A very early commentator called Shemot “the second book,” which would of course make sense if Vayikra was called the “third” book or Bamidbar the “fourth.” But the ordinal numbers actually begin and end at “second.” Like some siblings, only this book can be summed up by its number in the birth order.
Why is “second” the best way to describe Shemot? Bereisheet is to Shemot as planting is to reaping, says the Ramban in explaining the intrinsic connection between the first two books. Shemot is the fulfilment -- the carrying out, or completion -- of what began in Bereisheet. It is not a story, therefore, that stands alone in any way. The events we recount with excitement during the Pesach Seder can’t be understood without reference to Avraham Avinu. But two things are happening in the Hagadda when we begin with Avraham. He’s there in order to figure out how and why we ended up in Egypt but also, crucially, why we will be able to emerge.
R’ Yitzchak Twersky points out an amazing parallel between the story of salvation in Egypt and one of the salvation stories in Bereisheet. There are linguistic parallels in the story of salvation of Avraham Avinu’s nephew Lot in S’dom that link it to what happened in Egypt. When Hashem describes why he is anxious about S’dom, he says that the “cry” (Tza’aka) of S’dom is great and that he wants to descend to “see” and “know” what is happening there. A related term for “crying out” (Za’aka) is used in this week’s Parasha in describing the Jews in Egypt, and Hashem’s reaction is the same -- He wants to “see” and to “know” what is happening. Also, when the townspeople threaten Lot over his guests, Hashem smites them with a blindness that will be echoed by the darkness in Egypt during the plagues.
What do these parallels suggest? We know that S’dom was only marginally better than the other townspeople in S’dom. That he had chosen to live there at all was a revealing mistake. Especially in light of the chance he had to live close to his uncle, Lot’s inability to co-exist with Avraham and his choice to live instead in Sin City was telling. His own merit is not enough to be saved. Rather it is his connection with Avraham Avinu that saves him. Everything good he has, his hospitality especially, comes from Avraham. His best moral moments, as when he protected Avraham and Sara in Egypt, also relate to Avraham. When he and his family are saved from S’dom, the verse specifically says that Hashem remembered Avraham (19:29) as they escaped. The Zohar says that that memory came from the fact that Avraham Davened to save S’dom.
But it’s not just this historical connection to Avraham that saves Lot. The Midrash relates that his fellow survivors of S’dom, his two daughters, are not just a reference to the two women who escaped with him. His “daughters” were also the significant women, Ruth from Moav and Na’ama from Amon, who will descend from those daughters. And their significance will come in how they eventually attach themselves to the Jewish people. Lot, in other words, is saved both because of his link to Avraham in the past and his family’s link to him into the future.
The same can be said for the Jewish people in Egypt. As they cry out to Hashem, they are not worthy to be saved. The women have remained morally steadfast in Egypt but that would not necessarily have been enough. As they reach the sea, the angels themselves ask Hashem why the Jews are surviving while the Egyptians are drowning. In so many ways, the Jews are no different.
Yet the Jews are set apart by their connection to Avraham Avinu and the other patriarchs, the ones who were selected out of love. And, again, that connection is not just about the past. It is also based on the destiny that was promised to the patriarchs. It will be the Jews’ future to carry on, and to complete, what began with the patriarchs. Even at times of degradation, the promise of the past and its fulfilment in the future buoys the Jews.
It is always critical in understanding the connection between Bereisheet and Shemot to follow the light. Bereisheet began with light and Moshe Rabenu’s birth in Shemot is described as an appearance of light. We know that light has crests and troughs. (What it doesn’t have is rest.) Someone like Lot is an embodiment of a trough, and so is the experience of exile in Egypt. What saves Lot, and what saves the Jews in Egypt, is not their present state of being, which is lost. What saves them is their past and their future, the crests in the wave of light before and after the dip into a trough. We too must also remember the same thing: The experience of a trough comes between the cresting of the light. That cresting is where it was -- and will be again -- at its most intense. We are always here because of what has come before, and we must faithfully seek to pursue the intensification of the light to come. We are sustained by what has come before and the destiny tied to what came before will bring us out of any dip into the trough. We pray that we will see that next crest, Bimheira Biyameinu.
Congregation Emek Beracha 4102 El Camino Real Palo Alto, CA 94306
