What Paradise Means to Lot

When Avraham and Lot decide to part ways, the former offers his nephew the choice of where to live. The Chumash writes that Lot looked out to the Jordan River Valley, the region of Sedom, and saw that it was "like the Garden of God, like the land Egypt…" The comparison between Sedom and Egypt seems pretty clear. As Chazal suggest, Lot decided upon Sedom because of its agricultural and financial benefits. And, as we know, Egypt was the most prosperous nation of the time, reaping the benefits of irrigation from the Nile River. (This is why Avraham and Sarah migrated to Egypt to escape the famine in Canaan.) Thus, we can understand why Lot is reminded of Egypt upon seeing and contemplating the fertile region of Sedom.

But how could Lot associate Sedom and Egypt with "the Garden of God," Gan Eden? Why was this what comes to mind as he considers a new life in Sedom?

As mentioned, Chazal censure Lot's settlement in Sedom. It would seem that this reference to Gan Eden in this context may have contributed to our tradition's negative attitude towards Lot, or at least towards his choice of residence. Gan Eden is truly a "paradise," described in Parashat Bereishit as possessing "every tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food" (2:9). Furthermore, it was a place where an individual recognized, sensed, experienced and perhaps communicated with God most directly. Indeed, man's banishment from Gan Eden meant both physical hardship - the experience of hard work, pain and death - as well as the spiritual downfall of being distanced from God.

Lot's recollection of Gan Eden as he looked upon Sedom reveals what "paradise" meant to him. In his mind, Gan Eden was about the comforts of life, the freedom from hard work and financial concern. It was a place resembling Sedom and Egypt, featuring all the physical and material comforts one could hope for.

This skewed system of priorities is perhaps manifest even earlier in the parasha. After his ordeal in Egypt, Avraham emerged a wealthy man. The verse states that he was "overloaded" ["kaved"] with wealth. The Ba'al Hafla'ah suggests that this term - "kaved" - alludes to Avraham's attitude towards his newly acquired riches. Since he regarded them as temporal and ephemeral, the vast amount of assets seemed to him as a load, a heavy and cumbersome burden. Significantly, the verse that speaks of Lot's wealth does not use this term, and simply tells us that he possessed a lot of cattle and tents. Evidently, Lot's fortune was not a burden to him at all, as he regarded his wealth as his dearest possession.

The contrast between Avraham and Lot, then, teaches us a lesson about values and priorities, what we should consider as more important and what should be viewed as less meaningful. The difference between "olam oveir" - the fleeting, temporary world - and "olam omeid" - that which is eternal and everlasting - must accompany us throughout lives. This sense should motivate all our decisions, both big and small, and determine how we spend our resources of time, energy and wealth.