Parashas Vayaira 5773

“Far be it for You, the Judge of all the land, to not do justice” (B’raishis 18:25). This week’s piece is being written in memory of my Uncle Herbie, better known in New York legal circles (and elsewhere) as the Honorable Judge Herbert Kramer (http://www.brooklyneagle.com/articles/sentinel-bench), who passed away this past Sunday, and whose dedication to justice was evident and widely acknowledged.

As the above-quoted verse indicates, Avraham Avinu (Abraham our forefather) challenged G-d, implying that His decree against the residents of the five-city metropolis of S’dom was not a just one. As I have previously discussed (http://www.aishdas.org/ta/5765/vayeira.pdf, pg.3), G-d told Avraham what He was about to do to S’dom because He knew that Avraham would try to defend them (see Tanchuma 8), which would start a conversation that would lead to Avraham’s uncertainty about G-d’s justness being abrogated (see Tanchuma Yoshon 7; Avraham wasn’t sure whether or not there were any righteous people who perished in the flood). G-d’s reassurance that if there were 50/45/40/30/10 righteous people in S’dom He wouldn’t destroy it made it clear to Avraham that G-d is just. It becomes apparent, though, that even if the conversation achieved its desired result (from G-d’s perspective), Avraham’s arguments were not the most effective. After all, the cities were destroyed, and even the one that was saved was not saved through Avraham’s objection, but through his nephew Lot (B’raishis 19:20-22). A closer look indicates that this was not the only aspect of the conversation that, from Avraham’s perspective, seems flawed.

As I just alluded to, trying to save a city based on it having 10 righteous residents didn’t work, because there weren’t 10 such residents in any of the five cities. Lot’s argument, however, that Tzo’ar should be spared because it hadn’t yet reached the necessary sin limit (as it was settled more recently, see Rashi on 19:20), seemed to work. It is possible, though, that even if Avraham had made the same argument, G-d wouldn’t have agreed to spare the city (yet). When Lot refused to leave the area, and the only way to save Avraham’s nephew was to spare the city, then the city was spared. Not because they deserved to be spared, but because G-d didn’t want Avraham to suffer, and Lot forced G-d’s hand (as it were) to spare the city by making it the only way to spare Avraham from having anguish about his nephew.

Avraham didn’t ask G-d if He would save a city if it had only eight righteous residents, as there were eight righteous people in Noach’s family (or so Avraham assumed), and that didn’t protect anyone else (see Rashi on 18:32). However, Noach’s sons (and likely his daughters-in-law as well) were less than 100 years old (see Rashi on 5:32), and at that point (before the Torah was given) no one was punished by heavenly decree until they were at least 100 years old (which is why, Rashi explains, G-d made sure none of Noach’s sons would be that old before the flood). It is therefore theoretically possible that had there been eight righteous residents in one of the cities (and Avraham had asked G-d to save it on their behalf), it wouldn’t have been destroyed. For some reason, though see http://www.aishdas.org/ta/5764/vayeira.pdf, pg. 4, for a possible explanation), Avraham didn’t ask G-d if He would destroy a city that had eight righteous residents. Nevertheless, there likely weren’t eight righteous individuals, so it made no practical difference that Avraham never asked; the main point is that Avraham was able to clarify his question about whether or not G-d was just.

Why didn’t Avraham ask G-d if He would save a city if it had nine righteous individuals? Rashi (18:32) says that he already had, and was told that there weren’t. However, this request is not mentioned in the Torah. The commentators say Rashi means that this configuration was included in previous requests, either because 45 righteous individuals living in the five cities was the same ratio as nine living in one (see Sifsay Chachamim) or because after the concept was established that a nine per city ratio (with G-d Himself counting as the 10th) would spare the city, each subsequent request (40 saving four cities, 30 saving three, 20 saving two and 10 saving one) also included a request regarding nine per city (36/27/18/9). Since G-d said there weren’t enough righteous individuals to save even one city, there must not have been even nine (see Mizrachi).

Nevertheless, this formula doesn’t seem to work. The same way Avraham felt the need to ask if 40 righteous individuals would save four cities even after he was told that 50 would save five, shouldn’t he have verified that 36 would work the way 45 would? He asked if 30 would save three, 20 would save two and 10 would save one; why was it so obvious that nine per city worked no matter how many cities were involved if it wasn’t so obvious that 10 per city worked without asking for each possibility separately and explicitly? Ramban (18:24) explains that 50 righteous individuals can accomplish more than five times what 10 can, which is why Avraham had to ask for each lower set of 10; shouldn’t he have asked whether “nine plus G-d” would work for the lower sets of nine as well? It would also be difficult to suggest that each multiple of 10 that Avraham asked about included its multiple of nine, based on the way Tosfos (18:32) explains the different wording of G-d’s answers to Avraham’s questions. Since G-d told Avraham He wouldn’t “destroy” the cities if there were 45 righteous residents, while if there were 50 He “wouldn’t do anything” to them, the implication is that having nine per city (plus G-d) wouldn’t protect them from suffering, only from being completely destroyed. If there would be less protection for multiples of nine than for multiples of 10, how could Avraham have known that 18 or 9 would work just because 20 and 10 would, since for 20 and 10 (which would protect less than half of the cities) G-d would only save them from destruction, but not from suffering? [I don’t have an explanation for why Avraham didn’t ask about nine righteous individuals; suggestions are always welcome and appreciated (RabbiDMK at Yahoo.com).] Here too, whether or not Avraham could/should have asked about nine is not the primary issue, as the conversation was meant to help Avraham understand G-d better, and there likely weren‘t nine righteous individuals living in any of the cities.

This conversation took place when Avraham was 99 years old (17:24), after G-d had promised He would have a special relationship with him and his descendents (17:7), that He would give them the land he was traveling through (17:8), and had bestowed accolades upon him (18:17-19). Avraham not understanding everything about G-d didn’t prevent him from being able to fulfill G-d’s wishes and spread monotheism. If anything, it was Avraham’s confidence that G-d had to be just that allowed him to ask G-d about it. Rather than being a question of “are You just,” it was more like “You must be just, so please explain how You can wipe out entire cities, or an entire generation.”  As a matter of fact, G-d’s praises of Avraham just prior to this conversation included that he would “teach his children and his household after him to keep the ways of G-d, to do charity and justice.” Avraham teaching his offspring and his followers to “keep the ways of G-d” included fighting for and spreading justice.

Uncle Herbie, you were loved, respected, and appreciated. And will be sorely missed.