to find out how to make tax-exempt donations, or to suggest additional helpful ideas, please call Miriam Fine at +972-52-3920206 or at ozveshalomns@gmail.com.

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

Shabbat Shalom is available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il

For responses and arranging to write for Shabbat Shalom: pleiser@netvision.net.il