[NGFP-BookClub] The sins of Sodom
Tomer
ngfp-bookclub@lists.ngfp.org
Fri, 8 Apr 2005 07:41:05 +1000
I see in the common thread of hospitality a message about separating one
positive value and idolizing it.
Lot is prepared to sacrifice his daughers at the altar of hospitality. His
'hospitality' seems as insensitive and inhuman as the inhospitality
attributed to the people of Sdom. The hospitality of the story of the
concubine of Giv'ah is also extreme. The Israelite man is 'received warmly'
by the concubine's father, who plies him senseless with food and drink,
feasting gluttonously for days, then sending him off with the daughter who
had run to him for protection. The people of Giv'ah are as inhospitable as
the commentators depict those of Sdom, and the old man who takes in the
travelers mirrors them in his insensitive over-hospitality, offering his
virgin daughter and the man's concubine in place of his guest. I can't help
see connections with other concubine wives, and the compartmentalization of
women, from Lemech to Timna, mother of Amalek. The silence of the concubine
in this story (which I once heard described as 'the darkest place in the
Torah') is shocking, with the over-wined and dined desensitzed Israelite man
failing even to see that she is dead, and telling her to 'get up'. And yet
the Talmud in the closing lines of Ta'anit carries the story through to
redemption. Just as Lot's daughter is the progenitor of the Davidic line,
the death of the concubine and the ensuing genocidal war against the tribe
of Benjamin gives way to the women's dancing circles of Tu b'Av and a
Messianic vision of the end of days.
The Torah often seems to me to be like an echo chamber, with common themes
echoing and reverberating. Are these echoes sometimes intended commentaries
on earlier episodes? Sometimes, I suppose, as with the theme of sibling
rivalry in Genesis, they are a single story playing itself out. Is there a
difference between these two?
Debbie Miller
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Kugel" <jlkugel@fas.harvard.edu>
To: <ngfp-bookclub@lists.ngfp.org>
Cc: "'Aron Trauring'" <atrauring@zoteca.com>
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 5:39 AM
Subject: [NGFP-BookClub] The sins of Sodom
> Dear Students:
>
> That's a lot about Lot, but what about Sodom? Remember, this course
> is really about trying to understand how the Bible's first interpreters
> went about their job. Why did they say what they said? Were they
> suggesting some kind of common thread here, something connected to
> hospitality? After all, they stressed how hospitable Abraham was, while
> some of them said Sodom was guilty of "refusing to receive strangers"
> and "hating foreigners." Was this an intentional contrast?
>
> And then there's Lot's wife. What did she do that was so bad?
>
> _____________
> James Kugel
> 11 Efrayim St.
> 93621 Jerusalem
> Israel
> Tel. 972 2 672-2197
> Fax. 972 2 673-3027
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ngfp-bookclub-admin@lists.ngfp.org
> [mailto:ngfp-bookclub-admin@lists.ngfp.org] On Behalf Of FREDERICKA
> COHEN
> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 5:33 AM
> To: ngfp-bookclub@lists.ngfp.org
> Subject: RE: [NGFP-BookClub] The sins of Sodom
>
>
> --- Elie Aharon <elie5764@peoplepc.com> wrote:
>
> Sodom was incorrigibly hedonistic. Too many were
> > acting too indulgently,
> > with too much hubris and self-assurance. Their sins
> > were sexual to be sure,
> > but the sex was merely one vehicle for the
> > self-centeredness which was the
> > central problem. There was apparently minimal or no
> > potential for
> > redemption, unlike the city of Ninevah in the Jonah
> > story, for example.
> > Things were so bad in Sodom that a
> > punitive/redemptive message apparently
> > wouldn't be heard by even 10.
> >
> > 2. Lot: Lot was, I think, a pretty average guy,
> > committed to getting along
> > in any situation; committed to whatever was most
> > expedient.
>
> >
> > Elie
>
> These, I think, are outstanding points!
>
> The "self-centeredness" could be defended through the
> years as expedient in a particular situation. ("I
> better be nice to these strangers. I don't know who
> they are.")
>
> However, there are few times where sexual activity
> might be justified as expedient. Abraham and Sara in
> the Pharoah's court was self-serving.
>
> It became the least defensible of the Sodomites'
> activities. After all, the interpreters explained,
> haven't we all had to choose social or material
> expediency once or twice?
>
> So the prohibited sexual activity that was "one
> vehicle for self-centeredness" became the symbol of
> Sodom we accept today.
>
> Redemption and growth would have required
> affirmative/outgoing action from the Sodomites.
>
> Action like that suggested by Micah..."Do justice,
> love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God."
>
> Since they did not have the potential to grow, they
> had to be destroyed.
>
> However, here's the next question for the
> interpreters. Based on their life style, they would
> have destroyed their society within a few generations.
>
> Did God choose to destroy them as an example to
> mankind or to create a new generation with greater
> potential for redemption?
>
> Fredericka Cohen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> NGFP-BookClub mailing list
> NGFP-BookClub@lists.ngfp.org
> http://lists.ngfp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ngfp-bookclub
> NGFP Kugel Course Email Archives
> http://lists.ngfp.org/pipermail/ngfp-bookclub/
> NGFP Kugel Course Information
> http://members.ngfp.org/Courses/Kugel/
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> NGFP-BookClub mailing list
> NGFP-BookClub@lists.ngfp.org
> http://lists.ngfp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ngfp-bookclub
> NGFP Kugel Course Email Archives
> http://lists.ngfp.org/pipermail/ngfp-bookclub/
> NGFP Kugel Course Information
> http://members.ngfp.org/Courses/Kugel/
>