בראשית, פרק י״ח, פסוק כ״א

Before sealing the fate of Sodom, God declares His intention to examine the city's wickedness up close. Although everything is fully known to Him, the use of human concepts like investigating and seeing serves a profound purpose. The primary approach among commentators is that this conveys a vital moral lesson to earthly judges: capital cases must never be decided based on rumors alone. Instead, a judge must thoroughly investigate and establish the facts firsthand. Furthermore, the idea of God descending represents a deep dive into the underlying thoughts and actions of the people of Sodom [רש"י, ספורנו, גור אריה, מזרחי]. Others view this descent as a transition from His attribute of mercy to His attribute of strict justice [הטור הארוך, רבנו בחיי, אלשיך].

By stepping down into the human realm, God chose to judge the inhabitants of Sodom not against perfect, heavenly standards, but in comparison to ordinary people [אור החיים]. This divine investigation involved weighing the specific motives, timing, and circumstances that led to their sins—a nuanced assessment that only God can perform [מלבי"ם]. Additionally, this close examination served as a final opportunity for the city. By sending angels disguised as vulnerable guests, God tested whether the people would persist in their rebellion and act with their trademark cruelty in real-time [אור החיים, ביאור יש"ר, קונטרס חיבה יתירה].

The outcry that prompted this divine response is described in singular, feminine terms. Commentators explain that this refers to the collective cry of the entire state, which served as the mother city for the surrounding region [רש"י, רד"ק, ביאור יש"ר, חזקוני]. Alongside this, many commentators cite a tradition that highlights the cry of one specific young woman. She was brutally executed by the people of Sodom simply because she dared to give food to a poor person. It was her agonizing cry that ultimately tipped the scales of justice and reached the Divine Throne [רש"י, רד"ק, רבנו בחיי, הדר זקנים].

Regarding the potential outcome of this investigation, two main perspectives emerge. One approach understands God's declaration as a strict condition: if the people's actions truly match the horrific cry that reached heaven, He will bring about their total and absolute destruction [רשב"ם, רש"י, רד"ק, שד"ל, חזקוני]. The second approach suggests that God was checking the scope of their guilt, specifically looking to see if absolutely everyone participated in the corruption, without a single person willing to protest the evil [ספורנו, הטור הארוך, הכתב והקבלה].

If it turned out that not everyone had sinned, or if they had ceased their rebellion, God declared that He would know how to respond. Some commentators interpret this response as a shift in punishment, meaning God would know how to discipline them with suffering rather than wiping them out completely [רש"י, הכתב והקבלה, ברטנורא]. Conversely, others understand this as an expression of mercy, forgiveness, and salvation [אבן עזרא, חזקוני, רלב"ג]. Ultimately, God intentionally left the conclusion of His statement vague and open-ended. This ambiguity was a deliberate signal to Abraham that the final decree had not yet been sealed, providing him with the opening he needed to pray and advocate on behalf of Sodom [רד"ק, שד"ל, ביאור יש"ר, נחלת יעקב].