In so many areas of our lives we depend on the strength of a group to make a difference. Yet we know, intuitively, that groups are only as strong as the commitment and convictions of the people within them. A group cannot function without the many individuals that ultimately make their own choices; if these choices do not reflect well on the group, they can only carry so much significance.

This is best reflected back in the argument between Avraham and God regarding Sodom. There, it is manifestly clear that the presence of one or two righteous individuals is not enough to warrant that city’s continued existence. Avraham is aware of that and that is why he doesn’t ask anything of God, if there are less than ten righteous individuals there.

Advertisement




We need to consider – How large a minority is needed to create a sub-community suitably representative of the community as a whole.[1] But once there is a less than a quorum – however that is eventually defined – the individual will, (at best) be taken out of the city (like Lot) and judged on his own merits.[2] (In the worst case, he will be held accountable for continuing to live in the face of the community’s evil, which he was either not able or not willing to change.[3])

It is as part of nations that people are proud of fighting just wars or of developing exemplary medical health care systems. That pride is felt by the many, even though they did not necessarily take part in these accomplishments themselves. Likewise without having contributed to it, they are justifiably embarrassed by rampant crime, vice and blatant inequalities in their country. Both of these feelings arise from the understanding that they belong to a group that is impacting beyond those that make it up. But even more to the point is that it arises from the understanding that this impact can only be achieved on the national level. What this all boils down to is that the greatest impact of an individual is generally felt when he acts as part of the larger community.

And it is in line with the above that the commitment of the Jewish community can be more fully understood. God’s selection of the Jews has a twofold purpose. It is meant to elevate the members of the Jewish nation and thereby produce moral and religious excellence, but it is also meant to provide an example for the rest of mankind.[4]

An individual can be an inspiration for some individuals but he cannot be a model for an entire nation. It is understood that there are some individuals whose performance is off the charts and so a nation cannot hold itself to such a standard since it will be unattainable for anyone within the general norms of society. A model nation, however, is something else. It is not uncommon for national communities to emulate one another, since reaching each other’s achievements is at least conceptually plausible.


 

[1] See R. S. R. Hirsch on Bereshit 18:28 concerning the implications of the numbers of righteous inhabitants in Sodom.

[2] See Ramban on Devarim 11:13.

[3] See Sanhedrin 112a, which not only blames a righteous person for continuing to live in such a situation but also penalizes him financially.

[4] See Redeeming Relevance in Exodus, pp. 57-67.

Advertisement

SHARE
Previous articleLiving In A Sodom And Gemorrah Israel
Next articleTo Arm Or Not To Arm
Rabbi Francis Nataf (www.francisnataf.com) is a veteran Tanach educator who has written an acclaimed contemporary commentary on the Torah entitled “Redeeming Relevance.” He teaches Tanach at Midreshet Rachel v'Chaya and is Associate Editor of the Jewish Bible Quarterly. He is also Translations and Research Specialist at Sefaria, where he has authored most of Sefaria's in-house translations, including such classics as Sefer HaChinuch, Shaarei Teshuva, Derech Hashem, Chovat HaTalmidim and many others. He is a prolific writer and his articles on parsha, current events and Jewish thought appear regularly in many Jewish publications such as The Jewish Press, Tradition, Hakira, the Times of Israel, the Jerusalem Post, Jewish Action and Haaretz.