While Shem kept his doors closed so he could concentrate on pursuing his spiritual ambitions, the doors to Avraham’s tent were always open, as he was devoted to assisting all people and to impact the world through his kindness, wisdom and influence.
The haftara for Parashat Lekh-Lekha is taken from Sefer Yeshayahu, and in this prophecy we find a description of islands gripped with fear (“Ra’u iyim ve-yiyra’u” – 41:5). The Midrash (Bereishit Rabba 44:8) interprets this verse as a poetic reference to Avraham and Shem (Noach’s son), who lived at the same time (though obviously Shem was much older than Avraham). The Midrash writes:
Just as these islands are distinguished, similarly, Avraham and Shem were distinguished in the world. “And they were frightened” – this one feared the other, and this one feared the other. This one [Avraham] feared the other [Shem], saying, “Perhaps Shem resents me because I killed his descendants.” And this one [Shem] feared the other [Avraham], saying, “Perhaps Avraham resents me because I allowed wicked people to arise.”
It emerges from the Midrash’s comments that Avraham and Shem were the two most prominent religious figures of the time, and there was some tension between them. Avraham felt concerned that Shem resented the bloody war Avraham waged against the four eastern powers – kingdoms that were founded by the descendants of Shem. In the meantime, Shem suspected that Avraham might look unfavorably upon him because of the many wicked people that descended from him.
Rav Shimon Sofer of Cracow (son of the Chatam Sofer), as recorded in Mikhtav Sofer, suggested that the Midrash refers here to the tension that exists between two different models of spiritual greatness. Shem, as depicted in Midrashic literature, represents the model of a righteous person who achieves greatness through withdrawal and isolation. He preferred to remain separate and apart from his contemporaries so he could focus his attention on his own spiritual growth and achievements. Avraham, of course, adopted the precise opposite approach, working tirelessly to spread the truth of God’s existence throughout the world. He was very involved in world affairs, and maintained close ties with important figures while also going out of his way to care for even the simple, ordinary people. While Shem kept his doors closed so he could concentrate on pursuing his spiritual ambitions, the doors to Avraham’s tent were always open, as he was devoted to assisting all people and to impact the world through his kindness, wisdom and influence.
Each approach has its drawbacks, as the Midrash notes by depicting the tension that existed between Avraham and Shem. Avraham’s involvement in world affairs led him to intervene in a world war, which resulted in untold numbers of casualties. The tzadikrepresented by Shem keeps away from worldly affairs out of disdain for the morally complex situations that such involvement requires one to confront. From his perspective, the battlefield is no place for a person who has set his sights upon spiritual greatness. This pursuit requires a person to avoid soiling his hands and getting entangled in difficult controversies and conflicts that often characterize public service. Shem resents Avraham’s involvement in warfare; this model of piety advocates withdrawing from public, communal affairs, and instead isolating oneself in a safe haven of spirituality and sanctity.
Conversely, as the Midrash describes, Avraham resented the results of Shem’s policy of isolation. Generations of sinners emerged from Shem, as he remained cloistered in his “island” of spirituality. Communal involvement may necessitate some compromise in one’s personal growth, but unless spiritual leaders are prepared to make this compromise, the world’s standards will steadily decline. Avraham therefore looks askance at Shem, resenting his exclusive focus on his own spiritual growth which allows the world to continue along its downward spiral.
Am Yisrael, of course, is the nation founded by Avraham, not by Shem. The model we follow is that of religious excellence without ignoring the world. At the same time, the tension between the model of Avraham and the model of Shem will always exist – and must always exist. We must always struggle to maintain our own strict religious standards even as we involve ourselves in the world in an effort to perfect it. Although we certainly follow the model of Avraham, we must also feel the pressure of Shem, the pressure to pursue our highest spiritual ambitions even as we involve ourselves in world affairs.