Lekh Lekha | Why Was Exile Decreed on the Descendants of Avraham?
*****************************************************
Dedicated in memory of my recently departed father,
Dr. Lloyd Bayme - ד״ר אליעזר ביים
- Michael Bayme
*****************************************************
Dedicated in memory of Rabbi Jack Sable z”l and
Ambassador Yehuda Avner z”l,
by Debbie and David Sable
*****************************************************
An Unexpected Exile
During the dramatic prophecy of the covenant of the pieces (brit bein ha-betarim), God reveals Himself to Avraham and says:
Surely know that your seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years… And in the fourth generation they shall come back here. (Bereishit 15:13-16)
This foretelling of a bitter exile must have surprised Avraham, for God had begun His revelation by stating: "I am the Lord that brought you out of Ur Kasdim, to give you this land to inherit it" (v. 7). These words imply that God had brought Avraham to Canaan for the purpose of giving it to him, while now it becomes clear that it is not Avraham who will take possession of the land, but only his distant descendants – and that in the meantime, his seed will be subject to servitude in "a land that is not theirs" (15:13).
It is hard not to wonder at the sudden appearance of this terrible decree of exile. If this future exile was included in the Divine plan from the outset, why was it concealed from Avraham until now?[1]
Some commentators suggest that although the covenant of the pieces, with its pronouncement of exile, is written in the middle of the Avraham stories, in fact it occurred much earlier. Thus, for example, writes the Rashbam:
It turns out that Avraham was seventy-years old at the time of the covenant of the pieces, which took place when he left Charan the first time. And when the section of "After these things" (Bereishit 15:1) was told to him, he was seventy-five years old… But there is no chronological order in the Torah. And the section of the covenant of the pieces was inserted here in order to join together the sections dealing with the giving of the land to Avram. (Rashbam ha-Meshuchzar [ed. H. Novetzki] to Bereishit 15:7-13)[2]
A simpler alternative is to argue that the decree of exile was in fact not told to Avraham earlier, but neither was it concealed from him. Originally, Avraham himself was supposed to take possession of the land, precisely as God had told him. The decree of exile was introduced here as a punishment for Avraham’s skepticism, because instead of thanking God for the promise "to give you this land to inherit it" (v. 7), he dared to ask: "Whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?" (v. 8). Thus, for example, Chazal expounded:
Rabbi Abahu said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: Why was our father Avraham punished and his children doomed to Egyptian servitude for two hundred and ten years?… Shmuel said: Because he went too far in testing the attributes [i.e., the promises] of the Lord, as it is written: "[And he said: Lord God,] whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?" (Nedarim 32a)[3]
The connection between the sin and the punishment of exile is highlighted by the words common to Avraham's question and God's answer, as noted by Rabbi Chizkiya bar Manoach:
"Surely know" – With the same wording that he sinned, saying: "Whereby shall I know" (15:8), a decree was imposed on his seed, measure for measure. (Chizkuni [ed. Al ha-Torah] 15:13)[4]
At first glance, one might think that such an interpretation expresses excessive strictness towards Avraham's innocent question.[5] However, it is possible that the linguistic "measure for measure" ("whereby shall I know" – "surely know")[6] comes to indicate a more intrinsic connection: one who does not believe that God will give him the land, will lose his right to inherit the land.[7]
As interesting as this interpretation is, it suffers from several weaknesses. First, along with foretelling the delay, God promises, "But you shall go to your fathers in peace" (v. 15), which does not sound like an expression of criticism of Avraham. Second, the passage describes the making of a covenant: "In that day, the Lord made a covenant with Avram, saying: To your seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates" (v. 18). It is difficult to see a covenant as a punishment for sin.
Finally, this interpretation does not match the explanation that God Himself gives for the delay in the inheritance of the land: "And in the fourth generation they shall come back here; for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete" (v. 16).[8] The land of Canaan has a special feature – it tends to spew sinners out of it.[9] The delay in giving the land to Avraham is not connected to a sin that Avraham committed, but to the fact that the inhabitants of the land have not yet sinned enough to cause them to be ejected from it.
It follows that God intended to give Avraham the land immediately after it would spew out its wicked inhabitants, but some confluence of events and considerations brought Avraham to the land about four hundred years before the measure of its wicked inhabitants' guilt was filled. And, therefore, until the time would come for the current inhabitants’ exile, Avraham’s seed would suffer this terrible fate.
This explanation is also puzzling. Why did God bring Avraham to the land too early? And why does the fact that the inhabitants are not yet ready for exile necessitate a decree of exile for the seed of Avraham?
The Separation of Lot from Avraham
Let us follow the chain of events that led to the surprising announcement regarding the exile of Avraham's seed. At the beginning of the parasha, we hear that Avraham goes to the land at God's command. However, upon his arrival, he makes a disturbing discovery: "And Avram passed through the land to the place of Shechem, to the terebinth of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land" (12:6). Reality, it turns out, is very far from the ideal picture of "a land without a people for a people without a land."
As if that were not enough, a quarrel breaks out between Lot and Avraham shortly after their arrival.[10] Avraham offers a solution of "land for peace": "And Avram said to Lot: Let there be no strife, I pray you, between me and you, and between my herdsmen and your herdsmen; for we are brothers. Is not all the land before you? Separate yourself, I pray you, from me; if you will take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if you take the right hand, then I will go to the left" (13:8-9). Lot quickly adopts the proposal, and chooses for himself the nicest part of Canaan: "And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere… like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt… So Lot chose him all the plain of the Jordan" (13:10-11).[11]
And then, immediately after Lot and Avraham separate, Avraham receives a Divine revelation:
And the Lord said to Avram, after Lot was separated from him: Lift up now your eyes, and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward; for all the land which you see, to you will I give it, and to your seed forever. And I will make your seed as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall your seed also be numbered. Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for to you will I give it. (13:14-17)
My colleague Dr. Chezi Cohen offers an excellent explanation for God's choice to use wording that is so similar to the wording used in the account of Avraham's separation from Lot:
God rejects Avraham's generous offer to Lot. Avraham had offered to share the land with his relative: "Is not all the land before you…" (v. 9), and corresponding to that, God promises Avraham: "For all the land which you see, to you will I give it, and to your seed forever" (v. 15). God's words are also aimed at cancelling Lot's choice of Sedom… "And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere… So Lot chose him all the plain of the Jordan" (vv. 10-11). Corresponding to this God instructs Avraham: … "Lift up now your eyes, and look…"for all the land which you see, to you will I give it" (vv. 14-15)… And with this, He expresses His disapproval of Avraham's proposal to Lot to divide the land between them.[12]
Although Lot chose Sedom, God announces that is in fact Avraham and his descendants who will gain possession of it, as is revealed in the story that follows.
Returning the People of Sedom and Amora from Exile
The area that Lot chose to reside in did indeed look "like the garden of the Lord" (v. 10), but its inhabitants were "wicked and sinners to the Lord" (v. 13). These sinful kingdoms had long ago lost their independence and were subject to the alliance of the four kings of the East and the North. Now, in a scene that seems to foretell the bitter fate of the kingdoms of Yehuda and Israel, the local kings choose to rebel against their masters, and the alliance of the four kings embarks on a punitive campaign. The journey is a success, and when the four kings return to their lands, they take with them "into exile" much booty, both people and property. Thus, that rich and wicked region of land spews out many of its sinful inhabitants, including Lot.[13]
The land begins to be emptied of its inhabitants, and Avraham can acquire for himself a hold on the finest part of it, just as was implied by God's promise. But Avraham does not want to build himself up on the ruin of "his brother," and instead embarks on a daring rescue mission:[14]
And when Avram heard that his brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued as far as Dan. And he divided himself against them by night, he and his servants, and smote them, and pursued them to Chova, which is on the left hand of Damascus. And he brought back all the goods, and also brought back his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people. (14:14-16)
Although Avraham's action was intended to save Lot, in the course of that rescue, he also saves the other exiles.
In principle, Avraham is entitled to take the survivors and their property as booty, as indicated when the king of Sedom requests: "Give me the persons, and take the goods to yourself" (v. 21).[15] However, Avraham, who is probably familiar with the evil deeds of Bera the king of Sedom and his people (and the wickedness of Birsha the king of Amora and his people), desires neither them nor their assets. He resolutely refuses:
And Avram said to the king of Sedom: I have lifted up my hand to the Lord, God Most High, Maker of heaven and earth, that I will not take a thread nor a shoe-latchet nor anything that is yours, lest you should say: I have made Avram rich. (14:22-23)[16]
Avraham's answer expresses his revulsion for the wicked city and its possessions, and his desire to separate himself completely from them. However, by giving up both the people of Sedom and their property, Avraham allows the wicked kingdoms to return to their previous status.
The Unexpected Consequences of Rescuing Sedom
Avraham's noble deeds had two dire and unexpected consequences. The first result appears immediately "after these things" (15:1), in the "covenant of the pieces" with which we opened our discussion. The exile of the wicked who dwelt in the plain of the Jordan was cancelled in the wake of Avraham's noble deeds, and the plain of the Jordan was repopulated. Another four hundred years would pass before the measure of the guilt of the Amorite would be filled and they would lose the land. With the entire land inhabited, there was no space for the establishment of a new people – and it was Avraham's seed who would go out into exile.[17]
The second result relates to the future of the kingdoms that Avraham rescued. Paradoxically, it can be argued that by saving the people of Sedom and Amora, Avraham decreed even greater destruction upon them. If the inhabitants of those cities would have gone out into exile and become scattered throughout the East, they could not have continued defiling the land with their sins, and thus God would not have had a reason to destroy them. However, since the exiles returned to their cities, the wicked kingdoms continued in their reprehensible actions. The land refrained from spewing them forth, so they continued to accumulate sins and the blow that was due them became much more severe: "Then the Lord caused to rain upon Sedom and upon Amora brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven; and He overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground" (19:24-25). This time, not only were the wicked inhabitants exiled, but the land itself was destroyed beneath them.[18]
Did Avraham err in his actions? It is difficult to know. A person's actions lead to unexpected results in human terms. It is true that we pointed out the terrible price exacted by Avraham's choice to save Lot and the people of Sedom, but is it possible to correctly estimate the price we would have paid if Avraham had been willing to build his nation on their destruction?
(Translated by David Strauss)
[1] Grossman sees in this gap, between Avraham's expectation that he himself would inherit the land and the statement that only the fourth generation would merit to return to the land, "the deep issue of this unit ... not the very promise of the land, but rather the postponement of the realization of this announcement for another four hundred years. Avraham and his descendants are required also in the context of the covenant regarding the land to demonstrate special forebearance, patience and faith in the fulfillment of the promise" (Y. Grossman, Avraham: Sipuro shel Masa, Tel Aviv 5775, p. 111).
[2] This explanation is also in the commentary of the Chizkuni, ad loc. The calculation is based on Seder Olam: "Our father Avraham was seventy years old when God spoke to him at the covenant of the pieces… After He spoke to him, he went down to Charan, and stayed there five years" (Seder Olam [ed. D. B. Rattner and Sh. K. Mirsky], New York 5713, chap. 1, pp. 2-3). See also Rabbi Y. Medan, Ki Karov Eilekha: Lashon Mikra ve-Lashon Chakhamim – Sefer Bereishit, Tel Aviv 2014, pp. 94-96.
The opinion that Avraham knew he would not take possession of the land himself (because the rights of the current inhabitants of the land had not yet expired) stands at the heart of Chazal’s portrayal of the dispute between the herdsmen of Avraham and the herdsmen of Lot: "'And there was strife between the herdsmen of Avram's cattle and the herdsmen of Lot's cattle' (13:7) – R. Berakhya said in the name of R. Yuda: Avraham's cattle would go out muzzled, while that of Lot would go out unmuzzled. Avraham's herdsmen said to them: Is stealing permitted? The herdsmen of Lot said to them: Thus said the Holy One, blessed be He, to Avraham: 'To your seed will I give this land' (12:7), and Avraham is an infertile mule who does not have children, and Lot will inherit him, so they are eating from their own. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: Thus I said to him: 'To your seed have I given this land' (15:18). When? After the seven nations are uprooted from it. 'And the Canaanite [and the Perizite] was then in the land' (12:6)" (Bereishit Rabba [ed. Y. Theodor and Ch. Albeck], 40, 7, p. 392; see also Pesikta Rabbati 3).
[3] See also Targum Pseudo-Yonatan, ad loc.; Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer (ed. M. Higger), Chorev 10 (5708), 47, p. 236; Eliyahu Rabba 14 (ed. M. Ish Shalom), p. 65 (cited below, note 5); Midrash ha-Chefetz (ed. M. Chavatzelet), Bereishit 15:8; p. 130.
[4] See also Vayikra Rabba (ed. M. Margoliot), Jerusalem 5713, 11, 5, vol. 1, pp. 224-225; Pesikta Rabbati 47, 1; Midrash Aggada (Buber) to Bereishit 15:8. See also Y. Elitzur, "Berit bein ha-Betarim," Israel ve-ha-Mikra: Mechkarim Geografiyim Historiyim ve-Hagutiyim, Jerusalem 5760, pp. 35-43.
[5] Thus, for example, Chazal expounded: "A person should keep things to himself, lest he come to sin, even the slightest sin. Go out and learn from our forefathers, that they did not go down to Egypt but for a trivial matter, that Avraham said: 'Whereby shall I know?'" (Eliyahu Rabba 14 [ed. M. Ish Shalom), p. 65).
[6] Regarding the very phenomenon of linguistic measure for measure, see the remarks of my teacher and colleague, Prof. Yehonatan Jacobs, Mida ke-Neged Mida be-Sipur ha-Mikra' i, Alon Shevut 5766, esp. pp. 107-112.
[7] It is difficult not to recall in this context the generation of those who were taken out of Egypt (possibly the "fourth generation"; see below note 8), whose right to enter the land was passed on to their children after they demonstrated a lack of faith in the episode of the spies (Bamidbar 14; Devarim 1:22 and on).
[8] The commentators disagree as to whom the term "fourth generation" refers. Many maintain that the reference is to the fourth generation of those who were enslaved in Egypt. Rashi bases this on the generations of the sons of Yehuda (I Divrei Ha-Yamim 2:1-18): "And in the fourth generation' – After they go into exile in Egypt there will be three generations, and the fourth will return to this land… Thus it really was: Yaakov went down to Egypt. Go and count his generations: Yehuda, Peretz, Chetzron, and Kalev, and he was among those who entered the land of Canaan" (Rashi [online Ha-Keter ed.], 15:16). According to this explanation, Kalev indeed merited entering the land, but most members of his generation did not. Other commentators preferred to count by the generations of the sons of Levi (Shemot 6:16-25), as the Ibn Ezra explains: "And in the fourth generation' – after his seed was a stranger… And similarly Kehat was a stranger, and Amram, and Moshe, also Aharon, and their children returned to the land of Canaan" (Ibn Ezra, short commentary [Online Ha-Keter ed.], 15:16; and similarly Lekach Tov to Bereishit 15:16; Rambam, Commentary to the Mishna, Eiduyot 2:9; Radak 15:16; Ralbag 15:16.
On the other hand, many commentators maintain that the "fourth generation" refers to the inhabitants of the land, as the Rashbam writes: "And in the fourth generation, they shall come back here' – He who explains (see Rashi) that the fourth generation of Israel shall come back here to the land of Israel – is in error. For He gave a set time of four hundred years (above v. 13); why then do we care if it is the fourth generation or the fifth generation? In any event, they will be delayed for four hundred years. Rather, God gave a reason for His words… for even though the inhabitants of the land sinned… I must wait four generations, as it is written: 'Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, to the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me' (a combination of Shemot 20:5 and Shemot 34:7). Perhaps the children will repent, for the time after which I will punish the sinful Amorites has not been completed until now – until after the fourth generation of the Amorites… This is the simple meaning" (Rashbam [Online Ha-Keter ed.], 15:16; see also Ramban, 15:16; Y. Kil, Sefer Bereishit [Da'at Mikra], Jerusalem 5757, vol. I, pp. 413-415). Grossman suggests: "It is possible that 'the fourth generation' has a twofold meaning: a complete exile on the part of Israel and a complete sin on the part of the Amorites" (Grossman [above note 1], p. 494).
[9] Thus, for example, God warns the people of Israel: "Defile not yourselves in any of these things; for in all these the nations are defiled, which I cast out from before you. And the land was defiled; therefore I did visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land vomited out her inhabitants. You therefore shall keep My statutes and My ordinances, and shall not do any of these abominations; neither the home-born, nor the stranger that sojourns among you; for all these abominations have the men of the land done, that were before you, and the land is defiled – that the land vomit not you out also, when you defile it, as it vomited out the nation that was before you" (Vayikra 18:24-28; see also 20:22-24). It should also be mentioned that in this chapter we find many connections to what is related about Sedom in the book of Bereishit, including: the connection to Egypt (Vayikra 18:3); the prohibition of homosexual relations (Vayikra 18:22; 20:13); the prohibition of sexual relations between a father and his daughter (Vayikra 18:7); the prohibition of taking two sisters (Vayikra 18:18).
[10] The seeds of the quarrel between Avraham and Lot are evident already on their return from Egypt, when property makes a subtle appearance as a barrier between Lot and the family of Avraham ("And Avram went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, and Lot with him" [13:1]); compare to the order in 12:5) and then becomes a significant factor in the strife between the two sides (13:5-6). It stands to reason that it is not by chance that Lot decided to move from the house of Avraham to Sedom – a wealthy place, but so repulsive that Avraham refuses to touch their property (14:21-24). See also N. Lebowitz, Iyyunim be-Sefer Bereishit be-Ikvot Parshaneinu ha-Rishonim ve-ha-Acharonim, Jerusalem 5727, pp. 88-92; Ch. Cohen, "Pereidat Avraham mi-Lot (Bereishit 13)," Megadim 52 [5771], pp. 9-22; Tz. Shimon, He-Adam ha-Bocher: Sipur ha-Mikra'i ki-Derama shel Bechira, Jerusalem 5775, pp. 77-99, 150-154; Grossman, pp. 60, 64-94. Parenthetically, note that those who maintain that Sara is Yiska, the sister of Lot (for example, BT Megila 14a), must certainly consider the possibility that the first cause for Lot's separating from Avraham was the insult of his sister Sara being handed over to a foreign king in exchange for money (12:11-16).
[11] Lot's separation from Avraham is described with precisely the same wording as Esav's separation from his brother Yaakov (36:6-8). This seems to indicate that Lot should not be seen as Avraham's adopted son, but as his brother. In that light, it turns out that the recurring pattern within the family of the patriarchs, in which one of two brothers separates from the other, begins already in Terach’s family with Avraham's separation from Lot; the pattern continues with Avraham’s sons when Yitzchak separates from Yishmael, and ends with Yitzchak, when Yaakov separates from Esav. This perspective on the family of Terach strengthens the perspective, noted in my shiur for Parashat Noach, concerning Terach’s centrality in the Divine course of events.
[12] Cohen (above note 10), p. 19. See also M.D. Cassuto, Mi-Noach ve-ad Avraham, Peirush al Sefer Bereishit, Jerusalem 5725, pp. 250-251; E. Samet, Iyyumin be-Farashot ha-Shavua (2nd series): Bereishit-Shemot, Tel Aviv 5769, pp. 56-58; Shimon (above note 10), pp. 85-86; Grossman (above note 1), pp. 65-66.
[13] It stands to reason that the excessive wickedness of Sedom and Amora caused them to be punished before the rest of the inhabitants of the land. Rabbi Y. Medan argues that there was also a difference in the type of sins of each group: “It seems that the main sin of the Amorite who lived in the mountain region was idolatry. For that sin God waits patiently for four generations… (Shemot 20:4). In the overturning of Sedom and Amora… their sin was not only idolatry, but rather the sin of causing others to cry out, the sin of causing harm to another person. For this sin, the Holy One, blessed be He, does not wait four generations, as we learn in Parashat Mishpatim: ‘If you afflict them in any way, for if they cry at all to me, I will surely hear their cry. My wrath shall wax hot’ (Shemot 22:22-23)" (Medan [above note 2), pp. 99-100. It is difficult, however, to find decisive proofs for this distinction.
[14] Cohen notes that after the separation from Lot, Avraham fails to fulfil God's command: "Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it" (13:17), but rather chooses to settle for the first time in a permanent place: "And he came and dwelt by the terebinths of Mamre, which are in Chevron" (14:18). Only after the destruction of Sedom and Lot's departure from Canaan does Avraham return to wandering. Cohen concludes from this that Avraham does not identify with God's decision to reject Lot, and chooses to remain close to him out of a desire to assist him when necessary and a hope that Lot would return to him (Ch. Cohen, "Avraham ve-Lot – mi-Pereida le-Peirud," Megadim 54 [5773], pp. 33-46).
[15] See Y. Muffs, "Avraham ha-Lochem he-Atzil: Politika ve-Chukei Milchama be-Yisrael bi-Tekufat he-Avot," in Ahava ve-Simcha: Chok Lashon ve-Dat ba-Mikra u-be-Sifrut Chazal, Jerusalem 1992, pp. 59-79.
[16] The charged encounter between Avraham and Bera king of Sedom (14:17, 21-24) is the complete opposite of the encounter between Avraham and Malki-Tzedek king of Shalem (14:18-20). The contrast between the encounters clearly indicates that Avraham's aversion is not from a connection with the kings of the land in general, but specifically from the wicked king of Sedom. See also D. Elgavish, "The Encounter of Abram and Melchizedek King of Salem: A Covenant Establishing Ceremony," in A. Wenin (ed.), Studies in the Book of Genesis: Literature, Redaction and History, Leuven 2001, pp. 495-508; Shimon (above note 10), pp. 90-99; Grossman (above note 1, pp. 84-90). Some of the aforementioned scholars note that the encounter with the king of Sedom emphasizes the encounter that is not mentioned – that between Avraham and Lot. Perhaps an echo of the question "To whom does Lot belong?" can be found in the king of Sedom's demand, "Give me the persons, and take the goods to yourself" (14:21).
[17] Rabbi Y. Medan goes in a slightly different direction: "Politically, the meaning of Avraham's crushing victory over Khedarlaomer was the conquest of all of Eretz Israel, and the areas east of the Jordan all the way to the Euphrates, from the hands of those who had ruled there until then. Avraham should have become the official ruler, and thus fulfilled God's promise of the land until the Euphrates… but Avraham refused… he prefers to return to his tent and postpone the fulfilment of God's promise about taking possession of the land until it involved his seed alone… it is possible that in the long run he was right, and that the punishment he received, four hundred years of exile, is not a punishment but a necessary consequence..." (Medan [above note 2], pp. 96-99).
[18] The fate of Lot, who survived the destruction of Sedom, is not described in the book of Bereishit. However, in the book of Devarim we hear that God gave his descendants an inheritance to the east of the Jordan: "And the Lord said to me: Be not at enmity with Moav, neither contend with them in battle, for I will not give you of his land for a possession; because I have have given Ar to the children of Lot for a possession. The Emim dwelt therein before, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakim. These also are accounted Refaim, as the Anakim; but the Moavites call them Emim… that the Lord spoke to me saying: You are this day to pass over the border of Moav, even Ar; and when you come near over against the children of Amon, harass them not, nor contend with them; for I will not give you of the land of the children of Amon for a possession; because I have given it to the children of Lot for a possession. That also is accounted a land of Refaim: Refaim dwelt therein before; but the Amonites call them Zamzummim, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakim; but the Lord destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead" (Devarim 2:0-21). Many have noted the connection between these verses and the journey of conquest of the four kings on the east side of the Jordan: "And in the fourteenth year came Khedarlaomer and the kings that were with him, and smote the Refaim in Ashterot-Karnayim, and the Zuzim in Ham and the Emim in Sheveh-Kiryatayim" (Bereishit 14:5). See, for example, Ramban to Devarim 2:10-12; P. Artzi, in M. Weinfeld et al (eds.), Bereishit (Olam ha-Tanakh), Tel Aviv 1982, pp. 100-101; Z. Kalai, "Masa Khedarlaomer bi-Re'i ha-Historiyografiya ha-Mikra'it," Shenaton le-Cheker ha-Mikra ve-ha-Mizrach ha-Kadum 10 (1990), pp. 153-168; Y. Bin Nun, "'Ha-Aretz' ve-'Eretz Kena'an' ba-Torah," Megadim 17 (5752), pp. 35-41; Cohen (above note 14), pp. 44-45. These victories, seemingly superfluous in the immediate context of the narrative, are endowed with surprising meaning when we learn that the story of the four kings – the same story because of which exile was decreed on the people of Israel – also alludes to the clearing of lands on the east bank of the Jordan for the descendants of Lot!
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!