Words matter. As we dedicate the month of November to Clean Speech, we are focused on the words we say and the effect they have on both ourselves and others.

We have all have disagreements. How do they end? Do they disappear or do they get worse? It likely depends on what was said and how it was said. The words we choose to say or not say, have a major impact on whether the disagreement will escalate or diffuse.

In this week’s Torah reading Lech Lecha, the Torah records a dispute between the shepherds of Lot and the shepherds of Avraham.

The verse says, “And also with Lot who accompanied Avraham there were flock and cattle and tents” [Bereishis 13:5]. Rashi explains that through his association with Avraham, Lot was also blessed with great wealth. The Torah continues “And the land was not able to bear them that they might dwell together; for their substance was great so that they could not dwell together.” [13:6]

Rabbi Yissochor Frand points out that this last verse contains a glaring redundancy. The fact that the land was not big enough for both of them is mentioned both at the start and at the end of the verse. What is the repetition teaching us? Rabbi Frand quotes the commentary Shemen HaTov, who provides us with a very true insight:

There was a two-stage development here. First because of the abundance of cattle each owned, they got into a dispute regarding grazing rights. As a result of this dispute “they were unable to live together”. This is the nature of arguments. There may be valid and understandable reasons for the original dispute. But once people begin to argue, the reason why they started arguing might almost become immaterial. They will eventually get to the point where each party cannot stand to be in the presence of the other.

This is exactly what the verse is telling us. It started out as a fight over grazing rights. Ostensibly, the fight began because there was not enough room. But once they began to argue over grazing rights, the argument escalated. Things got out of hand. The parties got to a point where it did not matter anymore why they started arguing. Simply, “they could not dwell together” anymore!

Rashi explains that the original argument was based on the fact that Lot’s shepherds were grazing in other people’s lands. Avraham’s shepherds rebuked them and said that is stealing. Lot’s shepherds claimed it was okay because Hashem had promised the land to Avraham and he has no children so Lot will inherit. This dispute led to them not being able to live together.  Often when we try to correct someone else’s behaviour we make things worse by the words we use or the tone we use when trying to correct them. Perhaps Avraham’s shepherds did not use the best choice of words in their rebuke. And Lot’s shepherds were intransigent and defended their actions. Perhaps if the conversation had gone differently, they could have resolved the dispute in a way that allowed them to get along.

According to either approach it would seem that their inability to live together could have been resolved if the initial disagreement had been handled better.

The next time we disagree with someone let’s try and be cognizant of the words we use in stating our point of view. We can agree to disagree, but we cannot agree to allow our words to alienate our family and friends.

Good Shabbos,

Rabbi Shaps