Kabbalah of Information: 'The Theory of Evil - Part I'

'Evil does not abide with you' (Psalms 5:5) - The Informational Structure of Creation. The Fundamental Laws and Principles. The Informational Concept of Evil.

Noah and the flood (photo credit: John Martin)
Noah and the flood
(photo credit: John Martin)

Introduction 

The following will introduce the fundamental principles of the Kabbalah of Information regarding the structure and functioning of Creation, based on an analysis of events described in the Torah and the Nevi’im (Prophets). There will be a particular focus on the concept of Evil in Creation. 

When studying the Torah, it is important to approach the text as a single whole: each letter, each word, and each story is interconnected. 

In addition to the 613 commandments that are explicitly listed, the Torah also contains a wealth of other teachings and lessons. In order to uncover these lessons, one must reveal the hidden links, parallels, and patterns that exist between the events described in the Torah. 

This task requires knowledge of the Kabbalah. 

Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, a 2nd-century Tannaitic sage and disciple of Rabbi Akiva, described the stories in the Torah as the garments, the commandments as the body, and the Kabbalah as the soul of the Torah. 

This article will attempt to analyze the following interconnected stories through the lens of the Kabbalah of Information: 

> The Flood
> Abraham’s descent into and ascent from Egypt
> The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the salvation of Lot 
> Jacob’s flight from Laban with his family
> The Exodus 

The links between these stories will be traced according to the following considerations:

1 - All of the individuals mentioned in the stories above suffered from a higher evil that they could not overcome on their own.

According to the Kabbalah, the higher the root of the animal soul, the lower it may fall. It is believed that the souls of the most malevolent villains are initially formed at a higher level of revelation of the information conveyed by HaShem (the Almighty). In other words, they are very powerful. This is true of the antediluvians, the Pharaoh of the time of Abraham, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Laban, the Pharaoh of the Exodus period, and Esau. This seemingly paradoxical fact requires further clarification, which will be provided in the following sections.
2 - All of the stories mentioned above involve the direct intervention of HaShem with miraculous deliverance.
3 - None of the individuals in any of the stories listed above broke from evil entirely: 

— Noah took a grapevine with him on the Ark.
— Hagar accompanied Abraham and Sarah out of Egypt.
— Lot’s wife looked back while leaving Sodom.
— Rachel stole Laban’s teraphim as Jacob fled with his family. 
— When Moses delivered the children of Israel from Egypt, they were joined by ‘a great mixed multitude’ of Egyptians. 

4 - All of the aforementioned events had incredibly negative and irreversible consequences. 

Each story will be reviewed below in further detail, followed by a general overview from the standpoint of the Kabbalah of Information. 

1 - Chapter 1:
And There Was a Severe Famine in the Land, and Abraham Descended to Egypt; or the Pharaoh’s Revenge. 


A brief description of the events in this story: 

The Torah tells us, “And there was a famine in the land, and Abram descended to Egypt to sojourn there because the famine was severe in the land.” 
As they approach Egypt, Abram (Abraham) asks his wife Sarai (Sarah) to pretend to be his sister. Pharaoh takes Sarah to the palace and bestows on Abraham herds of animals, menservants, and maidservants. 
HaShem then sends plagues onto Pharaoh and his household on account of Sarah. The Midrash B’reishit Rabbah gives the following description of the event: “Rabbi Levi said: All that night the angel stood with a staff in his hand and hit. If she said ‘Hit,’ he hit; if she said ‘Leave,’ he left.”
Pharaoh realizes that he has been deceived, returns Sarah to Abraham, and gives him money. Abraham and Sarah return to the Holy Land.
After some time, we learn that they are accompanied by Hagar, an Egyptian woman who had become Sarah’s handmaid. 
This story has elicited much commentary, but the sages remain divided in opinion. 
For example, Rashi wrote in his commentary that the famine was meant to challenge Abraham’s faith: “To test him, whether he would think ill of the words of the Holy One, blessed be He, Who ordered him to go to the Land of Canaan, and now He was forcing him to leave it.”
Therefore, Abraham is commended for not questioning the will of HaShem and descending into Egypt. 
This interpretation is shared by Abraham ibn Ezra. 
Ramban, however, held the polar opposite opinion. 
In his commentary on the Torah, he writes, “And know that [our patriarch] Abraham sinned a great sin inadvertently, by bringing his wife the saint in a compromising situation, due to his fear that he be killed.” He further suggests that Abraham should have trusted HaShem to save both him, his wife, and all that they owned, as HaShem had the power to aid and to protect him. Ramban insists that Abraham’s descent from the land where he had been guided was a sin as he should have known that HaShem would have kept him from perishing during the famine. “Because of this action,” he concludes, “It was decreed that his descendants be exiled to Egypt at the hand of Pharaoh.”
The belief that Abraham’s descent into Egypt would lead to the exile is also expressed in the Zohar. 
It is later revealed that Hagar also left Egypt with Sarah and Abraham. It is important to note that the Torah provides information about Hagar immediately after describing the prophecy of the exile to Egypt. 
Who was Hagar, and how did she become part of Sarah and Abraham’s household? The Torah does not say. However, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai  in the Midrash B’reishit Rabbah explains that: “Hagar was Pharaoh’s daughter. When he saw the deeds on behalf of Sarah in his house, he took his daughter and gave her to her, saying, ‘Better that my daughter be a maidservant in this house than a mistress in another house.’”
This author believes that by analyzing the consequences of Hagar joining Abraham and Sarah’s household, another explanation for the event may be provided. 
Pharaoh ruled the most powerful empire on earth. A small tribe enters his land, headed by a ‘shepherd.’ The shepherd has a very beautiful sister. Pharaoh takes the sister to his palace and bestows immense riches on her brother. From Pharaoh’s point of view, there is nothing unlawful about his actions. 
However, it becomes apparent that the ‘shepherd’ has tricked him by disguising his wife as his sister. This event is followed by the punishment described above and the departure of Abraham’s family from Egypt, taking great riches. 
What might Pharaoh have felt in this situation? 

Firstly, he might have felt extreme humiliation (undeserved, from his point of view). It is worth noting that this punishment would have felt particularly shameful, as it was caused by a woman. This is reaffirmed, for instance, in Judges: “And Abimelech came up to the tower, and fought against it. And he went close to the door of the tower to burn it with fire. And a certain woman cast a piece of an upper millstone upon Abimelech’s head and crushed his skull. And he called hastily to the young man, his weapon bearer, and said to him, ‘Draw your sword and kill me, lest they say of me, ‘A woman killed him.’ And his young man pierced him, and he died.”
At the same time, Pharaoh must have also been overcome with fear and hatred. Fear because he could feel that the Higher Power was on Abraham’s side. Hatred because of how deeply he had been humiliated. It would be reasonable to assume that Pharaoh wanted to seek revenge, but he could not afford to do so openly out of fear of the Higher Power. Thus, he decided to give away his daughter Hagar to serve as a handmaid. In this author’s opinion, Pharaoh understood that Hagar, a princess who owned countless slaves herself, would never be content as a simple handmaid in the household of Abraham and that sooner or later, this discontent would become manifest. Therefore, Pharaoh set the scene for potential conflict within Abraham’s household, and the events that followed would confirm the success of his plan. 

The success of Pharaoh’s plan can be evidenced by the following arguments: 
1 - The Torah provides information that Hagar left Egypt with Sarah and Abraham directly after disclosing information about the exile to Egypt. 
2 - It is safe to assume that Sarah had several maidservants, including some from Ur Kaśdim (Ur of the Chaldeans), where her family lived. However, the servant that she gave away to become Abraham’s wife was Hagar the Egyptian. This fact also raises questions, as we know from the Torah that the men from Abraham’s family traditionally married their relatives (see Isaac or Jacob). 
3 - Hagar becomes pregnant, which instantly elevates her over Sarah. Sarah loses importance in Hagar’s eyes. In the Midrash Bereishit Rabbah, we read: “Rabbi Huna and Rabbi Yirmeyahu in the name of Rabbi Hiya bar Abba said:...Hagar would tell them: ‘My mistress Sarai is not inside what she is outside: she appears to be righteous, but she is not righteous, had she been a righteous woman, see how many years have passed without her conceiving, whereas I conceived in one night!’”
4 - The fact that Sarah offered Hagar as Abraham’s second wife indicates that she (Sarah) had absolute confidence in Hagar’s loyalty to her, which, in turn, must mean that Hagar reaffirmed her devotion and love towards Sarah. However, as soon as Hagar conceives Abraham’s child, her behavior changes dramatically, and she starts to despise Sarah, essentially betraying her (this is Pharaoh’s plan in action). 

5 - Sarah accuses Abraham of being too passive and invokes the Judgment of HaShem (Havaya) between them. 

The Midrash quotes Rabbi Tanhuma as saying in the name of Rabbi Hiyya the Great and Rabbi Berehiah, who in turn spoke in the name of Rabbi Eleazar, that “He who invokes judgment shall not escape judgment either. Sarah was intended to live as long as Abraham, but because she told Abraham, ‘May the Lord judge between me and you!’, forty-eight years were cut from her lifespan.”
6 - Considering that calling upon HaShem’s Judgement is a very extreme measure, one may assume that Abraham and Sarah had a major argument and completely failed to understand each other, which pushed Sarah to seek HaShem’s aid. 

Preliminary Conclusions


Hagar, an Egyptian maidservant, creates a rupture in Abraham and Sarah’s family, which results in Sarah’s lifespan being shortened by forty-eight years. It should be noted that HaShem considers interpersonal relationships more important than our relationship with Him. There are two facts in the Torah that prompt this conclusion: 

1 - Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because they violated the laws of hospitality. 
2 - The builders of the Tower of Babel were not destroyed, even though they intended to wage war on HaShem Himself. Instead, they were merely scattered across the earth because they had been a close-knit group and had treated each other with respect. 
When people are arguing and divided, they are spiritually incapable of properly serving HaShem. Therefore, the conflict over Hagar diminished the spiritual level of Abraham and Sarah’s service. This will be discussed in further detail later in the article. 
However, this is not the full extent of the negative consequences suffered by Abraham’s household due to the descent to Egypt and Hagar’s presence. 
Abraham gives Hagar back to Sarah, who starts mistreating her. Hagar flees from Abraham’s home. This escape was an extraordinary feat on Hagar’s part, as runaway slaves were punished by death at the time.
This bold escape indicates Hagar’s strength of character; she was a princess through and through. Upon reaching a well in the desert, Hagar encounters an angel sent by HaShem (Havaya). The angel orders her to return to Sarah and informs her that she will have a son, whom she should name Ishmael.
Hagar addresses HaShem (Havaya) by saying, “You are the God of seeing (El Roi)!”, then names the well Lachai Ro’i. E-l is the name of HaShem that corresponds to the merciful aspect of Creation. Hagar returns to Abraham’s household and gives birth to her son, Ishmael.
In so doing, HaShem answers Abraham’s plea for an heir. However, because of Abraham’s descent to Egypt, it is Hagar, the daughter of the Egyptian Pharaoh, not Abraham’s first wife Sarah, who becomes the mother of his firstborn child. Abraham and Pharaoh are now kin, and the Pharaoh’s bloodline will continue through Ishmael. The sages note that Ishmael’s descendants have been among the worst enemies of the Jewish people.
After some time, Sarah urges Abraham to cast out Hagar and Ishmael, saying, “The son of this handmaid shall not inherit with my son.”
‘HAGAR GIVING Ishmael Water From the Miraculous Well in the Desert,’ Charles Paul Landon.‘HAGAR GIVING Ishmael Water From the Miraculous Well in the Desert,’ Charles Paul Landon.
A later passage in the Torah states, “But the matter greatly displeased Abraham, concerning his son.” It is not hard to imagine the extent of Abraham’s distress. After all, he was to banish his firstborn son. However, HaShem appears to him under the name El-im, which stands for judgment. This is especially important. HaShem commands Abraham to do as Sarah tells him and promises that He will protect Ishmael.
The appearance of HaShem to Abraham under the name El-im signifies that every action performed by those in this story will be subject to judgment and bear the consequences.
Abraham banishes Hagar and Ishmael, leaving them all but empty-handed. They receive no more than a piece of bread and a waterskin, in effect sentencing them to near-certain death in the desert. This decision on the part of Abraham requires an in-depth analysis. In the Kabbalah, Abraham embodies the attribute of Chesed (loving kindness, charity) at the absolute level. He was known to welcome total strangers into his home, offer them food and drink, and encourage them to embrace HaShem. In light of the above, it is quite clear that sending Hagar and Ishmael into the desert is a direct contradiction of Chesed.
Commenting on this event, Rashi explains that Abraham did not give Ishmael any gold or silver because he hated him for his wicked deeds. However, this statement directly contradicts another one of Rashi’s comments, where he elaborates on the command HaShem gave to Abraham to sacrifice Isaac.
The Torah says, “And He said, ‘Please take your son, your only one, whom you love, yea, Isaac, and go away to the land of Moriah...’” 
Rashi interprets this passage as follows: He [Abraham] said to Him, “I have two sons.” He [God] said to him, “Your only one.” He said to Him, “This one is the only son of his mother, and that one is the only son of his mother.” He said to him, “Whom you love.” He said to Him, “I love them both.” He said to him, “Isaac.”’ 
It seems that these two comments by Rashi seem to contract each other. The first speaks of hate, the second of love.
There is another explanation behind Abraham’s uncharacteristic behavior. To understand, one must look at the words said by Sarah to Abraham: “Drive out this handmaid and her son, for the son of this handmaid shall not inherit with my son.”
From these words, it can be concluded that Sarah is not just telling Abraham to exile Hagar and Ishmael; she is also forbidding him from giving them any property. This is why HaShem will later appear to Abraham as El-im (judgment). Sarah may have been motivated by the fact that Abraham owed all of his wealth to the suffering that she endured in the house of Pharaoh and the house of Abimelech. 
From the above events, we can conclude that Sarah never forgave Hagar for her betrayal. She had to put up with her presence, because she had been unable to bear a child. With the birth of Isaac, the situation had changed. 
Sarah knew that Isaac and Ishmael  could not live together because there would be continued strife and rivalry between them. From that point of view, the decision to banish Hagar and Ishmael was correct. However, to send them empty-handed into the desert, especially that given that Ishmael was ill, was unnecessary cruelty. 
Thus, we witness yet another negative consequence of Abraham’s descent to Egypt: he is forced to banish his firstborn child into the desert empty-handed. This causes Abraham immense pain.
After some time, HaShem commands Abraham to take Isaac up the mountain and bind him as a sacrificial offering. This raises the question: was this command linked to any of the previous events? Rashi cites the sages who believed that this could have been due to Satan’s complaint to HaShem that Abraham was not making the customary offerings. Another theory stipulates that this event was instigated by Isaac boasting to Ishmael that he was ready to sacrifice himself to HaShem. The very fact that the sages were trying to determine the reason behind the binding of Isaac affirms that they could not (or would not) conceive that this extremely painful challenge could not be the result of some past misdoing. 
This urges the consideration of another version of the above-mentioned events based on the ‘measure for measure’ principle. Sarah tells Abraham to cast Ishmael, the son of Hagar, into the desert, while he, according to the sages, was sick and bereft of any source of sustenance, effectively dooming him to perish. HaShem, under the name El-im (judgment), assuages Abraham’s anguish, telling him that He will take care of Ishmael. HaShem then performs a miracle to save Ishmael. 
According to the ‘measure for measure’ principle, HaShem instructs Abraham to take Isaac, the son of Sarah, to the mountain and bind him as a sacrificial offering. However, Abraham had earlier been given the prophecy that Isaac would become his heir. Abraham passes the test, proving himself worthy. HaShem miraculously saves Isaac, yet we can imagine how Sarah felt when she learned of HaShem’s command. The story of the binding of Isaac (Aqeidah) contains multiple explicit and implicit lessons that will be examined further on. 
The following is one of several arguments (which will be provided below) in favor of the opinion that the Aqeidah was linked to Ishmael’s exile:
1. Hagar flees Abraham’s household and meets an angel of Havaya. The angel tells her that she will give birth to a son and that she must name this son Ishmael, then commands her to return. Hagar names the well Lachai Ro’i. 
2. The passage that describes the meeting between Isaac and Rebecca specifies that Isaac “was on his way, coming from Be’er Lachai Ro’i.” In his commentary, Rashi suggests that Isaac must have traveled to the well “to bring Hagar [who had been given the new name, Keturah] to Abraham, his father, that he should marry her” following Sarah’s death. 
The story of Abraham’s funeral mentions that Isaac returns to Lachai Ro’i after burying his father. Rashi does not provide any commentary on this event. 
Based on the aforementioned points, it can be concluded that Isaac did not merely travel to Lachai Ro’i in order to fetch Hagar. Rather, he lived there. In this case, the question is: what is the connection between Isaac’s residence near Lachai Ro’i and the Aqeidah? This author believes that there is, in fact, a direct connection. 
In the Torah, Isaac asks Abraham, “Where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” To which Abraham replies, “G-d [referred to as El-im, judgment] will provide for Himself [yir’eh-lo] the lamb for the burnt offering.” When Abraham raises his knife over Isaac, he is stopped by an angel of Havaya (in this instance, the name Havaya appears as the emanation of mercy). 
A further passage reads, “And Abraham named that place, The Lord [Havaya] will see, as it is said to this day: On the mountain, the Lord will be seen.” This signifies that the Temple will be built in that spot, and Havaya will see the offerings made here by the Jewish people. The location will, therefore, become a place where the information conveyed by Havaya will be made particularly clear. 
The Lech-Lecha reading that describes Hagar’s flight states: “And an angel of the Lord [Havaya] found her by a water fountain in the desert [...] and she [Hagar] called the name of the Lord [Havaya], Who had spoken to her, ‘You are the G-d [E-l] of seeing’ [...] Therefore the well was called Be’er Lachai Ro’i [The Well of Seeing].” 
The name HAVAYA symbolizes the entire Sefirot system and may represent both mercy and judgment, whereas E-l represents a specific Sefirah: the attribute of Chesed (loving kindness, sharing). Therefore, we see that an angel of Havaya appears to both Abraham on the Mountain and to Hagar, near the well. References to both of these locations given by Abraham and Hagar are almost identical, but in the second story, the name E-l is added. 
This prompts the conclusion that the Lachai Ro’i well must have been a powerful place of revelation, where a significant amount of information from HAVAYA was disclosed (albeit not as powerful as the location of the future Temple). 
In his commentary on the seventh reading of the Vayeira, the Lubavitcher Rebbe notes that Isaac gained the sacred status of a burned offering: the kind of sanctity that no other man had ever achieved before.
This leads to the conclusion that Isaac must have been highly receptive to the information conveyed by HAVAYA. Furthermore, this is likely why he settled near the Lachai Ro’i well. 
In light of the above, it may be concluded that the binding of Isaac is linked directly to the events involving Hagar and Ishmael. 
From the above, we can see that taking Hagar from Egypt caused a chain of painful events which affected Abraham, Sarah, and all the Jewish people. 
Noah 
Noah was part of the sinful pre-flood generation and could not have changed his circumstances on his own. Thanks to the miraculous intervention of HaShem, Noah and his family were spared from the Flood. 
HaShem gave Noah clear instructions regarding what and whom he was allowed to take aboard the Ark. However, the Torah later mentions that Noah also took a grapevine. HaShem had not commanded him to do this, but neither had He explicitly prohibited it. 
Either way, the presence of this very grapevine would be one of the factors that would provoke the devastating events revealed later in the Torah. 
There are several interpretations of the nature of the forbidden fruit eaten by Adam and Eve. According to one interpretation, the forbidden fruit was a grape. There is significant reason to believe that this was the case. 
Therefore, grapes indirectly caused the original sin and helped evil infiltrate the world. The grapevine prompted the downfall of Noah, who might have otherwise become the new Adam. Another argument in support of this theory could be the fact that the Nazirites were prohibited from consuming any food or drink involving grapes. 
As such, a ‘pattern of Abraham’ is clearly evident. Like Abraham, Noah is miraculously freed from evil but does not sever his ties to evil entirely. The consequences for this are well-known. 
The question naturally arises as to why Noah took a grapevine, even though HaShem had not instructed him to do so. Moreover, why was it a grapevine specifically, rather than another kind of fruit or seed? 
The answer is obvious. Noah took something that he was fond of and feared losing in the Flood. 
This conclusion is confirmed by subsequent events. 

Lot’s Wife 
In this story, Lot and his family cannot free themselves from the power of the people of Sodom, who are great sinners. Once again, HaShem intervenes miraculously. He saves Lot and his family but forbids them from looking back. Lot’s wife disobeys HaShem’s command. She looks back and is transformed into a pillar of salt. 
This is yet another example of the ‘pattern of Abraham’ — the ties to evil have not been severed entirely. 
It must be noted that the act of transforming a living human being into an inanimate object does not occur anywhere else in the Torah. This requires an explanation, which will be provided in a later chapter. 
Jacob and Laban 
In the story of Jacob and Laban, Jacob is forced to serve Laban, a sinful practitioner of magic, for twenty-one years. He decides to flee, but Laban pursues him. HaShem intervenes on behalf of Jacob and his family. He comes to Laban in a dream and tells him, “Beware lest you speak with Jacob, either good or evil.” This miraculous salvation is confirmed by Laban himself, who tells Jacob that he could have inflicted great harm upon him, but refrained from doing so, as commanded by HaShem. One would think that this means Jacob severed his ties with evil. However, this would be incorrect. Rachel stole Laban’s teraphim, which he used for black magic (meaning that they still bore a spiritual connection to him). There are numerous explanations as to why Rachel stole the idols, but we shall not dwell on them here. What matters is the sheer fact that another person’s property was stolen. The Torah tells us that HaShem, through Moses, instructed the children of Israel to destroy their idols, just as He Himself had destroyed the idols of the Egyptian gods. However, He never gave any command to steal idols, much less hold on to them. 
Rachel did not tell Jacob that she had stolen the idols, knowing that he would never approve. 
The story later takes a tragic turn: Laban accuses Jacob of theft. Outraged, Jacob wishes death upon the thief, not knowing that the true thief was, in fact, Rachel. She dies shortly afterward. 
The “pattern of Abraham” emerges again, as the ties to evil were never truly severed. 

The Exodus 
As the children of Israel were fleeing Egypt, “a great mixed multitude” of Egyptians accompanied them. HaShem had commanded Moses to deliver the children of Israel from Egypt but had neither instructed nor prohibited that he take in anyone else who might join. That was Moses’ own decision. The consequences of his decision proved catastrophic for both the children of Israel and the entire world. 
When the Torah was first received, Moses, the Jewish people, and the rest of the world were elevated to the highest spiritual level. However, the Egyptians that left the land with the children of Israel later initiate the sinful cult of the golden calf. Along with the Jewish people, they create an idol out of gold and pray to it. 
Marc Chagall’s ‘Moses Beholds All the Work,’ from The Story of Exodus (1966)Marc Chagall’s ‘Moses Beholds All the Work,’ from The Story of Exodus (1966)
HaShem prepares to destroy the Jewish people until Moses prays for forgiveness, and HaShem chooses to reverse His decision. He does not reverse it entirely, however. Instead, He informs Moses that, rather than being personally present, He would be represented by an angel, signifying a significant spiritual downfall for the Jewish people. Moses continues to plead with HaShem not to send an angel but to remain with the Jewish people Himself. Moses knows that angels cannot think for themselves. They are, in a way, information-sharing programs. Furthermore, Moses also knows that the Jewish people would surely continue to commit sins in the future, and an angel, being an informational program, would dispense divine judgment, but have no capacity to forgive them. Only HaShem can grant forgiveness. This is reaffirmed in the works of the great Kabbalist scholars: Gates of Light by Joseph Gikatilla and The Palm Tree of Deborah by Moses Cordovero. 
HaShem concedes to Moses’ pleas but reminds him that the Jewish people have not been fully absolved of their sin and that punishment is yet to follow. 
The ties to evil have not been severed, and we see the “pattern of Abraham” once again. 

Conclusion 

The parallels identified above between events that affected different people at different times reaffirm that these stories contain an important lesson, which, in turn, requires a detailed examination through the lens of the Kabbalah of Information. This examination will be attempted in the following chapters. To achieve this, themes must be addressed in relation to the creation of information, the information space, the role of different informational worlds in Creation, the concept of the soul and its roots, the concept of evil. 

I will also attempt to explain the idea of the concealment of God in the informational space. I will attempt to answer the question why the roots of the souls of the great evildoers come from a very high level. I will analyze the dynamics of the character of the Patriarchs with an emphasis on their interaction with evil and evildoers. The commandment of the Red Heifer also will be discussed. 
Furthermore, subsequent chapters will provide an explanation for one highly important fact: the similarity between the command not to look back on Sodom, given by the Lord to Lot and his family, and the command not to leave the house until the morning after the Passover sacrifice, given by Moses to the Jewish people. 
(To be continued)