Parshas Vayeira - As a Matter of Opinion

Parshas Vayeira

As a Matter of Opinion

By: Daniel Listhaus

וַיִּגַּשׁ אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמַר הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה צַדִּיק עִם רָשָׁע: אוּלַי יֵשׁ חֲמִשִּׁים צַדִּיקִם בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה וְלֹאתִשָּׂא לַמָּקוֹם לְמַעַן חֲמִשִּׁים הַצַּדִּיקִם אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבָּהּ: חָלִלָה לְּךָ מֵעֲשׂת כַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה לְהָמִית צַדִּיק עִםרָשָׁע וְהָיָה כַצַּדִּיק כָּרָשָׁע חָלִלָה לָּךְ הֲשֹׁפֵט כָּל הָאָרֶץ לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה מִשְׁפָּט

“Avraham came forward and said, 'Will You even destroy the righteous with the wicked? Perhaps there are fifty righteous men in the midst of the city; will You even destroy and not forgive the place for the sake of the fifty righteous men who are in its midst? It would be sacrilege to You to do such a thing, to bring death upon righteous with wicked; so the righteous will be like the wicked. It would be sacrilege to You! Shall the Judge of all the earth not do justice?”

-Vayeira 18:23-25

In the beginning of parshas Vayeira¹, the Torah describes that Avraham was sitting by the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day. Avraham, the tremendous ba'al chesed, was desperately awaiting guests even though he had just had his bris milah (circumcision) and was still in pain.² In order to appease Avraham, Hashem sent three malachim (angels) in the form of men for Avraham to entertain. Rashi³ tells us that each of these three malachim had come for a distinct purpose. One was to tell Sarah that she would give birth in a year, one was to heal Avraham, and one was overturn Sodom. After the first two had completed their missions, Rashi⁴ relates that the third malach delayed going to Sodom in order to give Avraham the chance to ask Hashem for mercy.

Indeed, after the malachim had left Avraham's tent, Hashem told Avraham that he was planning on destroying Sodom. Avraham's immediate response to this, however, seems quite aggressive. Avraham responded, “Perhaps there are fifty righteous people in the midst of the city; would You even obliterate, and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people that are within it? It would be sacrilege to You to do such a thing, to bring death upon righteous with the wicked...Shall the Judge of all the earth not do justice?”⁵

The fact that this sounds to us as a bold statement to make to Hashem, and that it does not seem to match with Avraham's usual humble personality,⁶ is beyond the scope of this d'var Torah. Let us just focus on the actual argument that Avraham was making.

Rashi⁷ explains that Avraham's argument was the following: “It is profane for You. For people will say, 'Such is His craft! He washes away everything, righteous and wicked. So did You do to the generation of the mabul (flood) and to the generation of Migdal Bavel (Tower of Babylon).'”

This Rashi is extremely difficult to understand. Why was Avraham so worried that such a thing would occur? The history text books were not as large then as they are now. Certainly the two major events covered in any school curriculum were the mabul and the dor haflaga (Generation of the Dispersion by the Tower of Babylon). Everyone knew the story of Noach's family and how they were saved in the teivah (ark) with all the animals. Additionally, everyone was aware of the fact that there were no casualties as a result of building Migdal Bavel, other than the fact that, consequently, the world was divided into seventy languages. So, what was Avraham so worried about? Why was he afraid that if Hashem would kill the righteous with the wicked in Sodom, that people would start to say that Hashem also killed the righteous with the wicked by the mabul and dor haflaga?

Perhaps the answer to this question could be found if we study human behavior. As egotistical people who think we are always right, we often times allow our opinions to control us. To illustrate this point, take a look at the following study:

In 2006, Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler created various fake newspaper articles – each one was written to confirm some widespread misconception or rumor, which people had formed strong opinions about. For example, in one article they wrote that the United States had indeed found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. After giving this article to some people to read, they would then give them a version of a “corrected” paper saying that there was a mistake, and that in reality the weapons of mass destruction were never found. In this research study, Nyhan and Reifler discovered that those who supported the war actually continued to agree with the first article – despite the fact that a second article was given to them specifically correcting that error. Also, those who were opposed to the war, said that they were all along skeptical of the first article and therefore never completely accepted its contents as accurate.

This is something that we do on a daily basis. When we weigh ourselves on the scale and are happy with the results – we jump off smiling. Yet, when we are upset with the numbers, we get off, reset the scale, and try again with absolute perfect balance. When playing baseball and running to first, the runner honestly swears that he got there first, while the first baseman equally assures everyone that he touched the base first with the ball and that the runner is out. All of these scenarios demonstrate that the assumptions we make and opinions we believe take a strong hold on us; even to the extreme that we will see facts erroneously and remember events differently.

The Orchos Tzadikkim⁸ discusses the importance of memory.⁹ Although the author writes that that it is obvious that the world would not be able to run properly without people remembering, the Orchos Tzadikkim goes through several examples. The last example he gives is the following: “And when one goes to testify before Beis Din (court) regarding that which he saw and knows, he must be extremely careful to remember correctly, and not subtract nor add on that which he saw and knows”.

In this chapter, the Orchos Tzadikkim is not discussing liars or people who are out to get others because of anger or jealousy. Those middos (character traits) are reserved for other chapters. If so, that the Orchos Tzadikkim is solely dealing with memory, then there seems to be a contradiction in the aforementioned statement. The Orchos Tzadikkim warns us to be careful to remember. However, why does the Orchos Tzadikkim then write, “that which he saw and knows”? If you are an honest person and know precisely what occurred, why should there be a worry that you may add or subtract to what you saw and know?

Perhaps the Orchos Tzadikkim is alluding to this point of human nature we are discussing. Even an honest person who thinks he knows what he saw must be careful not to allow his opinion to get in the way, thereby distorting the facts. If we allow our beliefs and personal opinions to be at the forefront of our minds, then what we are essentially doing is causing ourselves to constantly be looking at the world with colored glasses over our eyes. Such a person who allows facts to be tainted by personal opinion cannot be trusted to deliver accurate facts.

This is what Avraham was worried about. Hashem needed to destroy Sodom because its sins became to great for the world to sustain¹⁰. The destruction of Sodom and Amorah was going to be a lesson to the world to wake up and realize that such wickedness will not be tolerated. If Hashem were to destroy the righteous with the wicked in such a situation, Avraham was concerned that a strong opinion would be formed in the mind of the world as a whole. People would see that the righteous too were killed and say about Hashem that, “Such is His craft! He washes away everything, righteous and wicked. So did You do to the dor ha'mabul and so to the dor haflaga.” People would begin to subconsciously distort the facts of the past in order to fit them with their opinions of the present. Avraham, who knew that Hashem's judgment comes from absolute truth and righteousness,¹¹ could not stand for such a belief to enter the world.

This exact concept actually reappears later in parshas Vayeira as well. After the destruction of Sodom, Avraham traveled to Gerar. Upon entering, Avraham experienced déjà vu as Sarah was once again taken to the king's palace.¹² When Avimelech, king of Gerar was suddenly struck with a deathly plague, he called out to Hashem, “My Lord, will you slay a nation even though it is righteous? Did he [Avraham] himself not tell me that: 'She is my sister'...”¹³. Rashi¹⁴ on this passuk comments that Avimelech was really saying the following, “I have done nothing wrong. I was under the impression that Sarah was Avraham's sister, yet You want to kill me for trying to marry her? Perhaps this is Your practice, to destroy people for no reason. So did You do to the dor ha'mabul and the dor haflaga. I say that you slew them for no reason just as You will slay me [for no reason].”

In the end of the day, though, Avimelech was saved from the plague. So, what happened to his “strong belief” that all the history books were wrong? Did he or did he not believe that everyone in Noach's time was also righteous, and that all the participants during the dor haflaga were killed without record? What happened to the “I say that you slew them for no reason...”? Why were these differences in recalling the past dependent on something that would occur in the present? Clearly, Avimelech was not threatening Hashem that he would start pretending that Hashem was an unfair G-d, rather, Avimelech was just thinking out loud that if Hashem is willing to destroy innocent people, then that is what must have happened during the past events as well. Avimelech, without realizing, was on the verge of becoming a different person solely because on his newly formed opinion. He would therefore also have a different perspective and memory on the past – even if it would mean subconsciously making up parts of history.

This is the inferred lesson we could learn from Avraham's discussion with Hashem. Human's are easily swayed by opinions. The power of opinion and preconceived notions are such that we are even willing, subconsciously, to remember facts differently in order to fit them into our opinions and beliefs. This is something which is a middah and could be worked on. Zechira (remembering) is the safeguard for emes (truth and reality). This means that even if we are honest, good people we still must make sure that we remember things objectively, and not clouded by our thoughts and opinions. We must work on this aspect of this middah in order to ensure that we are not limiting ourselves to a perspective influenced by our views and beliefs. This is the only way we could be sure that we are really seeing what we think we see, and really know what we think we know.

1Beraishis 18:1-2

2Rashi Beraishis 18:1

3Beraishis 18:2

4Beraishis 19:1

5Beraishis 23-25

6See Beraishis 18:27, where Avraham, just two passukim (verses) later, humbly says that he is of but dust and ash.

7Rashi Beraishis 18:25

8Orchos Tzadikkim: Sha'ar HaZechira - (Gate 19: The Gate of Remembrance)

9It is difficult to understand how memory is a character trait that could be worked on and perfected. Memory is something we may associate with height or IQ level – that people are born with different set capabilities. However, from the fact it is in Orchos Tzadikkim it must be it is really something that could be worked on. See the section on my blog titled “Sha'ar Hazechira” for a possible explanation. Also see my d'var Torah to Parshas Korach – Remember to Remember for another possible approach.

10Bereishis 18:20

11Tehillim 19:10

12An almost identical episode occurred in parshas Lech Lecha 12:10-20

13Beraishis 20:4-5

14Beraishis 20:4
Photo Credit: http://tx.english-ch.com/teacher/roj/home/distinguishing-between-fact-and-opinion/