July 26, 2012 11:35 am at 11:35 am #604283EnglishmanMember
The Torah says ????????? ????????? ?????????? ???????? ?????? ?????, Lot’s wife looked at the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah with brimstone and fire, and she turned into a pillar of salt.
Josephus (in Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, Chapter 11, Verse 4) testified to seeing this pillar of salt. Is this the pillar that can be reached by driving southbound on Road 90, a few kilometers before the Dead Sea industrial area called the Dead Sea Factories? (“Lot’s Cave” can be found just beneath that pillar.)
And is it still salty?July 26, 2012 12:50 pm at 12:50 pm #1026657557Participant
I’ve heard about this alleged pillar, and the pillar is salt (though it’s covered in dirt, so it doesn’t look spectacular or anything), but I’ve heard from multiple sources that it was unsubstantiated rumor that the pillar was actually Lot’s wife.July 26, 2012 1:13 pm at 1:13 pm #1026658
Englishman: There are actually a lot of salt pillars in the area (and now there is a minefield, from what I was told). I had a Mekubal once tell me that the Mekubalim have a Mesorah about which is her, but I think it’s assumed that we don’t know anymore.July 26, 2012 2:14 pm at 2:14 pm #1026659chocandpatienceMember
there are apparently many salt pillars in that area. I doubt we know which one it is.July 26, 2012 2:18 pm at 2:18 pm #1026660arutz sheva is betterParticipant
Is it still salty? well try tasting it and tell us. And as far as it really being the place that you are mentioning i tend to doubt it. There is so much to be gained by torist money that I do not trust tour guides. they will say anything on the grounds that they have to justify their salary but the problem is when there is a serious scholar that tries to make sence out of their gibberish and perpetuates thir lies to the next group of tourists. In other words when going to a vacation be it disneyland or a historic ruins realize that the brooklyn bridge is for sale in all parts of the worldJuly 26, 2012 6:09 pm at 6:09 pm #1026661Doodle-Man™Member
So who is this dash guy?July 26, 2012 6:38 pm at 6:38 pm #1026662TheGoqParticipant
lol moski u kill me.July 26, 2012 7:17 pm at 7:17 pm #1026663Doodle-Man™Member
Goq: I think you belong here:July 26, 2012 7:44 pm at 7:44 pm #1026664SayIDidIt™Participant
moski: She was a girl!!
SiDi™July 27, 2012 3:43 pm at 3:43 pm #1026665ChortkovParticipant
What did ??? say when he saw his wife turning into a pillar of salt??
??? ????!July 27, 2012 4:47 pm at 4:47 pm #1026666shlishiMember
I wonder how the Slifkin type “rationalists” try to fardrei this pasuk in the Torah. After all, it isn’t “rational” that a person suddenly turned into a pillar of salt.July 27, 2012 5:20 pm at 5:20 pm #1026667
Shlishi: Why don’t you see how the Rambam, Ralbag, or the Chizkuni explain it. There were Rishonim who were rationalists too, you know.July 27, 2012 5:28 pm at 5:28 pm #1026668shlishiMember
Really, Sam? Which Rambam says “she never really turned into salt”? I never saw it, but it could be I overlooked it I suppose. Mekor?July 27, 2012 5:37 pm at 5:37 pm #1026669
Shlishi: I honestly don’t know what the Rambam said. My point is he was a rationalist. So they would probably explain it somewhere along the same lines as he does.July 27, 2012 5:41 pm at 5:41 pm #1026670
Shlishi: However, it would not in any way surprise me if the Rambam said that the whole story with Lot’s wife was either a Mashal, a dream, or a Nevua. After all, everyone is shocked when I point out to them that the Moreh says numerous times how Bilam’s donkey never actually spoke.July 27, 2012 5:53 pm at 5:53 pm #1026671yummy cupcakeMember
when we went in sem we were shown one pillar which many believe to be the one, but we were told that there are many so it’s possible that may not have been the one. we all took salt from it anyway. i still have mine.July 27, 2012 7:44 pm at 7:44 pm #1026672rabbiofberlinParticipant
shlishi (andSam2): I don’t know what the Rambam says about Lot’s pillar but I do know- for sure- what the son of the Rambam (R’Avrohom) says,in his pirush on Torah,about Yaakov Ovinu’s struggle with the Angel.He says-unequivocally- that it was a dream and imagined by Yaakov Ovinu. Don’t take my word for it, check it out. (I imagine R’Avrohom would be considered an apikorus today)July 29, 2012 10:08 am at 10:08 am #1026673menucha12Member
I have been there and seen the pillar it looked like a pillar of salt to me and no one can be sure of the specific one seeing as there are a ton over thereJuly 30, 2012 5:33 am at 5:33 am #1026674
A dream doesn’t mean imagined. It means a Nevua dream.
The Rambam doesn’t seem to have to have a hard time with Nisim. It is with concepts that contradict rational boundaries, not natural boundaries, that he explains away.July 30, 2012 7:18 am at 7:18 am #1026675
Berlin, why do you imagine that?July 30, 2012 8:49 am at 8:49 am #1026676SayIDidIt™Participant
If we knew which one is ‘her’, can a Kohen enter ‘her’ 4 amos?
A better question: Because we don’t know which one she is, can a Kohen go to that area?
SiDi™July 30, 2012 4:27 pm at 4:27 pm #1026677
SiDi, there is no reason to think that she passed through the death stage before turning into salt. Not that it would matter if she did, though.
As a side point, I don’t think a ‘rationalist’ would have such a hard time with this. The whole turning over of Sodom and Amora could have been a natural occurance. Chazal do tell us that the area was volcanic, and the Passuk describes the area being washed out with sulfur and salt (not necessarily table salt).
Hashem doesn’t need Nisim to run his world. Contrary to the common attitude that Hashem’s intervention has to be in the form of a bolt of lightning, it doesn’t. The pasuk says, Ha’aretz Hadom Ragli. Hashem runs all the variables, and there are more variables than we normally realize.July 30, 2012 4:57 pm at 4:57 pm #1026678ItcheSrulikMember
Isn’t there a chizkuni that vatehi l’nitziv melach goes on the cities, not Lot’s wife? It’s shver grammatically but that’s neither here nor there.July 30, 2012 10:35 pm at 10:35 pm #1026679ToiParticipant
even if she died, goyim are only mitameh bimagah.July 30, 2012 11:02 pm at 11:02 pm #1026680
Toi: The Mechaber seems to say that you should be Machmir for Ohel as well. And I thought it’s a Machlokes Haposkim whether Meisei Akum are Tofes 4 Amos.
It’s irrelevant anyway. Even if it is her, it’s not M’tamei. There’s no corpse. There’s no Atzamos. There’s no Eiver Min Hameis. There’s no M’lo Tarvad Rekev. There’s nothing there that could be M’tamei a Kohen.July 30, 2012 11:51 pm at 11:51 pm #1026681
Sam, what about eating it? Shouldn’t it be like eating earth in Bavel?July 31, 2012 12:11 am at 12:11 am #1026682yitayningwutParticipant
BTW the Chizkuni brings another pshat that the pasuk is referring to the land, not her. IOW she turned around and saw that the land had become a pillar of salt and sulfur.July 31, 2012 12:37 am at 12:37 am #1026683
There’s one basic flawed assumption that everyone always makes when discussing this topic…
There’s nowhere in the Torah that says that the pillar of salt didn’t disintegrate immediately after Lot saw it. I don’t think it’s derech hatevah for woman-sized pillars of very brittle rock such as salt to last for thousands of years against the elements, and there’s no specific mention (that I’m aware of) that this one is the exception.
Sorry to burst everyone’s collective bubble.July 31, 2012 1:24 am at 1:24 am #1026684
Curiosity: Salt pillars exist all over the world and last thousands of years. They basically fossilize so they harden and don’t wear down.
And good call by me on the Chizkuni being someone who would take the story not literally. Shlishi, maybe you should do some research before you (accidentally) accuse Rishonim of “fardreying” P’sukim again.July 31, 2012 1:27 am at 1:27 am #1026685yeshivishsocratesMember
Curiosity : Brilliant, love itJuly 31, 2012 1:31 am at 1:31 am #1026686yeshivishsocratesMember
Agav, Josephius Flavius, whos considered reliable enough for rashi to quote him over 20 times claimed to have seen the pillar of salt which was Lots wife. It could be that he thought he saw it but was mistaken. One thing is fairly certain though, he was under the impression that he saw her thousands of years after the transfiguration.July 31, 2012 2:09 am at 2:09 am #1026687sam4321Participant
Doesn’t Brachas 54b say upon seeing the pillar of lots wife one says a bracha?July 31, 2012 2:47 am at 2:47 am #1026688
????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????: ???? ???? ??”? ??”? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??”? ??”? ???? ???????
??”? ???? ???? ??’ ??? ? from Brachos 54bJuly 31, 2012 2:54 am at 2:54 am #1026689oomisParticipant
As to the opinion that Yaakov avinu’s struggle with the malach was only a dream – did he dream his dislocated gid hanasheh?July 31, 2012 3:49 am at 3:49 am #1026690
yeshivishsocrates: When does Rashi quote Josephus “over 20 times”? The only Rashi I am aware of is in Bava Basra 3b, and Rashi cites the “Sefer Yosifon”, not Josephus itself. I’m not even sure if Sefer Yosifon is the same as Josephus, as Sefer Yosifon is attributed to the authorship of ???? ?? ??????.July 31, 2012 4:04 am at 4:04 am #1026691
Sam2, that’s not really the point. You can ask your local orthodox geologist about the necessary preconditions required to instantly fossilize large salt formations to withstand thousands of years of erosion (not to mention the fallout from an entire city being blown up right nearby). The point is; why assume it still exists?
Also, and again, I’m by no means a scientist, but I would assume salt formations that form slowly, over thousands of years, one grain at a time, are more likely to fossilize and harden than something that instantaneously turns into salt. I always imagined a consistency not unlike a chunk of salt that you sometimes get in table salt containers. But this second paragraph is all just my assumptions.July 31, 2012 4:27 am at 4:27 am #1026692
Kozov – I wasn’t aware of that Gemara, thanks for informing me. I wonder if there are any mefarshim that hock on that halacha regarding sofek brachos. Still though, why would we assume that just because it was around 2,000 years ago, that it’s still around today?July 31, 2012 4:37 am at 4:37 am #1026693
Curiosity: There is a Gemara that assumes she still exists.
Choppy: I was once told my a leading Jewish historian that contrary to popular belief, Josephus and Yosiphon are two different books.July 31, 2012 4:46 am at 4:46 am #1026694
Sam2: That’s the academic world’s opinion. That doesn’t necessarily make them correct.July 31, 2012 5:05 am at 5:05 am #1026695
I sat silent hoping someone will say a word of emes. B’mokem she’ain ish – in a place that there is no man, a woman must speak up (who does daf yomi and happens to know shas):
A braysa at the end of Nidah 69:2 – The people of Alexandria asked R’ Yehoshuah b’ Chananyah twelve questions…three questions were mere nonsense – “divrei booros” (70:2): Does the wife of Lot m’tameh? He answered them, “A mes is m’tameh but not a ntziv melach”.
Anshei Alexandria were told the answer. Now you too.July 31, 2012 5:14 am at 5:14 am #1026696
For those curious, the other two “divrei booros” – questions of nonsense asked by Anshei Alexandria:
Would Ben-Ha’shunamis be metameh?
The dead who will resurrect in the future, do they need sprinkling of ashes?July 31, 2012 6:12 am at 6:12 am #1026697
Sam, are you sure the Chizkuni holds it wasnt actual? Its a bifeirushe Gemara.July 31, 2012 9:24 am at 9:24 am #1026698shmoolik 1Participant
if we follow the literal text Lot and family left Sodom in the direction we know today as Jordan what would be latter Amon and Moav
what is referred to as the pillar of salt or Lot’s wife is on the wrong side of the Valley/
somethings that are said and written must be taken with a grain of saltJuly 31, 2012 10:22 am at 10:22 am #1026699
Sam2- the Gemara is circa 2000 years old. Just bc it existed then, doesn’t mean it exists now. Also, look at all 2000 year old archaeology – it’s almost always covered by 10+ feet of earth. Things under 6 feet tall get buried very quickly.July 31, 2012 1:05 pm at 1:05 pm #1026700
Choppy: There’s no reason for them to be wrong. This is a historic, not Halachic, matter. Besides, this guy is Frum.
Kozov: I haven’t seen it inside, no.July 31, 2012 1:29 pm at 1:29 pm #1026701
Sam: The autorship of a sefer is more than simply a historic matter for us.July 31, 2012 2:57 pm at 2:57 pm #1026702ItcheSrulikMember
Curiosity: I suppose you can say that, though I think you’re stretching the word “circa” a bit.
Sam2: Do you mean Yosiphon as quoted by Rashi and others or the Hebrew sefer Yosiphon that people like to dig out around Chanuka? I ask because the title page of the latter says it’s a modern Hebrew translation of Whiston’s English translation of Josephus.July 31, 2012 4:18 pm at 4:18 pm #1026703
Many people learn Sefer Yosifon on Tisha B’Av, as per the psak that its muttar (I think in Mishna Brura.) It’s been around for over 1,000 years (Rashi quotes it) and there is a Yiddish language version of it still extant from over 700 years ago.July 31, 2012 4:47 pm at 4:47 pm #1026704
Itche: I dunno. I’ll try to contact this guy and ask him.
Curiosity: Only because cities would be built up in ancient times. That’s not Shayach in an uninhabited area.July 31, 2012 6:21 pm at 6:21 pm #1026705HealthParticipant
shmoolik 1 -“if we follow the literal text Lot and family left Sodom in the direction we know today as Jordan what would be latter Amon and Moav
what is referred to as the pillar of salt or Lot’s wife is on the wrong side of the Valley/”
Noone is interested in the truth because
1. You’re ruining the topic in the CR.
2. You’re ruining the tourist business for the tour operators
and the seminaries.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.