1. Parshat Vayera: Avraham & Sdom Shiur by Menachem Leibtag
Introduction
Theme of “bechira” – God’s choice of Avraham Avinu to become the forefather of a special nation that will represent him.
We have discussed the reason why (i.e. for what purpose) God chose Avraham Avinu. But how will this nation ultimately achieve this goal? A possible answer to this question can be found in the story of God's consultation with Avraham before He destroys Sdom..
Presentation by Ronni Libson

2. 1) The news that Sarah will give birth to Yitzchak
Breishit 18:1 – 19:38
Two topics:
1) The news that Sarah will give birth to Yitzchak
2) The story of Lot’s rescue from Sdom
Thematic connection between the two topics
One parshiya
Have students prepare 18:1-19:38
Q: What main topics are included?
Q: Note – it is all in one parshiya – what does that mean?

3. Why? Thematic Connection:
The “malachim” who tell Avraham about the birth of Yitzchak are the ones who destroy Sdom
Why?
Q: Ask students what connections they can think of between the two topics
Why is it necessary for the same angels who are to destroy Sdom to first stop and inform Avraham of Yitzchak's birth?

4. Hint to answer:
Look at Hashem’s explanation of why He must first consult Avraham before destroying Sdom
Q: What do 18:17-18 remind us of?
Note parallels between here and Hashem’s original choice of Avraham Avinu in Lech L’cha.
After reviewing that Avraham was chosen, Hashem continues to explain (for the first time) for what purpose and how,
Q: What is the purpose?
The mission - Avraham will teach his children (and those children their children, etc.) to do tzedaka u'mishpat) - –how it relates to Avraham’s offspring
Avraham is expected to initiate a family tradition to create a nation that will be characterized by a society of "tzedaka & mishpat" - thereby serving as God's model nation.

5. Sin of Sdom? Sin of Sdom must relate to lack of “tzedek u’mishpat”
Two facts from story so far:
Avraham’s offspring are to do “tzdaka u’mishpat”
Angels that tell of Yitzchak’s birth destroy Sdom
Q: What is the sin of Sdom?
Don’t know yet.
Two facts from story so far:However, whatever that sin may be, this 'prelude' certainly suggests that it must relate to a lack of "tzedek u'mishpat" in Sdom.
Sin of Sdom must relate to lack of “tzedek u’mishpat”

6. A model nation is to come from Avraham
Master Plan:
A model nation is to come from Avraham
Avraham’s Request:
Entire city should be saved due to “tzadikim”
Reflects the purpose for which Avraham was selected
The same angels assigned to destroy Sdom must first 'plant the seeds' for the prevention of future Sdom's.
That model nation will come from Yitzchak
Future plan – a model nation that could influence others
In light of “master plan” – look at Avraham’s request to save Sdom
Q: Ask students how this can be seen in Avraham’s request:
1) Entire city be saved (not just tzadikim) since the tzadikim could possibly influence the rest of the city and lead Sdom to teshuva, just as the nation of Avraham is destined to lead all mankind in the direction of God
2) Number of tzadikim - Avraham asks that the entire city should be saved, even if only 50 or 45, or 40, or 30, or even 10 "tzadikim" / see 18:23-32). But if less than ten, there is little chance such a small number can exert an influence.
In the future, it is God's hope that Avraham's nation, by setting the proper example, will prevent the emergence of similarly corrupt populations.
As Yitzchak is the son through whom this tradition will be transmitted, it is meaningful that the same angels assigned to destroy Sdom must first 'plant the seeds' for the prevention of future Sdom's.
Avraham makes this gallant effort to save Sdom despite its being an exercise in futility. His petition reflects the very purpose for which he was selected, the tradition he must pass on to his son Yitzchak and all future generations.

7. Sdom is a society bereft of "tzedaka u’mishpat."
Sdom: Antithesis of everything that Avraham stands for:
Lot decides to leave Avraham and move to Sdom (13:1-18):
After rescuing Lot from the ‘four kings’, Avraham refuses to keep any spoils from Sdom (14:22-23) – disassociates himself from Sdom
Before He destroys Sdom, Hashem states that Avraham's mission is to teach "tzedaka u’mishpat"
Q: Where do we see examples of Sdom being the antithesis of everything Avraham stands for?
1) Lot's decision to leave Avraham and move to Sdom (13:1-18) reflects his preference not to be dependent on God and to dissociate himself from his uncle.
2) Avraham Avinu, expressing his opposition to anything associated with Sdom, prefers to completely divorce himself from any resources originating from that city
Q: What can we conclude about Sdom from the above two examples plus God's statement concerning Avraham's mission to teach "tzedaka u- mishpat" before He destroys Sdom
These two events - Lot's settlement in Sdom and Avraham's refusal to take a single item therefrom - as well as God's statement concerning Avraham's mission to teach "tzedaka u- mishpat" before He destroys Sdom (in Parshat Va'yera/ 18:19), all indicate that Sdom is a society bereft of "tzedaka u’mishpat.”
Sdom is a society bereft of "tzedaka u’mishpat."

8. No guests allowed! (Sanhedrin 109a, Ramban 19:5)
Entire nation protesting:
No guests allowed! (Sanhedrin 109a, Ramban 19:5)
Warped “mishpat”, No “tzdaka”
Now look at the story in Perek 19:
Q: 19:4-5 – who gathered?
Rashi - a small group of the lowest social and ethical stratum of Sdom, who wanted to 'know them' in the Biblical sense
Pshat - Rasag & Ramban - is that the entire city joined in the protest demonstration
Q: Based on Sanhedrin 109a & Ramban 19:5, what were they protesting?
No guests allowed!
There's a strict law in Sdom: no guests allowed! The Ramban explains that the Sdomites don't want to ruin their exclusive [suburban] neighborhood. Should Lot accommodate guests this evening, tomorrow night more guests will come. [Like cats,] by the end of the month, the city streets will be flooded with transients and beggars. Should the 'word get out' that there is 'free lodging' in Sdom, their 'perfect' city would be ruined. Furthermore, if everyone agrees not to take care of the needy, the needy will ultimately learn to take care of themselves. Thus, in the 'best interest' of the needy, the government of Sdom enacted such a policy.
Hence, should any citizen ["chas v'shalom"] bring home a guest, the city's 'steering committee' immediately calls for a public protest
Q: Do we see tzdaka & mishpat?
No tzdaka, warped mishpat
Chazal discuss midat Sdom – Pirkei Avot

9. Sdom is associated with lack of “tzedek u’mishpat”
Nviim Acharonim:
Sdom is associated with lack of “tzedek u’mishpat”
Examples of Sdom being associated with lack of “tzedek u’mishpat” in Nviim Acharonim
Yechezkel - states explicitly that this issue of "hachnasat orchim” was the sin of Sdom
Yeshayahu - connection between the lack of "tzedek u'mishpat" and Sdom; conclusion of Nevuah about future

10. “Tzedek u’mishpat” in Am Yisrael
Nviim Acharonim:
“Tzedek u’mishpat” in Am Yisrael
Tzedek U’Mishpat in Am Yisrael in Nviim Acharonim
Yeshayahu - conclusion of Nevuah about future
Yeshayahu - "mashal ha'kerem" [the parable of the vineyard] - God's initial hope and plan that Am Yisrael would perform "tzedaka u'mishpat," and the punishment they deserve for doing exactly the opposite
Zecharya – commandment for people to do tzedek and mishpat to one another; relationship with Hashem in future will be one of tzdaka

11. “Tzedek u’mishpat” for Rulers of Am Yisrael
Nviim Acharonim:
“Tzedek u’mishpat” for Rulers of Am Yisrael
Tzedek U’Mishpat for rulers of Am Yisrael in Nviim Acharonim
Yeshayahu – Future ruler will rule with “tzedek”
Yirmiyahu - articulates God's precise expectation of the Jewish king:
Yirmiyahu - describes king as doing mishpat & tzdaka
Shmuel II – concrete example of king doing mishpat and tzdaka

12. “Tzedek u’mishpat” – Knowing Hashem
Nviim Acharonim:
“Tzedek u’mishpat” – Knowing Hashem
Tzedek U’Mishpat – knowing Hashem
Yirmiyahu - contrasts the corrupt king Yehoyakim with his righteous father Yoshiyahu, and admonishes;
NOTE - Yirmiyahu considers doing "tzedaka & mishpat" as the means by which we come to 'know God‘!!
Yirmiyahu - But even without proper leadership, this charge remains our eternal goal, the responsibility of every individual.
Also seen in the Rambam's concluding remarks to the last chapter of Moreh N'vuchim!
Once again we find that knowing God means emulating His ways, acting in accordance with the values of tzedek u'mishpat. Should the entire nation act in this manner, our goal will be accomplished.
Knowing God
Emulating His ways
Acting in accordance with the values of tzedek u'mishpat

13. ??Perhaps skip this?
It is not by chance that Yirmiyahu (in the above examples) uses the Hebrew word "la'daat" in the context of following a lifestyle of "tzedek u'mishpat".
As we have already seen, the shoresh "daled.ayin.heh" has been a key word throughout the narrative concerning Sdom.

14. Rashi: To “know” them in the Biblical sense – “mishkav zachar”
Support: Lot offers his two daughters “aher lo yadu ish" instead of his guests
Problem: Numbers – “kol ha’am mikatze” – If they are simply interested in sodomy, how could two guests 'suffice'?
Ramban: To 'know' their identity in order to 'kick them out of town,' in accordance with their city ordinance prohibiting visitors.
Support: Psukim from Yechezkel (and Yeshayahu chapter 1) that clearly identify Sdom's [primary] sin as their unwillingness to help the poor and needy.
Q: What are the opinions of Rashi & Ramban? What supports can be brought for each? What problems do each have?
Rashi answers the problem – [Rashi, in light of this problem, offers a somewhat novel explanation for 19:4, that only the "thugs of Sdom" ("anshei Sdom" implying a specific group and not the entire city) banged on Lot's door. The Torah mentions the rest of the population - "from young to old" - only in regard to the fact that they did not protest the gang's depraved behavior. Rasag (on 19:4) disagrees, \ proving from 19:11 both young and old had gathered outside Lot's house.]
Support: Direct contrast drawn between Avraham's devotion to tzedek u'mishpat and the character of Sdom
Problem: How (and why) should this offer of his two daughters appease this mass crowd who claim to be interested only in expelling unwanted guests?

15. Why such a severe reaction?
"I'd sooner give you my daughters than my two guests".
Sarcastic offer of his daughters instead of his guests - moral judgment of their 'no-guest' policy; a reprehension of their unethical social system.
Q: What did Lot say that prompted such a severe reaction? If he simply offered his daughters, why couldn't they just say: No, we prefer the men. Instead, they threaten to be more evil with Lot than with his guests. Does this mean that they want to 'sleep' with Lot as well?
[Furthermore, Lot does not bring his daughters with him when he makes his so-called 'offer.' In fact, he actually closes the door behind him (see 19:6) after he leaves to negotiate with the rioters. Had Lot really wanted to 'appease' them with his daughters, he should have taken them outside with him!]
This explains why the crowd becomes so angered by Lot's remarks. They are taken aback by his harsh rebuke of their 'no guest' policy.
[In other words, they seem to be saying: 'Hey, you're just a newcomer here in our town, and you already think you can tell us what to do!? No way - now we're gonna kick you out of town now, together with your guests!']
[This would also explain what they mean by - "Now we will do more evil to you than to them" (see 19:9). In other words, before we only wanted to expel you guests from town, now we are going to expel you and your family as well!]
This interpretation of "shafot" in relation to rebuke is found many other times in Tanach
See for example I Shmuel 7:6, where Shmuel (at Mitzpah) rebukes the entire nation for their behavior. We find a similar use of the verb "lishpot" in I Shmuel 12:7, when Shmuel rebukes the nation for not appreciating God's salvation when asking for King to lead them instead! [See also Yirmiyahu 1:16, and its context.]
If this interpretation is correct, then it may be that Sdom's sin involved only social justice (as Yechezkel 16:48-49 implies), and had nothing to do with 'sodomy' at all! And for this reason alone, God found it necessary to destroy that city.

16. Destruction Sin of Sdom: Social injustice
Sin of Sdom – ONLY social injustice, and for this reason alone, God found it necessary to destroy that city.
Difficult as it may be to understand, this conclusion should be seriously considered as we set our own values and determine our lifestyle and community priorities.