Avimelech was the king of the Pelishtim in Gerar. He features in the Torah portions of Vayeira and Toldos. Avraham Avinu and his entourage came to Gerar, and Avimelech abducted Sarah, thinking she was Avraham’s sister. HaShem appeared to him in a dream, telling him not to harm her. He then released her and made a treaty with Avraham. Yitzchak Avinu also encountered Avimelech. The king became jealous of the wealth Yitzchak amassed in Gerar. His subjects filled in wells Avraham had dug, and Yitzchak redug them, leading to disputes with the Pelishtim. After resolving their disagreements, they made a treaty in Beersheva.
In parashas Vayeira, we are told how Avraham Avinu came with his entourage to the land of the Pelishtim (Philistines). Avraham feared the Pelishtim would kill him if they knew he was married to the beautiful Sarah; therefore, he said she was his sister. The king of the Pelishtim, Avimelech, took a liking to Sarah and brought her to his household. However, that night G-d appeared to him in a dream, sternly warning him that he had taken a married woman and that his life was in danger as a result. Avimelech self-righteously argued with HaShem, claiming he had not yet done anything immoral. HaShem countered that nonetheless he certainly was not totally innocent,[1] and ordered him to return Sarah to her husband.
The next morning Avimelech confronted Avraham, claiming the Pelishtim had committed no sin against him, and demanding to know why he had acted so deceitfully. Avraham replied: “I said to myself that only there is no fear of G-d in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.”[2] Malbim analyzes these verses, seeking to explain the underlying dialogue between the two men. He begins by elaborating on Avimelech’s argument.
Avimelech professed his and his nation’s innocence so indignantly because the Pelishtim were known to be highly moral. Accordingly, he felt that Avraham had had nothing to fear. In his brief but powerful response, Avraham acknowledged the nation’s morality. There was only one problem – this decency did not emanate from recognition of the one G-d, who is involved in every aspect of our lives; rather, it stemmed from intellect.[3] There is a big difference between morality driven by fear of G-d and morality that a person defines himself. In the case of the former, G-d defines what is moral and immoral, and one must subjugate his beliefs and desires to that which G-d instructs him. Therefore, even if he has a strong desire to act in a morally questionable way, his fear of G-d will enable him to see that his course of action is immoral and thereby control himself.
In contrast, when a person’s morality is self-defined, it is very easy for him to justify certain behavior, even if it contradicts his beliefs. This is because he is guided not by an objective standard, but by his own whims and desires. This, says Malbim, is what Avraham was telling Avimelech: The Pelishtim may be an ethical people, but when they see a beautiful married woman, they will find a way of “removing” her husband so they can satisfy their coarse desires. Accordingly, Avraham justified his evasive behavior by arguing that since the Pelishtim did not base their morality on ethical monotheism, they could easily justify killing him in order to take his wife.
This sobering lesson has remained relevant throughout history. During the early years of Nazi Germany, Rav Elchanan Wasserman, ztz”l, delivered a lecture to rabbis in Berlin and cited this Malbim. While the Nazis’ virulent anti-Semitism was already well-known, nobody had any inkling of how cruel they and the German nation would become. Indeed Germany was considered among the most progressive and intellectual nations, a model of culture and nobility. That year, Time ran a feature article on the Germans' exceptional concern for animal rights, and the laws they passed to protect animals. Yet Rav Wasserman argued that the etiquette and propriety of German society was not based on fear of G-d, and like the Pelishtim, once their natural desires overcame them, they would stoop to the depths of evil. Many rabbis objected to this warning. They insisted that the Germans’ refined character and humanistic values guaranteed the safety of German Jewry. Sadly, Rav Wasserman was right. Once the Nazis showed their true colors, the façade of humanism fell away, and many Germans gladly participated in the most unspeakable atrocities in history.
Today moral relativism is very powerful. There is no objective morality, say the relativists, so one can never declare any belief system immoral, however repugnant it may seem. Ultimately, subjective morality means there is no such thing as morality altogether. When most people face this logical conclusion, they quickly reject moral relativism. This in and of itself is a testament to the fact that most do recognize objective morality, and in turn that this morality emanates from One G-d.
As we have seen from Malbim’s explanation of the encounter between Avraham and Avimelech, the only guarantee of moral behavior is fear of G-d. When a person recognizes G-d alone as the source of right and wrong, he will not be subject to the flaw of the Pelishtim.
Notes and Sources
[1] Rashi, Bereishis 20:6.
[2] Bereishis 20:11. See the next two verses for the remainder of Avraham’s reply.
[3] The Pelishtim, like their contemporaries, believed in multiple gods, but these gods did not instruct them in areas of ethics. Rather, any morality they professed came from their own minds.
From the book “Beacons of Light”
