tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post9144642439170088439..comments2024-03-28T21:21:02.777-04:00Comments on Divrei Chaim: v'Lot yosheiv b'Sdom - no regretsChaim B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-70772827474929658602016-11-16T20:53:44.589-05:002016-11-16T20:53:44.589-05:00>>>perhaps the king of tzo'ar was not...>>>perhaps the king of tzo'ar was not as wicked <br /><br />maybe that contributed to its being saved?Chaim B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-41735680784127092382016-11-16T20:51:53.050-05:002016-11-16T20:51:53.050-05:00R' Chaim (quoted in GRI"Z al Hatorah) say...R' Chaim (quoted in GRI"Z al Hatorah) says that Avraham deliberately avoided asking the obvious question because there was no resolution. Sefas Emes says Avraham could be mochel on Hashem's promise for the sake of accepting the nisayon. Chaim B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-18625228719509647972016-11-16T16:03:17.514-05:002016-11-16T16:03:17.514-05:00I believe Ramban briefly addresses #3. He writes t...I believe Ramban briefly addresses #3. He writes that because Tzoar was such a small city, their king was not famous ("had no name" outside his own city). This is a variation on your idea, but also leverages one of the few other facts revealed about Tzoar (in Vayera) - its modest size.<br /><br />Siftei Chachamim suggests (speculates?), based on Rashi's interpretation of the other kings' names as indicating wickedness, that perhaps the king of tzo'ar was not as wicked and/or his name didn't convey anything interesting, and therefore the Torah did not list it.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14371365602074869132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-80162633778219718322016-11-16T10:29:52.341-05:002016-11-16T10:29:52.341-05:00I like #2 very much.
Rashi says: his dwelling in...I like #2 very much. <br />Rashi says: his dwelling in Sdom was the cause. That's true objective reality, that's what the Torah is teaching us (the readers). But Lot couldn't understand this, or wouldn't take it to heart, as you suggest in your explanation. We see clearly Lot had no remorse about living in Sdom -- this is not just speculation -- because after Avraham rescues and sets him free, Lot goes right back home to Sdom and continues living there. In fact in Vayera even when it's clear God is about to destroy the city, Lot still drags his feet and hesitates to leave (vayitmah-mah). We can see important mussar in that about how attached and addicted human beings can become to the wrong things sometimes, sadly.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14371365602074869132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-9132648462560955062016-11-14T22:54:22.003-05:002016-11-14T22:54:22.003-05:00Along the same lines as #1... We make a big deal a...Along the same lines as #1... We make a big deal about the how Avraham was willing to sacrifice his son at the aqeidah, after waiting so long to have Yitzchaq. But wasn't he told "ki miYitzchaq yiqarei lekha zara" -- and Yitzchaq didn't have offspring yet! So didn't Avraham know that Yitzchaq would survive, be resurrected, or in some other way not really be permanently sacrificed?micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.com