ויהי כהוציאם אתם החוצה ויאמר המלט על נפשך אל תביט אחריך ... ותבט אשתו מאחריו ותהי נציב מלח “And it was as they took them out, he said, “Flee for your life! Do not look behind you.” ... And his wife peered from behind him and she became a pillar of salt.” (Bereishis 19:17, 26)
Lot’s wife who did not heed the directive of the malach [angel] and looked back at the destruction of Sodom, was transformed into a pillar of salt. According to Rashi (v. 26), since she sinned with salt, she was punished with salt. As Rashi describes (based on Bereishis Rabbah 50:4), when Lot invited the malochim to his home, he asked his wife to give them some salt to flavor their food. Not only did she refuse, but she accused him, “Now you want to introduce this evil custom into our city, too?”
According to another opinion in the Medrash (51:5), she went from neighbor to neighbor and asked to borrow salt, announcing that her husband was hosting guests, so that the city’s inhabitants would come to her home and attack the guests.
The Medrash Talpiyos (1: Anaf Ishah) gives yet another version of how she sinned with salt. Her nickname was, in fact, Melach, which means salt. This was because when poor wanderers came to her door begging for bread, she only gave them salt, not exactly a nourishing food. In their suffering, the victims called upon the Almighty to punish her by turning her into a mass of salt. She misinterpreted their curse as a blessing and responded, “Amen.” When the time came for the destruction of Sodom, these embittered prayers were fulfilled and she, too, was punished.
The Gemara (Eruvin 17b, Chullin 105b) notes that melach Sedomis, salt from Sodom, can blind one’s eyes. Accordingly, Chazal mandated mayim acharonim, that we wash our hands at the end of a meal in order to remove this toxic substance. (See Orach Chaim 181:1, 10.)
What is the salt of Sodom and how does it blind the eyes? Does it somehow relate to the wife of Lot, her insensitivity in connection to salt, and her turning a blind eye to the needy?
The Gemara (Berachos 6b) tells us that Mar Zutra said, “Agra de’taanisa, tzidkasa — The main reward of a fast day lies in the charity dispensed.” According to many meforshim (see Mishlei Yaakov on Vayikra, 144), the true value of a fast is not in abstaining from food, but in the sympathetic chord that resonates within the person who denies himself sustenance. All year long — while the stomach is full — one cannot truly understand the plight of the poor and hungry. It is only during a fast, when one experiences his own hunger, that true identification with starving people is possible; it causes a person to reflect, “Just imagine. This guy feels this way all year long!” This thought process gives a person a newfound ability to give tzedakah with an open hand. Hence, the main reward for or benefit of fasting is due to the identification with the poor and the empathetic change it can bring.
This notion is explained further by Rav Chaim Shmulevitz (Sichos Mussar 5731, “Yeish koneh olamo be’shaah achas”). In Parshas Va’eira (Shemos 6:13), the pasuk says, “Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe ve’el Aharon vayetzaveim el Bnei Yisrael — Hashem spoke to Moshe and Aharon and commanded them regarding the Children of Yisroel...” However, the Torah omits the details of the instructions they were to deliver to Bnei Yisroel. The Yerushalmi (Rosh Hashanah 3:5) tells us that the command was regarding the mitzvah of shiluach avadim, sending one’s Jewish slaves free after they have worked for six years (Shemos 21:2).
Rav Chaim Shmulevitz points out that this seems to be a rather odd time to command Bnei Yisroel regarding this mitzvah, which wouldn’t even be applicable for over fifty years, until after they conquered and settled Eretz Yisroel. Why not wait at least until Har Sinai, when they were commanded in other mitzvos?
Rav Chaim Shmulevitz explains that the mitzvah of sending one’s servants away is quite difficult. After the initial purchase price, one has free help for six years, which he can grow accustomed to. Suddenly, after six seemingly short years, the Torah requires that not only must the master set the slave free, but he must do so with various gifts.
It was specifically at this time, when Bnei Yisroel were being told that their personal redemption was imminent, that they were able to put themselves in the slave’s shoes and appreciate how much he yearns for his freedom. Thus, this was the ideal time to present the mitzvah to Bnei Yisroel. Although Matan Torah was just around the corner, the interim period would cause them to begin to forget the great joy they had experienced at their own freedom, and would make the acceptance of this mitzvah that much harder.
One can best identify with the needs of another when he himself is facing the same issue. But upon extrication from said predicament, one may lose that sense of identification, which is needed to arouse compassion for another.
Similarly, before a meal or during a fast, while yet hungry, I can understand the plight of those who don’t have food to put on their tables. But at the end of the meal or after breaking my fast, with my thirst slaked and my hunger abated, I may lose my empathy. And I may begin to acquire elements of the middos of Sodom, to be insensitive to the hungry.
The Gemara (Sanhedrin 109a) attributes Sodom’s arrogance and disdain for the needy to their great wealth. They are the paradigm of the pasuk in Haazinu (Devorim 32:15), “Vayishman Yeshurun vayivat — Yeshurun became fat and kicked.”
The Torah (Bereishis 13:10) describes the area of Sodom as the garden of Hashem. As it says in Iyov (28:5–6; and explained in Pirkei De’rabbi Eliezer 25), the land was very fertile; the earth itself produced bread in its completed form, and the inhabitants mined gold, silver, and precious stones directly from the ground. The people of Sodom, who lived by the adage (Avos 5:13), “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is yours,” declared, “Since our land is so productive, why do we need travelers, who will come and divest us of our property?” As they lost sight of others’ needs, they came upon a plan to ensure that no guests would enter their city.
Perhaps, on a symbolic level, this is why the Chachamim instituted the mayim acharonim at the end of the meal. When hungry and sitting down to a meal, one would be more kindly disposed to a poor person who knocks at the door asking for food, as he understands how the hungry pauper feels. yet after the meal, he may not feel so sympathetic and may even feel annoyed at the poor man for disturbing him.
Precisely then, there is the danger of the melach Sedomis leaving its harmful effect. The Sodom behavior toward beggars and strangers was cruel and harsh. Lot’s wife’s refusal to give salt to the guests (or, according to the other versions, her custom of going around asking for salt or of only giving salt) was emblematic of her ruthless and repulsive stinginess. She was therefore punished by turning into a pillar of salt, the symbol of her crime.
Perhaps this helps explain something else. Prior to their ultimate demise, the people of Sodom were stricken blind (Bereishis 19:11). They misused their gift of sight, turning a blind eye to the needy. Hence, they lost their ability to see.
Finally, when Chazal said that one must perform mayim acharonim because melach Sedomis is harmful to the eyes, perhaps they meant, be’derech derush, that finishing a good meal presents a peril. This would be the danger of becoming indifferent to the plight of the needy, which, as in the city of Sodom, could “blind” us to the hunger endured by the underprivileged.
As such, after finishing a satisfying meal, we are enjoined to wash away the salt of Sodom, and to cleanse ourselves of the insensitivity that can fill our hearts when our stomachs are full. (R’ Avraham Bukspan, Classics and Beyond)
