Parshat VaYerah
Rabbi Bernard Fox
“And
he lifted his eyes and he saw that three men were standing before him. And he saw and he ran from the opening of
his tent to greet them. And he bowed towards the ground”. (Beresheit
18:2)
Hashem sends three messengers to Avraham. Rashi refers to these messengers as malachim – angels. He explains that an individual malach –
angel – can only have a single mission.
Each of these malachim has a unique assignment. In this instance, one was assigned the
responsibility of healing Avraham from his recent milah – circumcision. Another was to tell Avraham that Sara would
soon bare him a son – Yitzchak. A third
malach would tell Avraham of the coming destruction of Sedom.
After fulfilling his responsibility, the angel that foretold the birth of
Yitzchak left Avraham and the others.
His job was done. The remaining
two messengers proceeded to Sedom. The one who told Avraham of the fate of
Sedom would now destroy the city. The
other angel would rescue Lote.
Rashi acknowledges that this second angel’s responsibility presents a
problem. An individual angel can only
be assigned a single mission. This
second angel seems to have performed two tasks. He fulfilled his first mission in the presence of Avraham. He would now execute a second responsibility. He would save Lote.
Rashi responds that this second angel was the messenger that had
previously healed Avraham. He further
explains that this does not violate the principle of assigning a single task to
an individual angel. Both tasks involve
salvation. Because of this common
feature, a single angel could perform both tasks.[1]
Rashi’s comments present two problems.
First, he never seems to answer his question. He concludes that one angel did perform two tasks. Rashi argues that because these two tasks
are related, the question is somehow answered. However, the relationship seems
rather artificial. Rashi describes both
missions as acts of salvation. The
rescue of Lote was a true act of salvation.
However, the healing of Avraham was an act of salvation in only a
figurative sense. Avraham was saved
from additional physical pain.
Second, why does Rashi insist that the dual responsibility fell to angel
that healed Avraham? There is another
candidate for two tasks. This is the
angel that foretold Yitzchak’s birth.
Why could this angel not be assigned the task of saving Yitzchak? It seems that these two responsibilities
could also be characterized under the general heading of salvation. We know that Avraham was deeply concerned
with having children. This angel
relieved Avraham of this anxiety. This
is also a form of salvation.
In order to answer these questions, we must understand Rashi’s comments
at a deeper level. We need to explain
the Rashi’s basic principle. An
individual angel can have only a single responsibility.
It seems that Rashi maintains that each angel or messenger represents a
different theme within Divine providence.
Each expresses a unique objective.
The various themes are identified by associating each with a different
messenger. This understanding of
Rashi’s principle suggests an approach to answering our questions. Apparently, Rashi maintains that the healing
of Avraham and the saving of Lote are manifestations of a single theme within
providence. In order to understand the
relationship between these two tasks, we must identify the themes represented
by the angels.
One theme is easy to identify.
Providence is sometimes an expression of Divine justice. This theme is represented by the malach that
destroyed Sedom. The other two themes
are more difficult to differentiate.
The remaining two angels seem to have had similar objectives. They were expressions of the Almighty’s
kindness to Avraham. One healed Avraham
the other foretold Yitzchak’s birth.
What are the different themes these malachim represent?
Rashi explains earlier that the world was created with a specific
objective. The Almighty wished to
create a world that would embody and give expression to the Torah.[2] Avraham was chosen to be the progenitor of
the nation that would receive the Torah.
He served as the instrument for the fulfillment of the Creator’s
plan. Granting a child to Avraham, was
an expression of the Divine plan to create a sacred nation. We can now identify the theme represented by
the angel that foretold Yitzchak’s birth.
He was an expression of the Divine design to create of world embodying
Torah.
The theme represented the angel that healed Avraham can now be
distinguished. This malach represents
the providence that Hashem grants the righteous. The healing of Avraham was not an expression of Divine
justice. It was not part of the
Almighty’s design for His world. This
healing was simply a kindness performed for the righteous.
It is now clear that the malach that healed Avraham was the appropriate
angel to save Lote. Lote’s salvation
was also an act of kindness performed on behalf of Avraham. It is appropriate that the healing angel
should perform this task. He represents
the theme of the Almighty’s providence over the righteous.
“And
he hesitated. And the men seized him,
his wife and his two daughters because of the compassion of Hashem for
him. And they left him outside of the
city.”
(Beresheit 19:16)
The melachim reveal to Lote their
mission. They urge him to gather his
family and flee Sedom. Lote
hesitates. The melachim seize Lote, his
wife and daughters. They deposit them
outside of Sedom.
The general impression created by
the messenger’s urgency is that they had limited control over the destruction
destined for Sedom. Therefore, they
insisted that Lote act quickly. The melachim
could not delay the unfolding events.
This explains an odd event
earlier in the parasha. In the
beginning of the parasha these messengers, accompanied by a third messenger,
visit Avraham. Avraham and Sara are
told that they will have a son Yitzchak.
The melachim then leave Avraham’s home.
He accompanies them. The
messengers gaze upon Sedom. Suddenly,
Avraham has a prophecy. The Almighty
reveals to Avraham that He will destroy Sedom.
This leads into an involved discussion in which Avraham beseeches Hashem
to spare Sedom.
Rabbaynu Nissim asks an
interesting question. Avraham received
this prophecy while standing on the road.
Hashem did not wait for Avraham to return home. Why did this prophecy come to Avraham at
this odd location?
Rabbaynu Nissim provides a
response based upon a teaching of the Sages quoted by Rashi. The Torah tells us that the messengers
looked out upon Sedom. The term used is
vayashkifu. Rashi explains that this
term means to look out. However, it has
a specific implication. It implies a
negative outcome. In the context of our
pasuk, the gaze of the melachim, upon Sedom, indicates impending disaster.
What is the connection between
the gaze of the messengers and destruction of Sedom? Rabbaynu Nissim explains that the gaze is not merely a harbinger
foretelling disaster. It is the
initiation of the destruction. In other
words, through looking out upon Sedom the destruction was initiated.
This explains Avraham’s sudden
prophecy. The process leading to
Sedom’s destruction was initiated the moment the messengers looked upon the
city. The Almighty wished to provide
Avraham an opportunity to appeal for mercy.
Little time remained for Avraham to act. Therefore, Hashem spoke to Avraham immediately after the
messengers initiated the destruction of Sedom.[3]
We can now explain the haste of
the melachim to evacuate Lote. How did
their gaze initiate the destruction of the city? It seems that Sedom was not destroyed through a sudden,
completely unnatural cataclysm. The
destruction of Sedom was brought about through a manipulation of nature. Once the causes precipitating this cataclysm
were initiated, they preceded in a chain of natural cause and effect to their
inevitable end. This manipulation of
nature began with the messengers looking upon Sedom. Once this manipulation was initiated, the messengers had limited
ability to alter or delay the outcome.
This explains their urgency in dealing with Lote. Sedom’s destiny was decided and
inevitable. It was crucial for Lote to
escape before the destruction befell the city.
“And
Avraham rebuked Avimelech over the well that his servants had stolen”. (Bereshit
21:25)
Avimelech the king of Gerar comes
to Avraham. He wishes to establish a
covenant with Avraham. Avimelech has
seen that Avraham enjoys the providence of the Almighty. He wants to be sure that his descendants and
Avraham’s will live in peace.
Avraham agrees to the
covenant. Suddenly, Avraham raises a seemingly
unrelated issue. Avraham had developed
a well. Avimelech’s servants had forced
Avraham to abandon the well and taken control of this resource. Avraham rebuked Avimelech for allowing this
theft to occur in his kingdom.
Avimelech responded that he was unaware of the crime. He should not be held accountable for this
wrongdoing. Avraham apparently accepts
this explanation and completes the covenant.
Avraham’s actions are difficult
to understand. First, he agrees to the
covenant. However, he does not enter
into the agreement immediately. He
rebukes Avimelech. After the rebuke, he
completes the covenant. It seems that
the incident of the well deeply concerned Avraham. He had misgivings regarding Avimelech’s honesty. He should have questioned Avimelech before
agreeing to the covenant! Once Avraham
had agreed to the covenent, why did he question Avimelech’s actions?
Rabbaynu Avraham ben HaRambam
offers an interesting response. He
explains that Avraham had agreed to enter into a covenant of peace. This action implied that Avraham did not
bear any animosity toward Avimelech.
However, Avraham realized that at this point such an agreement would be
misleading. He did have grave concerns
over Avimelech’s honesty. The agreement
to enter into the covenant required that these issues be resolved.
Now Avraham’s behavior is
understood. He did not seek out
Avimelech. However, once he agreed to a
covenant, he felt obligated to reveal his true concerns. After the concerns were addressed to
Avraham’s satisfaction he was willing to complete the agreement. Now the covenant would honestly reflect
Avraham’s attitude.[4]
[1] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer
Beresheit 18:2.
[2] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer
Beresheit 2:1.
[3] Rabbaynu Nissim ben Reuven Gerondi (Ran), Commentary on Sefer
Beresheit 18:16.
[4] Rabbaynu Avraham ben HaRambam, Commentary on Sefer Beresheit
21:25.