Parshat Noach

פרשת נח

בראשית  ו:ט

אלה תולדת נח נח איש צדיק תמים היה בדרתיו את האלקים התהלך נח.

Although Noah has already been introduced to us at the end of Parshat Breishit, he is reintroduced in this Parshah. The story of Noah is a “book” of its own. It continues the story of Creation, but it is also its own story, with its own character and characteristics. The change of focus from the evil generation of the era to the lone righteous and complete individual on earth is not merely a change from the macrocosm to the microcosm. It is a change from a focus on the evil past to a potentially good future. The picking out of Noah from the rest of human “flesh” to survive the Deluge and recreate humankind is a Divine act that insists on choosing the good as being ultimately significant, no matter how much evil surrounds it.

This good person has two qualities.

1. His life has been an essentially righteous and wholesome life.
2. His continuing activity is advanced by an effort to keep pace with God, or the way God would want him to live.

In other words, he is good, and he is trying to continue being good. This is in contrast with the generation, described 4 verses earlier, that was both evil, and trying to think how to do even more evil. Noah is described as living in more than one generation. Simply understood, he lived in two: the generation before the flood, and the generation after. More on that later on.

Our commentaries argue as to whether the Hebrew word ” תולדות” should be translated as “progeny” listed in the next verse, as in Genesis 5:1. or “events”, which would refer to all the stories related to Noah. There is a common denominator to these 2 translations. The story of Noah is not essentially about Noah himself. It is a story of the origin of the new world that is being brought about through his survival. This individual becomes the ancestral totality of the human future, and all that happens to them. The flood, the ark, the protection of animal life, the worship following survival, the covenant of the rainbow, the drunkardness, the proliferation of Noah’s descendants, and the Tower of Babel, are all central to the foundation of humanity that Noah fathers. It is not about him. It is about us.

בראשית ו:י

ויולד נח שלשה בנים, את שם את חם ואת יפת.

This verse repeats information already found in Genesis 5:32, and on the face of it adds nothing. We are obligated to understand the cause and meaning of this repetition. First of all, the context of mentioning Noah’s sons is completely different in 5:32 than in our verse.In 5:32 we are in the midst of a chapter relating the names of offspring in a chain of descendents beginning with Adam, ending with Noah’s sons. In that chapter they are mentioned as part of the continuing generations of mankind, seeming to be never ending.

In our verse their names appear after the decree of the destruction of mankind (6:7). Their current mention is in context of being part of the surviving family. This may be the significance of the mention of there being 3 sons in this verse, not pointed out in 5:32. In 5:32 their number is not significant. They are part of the multitude of people continuing humankind. But in our verse, their number, though obvious without mention, is significant. Three. That is it. Man will be wiped off the face of the earth, with the exception of Noah’s family. These three will be responsible for the re-population of mankind on earth. Their unique traits and qualities may affect the future of Man for all time.

בראשית ו:יא

ותשחת הארץ לפני האלקים, ותמלא הארץ חמס.

This verse provides God’s perspective on the upcoming flood. The flood is not that which destroys the land. The land is already destroyed. From God’s perspective it is the violence and corruption of Man that is destroying the land. Before God, the elements do not destroy. Man’s immorality is the destructive force that makes the land a desolate place. The Flood is merely a physical enactment of what Man has already wrought with  his corruption.

בראשית ו:יב

וירא אלקים את הארץ, והנה נשחתה, כי השחית כל בשר את דרכו על הארץ.

Just as in Creation God views what He had just created and evaluates it, so here God views what Man has wrought, and comes to conclusions regarding its status, and what caused this result.

The world has been destroyed. The ever increasing population of people, animals, birds, fish, trees, and grass, the developing agriculture, the jungles and their ecosystems, the cities that continue to grow larger and larger all notwithstanding, the world is destroyed because all men have destroyed their moral way on the land.

Man is referred to in this verse as “flesh”. The course of his actions has removed him from the unique distinction of being “Man”. Although his intelligence towers over that of the most intelligent beast, Man’s uniqueness has no moral implication. He acts like an animal, a genius of an animal. Hence he is called “flesh,” avoiding his human title.

בראשית ו:יג

ויאמר אלקים לנח: קץ כל בשר בא לפני, כי מלאה הארץ חמס מפניהם, והנני משחיתם את הארץ.

Noah is a prophet. This is the first of 6 messages Noah receives from God. This is their content:

1. The command to build the ark
2. The command to enter the ark
3. The command to leave the ark.
4. The blessing Noah receives after he leaves the ark.
5. The Covenant God makes with Noah not to destroy the world again
6. The presentation of the sign of the Covenant, the Rainbow.

These prophecies can be simply divided into 2 categories.

1. The 3 commandments ensuring Noah’s survival;
2. The commitments towards the future of the world.

As opposed to Adam, Eve, and Cain, who all responded to God and conversed with Him, Noah receives God’s message, fulfills the commandments, receives the blessing and the Covenant as well, but never utters a word in response to God. And although Noah does bring sacrifices, we do not find Noah praying to God. Noah’s relationship with God  is powerful, but one sided. God commands and informs. Noah obeys and receives.

The word קץ has 3 meanings:

1. End
2. Disgust
3. Cut off

All 3 meanings are meant here. God is disgusted with humanity. Therefore He is ending its existence and cutting it off from the world.

The final words  והנני משחיתם את הארץ confuses us as to whether the object of the destruction is the flesh, or the land, or both. The text seems to intentionally cause this confusion. Only Man can sin, and therefore in theory only he should be punished. But Creation was a build up to Man, and Man’s sinning makes all of Creation pointless. The violence of Man is responsible for the rejection of all existence as being worthless. Therefore, God will destroy all of Creation in bringing down Man.

בראשית ו:יד

עשה לך תבת עצי גפר, קנים תעשה את התבה, וכפרת אותה מבית ומחוץ בכפר.

In the next three verses God commands the building of the ark and its details.

God does not miraculously save Noah and his family from the Flood. He demands that Noah save himself, and the rest of animal life as well. God tells Noah how to build a safe ark, but He will not do it for Noah. This final act of righteousness on Noah’s part, obeying God in building the ark and eventually entering it, is crucial for Mankind being saved.

This is for 2 reasons:

1. By building the ark, Noah is mentally separating himself from the rest of human society. He may go through the motions of being one of them, but in his mind he already knows he and his family and a few animals are all that will remain in the not too distant future. The decision to obey God and separate is the beginning of the new era as he experiences it.
2. By building the ark, Noah has affirmed his desire to survive. It is not unlikely that Noah was not alone in apprehending the decadence of all around him. But society at large was drugged with its evil ,and addicted to it. At least some, and perhaps many, understood that a world full of violence could not continue. They may have seen the end, and acquiesced to it. Noah was being given the opportunity to rise above it, and survive the moral destruction all around him. By obeying God he chooses to do so.

בראשית ו:טו

וזה אשר תעשה אותה: שלש מאות אמה ארך התבה, חמישים אמה רחבה, ושלשים אמה קומתה.

This verse invites a discussion as to whether the Flood story is an historical event or an allegory. The size of the ark is insufficient to contain male and female of all the species on the planet. This was already clear to the Ramban. Ramban resolves this by assuming that the ark contained all the species miraculously. But there is no  hint to any miracle of this sort in the story. While this fits into a general thesis of Ramban that many miracles in the Bible are not explicit but are rather implied, there are also other difficulties with taking the Flood story literally. A flood of this planetary dimension should have left a geological record of its having taken place. There is no geological indication to this effect. Furthermore, there is not sufficient water on planet Earth and its atmosphere to cover the whole planet with water 15 cubits above the highest mountain, as described later on in the story. While this could be resolved by resorting to another “miraculous event” interpretation, the “miracles” are mounting, and none of these miracles are pointed out in the verse.

Rav Gedalya Nadel, student of the Hazon Ish, concluded for his own reasons that the Flood was only in Mesopotamia. But to the limits of the knowledge of this author, there is no geological record of a Mesopotamian flood either.  The matter is confounded further by Rav Yochanan’s statement in Masechet Zevachim, quoted by Ramban,  that the Flood waters did not extend to the land of Israel.While that need not be taken literally, it might leave us completely befuddled as to what is and is not literal in this story, between Torah verse and Medrash.

This might leave us with no choice but to conclude the story is not a real event. While this approach is possible, it does not seem likely. Here are two reasons:

1. There are traditions of “all land” Flood stories in so many of the cultures of the world that it may be more likely that they are variations on an actual historical event than to dismiss them all to vivid imagination. One of them, the Gilgamesh epic, engraved on the mountain side near where the ark landed, seems to be related to the Torah’s description of Noah and the Flood. That there are competing versions of the Flood, especially between idolatrous presentations and our Divinely given Torah, indicates something really happened, and the “competition” is out to lay religious claim to the appropriate  interpretation of a real event.
2. A careful reading of the description of the rising water of the Flood, and its descent, resulting finally in the complete drying of the land, gives one a powerful sense of a real life account of something that has taken place, that the writer is describing experientially.

The most realistic suggestion to resolve this issue is that the story describes the flooding of the empty Black Sea basin in prehistoric times. For those who were living in the empty Black Sea basin prior to the Flood, that area could easily be so large as to be perceived as the whole of the world. It would be this historical event the Torah is describing. It would also allow us to take literally Rav Yochanan’s statement that the Flood did not reach the land of Israel. Following this approach, the size of the ark described in the Torah could well be large enough to take in the domestic and wild life men living in that place and time were familiar with. This would also explain why the ark rested on the Taurus mountains at the end of the Flood, since the Flood took place right there by the Black Sea.

בראשית ו:ט”ז

צהר תעשה לתבה, ואל אמה תכלנה מלמעלה, ופתח התבה בצדה תשים, תחתיים שניים ושלישים תעשה.

This third verse describing the ark to be built tells its final details:

1. It should have a window.
2. The top should lead to an arkh finishing with one cubit’s horizontal length.
3. The entrance should be on the side.
4. It should be have 3 levels of rooms.

How the top of the ark should finish is essential for its basic structure. The same is true for the entrance, and the division into 3 floors. That the window is mentioned first before any of these points would not be expected, and calls for explanation.

The window is the one aspect of the ark that connects the ark to the outer world. The point of the ark is to be insulated from the Flood all around. It is meant to separate those inside from the havoc and destruction beyond. The window is the tangent spot of the ark to its surroundings. Through it Noah and his family saw the deluge take place, the rising of the water, its overtaking the animals, the people, the houses, everything. The window causes those inside to experientially realize what  is happening to those outside, and what they are being saved from. It changes the experience of the ark from being a different world to being a mere shelter from the destroyed existence just beyond. It results in those within, coming out with the experience of being a survivor.

בראשית ו:יז

ואני הנני מביא את המבול מים על הארץ לשחת כל בשר אשר בו רוח חיים מתחת השמים, כל אשר בארץ יגוע.

Noah is informed of the ominous Flood only after he was commanded to build the ark that would save him. Not a moment goes by with Noah wondering how he would survive the Flood. Noah’s psychological security is protected by God from the first moment. Before the Flood is announced even to Noah, himself, he becomes aware of the unique protection he has merited from God. He is a priori separated from the world he has grown up and developed in, to begin the world anew.

The term הנני is used here in the Torah for the first time. In the future usage it will usually be a human who submits himself before God, or before a superior person, regardless of the task imposed on him or its consequences.

Over here, it seems God is submitting Himself before Himself. God is caught between His love of His creation and His overwhelming disappointment with its moral debacle. God the Lover of the world submits to Himself, the Judge of the world, and has no choice but to accept His own judgment. The lock, stock, and barrel of His creation will be destroyed, and His love will focus completely on the re-establishment of Creation through the survivors of the ark.

Once again, Man is included with the animals in the collective term “flesh”, without any distinction.Even the term “death” is withheld from Man. “All in the land will expire.” Man, having abandoned his human uniqueness through his immoral actions, will “expire” in the Flood like an animal.

בראשית ו:יח

 והקמתי את בריתי אתך, ובאת אל התבה, אתה, ובניך, ואשתך,  ונשי בניך אתך

God commits to a covenant with Noah. This first stage of the Covenant is Survival. As of now it refers to survival of the Flood. Eventually this covenant will be extended and formalized to include survival beyond the Flood as well, for the duration of the world as we know it.

This is the first covenant mentioned in the Torah. Adam never received a covenant with God. The need for the covenant at this point is to separate Noah, his family, and the animals of the ark from the rest of the world, which will be destroyed. God’s covenant with Noah is one sided, and as a result, unconditional. God commits to save Noah and all of the ark. Noah commits nothing. Thus, it is impossible for Noah to abrogate the covenant. This fits the pattern of Noah never speaking to God. But it is much more striking, since covenants are almost always mutually committing. But this covenant only obligates God.

It should already be mentioned that God’s covenant with Abraham is mutually binding. and obligating.This is the first indication of the difference in God’s relationship with Abraham as opposed to His  relationship with Noah. His selection is exclusive from those to be destroyed, but he is to father all of humanity without exclusion. Abraham is chosen to father the chosen nation within humanity

The command to enter the ark includes both the men and the women, but makes clear that the men are separate from the women. The year long Flood is not a time for procreation, given the already cramped circumstances of the ark. Nor is it a time for the pleasure of sexuality. The world is being destroyed. Even those who are saved must be cognizant of the ultimate tragedy of the event.

בראשית ו:יט

ומכל החי, מכל בשר, שנים מכל תביא אל התבה להחיות אתך, זכר ונקבה יהיו.

The ark will save not only humanity, but animal life as well. Noah is here charged with making sure the animal world is brought into the ark. Man thereby becomes a partner with God in saving animal life from the Flood. This will result in a new relationship between Man and Animal, to be explained in detail by God after the Flood will be over.

בראשית ו:כ

מהעוף למינהו ומן הבהמה למינה, מכל רמש האדמה למינהו, שנים מכל יבאו אליך להחיות

In this verse Noah is commanded to make sure to include each and every species. It is not just that God wants the new world to have animals . He wants the new world to have every animal, every species, that His original creation contained. The ark must transmit the world of the living as a complete whole into the coming era, leaving out no living being. 

בראשית ו:כא

ואתה קח לך מכל מאכל אשר יאכל ואספת אליך והיה לך ולהם לאכלה.

Noah is given the responsibility for collecting food for the duration of the Flood both for the people and the animals. The implication is he is not only responsible for getting the animals on board, but for their maintenance throughout the Flood as well. It is not sufficient that Noah provides a sufficient quantity of food for the duration of the flood. He must bring all the different kinds of food available. Variety of food is necessary for the health and psychological well being of all on the ark.  The quality of life on the ark will be maintained to the greatest extent possible.

בראשית ו:כב

ויעש נח ככל אשר צוה אתו אלקים, כן עשה.

 

This verse tells us the nature of Noah’s relationship with God. It is a relationship of obedience. God commands, and Noah obeys. It should be noted and emphasized that Noah could have been motivated to do as God had requested for his own good, and the good of his family. The alternative was to be destroyed like everything else. The verse clarifies that his motivation was not for his own welfare, but rather as an act of religious obedience. This justifies God’s choice of Noah to be the father of future humanity. Furthermore, it creates a base of a future relationship with mankind. Noah gives God hope.

By being informed that Noah did as God commanded him, we should conclude that this obedience resulted in the complete building of the ark. No hint is given as to whether this took a month, a year, or many years. Whatever it took, it was done. The ark is complete, all 3 stories, all the rooms for all its passengers, all the food necessary to feed all aboard for a full solar year. This prepares us for the next verse. 

בראשית ז:א

ויאמר ה’ לנח: בא אתה וכל ביתך אל התבה, כי אתך ראיתי צדיק לפני בדור הזה.

The time to enter has arrived. God informs Noah that he has been chosen to survive  for his righteousness before God in this generation worthy of mass destruction. It seems it was specifically Noah whose righteousness stood out. No mention is made of the rest of his household’s virtue. His wife, sons, and daughters-in-law follow his lead in the way of life, and are saved with him as part of his household.

God, in saving Noah and his household, relies on Noah to educate the next generation. That generation will literally build the world anew. That education begins with Noah’s personal example. God sees Noah not only personally worthy of survival, but as capable of showing the right way to the 3 families of his children. His handling their moral education is no less vital than his personal morality up to this point.

It is even possible that the words in the verse “in this generation” refer not to the generation that will be destroyed in the Flood, but rather the generation that is being saved in the ark. Noah is being called “righteous before me in this generation” not in being chosen to be the lone survivor in a generation when all others will perish, but rather to be the righteous model for this new generation that is surviving with him in the ark. And modeling may not be sufficient. His righteousness will demand he relate to them, develop them, educate them, lead, and guide them, in order to develop the new society that God awaits. Following this interpretation, the verse is not merely God telling Noah what we were informed at the beginning of the portion. He is explaining to Noah that his righteous persona must exude to the generation of the ark.

Noah is not called “tamim”, whole, in this verse. Wholeness is the sum and result of his 600 years up to this point. It is not a personality trait he can take with him to the post Flood reality. It is Noah’s righteousness alone that will hopefully help him model and educate the coming world to become a whole society as righteous as Noah.

For the first time in the Noah- Flood story, God is referred to in this verse not by אלקים, but rather by His four letter name. The focus on saving Noah and his entourage in these verses results in God being referred to by His personal name, rather than His title from Creation.

בראשית ז:ב

מכל הבהמה הטהורה תקח לך שבעה שבעה איש ואשתו, ומן הבהמה אשר לא טהרה הוא, שנים איש ואשתו.

This verse strikingly adds to the command Noah originally received from God. In 6:19 God said to bring two animals of each species into the ark, one male and one female, apparently to allow for reproduction of the species. Here God distinguishes between the  “tahor”, the pure animals, who should number seven pairs of males and females, as opposed to those who are not, who should number two, one pair of  male and female.

Let us try to define “tahor”. The simple understanding would come from Leviticus chapter 11, where we are told the physical properties of the kosher animals, referred to as “tahor”. Similarly, we are given there the list of birds that are not kosher, leaving all other birds to be kosher, that is, “tahor”.

Rabbi Menachem haMeiri, in his commentary to the Talmud (Pesachim), suggests that the word “tahor” in this verse refers to the sexual morality of these animals, as animals that were careful to mate only with its own species.  The new post Flood world must have all the species, regardless of their purity or lack thereof. All are God’s creatures, all must be preserved. In fact, in the context of saving all species from the coming Flood, no species is called “tamei”, defiled. The species are either tahor, or not tahor. The negative appellation is not used. Living beings are referred to by different levels of positive description.

But however we understand purity in this context, the new world will have a head start with a greater number of “tahor” species, rather than the bare minimum for survival. The world needs “taharah”. Even seven times more. The Torah here refers to the relationship between the male and female animals as “man and his wife” rather than “male and female”. For the animals that were only one male and one female, the relationship between these two must have been very different than when there were many options, prior to the Flood. These animals now had only each other. The uniqueness of their relationship is described in human terms, as if they were husband and wife.

Apparently, even the other species that had seven pairs of male and female were not intended to be promiscuous. They were to pare off into seven pairs, and live as human husband and wife would be expected to. The family morality imposed even on the animals of the ark brings a completely different existence to the survivors of the Flood. Whereas the men about to be destroyed in the Flood are described as forcing themselves upon women against their will, the new world will begin with even the animal world  respecting conjugal relations between male and female. The new world has animals on a higher moral level than the humans of the world to be destroyed.

 בראשית ז:ג

גם מעוף השמים שבעה שבעה זכר ונקבה, לחיות זרע על פני כל הארץ.

While the animal survivors were one pair of non-“tahor” animals and seven of the “tahor”, the birds of the heavens all survived in groups of seven male and seven female, without distinction. The emphasis on birds as being “of the heaven” seems to be the reason for this difference. Animals usually live in a specific area of Earth, and their existence is relevant only to a local ecosystem. Birds traverse the planet, many traveling from North to South and back over the course of a year. They are part of the planetary wide ecosystem. They impact “bringing living seed throughout the face of the land” as a result of their wide travel. They must be more numerous in order to effectively have this impact. Furthermore, they travel in group formation, which must require a minimum amount in order to be effective. Fourteen is a sufficient number for them to effectively survive in their group travel.

בראשית ז:ד

כי לימים עוד שבעה אנכי ממטיר על הארץ ארבעים יום וארבעים לילה, ומחיתי את כל היקום אשר עשיתי, מעל פני האדמה.

One can hear God’s “clock” ticking in this verse. There are only seven days left until the Flood will begin. Forty days later the world God had made will be destroyed. One can even detect apprehension in God’s voice regarding what is about to happen. There is regret even before it happens, but not enough regret to change the plans. The dye is cast.  Noah and the animals will enter the ark seven days before the Flood will begin. These are the last seven days of this first, failed version of human society. They are the reflection of the first seven days, the days of Creation. It could have been otherwise. Creation had such promise, such potential. This is the way it is ending.

But the presence of the living that survive the Flood in the ark during these seven days is their separation from those to be destroyed. Their existence there represents their creation anew even as the world to be destroyed is breathing its last gasps of air.  Forty days appears in the Torah regarding the Flood, and Moses’ stay on Mount Sinai to receive the Torah. These are historic changes that result in the world being completely different. God himself is the one to wipe away the world he created.

 בראשית ז:ה

ויעש נח ככל אשר צוהו ה’.

Noah is obedient to God’s commandment in the same way, regardless of whether God is preparing him for the Flood long in advance with detailed instruction, or whether God is commanding the severance from the world of his 600 years by commanding his entrance to the ark. There is no discussion, no delay, no argument, no passive -aggressive response. Obedience. Obedience to God  (Elohim) in His negative judgment of the world. Obedience to God (Hashem) in His compassion for Noah and the few people and animals to be saved with him.

בראשית ז:ו

ונח בן שש מאות שנה, והמבול היה מים על הארץ.

Noah’s age at the time of the beginning of the Flood might be mentioned in order to date it.

It is also possible that we are meant to understand the significance of the Flood within the personal life of Noah. Noah is uniquely righteous in this violent generation. But it is his world, and the only one he knows. He has lived in it for 600 years. If the average lifespan at the time of the Flood was 900 years, Noah by standards of his time was about to enter the third portion of his life, with most of his years behind him. Nothing much has changed since he was born, and there was not much reason to think much would change in the next 300 years.

The Flood changes all that.

When the Flood will end, the remainder of Noah’s life will have to be dedicated to renewing the world. He must have already understood this upon entering the ark. He will have the whole world in his hands. He has the duration of the flood to think about what he will do with it.

בראשית ז:ז

ויבא נח ובניו ואשתו ונשי בניו אתו אל התבה, מפני מי המבול.

The Torah doubly informs us of Noah and his family’s entry to the ark. We are told once that Noah does as God commands him. We are also told, in this verse, that he and his family enter the ark due to the Flood waters. Both obedience and practicality guide Noah’s actions. Noah does as God tells him to do. Noah also has perfect faith in God’s words that there will be a Flood. Therefore, he also enters the ark to survive the deluge. There is no contradiction in having this double motivation. Man may not always understand the reason behind God’s commandments. But when the reason is clear, we fulfill God’s command both out of the obligation to fulfill God’s word, and in order to fulfill the rationale behind the commandment.

בראשית ז:ח

מן הבהמה הטהורה, ומן הבהמה אשר איננה טהרה, ומן העוף , וכל אשר רמש על האדמה.

The verse paints us a picture. We can see four different groups gathering to enter the ark. The “tahor” animals, the “non-tahor” animals, the birds, and all those who trod the land. But not all. Only the select few. This becomes even clearer in the next verse, where the picture gets even more specific.

בראשית ז:ט

שנים שנים באו אל נח אל התבה, זכר ונקבה, כאשר צוה אלקים את נח.

Only one set of male and females of each species comes to Noah. Rashi points out that this is a minimum, since  seven pairs came from the tahor animals. But the verse can be understood as is. There is no saving of individual animals or birds. Every male is accompanied by a female, and every female by a male. It is the species that is being protected, not the individual. Each male and female has a mate for reproduction. Notice that there are no multiple males for females or vice versa. Everyone is being paired off. It also seems there are no collective mates, even for the tahor animals. Each male has a specific female, and each female a specific male. Conjugal relations are the norm even for animals at this stage.

The phrase “as God commanded Noah” is not easily understood. It seems the animals were the ones who are obeying God’s command to come to Noah to enter the ark, not Noah. Ramban resolves this by explaining that one pair came by themselves, and for the tahor animals Noah went out to collect them to have seven pairs. But this detail seems to be missing from the scriptural picture being painted.

In fact, there seems to be a slight inconsistency between the command to Noah and description of its fulfillment. It is Noah who is commanded to collect seven pairs from the tahor species and one pair from the other species. But in the fulfillment, the verse describes the species all coming on their own. It is probably to resolve this that brings Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook in his “Lights of Holiness” to describe Noah as having a kind of magnetic pull on the animals who come to enter the ark. They are drawn to Noah, “as a branch is drawn to its root.” The animals arrive on their own, drawn to Noah. It is Noah’s responsibility to place them comfortably in the ark, ready for travel when the moment arrives.

בראשית ז:י

ויהי לשבעת הימים, ומי המבול היו על הארץ.      

The set of seven days passes, and the Flood waters come upon the land. It has begun. Noah, his family, and the animals to be saved are all tucked away in the ark.

The waters are immediately referred to as Flood waters. It is not clear whether there was something “Floody” about them right from the beginning, or whether they seemed like regular rain, but the forty days of heavy rain became a Flood.

בראשית ז:יא

בשנת שש מאות שנה לחיי נח בחדש השני בשבעה עשר יום לחדש ביום הזה נבקעו כל מעינות תהום רבה וארבת השמים נפתחו.

In this verse the mention of Noah being 600 years old seems to be for dating the Flood. The date is not merely the year of Noah’s life, but even the month and day of the month. The date has future Halachic significance as the date when prayer for rain begins if it has not yet rained that season (Mishnah Taanit 1:4). The verse describes a “top” and “bottom” gushing forth of water. The springs connected to the great Deep burst open. The windows of heaven open with rain. Under normal circumstances this burst of water on this date would be a blessing. It was probably appreciated as such at the beginning. Meanwhile, Noah and his entourage understand this is the beginning of the end. We are not informed whether Noah’s neighbors viewed Noah’s ark and its animals as insanity, a curiosity,a freak of nature, or whatever else one could imagine.

 בראשית ז:י”ב

ויהי הגשם על הארץ ארבעים יום וארבעים לילה. 

In this verse we confront the fragility of human existence. The Flood is not presented as a miraculous event. All that is necessary to wipe out humanity is for it to rain consecutively for 40 days and nights, and the “popping” open of the underground springs. The combination of those two is more water than humanity can handle. It is the continuity of the rainfall that does us in.

Nature is a system of checks and balances. The maintenance of the system’s equation is what makes life and life on land possible. A “minor” imbalance , such as 40 days of rain, and we are deeply in trouble.

It is possible this imbalance should be compared with the imbalance created in human society by violence in order to steal and the forced taking of women by powerful men. These acts are not only morally and legally wrong. They undermine the stability of society so that “natural” society cannot continue to prosper, or even exist. The imbalance created in society when:

1. People are not able to hold onto their legitimate property, and
2. People are not able to maintain the exclusivity of their conjugal relationships, results in social chaos. It is not necessary to do more than that. Those 2 imbalances will completely overhaul society.

God destroys the physical world by overdosing the world with rain and springs, just as Man destroyed society by trampling the rights of property and marriage. 

 בראשית ז:יג

בעצם היום הזה בא נח, ושם וחם ויפת בני נח, ואשת נח, ושלשת נשי בניו, אתם אל התבה.

The emphasis “on that very day” indicates this event is a historical change in the history of the world. Only 2 other days are given this term and description in the Torah; The day of the Exodus from Egypt, and the day of Moses death. The antediluvian period of world history has come to an end. The world is beginning anew. The cradle of this new civilization will not be Eden. Nor will its founders be a lone man and a woman. The cradle will be an ark. Its people will be a family of 8, two parents, their 3 sons, and 3 daughters in law.

This cradle is not one in which you leisurely roam around and eat the luscious fruit freely growing on limitless trees.  The food of the ark was stocked by Noah, not by God. The supply was limited, and measured to last a year. The animals of Eden were ruled by Adam, but he was not responsible for their welfare. The animals of the ark will eat what Noah prepared for them before the flood, and he will be responsible for its distribution. In short, there is nothing Edenic about the ark. On the contrary, this cradle of civilization is chocked full of human responsibility that must be maintained in order that Noah, his family, and the animals come out of this alive and well.

We are not given any information about the personal relations between the 8 people on the ark during the flood. Did the brothers get along? Did the sisters in law get along? Did the mother in law get along with her daughters in law? Did Noah? One suspects there was a powerful awareness that there was no room for normal family disputes. The close quarters, the sense of being a survivor, and  the responsibility  to care for an untold number of animals, prevented fighting, even arguing, from becoming a recreation.

בראשית ז:יד

המה וכל החיה למינה וכל הבהמה למינה וכל הרמש הרמש על הארץ למינהו, וכל העוף למינהו, כל צפור כל כנף.

Already in this verse the Torah is painting a picture of what is happening. It is known from earlier verses that all living things on land and all birds will be brought into the ark to survive.  In this verse we receive a picture description of the boarding of the ark. The humans are mentioned first in 7:13. In this verse the boarding of the animals is described. The animals are broadly divided into wild animals, domestic animals, creatures that trod the earth that do not fit into the 2 earlier categories, and birds of every species and each type of wing.

The purpose of the vivid description is to have the Torah reader experience life in the ark. It begins with the boarding process. The ark is a jungle of life without vegetation. Its close quarters are stifling beyond imagination. The first word in the verse repeats that the people mentioned in the previous verse are there as well. This results in a dual presentation of people in the ark. On the one hand, they are a category unto their own, mentioned alone in Genesis 7:13. On the other hand, they are part and parcel of the zoo onboard the ark, mentioned together with all the other living beings in this verse.

Emphasis is made in earlier verse that the generation of the flood are referred to as flesh, as if there were not much difference between them and the animals. By Noah and his family referred to without the animals and with them as well, it is clear that this family will restore the dual nature of Man being both at the head of the animal kingdom, and beyond them as well, as explained in the creation chapters of the Torah.

בראשית ז:טו

ויבאו אל נח אל התבה, שנים שנים מכל הבשר, אשר בו רוח חיים.

The verse encourages us to “view” the animals marching two by two into the ark. The implication of the verse is that the animals are going first of all to Noah, and also to the ark. They are attracted to Noah as the lone human worthy of leading them in the precarious circumstance they are already sensing. He is the image of God in this world that gives higher meaning to all of their existence. Following Noah, they are willing to enter the cramped quarters of the ark, despite their entrapment.

בראשית ז:טז

והבאים, זכר ונקבה מכל בשר באו, כאשר צוה אתו אלקים, ויסגר ה’ בעדו.

It has already been mentioned in 7:9 that the two of each species that arrived were male and female. The reiteration is to make this point once again as the doors of the ark close. Before the arrival was being described. In this verse they are inside. The preservation of each species is provided for by having male and female of all flesh inside the ark. This must have been checked by Noah, thereby fulfilling God’s commandment that so should it be. The ark is closed by God himself, with Noah on the inside of the closure. All inside are protected from what is about to happen.   The preservation of all life has been assured. God is free to destroy the world outside the ark.

 בראשית ז:יז

ויהי המבול ארבעים יום על הארץ, וירבו המים וישאו את התבה, ותרם מעל הארץ.

The Torah is now giving us an extremely detailed description of the Flood, its waters, and the effect they have on the ark. The overall duration is going to be 40 days. But the stages of impact are very gradual. The waters slowly become quantitatively great. At some point the waters undermine the traction connecting the ark to the ground, and the ark starts moving. Eventually, the water raises the ark off the ground. Considering the weight of the ark, whose wood alone was very heavy, and was further weighed down by the animals and their food, it must have taken a tremendous amount of water to move the ark. But eventually,  the ark was lifted.

 

בראשית ז:יח

ויגברו המים, וירבו מאד על הארץ, ותלך התבה על פני המים.

 

Picture the water coming down even stronger, resulting in the water quantity even greater, and increasing at a faster pace. The ark starts traveling around in the ferocity of the water rise.

 

בראשית ז:יט

והמים גברו מאד מאד על הארץ, ויכסו כל ההרים הגבהים אשר תחת כל השמים.

 

Each verse indicates a further increase in the Flood water, with a result. In this verse, the result is the covering of all the high mountains.

 

בראשית ז:כ

חמש עשרה אמה מלמעלה גברו המים, ויכסן ההרים.

 

The picture now shows not only that the water is above the mountain, but even 15 cubits above the highest mountain. 15 cubits is more than 3 times the height of an average person. Even the highest mountain is deeply submerged from the perspective of human height. This verse ends the description of the intensity and quantity of the flood itself. The next 3 verses describe the results of this deluge.

 

 

בראשית ז:כא

ויגוע כל בשר הרמש על הארץ, בעוף ובבהמה ובחיה, ובכל השרץ השרץ על הארץ, וכל האדם.

 

The verb ויגוע is a technical term used in the Torah for clinical death. By and large it is accompanied by the verb וימת, a verb denoting death in a human, personal sense. Here the verb ויגוע is used alone. The death this verse describes is technical, and no more. It is the equivalent of the term “eliminated” as used by imaginary (or real) intelligence agencies in doing away with their human targets. The verse starts with the collective term “trodders on the land” without discriminating between the different types of living beings that are expiring. It then shares with us the details of 5 types of living beings included; birds, domestic animals, wild animals, all those that creep close to the earth, and men. The inclusion of men as merely an additional biological specimen is in line with men being referred to earlier in the portion as flesh. Man, who lived his life without morality as a highly intelligent beast, expires in the deluge the same as birds, domestic and wild animals, and creepers. The list here mentions him last, as if to say, “Man might have been in a category all to his own, however, the truth is there is no basis to distinguish him from all the other living creatures.” In fact, it is this animalistic behaviour on man’s part that is the cause of the deluge in the first place.

 

בראשית ז:כב

כל אשר רוח חיים באפיו מכל אשר בחרבה מתו.

 

This verse summarizes the previous verse. All land life is included in the term”who has the spirit of life in its nostril, and states unequivocally that they died, in the absolute past tense without the storytelling form of the verb.

 

בראשית ז:כג

וימח את בל היקום אשר על פני האדמה, מאדם עד בהמה עד רמש ועד עוף השמים, וימחו מן הארץ. ןושאר אך נח ואשר אתו בתבה.

 

Not only did all living things die. They were obliterated. The word “yekum” seems to mean anything that stands above ground level. Rashi emphasizes the verb “he obliterated” as being active and not passive. Who is the subject of that verb? In Hebrew, water is a plural term, and this verb is singular. The hidden subject seems to be God Himself. God obliterated all that stood on the face of the earth, leaving only Noah and all the living things with him in the ark. Noah can see all this going on from the window in the ark. He literally sees people’s and animals’ bodies floating by, possibly even people he knew. But the point comes where the human and animal forms are too obliterated to be recognized. The sense of being alone in the world with his arkmates overcomes Noah, as the signs of body recognition disappear. He is not only alone in being alive. He and those with him are alone to maintain human or animal form.

 

בראשית ז:כד

ויגברו המים על הארץ חמישים ומאת יום.

 

The simple reading of this verse is that after the 40 days of the flood rains the water remained at its height for 150 days, for a total of 190 days. It is also possible that the 40 days of flood rains are part of the 150 days. Either way, the water of the flood does not subside immediately after the flood. It remains extant on the surface for much longer than the days the water rained down. Furthermore, the term “And the waters were strong” implies that the waters did not merely sit there, but were tumultuously moving around, further wiping away any remnant of the previous world that might have still existed.

 

The persistence of the flood waters well after the rain had ended must have been difficult for Noah and his entourage. They may have wondered whether the water would ever subside. True, they were told to take food for one year, but they may have been nervous nonetheless.

 

בראשית ח:א

ויזכר אלקים את נח, ואת כל החיה ואת כל הבהמה אשר אתו בתבה, ויעבר אלקים רוח על הארץ, וישכו המים.

 

The need for God to “remember ” Noah indicates how separate his being saved is from the total destruction of humanity and the world. It was as if God’s focus on the destruction left no room for any survival, even Noah’s. Noah’s survival is a separate act of redemption, almost in conflict with the Flood. This verse is quoted in the Musaf prayer of Rosh Hashanah among the 10 verses of Remembrance. It is the first one quoted. It is introduced in the following way: “For the memory of all creatures come before you, and you remember the deeds of them all. And also Noah with love you remembered! And you recalled him for salvation and mercy, when you brought the waters of the Flood to destroy all flesh due to the evil of their deeds, thereby his being remembered came before you , Hashem our God, to multiply his seed like the dust of the planet,, and his descendants like the sand on the sea, as it says in Your Torah: And God remembered  Noah, and all the wild and domestic animals with  him in the ark, and God passed a wind on the land, and the waters calmed.”

 

The Prayer interprets the verse as saying that Noah is remembered with love for salvation. Therefore it is an important quotation to start the verses of Remembrance in the Musaf.  We are trying to “manipulate” God’s remembering us in judgment into remembering us for Salvation.

 

בראשית ח:ב

ויסכרו מעינות תהום, וארבת השמים, ויכלא הגשם מן השמים.

The reversal of the flooding process begins. The sources of water, both from the depths and from the heavens, are dammed. Not only will there be no more flood water; even natural rain ceases. The evaporation and sinking of the water into the land has begun.

 

 בראשית ח:ג

וישבו המים מעל הארץ הלוך ושוב. ויחסרו המים מקצה חמשים ומאת יום.

 

The reversal of the Flood does not take place miraculously, nor in any accelerated manner. The combined processes of water seeping into the earth and evaporation take place ever so slowly, though simultaneously. The waters appear to toss to and fro, but are actually diminishing.

It is not clear whether the 150 days mentioned in this verse are in addition to the 150 days mentioned at the end of chapter 7, or are a separate 150 days afterwards, at the end of which the waters noticeably started to diminish. While it is clear the Flood and the return to normal total a complete solar year of 365 days, the numbers of days for each stage in the process do not neatly add up to 365. The commentaries have different approaches to which numbers overlap, and why. If these 150 days are in addition to the first 150 days, the Torah describes a reverse process that exactly reflects the counterpoint to the maintained strength of the Flood.

 

 בראשית ח:ד

ותנח התבה בחדש השביעי בשבעה עשר יום לחדש, על הרי אררט.

 

The landing of the ark on the Taurus mountains opens up the likelihood that the flood was associated with the Black Sea, as described before. Should we assume 30 day months, the landing on the same day of the month, 17th, as the start of the Flood, supports the 150 days being inclusive from the beginning of the Flood until this point.

 

בראשית ח:ה

והמים היו הלוך וחסור, עד החדש העשירי. בעשירי באחד לחדש נראו ראשי ההרים.

 

The Torah continues to include us in the experience of those in the ark. The first visual experience of the fall of the water level is the view of the mountain tips peeking out from beneath the Flood waters. It must have been a very exciting moment.

 

בראשית ח:ו

ויהי מקץ ארבעים יום, ויפתח נח את חלון התבה אשר עשה.

 

Every act or event that indicates a step towards the end of the Flood and the return to the land is mentioned., and celebrated. Noah waits another 40 days from the day the mountain tips could be seen , until he risks opening the window. In theory, the window could have been opened from the time the Flood ceased. Its being opened at this point indicates the overcoming of a psychological block. Separating the internality of the ark from the external Flood is no longer necessary. The window opens, and air flows freely from the wide world, to the ark. Fresh air is experienced for the first time since the sealing of the ark many months ago.

 

בראשית ח:ז

וישלח את הערב. ויצא יצוא ושוב, עד יבשת המים מעל הארץ.

 

Noah’s decision to test the state of the land with a raven at first is not well understood, not explained. The Hebrew root of the word for raven means “mix”. The mixture of water and earth while the earth was still damp might be implied by the bird’s name. In any case, the raven does not get anywhere. What is striking is the lack of effort on the raven’s part to seek out a haven for itself. It seems to exit and re-enter the ark almost immediately. It is probably for this reason that Noah tries a different bird for his next fact finding mission.

 

בראשית ח:ח

וישלח את היונה מאתו לראות הקלו המים מעל פני האדמה

 

The sending of the dove in place of the raven is successful. This success may be attributed to the quality of the different birds, whether on a species level or their individual temperaments. But a careful reading of the verse indicates much more had changed than merely the species.

2 other differences are mentioned. First of all, the dove is sent from himself, that is, from Noah himself. There is a sense that the dove was made to understand that he was being sent by Noah personally. There is no indication that the raven was given this sense.

 

Second, the dove’s mission is mentioned. No mission is mentioned by the raven. It seems the dove was brought to understand what its mission was, that is, to investigate if the waters had lessened. The dove is both given a personal sense of being sent by Noah, and is informed of its mission. The message is clear. 2 things are necessary to produce a successful agency mission:

1. An agent must be given a sense of attachment, importance and agency from its sender
2. The agent must know its mission.

 

בראשית ח:ט

ולא מצאה היונה מנוח לכף רגלה, ותשב אליו אל התבה, כי מים על פני כל הארץ, וישלח ידו ויקחה, ויבא אותה אליו אל התבה.

 

Upon the dove concluding it would not find a place to rest its feet, it returns to Noah and to the ark. The verse states the dove returned in order to reunite with both Noah and the ark, and that Noah brought it back to himself and the ark. The repeated emphasis on both Noah and the ark indicates the great significance of both the ark filled with all the animals, and Noah himself. Noah had developed a significant attachment with all the animals in the ark.

בראשית ח:י

ויחל עוד שבעת ימים אחרים, ויסף שלח את היונה מן התבה.

 

This is the first time in the Torah since creation that significance is given to the 7 day week. Noah is thinking in terms of creation. He is aware that what he is undergoing is creation anew. It is therefore units of creation that separate his sending the dove to rediscover the created world.

 

בראשית ח:יא

ותבא היונה אליו לעת ערב, והנה עלה זית טרף בפיה, וידע נח כי קלו המים מעל הארץ.

 

That the dove knows to bring the olive leaf to Noah is further indication of its sense of agency. It is acutely aware its responsibility is to make Noah aware of the state of dryness of the land, and it finds the leaf to indicate this to him. Was this olive leaf from a pre-Mabul tree that was floating, or was it a leaf from a live olive tree that had once again started bearing leaves? It would appear to be from a live olive tree. A dead leaf from before the Flood indicates nothing at all. The Dove was showing Noah that trees were coming back to life, with newly grown leaves. The subsiding of the water had already resulted in the rejuvenation of a tree. The natural world, that had suffered due to the evil of Mankind, was returning to its old self.

 

בראשית ח:יב

וייחל עוד שבעת ימים אחרים, וישלח את היונה ולא יספה שוב אליו עוד.

 

The word ויחל in verse 10 and the word וייחל in verse 12 are both variations of the Hebrew verb “to wait”. The difference between the word ויחל and the word וייחל grammatically is the difference between the plain form of the verb, ויחל,  and the reflexive form, וייחל. The first time Noah waits, there is no tension involved. Given the dove cannot find any place to rest its feet, Noah simply waits 7 days before trying again. But once the dove comes back with a fresh olive leaf, Noah realizes soon there will be dry land to walk on. His tension rises, and he feels like checking the situation constantly.

 

It takes him great self control to force himself to wait 7 days again before sending out the dove once more. He must give a significant amount of time for the situation to change substantially enough to make a difference.  Only then will sending out the dove again make sense. When he finally does, sure enough, the dove has found a place to be and remain, and never returns. Progress has indeed been made. It is only a matter of time now.

 

בראשית ח:יג

ויהי באחת ושש מאות שנה בראשון באחד לחדש חרבו המים מעל הארץ ויסר נח את מכסה התבה, וירא, והנה חרבו פני האדמה.

 

The date given is significant. It is the first day of the first month of the year 601. The verse does not say explicitly from when the year 601 is being counted. It is apparently the year 601 of the life of Noah, since it says in 7:6 that Noah was 600 when the Deluge began. Noah’s lifetime has become the new assumed basis of year counting. No one is alive older than he is. Any life that preceded Noah’s is destroyed. All historical reckoning begins with him. It is unnecessary to mention the count of the years of his life. There is no other relevant count.

 

The date is the first day of the new year. Noah is inspired by the event of the new year to check the status of the ground’s dryness personally, not through a bird. The land is technically dry, though apparently not dry enough for Noah to exit the ark. Noah intuits that the land will be sufficiently dry and ready for him with the incoming year. But the incoming year may be understood in 2 ways; the formal date of the first of the new year, and a full calendar year from the day the Deluge started. Indeed, on the first day of the new year Noah removes the covering of the ark, undoubtedly a grand act filled with emotion, hope , and expectation. Yes, the land is dry as Noah thought it would be. But it is not dry enough to exit the ark. The Hebrew word “charev” indicates there is no actual water, but the muddiness of the ground is still prohibitive.

 

בראשית ח:יד

ובחדש השני, בשבעה ועשרים יום לחדש, יבשה הארץ.

 

The date given for the full drying of the land, the 27th of the second month,  is 365 days after the beginning of the Deluge, the 17th of the second month (Genesis 7:11). Thus the Deluge and its aftermath endure exactly one complete solar year. The Deluge, sum total, conforms to a natural border. It begins in the rainy season (following the approach that the second month is Cheshvan), but instead of normal amounts it floods, and destroys all life not in the ark. The actual rains end 40 days later, which is reasonable enough, except that for 40 days it did not stop, and the amounts were excessive even for non stop rain, resulting in the Flood accumulation described.

 

Due to the miraculous excess, it takes until the end of a full solar year for the rains to subside and the ground to return to the level of moisture regular for the end of the summer drought. With the end of the solar year, the relationship of the calendar and the rainy season will hopefully resume to what is expected each season. But after a year of Deluge and its aftermath, nothing is taken for granted.

 

בראשית ח:טו

וידבר אלקים אל נח לאמר.

 

The syntax of this verse is the same as a verse appearing repeatedly in other books of the Torah, namely , וידבר ה’ אל משה לאמר.  That verse usually introduces a commandment of God to the Jewish people, to be told to them by Moshe. Here it is a commandment of God to Noah himself.

This matter requires evaluation. Given we were informed in the previous verse that the ground had completely dried, why didn’t Noah leave the ark on his own? Why did he need God to order him to do so?

 

This question may be answered Halachically, or psychologically.

Halachically: Noah was commanded to enter the ark. That being the case, in order for him to be permitted to leave, he requires God’s explicit approval. Otherwise, the original command to enter the ark and remain there continues.to obligate Noah.

 

Psychologically: The world Noah left upon entering the ark is not the world Noah is about to return to upon exiting the ark. Noah is about to enter a world completely void of people. He will be the new Adam. God is implicitly trusting him, and at the same time giving him the responsibility of leading the new world in a direction of fear of God and observance of his commandments, and developing a just society.  Rather than being proud of this trust, Noah is frightened of this responsibility. Who knows if he will succeed where his ancestors had failed? While he can perhaps control and direct himself, how can he take responsibility for his children, their wives, and future descendants? God will soon relate directly to these concerns of Noah. But in the meantime God commands Noah to exit the ark without a priori promises.

 

Noah cannot be allowed to be so timid as to not even step out of the ark without a Divine commitment of some sort.. He must exit, thereby expressing some level of confidence in himself and the future. While Moses almost always heard from God by the Divine name of the 4 letter Tetragrammaton,  the Noah equivalent verse uses the name by which God has always spoken to Noah, Elokim. This is God’s title, rather than His name. The relationship of Noah and God remains formal and somewhat distanced.

 

בראשית ח:טז

צא מן התבה, אתה ואשתך ובניך ונשי בניך אתך.

 

The imperative to exit the ark has been elaborated on in the commentary to the previous verse. Two points are left for focus. Rashi points out that Noah is to exit with his wife, and his children are to exit with their wives. The implication is that cohabitation is permitted and encouraged, now that they will once again be on land.The final word in the verse, “with you,” is a command to mutualize this great moment by remaining together with the leadership of Noah. After being cooped up together in the ark for a year, those who had been within may desire a “vacation” from each other’s company for a while. Explains God:”This is not the time to disperse. Stay together under your leadership for the foreseeable future so that society can coalesce and develop with as many members as possible helping each other out. The time to disperse has not yet arrived.”

 

 

בראשית ח:יז

כל החיה אשר אתך מבל בשר, בעוף ובבהמה, ובכל הרמש הרמש על הארץ היצא אתך, ושרצו בארץ, ופרו ורבו על הארץ.

 

Noah’s responsibility to leave the ark is not merely to personally leave, nor is it limited to demanding that all people exit. As his final act as God’s agent to protect all species from the Flood, Noah must bring out from the ark every animal that had been brought in. His taking them out is part of his own leaving of the ark. What was merely implied in the previous verse by mentioning Noah’s wife immediately after Noah followed by his sons and their wives, namely, that sexuality and procreation is now encouraged, is stated explicitly regarding the animals. They shall swarm, reproduce, and become many.

 

God’s language distinguishes between swarming, and reproduction. Swarming is the result of heavy reproduction. The swarming, namely, that the number of each species should rapidly develop and become great quickly, is God’s desired result, and is therefore mentioned first. But this should come about without miracle, but rather through the natural means of biological reproduction, mentioned immediately after.

 

 

בראשית ח:יח

ויצא נח, ובניו, ואשתו, ונשי בניו, אתו.

 

As Rashi points out, Noah does leave the ark, but not as God had told him to. He was to leave with his wife immediately with him. The order of the command was Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives. The order they left was Noah, his sons, his wife, and the sons’ wives. The distinction is subtle, but crucial. The sense that we are going to repopulate the world is felt much less when husband and wife are separated. After refraining from sexual relations for a solar year, getting back together may be awkward, and requires getting to know each other again in that way. Walking out of the ark together would be a kind of “date” , had they only done that. But they remained separate while leaving.

 

בראשית ח:יט

כל החיה כל הרמש, וכל העוף, כל רומש על הארץ, למשפחתיהם יצאו מן התבה.

 

The list of those leaving the ark differs from the list of those who entered, in that domestic animals are mentioned as entering (7:14), but not as leaving in our verse. There is no question that they left, and are included in the words “all who trod on the land”. But it is striking that when entering they are mentioned specifically , yet while leaving they are not. It is possible that living with all the other animals in the ark reduced the “domesticity” of the domestics to the point that they were no longer discernible from the rest of the living beings. With everyone cramped into the ark, how could anyone tell the difference between the wild and the tame? The distinctions are lost.

 

But domestic animals did not lose their domesticity in an ultimate way. The next verse will mention domestic animals as unique explicitly. While in the ark, there was no difference, Upon leaving, the domesticated reverted to their natural state of domesticity. The verse mentions the animals left the ark according to their families. Nowhere before has the notion of families been mentioned regarding animals.

 

The etymology of the Hebrew word for family, “mishpachah” , relates it to only one other Hebrew word- “shifchah”, maid-servant. The connection requires understanding.

There is a different word in Hebrew which emphasizes the blood connection between relatives, שאר בשר, which translates literally, “extension of flesh”. The term “mishpachah “, although also referencing relationships, means something else. Mishpachah , like the word “shifchah”, means a relationship of service. The family relationship assumes that the members of the family will be there for each other, and help each other, certainly when in need, and even beyond.

 

When the animals entered the ark, they entered as male and female partners of a species. This would allow reproduction of each species upon their leaving the ark. But the experience of the Flood and survival in the ark cemented the male -female relationship more powerfully. They entered as mates. They left as families. The mutual help they needed and provided each other with during the year in the ark accomplished this. Hence the new word regarding each separate male-female unit “mishpachah”.

 

 

בראשית ח:כ

ויבן נח מזבח לה’, ויקח מכל הבהמה הטהרה, ומכל העוף הטהור, ויעל עלת במזבח.

 

Offerings to God are mentioned earlier in Breishit as being brought by Cain and Abel. However, no mention is made of an altar. Our verse is the first mention of an altar. Noah builds an altar. One gets the sense that Noah has not yet built a house for himself and his children. The altar gets built first. The Hebrew word for altar is literally translated “slaughter-site.” Let us recall that Noah does not have a house to live in for any of the 4 families that have just come out of the ark. Noah’s first priority is to build an altar. Thus the first 4 words of our verse introduces several new concepts to the service of Man to God.

The following messages may be derived from this prioritized act:

1. Man’s function on earth is to worship God. There cannot be any priority that could possibly precede this obligation. Noah starts with showing God he understands Man’s purpose on earth by immediately fulfilling that purpose.
2. Worship of God calls for a specific site, and might not be properly accomplished without specifying a holy place. The space is not merely to be specific, but must be built up by man to be appropriate for this purpose. Formal worship of God should not be haphazard. Worship should take place on an altar built for the purpose of worship, not a randomly chosen spot. Man, in this case Noah, should build the altar.
3. Man cannot just live his life in a fashion that God approves of to be the way by which God will implicitly be served and worshipped. Explicit worship must be performed by Man to God to create a human relationship with the Divine.
4. Proper worship of God should be expressed by giving Him a portion of every kind of land living non human beings that is pure enough to be brought before Him. No exceptions.
5. The sacrifice that expresses this absolute dedication is the Olah, wholly burnt before God.

Another “first” of this verse is the notion of “olah”, as opposed to the “minchah” brought by Cain and Abel. An olah is an offering to God by sacrificing the life of a living being before God. The literal meaning of the Hebrew word “olah” is the verb “risen”. The olah has been risen to the altar whole. According to Rashi, Noah came to the conclusion that God desired Noah to do this as a result of God requesting more than the minimum number of “Pure” animals and birds to enter the ark, seven pairs rather than one. He assumed their purpose was for sacrifice.

The notion of sacrificing an animal as representing the sacrifice of the person themselves seems to be an idea implicated for the first time in the Binding of Isaac. The animal sacrifices of Noah do not seem to be that “lofty”. Were the idea to represent oneself in sacrifice one animal would have been enough, and perhaps more appropriate. Nevertheless, Noah is performing an act of cultic worship rather than a gift to God (what Cain and Abel did). Noah is thereby revolutionizing worship of God. God is not merely being presented with a gift. He is being worshipped.

It would appear there is an additional dimension to sacrificing birds and animals to God. By Noah sacrificing animals and birds, these creatures are participants to Man’s worship of God. Man and Animal are united in God’s service as a result of the animal sacrifice. The merging of Man and Animal during the Flood took place both in the devastation of the Flood, where no distinction was made between different living beings, and within the ark, where both Man and Animal were saved. The thanksgiving worship after the Flood has participation of Man and Animal together in the animal sacrifice to God performed by man.

It has already been mentioned in our commentary to Genesis 7:2 that there are different interpretations regarding what characteristics result in an animal or bird being called “Tahor”, that is, pure. It was from those animals and birds exclusively that Noah brought sacrifices to God after the Flood. It is not known what the practical difference between “tahor” animals and non-tahor animals was before the Flood. After the Flood it is clear that only Tahor animals may be brought as sacrifices before God. Perhaps this was the case before the Flood as well.

There is no indication that Noah was forbidden to eat the animals that were not Tahor. But Noah either was told or intuited that only Tahor animals may be brought as sacrifices before God. God does not accept all that Man offers. God accepted Abel’s offering, but not Cain’s. The difference there seems to be the quality of Abel’s offering. Here by Noah the criteria is objective. Only Tahor is accepted. Once we know the animals of the world are either Tahor or not, it is clear that only the Tahor will be accepted.

The spiritual quality that renders some animals as Tahor is not revealed here. Whether it is revealed anywhere else depends on how we are to understand the term Tahor as explained in Genesis 7:2. The sacrifices Noah brings are at least one of each of the types of Tahor animals and birds. As a result, every Tahor species is represented in Noah’s sacrifices. Thus, it was as if the species were offering part of themselves up before God, and not only Noah bringing the offering. Thereby, all living things are bringing the offerings before God.

 

 

בראשית ח:כא

וירח ה’ את ריח הניחוח, ויאמר ה’ אל לבו: לא אסיף לקלל עוד את האדמה בעבור האדם כי יצר לב האדם רע מנעריו, ולא אסיף עוד להכות את כל חי כאשר עשיתי.

 

The expression that God smelt the pleasant scent of the burning sacrifices sounds to our ears very “physical” in reference to God, and horribly anthropomorphic.. However, in the context of a world that believed that deities ate the sacrifices burnt for them, explaining that God merely smelt the sacrifices is a powerful statement countering God’s physical need for the sacrifices. In other words, the verse itself is countering the idolatrous notion of God “eating” the sacrifices, by clarifying that all He does is benefit from its scent. Unkelos further separates us from any physicality regarding God by interpreting that God received the sacrifice with positive will, rather than interpreting it literally. It is clear that Unkelos is sensitive to anthropomorphism even in the form it takes in the verse, just as we are.

The notion that God receives sacrifice for its scent becomes the continuing phrase throughout the Torah for God receiving sacrifices in good will. That is why all the regular obligated sacrifices in the book of Numbers chapter 28 are described as having a pleasant scent before God. All of these verses are countering the idea that God “eats” the sacrifice.

 

The phrase “And God said to His heart”  in our verse is provocative:

1. The phrase itself appears nowhere else in the Torah or Bible.
2. The verse implies a cause and effect relationship between God smelling the pleasant scent, and God’s statement to Himself not to destroy Man ever again. Why does God scenting the sacrifices result in God’s internal commitment to never destroy Man again?

 

In theory, every statement of God not heard by Man is an example of God speaking to His heart. But only this statement in our verse is mentioned as such because it is God making a commitment to Himself. In fact, the Talmud views this verse as God taking an oath. In Torah law, oaths are commitments made in the name of God. God’s commitment here as an oath becomes an oath as a result of God making this commitment “to His heart”. It is the reflexive nature of God’s commitment that makes it an oath.

 

The first part of God’s commitment is that he will no longer curse the land because of Man. One wonders what curse is being referred to. There does not seem to be a verse that calls the Flood a curse while it is being decided upon, nor while Noah is being informed of it. This phrase seems to be God regretting not the Flood, but rather regretting the ancient curse God placed on the land while driving Adam out of the Garden of Eden, mentioned in Genesis 3:17, “Cursed be the land because of you.”

 

The history of Man until now has been one long spiral of Man’s sins and God’s decisions to punish him. God is changing his whole approach.  In one swoop God accepts upon himself to never curse the ground again because of Man, as he did at the time of Adam, and also to never attack all living things, as He did in the flood. This commitment to maintain the integrity of both the ground and all living things, gives them legitimate rights of existence even when Man no longer deserves their service and use.

 

The paradigm of the Flood assumed that the world’s continued maintenance was contingent on the legitimate existence of Man at the helm, anchor, and centerpiece of existence. Man’s evil actions delegitimized all other existence. Let us recall that in chapter 1, while Man is the pinnacle of creation, he is not its be all and end all. In chapter 2, Man is what all of creation is about. The Flood is a legitimate destruction of the world based on Man’s evil from the perspective of Genesis chapter 2. The decision to never allow Man’s evil to cause the destruction of the wider world is an acceptance of the world as described in Genesis chapter 1, with Man being part of the world, and not what it is all about.

 

This approach is over. The world is no longer subject to Man’s righteousness. The world will continue to exist on its own merit, even if Man’s merit disappears. “The desire of Man’s heart is to do bad from his youth” Man’s desire to do bad from his youth tips the scale in terms of what God learns to expect from Man. True, as  (individual) Man develops and gets older, his understanding of the importance of goodness develops as well, and his actions tend more and more to reflect his ethical and moral understanding. But the habits formed in Man’s youth die hard. Man cannot be relied upon to maintain a  righteous world consistently. While aging there is a continuous battle to have one’s conscious direct one’s actions more and more rather than one’s desires. Good does not always win, neither on a personal level, nor for the generation.

God’s decision at this point is stated in the negative. God will not curse the land, nor will he attack all land life again. A positive formulation is not yet available.

 

בראשית ח:כב

עד כל ימי הארץ ,זרע וקציר, וקר וחם, וקיץ וחרף, ויום ולילה לא ישבתו.

 

This verse moves off the commitment to no longer harm the land and all life, and moves on to a commitment to maintain the various cycles that take place on Earth. ( The English word “Earth” is a direct etymological expression of the Hebrew word “Aretz”, and here is its perfect translation.) Earth has 4 cycles mentioned in this verse, each one representing a different earthly cycle.

 

1. The first is the agricultural cycle. There is a time of the year when seeding takes place. This is regardless of whether the seeding is done manually or naturally.The seeds fall into holes and grow produce. The time of seeding is followed by the reaping. The amount of time between seeding and reaping is different from crop to crop. Even 2 crops so similar as wheat and barley are harvested at different points in the year. Reaping by its nature is a human activity. It does not take place without people. Therein lies God’s promise to maintain Man, the reaper. But the promise that Man will be maintained seems to be because he is part of the natural agricultural cycle, rather than as an entity worthwhile in his own right.
2. The second is the weather cycle. There are times of the year that are cold, and others that are hot.  The world will forever more be allowed to continue with alternating periods of cold and hot weather.
3. The third is the season cycle. Summer and winter alternate over the course of a solar year. (The Flood lasted for a complete solar year.) Since agriculture and weather have both already been mentioned, the season cycle probably relates to the cycle of the relative length of day and night. During the summer the days are long and the night short, while during the winter the days are short and the nights long in the Northern hemisphere where Noah probably lived, and where the ark landed in the Taurus mountains.
4. The fourth is the daily cycle of day and night alternating.

 

With Man and animal in the ark, the significance of these cycles certainly waned and were perhaps obliterated for the duration of the Flood. None were experienced in a meaningful way. These cycles of the days of the Earth will no longer cease..

 

 

בראשית ט:א

ויברך אלקים את נח ואת בניו, ויאמר להם, פרו ורבו ומלאו את הארץ.

 

This verse intentionally parallels Genesis 1:28, and is meant to be compared with it. God blesses Noah and his children just as he blessed Adam and Eve, and tells Noah and his children of this blessing just as He told Adam and Eve. The blessing itself that Noah and his children receive was received by Adam and Eve as well, in the exact same words. The world is beginning all over. Noah is both blessed and commanded to be fruitful and multiply and fill the world, just like Adam and Eve were told and blessed. God is trying it again. He is giving Mankind another chance.

 

Regarding children: Noah’s sons are included in the blessing, whereas Adam’s children were not yet born. Regarding wives: The blessing in Genesis 1:28 is in the plural, thereby explicitly including the woman, Eve. No mention of Noah’s wife appears in this verse. In fact Noah’s wife, while explicitly saved in the Flood, is only referred to, but never mentioned by name. It is difficult to tell whether her anonymity is a result of the nature of Noah’s relationship with her, such that his dominance precludes her significance, or whether her persona is intrinsically of little importance in the continuing story and is therefore left unmentioned. Regardless, it cannot be ignored that women disappear from the story of humanity from their exit from the ark until it is mentioned many generations later that Abraham and Nahor took wives, Sarai and Milkah.

 

Let’s suggest two approaches:

1. God found Noah and his sons worthy of prophecy, and their wives were not worthy. Therefore only Noah and his sons receive the word of God.
2. The women were as worthy (or unworthy) as the men.The family structure was such that it was appropriate to inform the family as a whole by informing the male family leader.

 

Either way, there is nothing intrinsically preventing women from receiving God’s prophecy.

That being said, the lack of inclusiveness of women in the religious process may have resulted in the failure of transmitting the religious message to the future generations.

 

 

 

בראשית ט:ב

ומוראכם וחתכם יהיה על כל חית הארץ, ועל כל עוף השמים, בכל אשר תרמש האדמה, ובכל דגי הים בידכם נתנו.

 

Let us start by distinguishing between the first 2 words. מוראכם means the fear you will impose. חתכם means your domination that will result. In this verse Noah’s relationship with all other living things is markedly different than that of Adam. In Genesis 1:28 we are told that Man will conquer the world, and rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and all living things that trod the ground. Noah, on the other hand, is not told to conquer the land. His rule is virtually automatic. His being will impose fear and domination on all land based life, and sea life is given to him as well.

 

It is hard to imagine that some natural difference has occurred  at this point that intrinsically changed the natural relationship between Man and animal life. The implied change seems to be the precursor statement of Man being allowed to eat animal, bird, and sea life, as explained in the following verse. Adam is vegetarian, indeed, vegan. His relationship with the animal world in its ideal is one of leadership and rule. But when it comes to food, Man and Beast both live off the plant world. This mutuality of food source is now changing. Noah will be permitted to eat animal life. The new divide turns animals from subject to prey. They shall fear him because he threatens their life.

 

בראשית ט:ג

כל רמש אשר הוא חי לכם יהיה לאכלה כירק עשב נתתי לכם את כל.

The permissibility given to Noah to eat animals that had been alive is not merely an extension of his menu. Were that the case he would not have been informed that animals are given to him to eat like green grass. Allowing Noah to eat animals is meant to change the basic relationship between Man and Animal. Until now Man and Animal were in a single hierarchy with Man on top and animals beneath him. Forbidding man from eating animals implies a commonality of human and animal life, indeed, a continuum of existence from Man to Animal. The moral superiority that Man is demanded to maintain over animals is not implied in this continuum. Man is expected to maintain his “Image of God” intrinsically, despite his similarity to animals in so many ways.

 

But Man before the Flood ended up acting like an animal. His taking advantage of both the property and women of his weaker peers was animalistic, creating a society of the domination of the powerful. There was a need to further separate Man from animal society.  Man needed to be shown how different and separate he is from animals. The Man-Animal continuum had to be broken. God therefore permitted man to eat animal flesh. The continuum is  gone. Animals are no more significant than grass. Man is alone in the category of life that cannot be taken.

 

 

בראשית ט:ד

אך בשר בנפשו דמו לא תאכלו.

 

Despite the permission to eat animal life, a modicum of dignity to the life of the animal is demanded. The animal shall be killed before partaking of its flesh. The animal is forbidden while alive. This is the compromise between the complete prohibition of animal flesh that preceded the Flood and the permissibility of flesh at this point. Animal life may not be eaten if still actually alive. The requirement to take the animal’s life in order to permit it as food serves as the background to introduce the prohibition to kill a human being. The permission to kill an animal in order to eat it seems to be the necessary introduction to the prohibition of killing people to be mentioned shortly. The ancient cantillation of the verse implies the reference to blood is to emphasize the livingness of the animal, rather than a specific prohibition regarding its blood.

 

בראשית ט:ה

ואך את דמכם לנפשתיכם אדרש, מיד כל חיה אדרשנו, ומיד האדם, מיד איש אחיו, אדרש את נפש האדם.

 

God here demands punishment for the murder of human life, regardless of whether the killer is human or animal. The phrase “and from the hand of a man to (kill) his brother” would appear superfluous. It is possible that this is meant to hark back to the murder by Cain of Abel.

As described in explaining Genesis 9:1 , these verses are God’s commandments at the beginning of humankind all over again. The possibility of murder was not raised when God spoke with Adam and Eve.. The Edenic stage of the world precluded relating to such a possibility.

 

Even mentioning it would sound like a defamation of the perfection of creation.

But that was a long time ago. Since then the world Man has lived in has shown itself to be open to many travesties, including murder. Here, where God is permitting killing animals for food, perhaps implying that killing is not so terrible, Man is commanded forbidding murder, and is warned that God demands “compensation” of the life of the murderer for having taken the life of a person.

בראשית ט:ו

שפך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך, כי בצלם אלקים עשה את האדם.

 

This verse states two ideas expressed for the first time:

1. Man is responsible for punishing his fellow men for committing murder. God will not take responsibility for policing or punishing Man for killing each other. The punishment is decreed by God: capital punishment. But it is for Man to bring his fellow men to justice and punishment.
2. The philosophical basis for Man’s authority to punish his fellow for murder is based on Man being made by God the image of God. Man’s being in God’s image has 2 results in this regard. First, murdering Man is so severe that it is a capital crime, because Man is made in God’s image and therefore killing a man is killing God’s image. Second,  Man is worthy of trying and convicting the murderer, because being in God’s image gives him the authority to do so (Chizkuni).

 

The notion that Man is in God’s image once again takes us back to Man’s creation in the first chapter of Genesis, where it is proclaimed  (Genesis 1:27) that God created Man in His image. In that original proclamation it is an expression of Man’s greatness within the context of creation. But our verse takes this grandiose title and turns it into a solemn responsibility. Man being in the image of God demands of him to maintain society in a state appropriate for God’s image to reside in.

 

בראשית ט:ז

ואתם, פרו ורבו, שרצו בארץ, ורבו בה.

 

With the return to and restatement of the command of 9:1 to be fruitful and multiply, God emphasizes the religious imperative of populating the world, the opposite of murder. Having children is not merely a commandment that stands alone. It stands in the backdrop of  bringing God’s image into the world. Just as murder obliterates God’s image, so does procreation increase  God’s image.

 

Noah is further commanded to swarm in the land, and multiply within it. The command to swarm and multiply is separate and beyond the earlier command, here restated, to be fruitful and multiply. Noah is commanded to spread out and have his progeny go all over the land. The second command to multiply is to do so throughout the land, not just in one or a few spots.

The command to swarm the land is not given to Adam. That it is given to Noah may be understood in two ways:

 

1. Noah is being commanded to not merely procreate, but to “makeup” for all the lost population lost in the Flood.
2. God is strategically widening the command of procreation and multiplication to include geographic dispersal. Nor only should Man become numerous. He should also spread his residence to include wide areas of the world. He should be many not only quantitatively, but also dispersed geographically.

 

In chapter 11 it becomes clear that Noah’s descendants multiply, but do not voluntarily disperse.

 

 

בראשית ט:ח

ויאמר אלקים אל נח ואל בניו אתו לאמר.

 

The first statement God makes to Noah upon his exit from the ark is a command made with the language of וידבר. ( Genesis 8:15). The second is a blessing made in the language of ויברך and ויאמר. ( Genesis 9:1). The third, in our verse, uses only the language of “ויאמר”. We are about to be presented with a covenant. It is neither a command nor a blessing. A covenant is in a category of its own. This is the first covenant mentioned in the Torah.

 

בראשית ט:ט

ואני הנני מקים את בריתי אתכם, ואת זרעכם אחריכם

 

The word “And I” is unnecessary in this verse. The same message could have been put across without it. God’s self reference states the personal commitment of God in this covenant. God is not merely imposing this covenant on Noah and his family. He is personally involved. The covenant is established by God, not dictated. It is made “with” Noah and the others alive, not upon. And it is a covenant not only for the current generation, but for the future descendants of those alive at that time. It will continue not only to the descendants who will be born in the lifetime of those present, but also after they have passed on.

 

 

בראשית ט:י

ואת כל נפש החיה אשר אתכם, בעוף, בבהמה, ובכל חית הארץ אתכם, מכל יצאי התבה, לכל חית הארץ.

The covenant is not only with Man, nor is it only with all future generations of people. It is with all living land beings, including both birds and land animals, all included in the ark. Gone are the days when God and Man are in cahoots without the living animals being part and parcel of the deal. Man is no longer alone in his custodianship of God’s world. All living things and their descendants are included in the covenant.

Given animals are included, it seems even the people included are not there uniquely as people, but rather as fellow living beings, together with the animals. Just as the Flood decimated all flesh, without distinction between animals and people, so the covenant forbidding future floods is made with wild and domestic animals, birds, and people without distinction.

God’s covenant is one sided. It is with Man and the animals, but it obligates only God Himself. Just as the animals could not possibly violate the covenant, so, too, Man is merely another participant in the receiving of God’s one sided obligation.

 

 

בראשית ט:יא

והקמתי את בריתי אתכם, ולא יכרת כל בשר עוד ממי המבול, ולא יהיה עוד מבול לשחת הארץ.

 

This verse gives us the content of the covenant. It is stated in 2 forms:

1. All flesh will never again be destroyed by the waters of a Flood.
2. There will never be another Flood to destroy the land.

The double phrased covenant first protects the flesh from a water flood, and then promises that no flood will ever destroy the land. Despite the similarity of these statements, the double assurance of no further destruction, and no further flood that will destroy,  doubly protects Man for the future. God makes clear this will never happen again, both from the perspective of destruction and of waters.

 

בראשית ט:יב

ויאמר אלקים: זאת אות הברית אשר אני נתן ביני וביניכם, ובין כל נפש חיה אשר אתכם, לדרת עולם.

 

God’s statement that there will never again be a Flood should be enough for Noah. God provides a sign of the Covenant as the “seal” of His commitment for future generations.

 

 

בראשית ט:יג

את קשתי נתתי בענן, והיתה לאות ברית, ביני, ובין הארץ.

 

The sign of the Covenant is the physical result of the end of heavy rain. The rainbow expresses God’s commitment to stop every rain, no matter how fierce, before it threatens all of mankind. Its being built into nature indicates the depth of the Divine commitment that rain will  overtake his creation.

 

בראשית ט:יד

והיה בענני ענן על הארץ, ונראתה הקשת בענן.

 

בראשית ט:טו

וזכרתי את בריתי אשר ביני וביניכם ובין כל נפש חיה בכל בשר, ולא יהיה עוד המים למבול לשחת כל בשר.

 

בראשית ט:טז

והיתה הקשת בענן, וראיתיה לזכר ברית עולם, בין אלקים, ובין כל נפש חיה, בכל בשר אשר על הארץ.

 

בראשית ט:יז

ויאמר אלקים אל נח: זאת אות הברית אשר הקמתי, ביני ובין כל בשר אשר על הארץ.

 

Each verse from 9:9 to 9:17 adds one point in the revelation of the rainbow to Noah.

 

9:9 informs that a covenant is about to be established.

9:10 informs the covenant is not only with the people, but with the animal and bird life as well.

9:11 informs the obligation God takes upon Himself through the covenant, namely, to never again destroy the world.

9:12 informs there is a sign to represent this eternal covenant.

9:13 informs that the sign is the rainbow.

9:14 informs how the sign of the rainbow is employed, namely, that the rainbow will be seen in the clouds

9:15 informs that upon God seeing the rainbow He will be reminded of the covenant between God and all living things, and as a result God will not allow the rain to turn into a destructive flood.

9:16 informs that the rainbow will remind God not only to prevent the rain from becoming a flood on any specific occasion, but also that the covenant signified by the rainbow is eternal.

In 9:17 God shows the sign of the covenant (the rainbow) to Noah.

 

The above describes the different stages of the revelation of the rainbow and its significance to Noah. But there is another dynamic in these verses regarding with whom the covenant is made.

It is striking that 4 times the verses emphasize that the covenant is both with “you”, the people, as well as with all other living things. Yet in verse 13 only the land is mentioned, and in 16-17  the last 2 verses, Man is not singled out, and is merely included in the rest of the living beings.

The result of the above points in the following direction:

The covenant is with the world on 3 levels.

 

1. The world at large, as indicated in verse 13;
2. Man and all living things as distinct from each other;
3. All living things inclusive ( without Man receiving any separate mention).

 

The world as a whole merits this covenant (verse 13). Living things merit this covenant as well, though in 2 different representations. One is all life with Man receiving special mention, and the other is all life with Man inclusive but without mention. The worthiness of Man as uniquely worthy of mention is an option, though not the final iteration of the covenant, which stands as Man merely included. Man is not independently worthy of a covenant with God not to be destroyed. Only with the rest of living things does he merit inclusion in the covenant with God. And even then, possibly not a separate participant in some expressions of the covenant.

 

 

בראשית ט:יח

ויהיו בני נח היצאים מן התבה, שם, חם, ויפת, וחם הוא אבי כנען.

 

When the Torah goes into detail regarding the lives of its characters, the introductory comment may reidentify the context the characters have come out of. Our verse re-emphasizes that a priori all the sons of Noah are equal in status. They exited the ark without any distinctions between them. All of their children should inherit this status of equality. Canaan, as a son of Ham, should be the same as all the other sons of Ham, Shem, and Yefet. In the Torah paragraph following this one the descendents of the 3 sons of Noah will be detailed. Ham and his son Canaan will be mentioned the same as the others in that genealogy. In theory, he is like all the others. In practice, he is not. This is the first mention of Canaan in the Torah. Canaan will become known as the ancestor of the nations that inhabited the land of Israel before the Jewish people captured it. This point is the elephant in the room regarding the coming story in which Noah curses Canaan.

 

בראשית ט: יט

שלשה אלה בני נח, ומאלה נפצה כל הארץ.

 

This verse takes us from the ark of the previous verse that depicts a united family, directly to the dispersal of Noah’s descendants throughout the land. But we will not be told the dispersal story until later in the Torah.

 

Question: Why is the dispersal mentioned already in this verse?

Answer: Because although the dispersal results from God’s reaction to the tower of Babel later on, the kernel behind the dispersal is inherent in the story to be told in the next few verses. The distinguishing blessings and curse Noah bestows on his sons as a result of this story must result in different cultures with different qualities in the future. Noah even determines the interaction and relationship of the descendants of each of his sons. The Divine decree of dispersal has yet to come. But the separation of the sons into different cultural dimensions is predicted and predicated with the coming story.

 

בראשית ט:כ

ויחל נח איש האדמה, ויטע כרם.

 

The Flood is over. God has saved Noah from it. But Noah has received no direction on how to live in its aftermath, other than encouragement to perform the mitzvah of reproduction, and the prohibition of murder. What should Noah do? How should he develop the world? How might he live so as to prevent the world from becoming once again the debacle it became?

 

One thing blatantly missing is a mourning period for the tremendous loss of life that has just taken place. When Noah was in the ark there could have been no time or focus for mourning. The decimation may be coming home to him fully only now. It is possible that God did not tell Noah to mourn because to enter mourning for a whole world would overcome Noah in a way that would leave him without capacity to function. Like many Holocaust survivors, in order to continue he would have to look only forward, and not back. But his not mourning may have taken its toll.

 

Our sages disagree as to whether there is a Torah obligation to mourn close relatives. But even among those of our sages who hold mourning is a Torah obligation, the widely accepted opinion limits that obligation to one day. Mourning for 7 days, although mentioned in the Bible as the period Joseph mourned his father, is only rabbinically required once the Torah was received.

Noah must be distressed in not knowing how to deal with his emotions of mourning. The Flood generation was evil, and deserving of what God brought upon them. No one knew this better than Noah. But the ability of a human being to subjugate and sublimate his emotions completely in accepting God’s judgment is limited at best. His mourning instinct will burst out, and does.

God’s silence on how to move forward in life leaves Noah unguided. God expects from Noah not only to continue being a tsadik, but also to figure out and bring about the development of a just, God fearing society.

 

Perhaps in an attempt to rise to this occasion, Noah accepts upon himself the role of “Man of the land”. One might have assumed he would therefore build things upon the land. But this is not what he is reported as doing. Noah expresses being Man of the land by bringing out the land’s inner potential for agriculture. In particular, Noah grows something to bring joy to the world. This may be in reaction to the sadness enveloping him as a result of his lack of mourning.

The Hebrew term ויטע indicates Noah had shoots of vine to plant, rather than using grape seeds. Perhaps he anticipated his sorrow upon exiting the ark, and knew to bring vine shoots to have  ready to plant shortly upon leaving the ark, in order to make wine.

 

בראשדית ט:כא

וישת מן היין וישכר, ויתגל בתוך אהלה.

 

The Torah leaves open 3 possible frames of reference that resulted in Noah getting drunk:

1. Noah did not know the impact of wine on the mind, and the resulting drunkenness was not intended
2. Noah was aware of the possibility of getting drunk, but was convinced he could keep his drinking under control. He had one too many.
3. Noah was trying to get drunk, and succeeded. A possible reason he would want to get drunk was out of despair for the destroyed antediluvian world  .

 

I would bet on number 2. He knew what might happen, but was convinced he would prevent it. That Noah undresses when drunk comes from the “liberation” of the person from inhibitions when drunk, or perhaps we should say the inability of people to maintain inhibitions when drunk. As Ramban has pointed out, this story is meant to teach all future generations not to be confident of one’s ability to overcome alcohol or assume one will stop drinking just on time.

A moment should be taken to see the different attitude expressed here regarding nudity as compared with Adam and Eve in Eden. There is no suggestion, or even a thought, that Noah attains a “higher” level of consciousness through the freedom of drunkenness to be able to overcome the shame of nakedness. Noah, the ancestor of all mankind, succumbed to drink, and lost his human dignity.

 

בראשית ט:כב

וירא חם אבי כנען את ערות אביו, ויגד לשני אחיו בחוץ.

 

Ham needs no identification whatsoever. He is well known to us from the beginning of our parshah. If he were to receive any identification, it should have been “son of Noah”. His being identified right off as father of Cnaan indicates he is acting here not as a worthy son of Noah, but rather as someone who acts as if he were unrelated, as if he were a future generation who can barely relate to his direct family connection to Noah, his father. He is acting much more as a father of Cnaan than as a son of Noah.

 

Noah may have been seen by his sons, including Ham, as a legendary figure even in his lifetime. He must have stood out to them as righteous in the pre-Flood era when all others were evil. Noah being chosen by God himself to survive further legendizes him. His being captain of the ship of all species during the yearlong flood made him effectively king of all land creatures. These memories are deeply ingrained in Noah’s sons. Noah is the most dignified being on Earth. He truly was “In the image of God.”

 

The sight of Noah stone drunk naked was the most shocking sight one could have imagined. Here Majesty itself was reduced to subhumanity. Ham’s shock at the sight left him dumbfounded as to what to do. But beyond the shock, there may have been a bit of savoring of the sight. Father may not be everything we trumped him up to be. See how easily he fell apart.

 

Here is the first Biblical example of a person acting completely out of character. The question becomes: Is this descent an exceptional aberrational act of a truly great man? Or is Noah no longer the righteous and whole person described when he was introduced? revealing the ugly truth of his personality and character just beneath his facade, revealing who he really is?

This is Ham’s question as he ponders this sight.

 

It may be our question as well. Is this the Noah who was called righteous and whole when originally being introduced, who momentarily strays? Or is he no longer who he had been?

Rather than protect his father’s reputation and handle the matter alone, Ham takes counsel with his brothers, thereby spreading the word.

 

בראשית ט:כג

ויקח שם ויפת את השמלה, וישימו על שכם שניהם, וילכו אחרנית, ויכסו את ערות אביהם, ופניהם אחרנית, וערות אביהם לא ראו.

 

Shem and Yefet do not delay. Their father’s dignity must be restored and protected. They will be careful not to see their father’s shame, and simultaneously cover their father so the indignity ends.

 

בראשית ט:כד

וייקץ נח מיינו, וידע את אשר עשה לו בנו הקטן

 

This is often how drunkenness ends. One awakens to a memory of what happened, with an awareness of one’s own embarrassment, and a sense of vengeance against those who revelled in it. Noah knows he is responsible for his stupor. But in retrospect he expected his sons to help him cover what he had to hide. He was right regarding Shem and Yephet. Not Ham.

Before this verse we probably assumed Ham was the second of Noah’s children. This verse may tell us that in fact Ham was the youngest, despite being mentioned second in every list.

 

בראשית ט:כה

ויאמר ארור כנען. עבד עבדים יהיה לאחיו.

 

The obvious question of this verse is”why does Noah curse Cnaan, when it was Ham who treated Noah without respect? The answer is probably that Noah could not find it within himself to curse his own son. He therefore pushed off the curse to the next generation, imposing it on Cnaan.

This being the case, Noah could not bring himself to curse his son. But he was able to bring himself to curse his grandson. The question is sometimes asked, why is it that God chose Abraham to found the chosen nation, and not Noah?

 

The answer may be exactly this point. Someone who could bring himself to curse his grandson, cannot see into the future the implication of founding God’s chosen nation. Noah’s generational myopia prevented him from being a spiritual ancestor of the Jewish people. Only Abraham, who could be told by God that his descendants will be redeemed and returned to his land in 400 years, and appreciate it, could be the founding patriarch of Israel. He could relate to multiple generations into the future, while Noah lost sight of relationships 2 generations down.

Only Canaan is cursed by Noah as a way of punishing Ham. Canaan’s destiny to be a slave or servant to Shem and Yephet adumbrates his illegitimate claim on land. Shem’s descendant Abraham, through his own descendants, Israel, will lay claim and take ownership of the land known by the name Canaan. Making Canaan a slave is not merely “putting him where he belongs.” Were that the case, it would be a blessing rather than a curse. Noah’s opening words are “Cursed be Canaan.” Slavery is an expression of the curse, not the curse per se.

.

בראשית ט:כו   

ברוך ה’ אלקי שם, ויהי כנען עבד למו.

 

This is the first blessing given by a person in the Torah.

One would have expected Noah to bless Shem in this verse. Instead , he blesses Hashem, God of Shem. Noah is acutely aware of the dependency of all blessings on God. It is to the point that directly blessing Shem would miss the point of this effort. The ultimate blessing is to bless God. Shem will participate in this blessing by his worship, commitment, and connection to God, who along with being God of the universe, is his personal God. Ham, by violating his father’s physical modesty by way of informing his brothers of their father’s state, has lost a measure of connection with God. His son Cnaan will make up for this loss by attaching himself to Shem as a slave. Thereby, via Shem’s household, Cnaan, too, will be attached to God.

 

בראשית ט:כז

יפת אלקים ליפת, וישכן באהלי שם, ויהי כנען עבד למו.

 

The realm of esthetics, discussed regarding the tree of knowledge, is dealt with here, both thematically and personally. Yefet’s talent for beauty is recognized and legitimized here. Crucial in its recognition is that its source is God Himself. Man’s success in bringing about beauty is a divine gift, part of man’s ability as a “צלם אלקים”. Shem, whose focus on religious truth and observance goes beyond the esthetic realm, cannot be relied upon to include beauty in his worship.

 

God blesses Yefet with objective beauty, and calls for its residence in the tent of Shem. Shem must welcome Yefet’s contribution to God’s worship and include Yefet’s talent for beauty in the house of worship Shem dedicates to God. The beauty of the Mishkan is implied here in the words ” וישכן” and “אהלי”. Moshe himself did not have what it took to bring Yefet’s beauty into the Mishkan. It required the unique talents of Betsalel, endowed with the beauty of Yefet, to do so. As explained regarding Shem, Cnaan may be attached to God through Yefet and his beauty, by accepting himself as a slave to Yefet.

 

בראשית ט:כח

ויחי נח אחר המבול שלש מאות שנה וחמישים שנה.

 

This verse, in order to be properly understood, must be compared with the genealogy of the generations from Adam to Noah in Genesis chapter 5. There the lifetime of each descendant from Adam to Noah is broken into 2 parts, namely, the years lived before having a child, and the years lived afterwards until death. That pattern is broken when Noah is born. We are informed he had a child when 500 years old, and then, instead of telling us how long he lived after he fathered a child, the Torah goes on to discuss his life.

 

Our verse, 9:28, picks up the description of Noah’s life in a similar form to his ancestors mentioned in chapter 5, with a powerful difference. Instead of dividing his life by the birth of his first child, his life is divided by the Flood.We are not told how long Noah lived after Shem was born. We are told how long Noah lived after the Flood.

 

The obvious conclusion must be that while for all his ancestors the crucial divider in their lives was having their first child, the crucial divider in Noah’s life  is the Flood. As important as Shem and his brothers were, the event of their birth in Noah’s life pales when compared to the event of the Flood. As will soon become clear, the Flood is not only the crucial divider in Noah’s life. It is the crucial divider in the longevity of life between those that lived primarily before the Flood, and those that lived after.

 

בראשית ט:כט

ויהיו כל ימי נח תשע מאות שנה וחמשים שנה, וימת.

 

Noah lived a number of years comparable to his ancestors back to Adam, the majority of whom lived more than 900 years and less than 1000. In fact, he is third in longevity after Methuselah and Jared. This indicates his physical prowess as being in the category of his ancestors, rather than his descendants, whose lives are much shorter. One might say he is an “antediluvian” person. If we are to divide his years into 19 fifty year periods, 12 precede the Flood and 7 succeed it.

 

בראשית י:א

ואלה תלדות בני נח שם חם ויפת, ויולדו להם בנים אחר המבול

 

The descendants of Noah will be described in 2 different ways:

1. A list of Noah’s descendants from all 3 of his children. More on that list later.
2. A lineage of descent from Noah to Abraham.

 

Our verse introduces the descendants from all 3 children. The verse seems to continue from Genesis 6:9-10, where the “toldot” of Noah are listed. Here the toldot of his toldot are listed. While Noah had no children after the Flood, despite God’s command to be fruitful and multiply, his sons do.

 

בראשית י:ב-ד

בני יפת  גמר ומגוג ומדי ויון ותבל, ומשך ותירס. ובני גמר, אשכנז וריפת ותגרמה. ובני יון אלישה ותרשיש, כתים ודדנים.

 

The sons of Yefet include several names of well known nations for the duration of history; the Medes, the Greeks, and according to Rashi the Persians as well (Tiras= Persia). Magog is known to us from the prophecy of Ezekiel in chapter 39, where the apocalyptic war of Gog and Magog is described. Tarshish is understood to be the island of Crete, near Greece. It is thus understood that the person called Tarshish, after whom the island is named, is a son of the original Greece, son of Yephet.

 

In these 4 verses we identify people who father nations we are familiar with from history. Some are still present in the current world. The Torah begins to close the gap between primordial history represented by Noah and those who preceded the Deluge, and the world we know and identify with.

 

בראשית י:ה

מאלה נפרדו איי הגוים בארצותם איש ללשונו, למשפחתם  בגויהם.

 

The Hebrew word אי means an island or a peninsula. The descendants of Yefet lived on the islands and peninsulas of the Meditteranean. The verb נפרדו indicates these families were separated from each other against their will, as will be told in the upcoming story of the Tower of Babel. Four terms are used to distinguish the units of people that spread out on these islands:

 

1. גוי
2. ארץ
3. לשון
4. משפחה

 

Each of these terms distinguishes a group of people from all others in some way. Let us define each of them:

 

1. משפחה

Mishpachah, or family, implies a biological family connection between a group of people. It is not clear how close the relation to one another is necessary in order to qualify. It may be that as long as the people involved view their relation as relevant, the term Mishpachah is appropriate. In Numbers 26 the term Mishpachah seems to refer to groups of thousands of people.

 

2. ארץ

Eretz, or land, implies the group lives in a common geographic area. The size of the land is not determined. It is fair to assume that as long as the land is contiguous, and the  group identifies the land as their own, Eretz is an appropriate term.

 

3. לשון

Lashon, or language, implies that the group has a common tongue.

 

4.גוי

Goi, or nationhood, does not have a biological, geographic, or linguistic definition. The self perception by a group of people that they are nationally united is the key to this reality. This term in our verse is used both at the beginning and the end of the distinguishing qualities of the group. At the beginning the islands and peninsulas are identified as pertaining to a particular group. At the end of the verse the families coalesce into nations. Family, Land, Language, and perceived Nationhood together result in the formation of nations that are internally united and are distinct from one another.

 

בראשית י:ו

ובני חם: כוש ומצרים ופוט וכנען

 

Three of the sons of Ham are known to us as Ethiopia, Egypt, and Canaan. It is striking that the Torah goes on to tell us details regarding the progeny of these three nations with which we have familiarity and says nothing about Fut, who we have difficulty identifying. The eldest son, Ethiopia, while mentioned in the book of Amos, has little effect on the story of the Jewish people in the Torah. Egypt and Canaan, on the other hand, play crucial roles.

 

The brotherhood between Egypt and Canaan explains a powerful connection between the nation that enslaved the Jewish people and the nation inhabiting the land they were to conquer. After Egypt, brother Canaan is not a novelty. They are almost “la meme chose”.The Divine success of the Jewish people in being freed from Egypt portends success in their coming to conquer Egypt’s brother – nation Canaan.

 

בראשית י:ז

ובני כוש סבא וחוילה וסבתה ורעמה וסבתכא, ובני רעמה שבא ודדן

Chavilah has already been mentioned in Genesis 2:11 as the land in which the Pishon river flows.Here we are informed that Chavilah is actually the name of the son of Kush who inhabited a land, and that land was then named after him. Given the Pishon is the Nile, as was explained there, Chavilah is likely to be the area of the source of the Nile and a good portion of territory surrounding the Nile flowing north.

 

Sheba is mentioned here as a son of Raamah, thereby a grandson of Kush, and a great grandson of Ham. The kingdom of Sheba, whose queen had an association with Solomon, mentioned in Melachim, may have been the monarch of the nation descended from the Sheba mentioned in our verse.

 

בראשית י:ח

וכוש ילד את נמרד. הוא החל להיות גבר בארץ.

 

Nimrod is the only figure of stature mentioned in the Torah who is a descendant of Ham. His stature is his being a “Gibor”, a man of great strength , apparently a warrior who becomes a monarch.  The terminology regarding Nimrod is “complicated”.The following are the terms used to describe him:

 

גבור-Warrior

גבור ציד- Powerful hunter

לפני ה’-Before God

ממלכתו (כלומר, מלך על מלכות רחבה)- king, emperor

 

The Torah indicates what Machiavelli clarifies thousands of years later, namely, that

1. Hunting and battling is the same skill, so a great hunter is likely to become a great soldier
2. The leading soldier can then demand to rule.
3. He who rules can then demand to reign.
4. A king who starts in one area can move on to rule nearby areas as well, to the point that he develops an empire.

 

The term  ‘ לפני ה’, “before God” used regarding Nimrod requires understanding.

There is no indication of spiritual or religious development or rule in the description of Nimrod’s person, rule, or empire. Historically, to the extent of our knowledge, historical as well as Midrashic, the religion of the areas Nimrod ruled was idolatry.

 

The Torah completely ignores the religious beliefs of the people listed, and focuses on the Torah perspective of Nimrod’s rule. Among the Jewish people Nimrod was a legendary figure as a hunter. His reputation was to have been the greatest hunter of all time. The title ” Most Powerful Hunter” is how he became known in the lore of the Jewish people at the time of the Torah. It is clear in the Torah that his hunting and warrior skills resulted in his becoming a king and emperor.  But in Jewish lore he was not known as an emperor.  The Jewish tradition the Torah quotes recognizes his greatness as a “Hunter before God”, apparently meaning the greatest hunter in God’s wide world. Hunting was a skill Jewish people valued. His becoming a dictator was not what he is remembered for. Notice that it is clear he was a king, and therefore the word ממלכתו is used, yet the word מלך itself is avoided, perhaps out of disdain.

 

 

בראשית י:ט

הוא היה גבר ציד לפני ה’. על כן יאמר: כנמרד גבור ציד לפני ה’.

 

The term “before God” is used here to refer to the whole world. It indicates no particular place. The universality of Man before God as referring to all men, including Nimrod, is reflected in the universality of all places being equally before God as well. There are no chosen people, and no special land. It is near impossible to miss the Hebrew meaning of the word Nimrod, namely “We shall rebel”. Nimrod’s name sparks the Midrash to connect Nimrod’s empire to the rebellion of the generation of dispersal against God.

 

בראשית י:י,י”א, י”ב

ותהי ראשית ממלכתו בבל, וארך, ואכד וכלנה, בארץ שנער. מן הארץ ההיא יצא אשור, ויבן את נינוה, ואת רחבת עיר, ואת כלח. ואת רסן, בין נינוה ובין כלח, הוא העיר הגדולה.

 

Nimrod is never called a king, yet the Torah describes the geographic extent of his kingdom. He seems to rule without royalty. His early rule includes very extensive and important areas, including Babylon and Acadia. We see the early stages of what becomes an important kingdom, indeed, an empire.

 

It is not absolutely clear whether the large city referred to at the end of verse 12 is Resen, or one of the other cities. However, we know from the Book of Jonah that Nineveh is an unusually large city, so it is likely that here ,too, the large city is Nineveh. It is striking that Nimrod and Cain are both city builders. They also share the phrase “לפני ה'”.  By Cain it is a reference to where Cain is not welcome, that is, nowhere, thereby the term ‘מלפני ה’,  Nimrod refers to the whole world.

 

בראשית י:יג-יד

ומצרים ילד את לודים ואת ענמים ואת להבים ואת נפתחים. ואת פתרוסים ואת כסלוחים, אשר יצאו משם פלשתים ואת כפתרים.

 

Kush and Mitzrayim are “adjacent” brothers, the first and the second of Ham’s children. Similarly, their nations occupy adjacent areas on the eastern coast of Africa. But while Kush’s children are named as individual people, Mitzrayim’s progeny are described as families. Kush’s children lead up to the grand individual  “Nimrod”, Kush’s most famous and grandest descendant. Mitzrayim’s descendants do not stand out as individuals worthy of mention in the Torah. It is rather whole families, perhaps the size of nations, that are his descendants. It appears, as Ramban explains, that these families occupy sections of Mitzrayim, that is, Egypt itself. These families of people are listed in the plural, rather than by a single national name. They do not become nations. They remain, with one exception, large families that are part of the Mitzrayim nation.

 

The exception is the Plishtim- Kaftorim family. They geographically separate from Egypt and settle the coastal area of Canaan. It is striking that the Torah never relates to them as a nation of Canaan. The nations of Canaan are  listed in the next few verses and are Canaan’s descendants. The area of the Plishtim is never considered Halachically Plishtim national land. They are not Cnaanim, but rather misplaced Egyptians. Their settlement on the coast of Canaan is to make convenient their travel and trade to other areas of the Mediterranean. When the Canaanim are primarily wiped out by Joshua, the remaining presence of Plishtim becomes the gentile presence in Canaan, until they too are overcome.

 

בראשית י:טו

וכנען ילד את צידן בכרו ואת חת.

 

The only sons of Canaan mentioned by name are Tsidon and Chet. Tsidon has a city currently in Lebanon named after him. That city is mentioned in the Bible frequently. It is fair to assume he or his descendants settled that city first. Therefore, the area of the city of Tsidon is apparently part of the land of Canaan. It would make sense that all the area south of Tsidon in the direction of the northern border of the modern state of Israel are also part of the land of Canaan.

 

Chet is apparently the ancestor of the nation mentioned repeatedly in the Torah as one of the 7 nations of Canaan, namely, the Chitim. That Chet is mentioned separately as a person, unlike the other nations of Canaan in the coming verses who are not mentioned as specific people but rather as groups of people, indicates he is in a different category, though it is not clear why. It is possible he and Tsidon fathered all the nations of Canaan mentioned in the coming verses. It is also possible that some of the Chitim lived beyond the borders of Canaan, and therefore mentioning Chitim together with the other Canaan nations at this point would be misleading. This latter possibility seems to be born out historically. It is also possible that both possibilities mentioned above are true.

 

בראשית י:טז

ואת היבוסי, ואת האמרי, ואת הגרגשי.

 

These 3 Canaanite nations are mentioned frequently as such. They are 3 of the 7 nations of Canaan listed at the end of Bamidbar. Together with Chet mentioned in the previous verse, 4 Canaanite nations are now mentioned. The Yevusi were primarily in the city known as Yevus, the Canaanite name of Jerusalem. It is striking that after the mention of the 2 sons of Canaan, the first Canaanite nation mentioned is the nation that occupied Jerusalem. That may indicate that Jerusalem is at the top of the list, and the center of the radar, of Canaanite nation settlement.

The Emori, mentioned next, were the first Canaanite nation Israel attacked upon their return to the land of Canaan. This attack took place under the leadership of Moshe, Bamidbar. The Emori lived in Canaan on the east bank of the Jordan river.

 

The Girgashi are never battled in the conquest of Israel in the book of Joshua. Chazal have a tradition that upon the arrival of Israel in Canaan they left Israel of their own accord and settled in Africa. This may be hinted at in their name, which has a root similar to the Hebrew word for “driven out”.

 

בראשית י:יז-יח

ואת החוי ואת הערקי ואת הסיני. ואת הארודי ואת הצמרי ואת החמתי, ואחר נפצו משפחות הכנעני.

 

The Chivi are the 6th of the 7 Canaanite nations mentioned at the end of Bamidbar to appear here. The remaining 5 Canaanite nations mentioned in these 2 verses are not mentioned elsewhere as Canaanite nations. It is possible they are included in the Canaanite nation known as “Canaanites”. It is also possible they assimilated into all or several of the other 7 Canaanite nations.

 

The only of these nations easily identifiable are the last mentioned, the Chamati. They are probably a nation that settled the area on the southwestern bank of the Kineret, and founded the city known as Chamat. The name of this nation seems to be associated with the hot springs right there in the southwestern coast of the Kineret. The first 2 letters of Chamat, Chet and Mem, mean”hot” in Hebrew. If this is the case, this nation would have developed as separate from the others as a result of their geographic seclusion, being at the bottom of the Galilean hills on one side, the Kineret and the Golan Heights on the other side, and being in a very deep altitude, one of the deepest in the world.

 

It would be more appropriate to refer to the Canaani groups as families at this point, than as nations. This is indicated at the end of this verse, referring to them as families. The Canaani families spread out. Perhaps as a result of their spreading out, some of the families lost their unique identity, and merged into what became the Canaani people.

It seems that the dispersal mentioned  in this verse, is not the dispersal associated with the Tower of Babylon, but rather a later dispersal that resulted from a reorganization of the Canaanite families.

 

בראשית י:יט

ויהי גבול הכנעני מצידן באכה גררה עד עזה, באכה סדמה ועמרה ואדמה וצבוים עד לשע.

 

The verse gives a description here of the coastal border from north to south. That is, from Sidon until Gaza city, both Mediterranean ports.The eastern border is not described in this verse. We are only told that the Canaanite nation extended on the east to the 5 cities of Metropolitan Sodom that lie on the coast of the Salt (Dead) Sea. The implication is that all the people living in between the coast and the Sodomite cities are Canaanite as well.

 

בראשית י:כ

אלה בני חם למשפחתם ללשנתם בארצתם בגויהם.

 

This verse is the concluding verse naming the descendants of Ham. It should be carefully compared with the concluding verse of the descendants of Yafet above, Genesis 10:5. The difference is slight but striking . Here are the 2 verses in Hebrew:

 

Yefet:

מאלה נפרדו איי הגוים בארצתם, איש ללשונו, למשפחתם, בגויהם

 

Ham:

אלה בני חם למשפחתם ללשנתם, בארצתם ,בגויהם

 

Let’s point out the differences:

Regarding Yefet the verse starts by emphasizing the following points:

1. The dispersal
2. To the islands of nations
3. In their lands
4. Each man according to his language
5. According to their family
6. Within their nation

 

Let’s restate the above:

Yefet was widely dispersed . The dispersal was not merely to a variety of lands. There were also islands. The islands were probably both Caspian (corresponding to Medea and Persia) , and Mediterranean (corresponding to Greece). It is fair to say the distance from one end of Yefet’s territory to the other end is about 2000 kilometers.  The number of families and ethnic groups that sprouted from Athens to Teheran is almost innumerable. The dispersal is not merely very wide, but very varied. Some of the languages are Semitic, and some Indo- European, including Romance, Hellenic , and Persian.The ancient languages spoken in Yefet’s territory includes Aramaic, Arabic, Persian, Turkish, Greek, and Latin. It includes the civilized world of the Biblical era.

 

Ham’s dispersal in terms of kilometers is not less than that of Yefet, and is probably more. But it is primarily along the east coast of Africa and northward into the Canaanite coast of the Mediterranean. Ham’s territory is Northeastern Africa and the adjacent Mediterranean southeastern coast.

 

Yefet’s territory emphasizes its islands, lands, languages ,families, and nations, in that order. Ham’s territory emphasizes its families, languages, lands, and nations; a different order. We will assume the order of the verse is a causative order, meaning for Yefet,  the different islands resulted in different lands, which resulted in different languages, with even individuals developing separate languages, then families, and ultimately nations.

 

Ham’s dispersal starts with families that developed distinct languages, resulting in different lands, and ultimately nations. Apparently Ham’s families divided and developed without geographic separation. It was their ethnic and linguistic difference that brought them to go to different lands and develop different nations. Their internal tendency to live close but to develop separation nonetheless might indicate a tendency towards strife. This may have resulted from their awareness of the lack of respect Ham displayed towards Noah, and a deep lack of self respect. This may have been even truer of Canaan, who was explicitly cursed by Noah.

 

בראשית י:כא

ולשם ילד גם הוא אבי כל בני עבר, אחי יפת הגדול.

 

This verse may be compared with בראשית ד:כו:

ולשת גם הוא ילד בן

 

These verses have the following in common:

1. They begin with the Hebrew letter “ו” attached to a person’s name
2. The verb ילד is used in the pual form, third person singular past. This indicates heavy recognition of the woman’s active pregnancy and delivery  as opposed to the relatively passive husband.
3. The Hebrew words “גם הוא”  are used regarding them both. In both cases it is this progeny through which the great historic personality of the next generation will appear in 9 generations: Noah and Abraham. Thank God, Seth and Shem both fathered progeny that would eventually prove worthy of unique religious quality, and unique responsibility in the development of the world.

 

בראשית י:כב

בני שם עילם ואשור וארפכשד, ולוד וארם.

 

The names of Shem’s children are striking. They are each names familiar to us one way or another.

Elam is a territory east of Persia. One of the kings in the battle of the valley of the Dead Sea, between the 4 kings who invaded and the 5 kings of the local area, was Kdarlaomer, king of Elam (Breishit 14:1,4,5,9,17) mentioned more often than any other invading king. Ashur has already been emphasized in Genesis 10:11 in the context of NImrod. It is mentioned in  other Biblical texts from the late first Temple period. Ashur as a nation continues for thousands of years into the future. The country today called Syria, or in the Talmud, Suriya, is the same place as Ashur, and a corruption of that name.

 

Arpachshad has no place named after him. But he is the son of Shem who is the ancestor of Abraham, as explained in the next chapter of the Torah. The name seems not to be a Hebrew name, unlike the rest of Shem’s sons’ names, which could pass as Hebrew words. Lud may be a reference to the city by that name in central Israel. It was already called by that name in the period of the Mishna, and there is every reason to assume that name was what it was called thousands of years before, as is the case with so many cities in Israel today.

 

Alternatively, It may also be a reference to an ancient kingdom in Turkey, called by that name in Biblical times. That might fit in better with the other names of Shem’s sons.There are several places known as Aram, the last of Shem’s children mentioned. all close to each other. Aram Naharayim, that is, Aram of the 2 rivers Euphrates and Tigris, is the geographic area enclosed by these rivers, which merge into each other and end as they flow into the Persian Gulf.

 

בראשית י:כג

ובני ארם: עוץ וחול וגתר ומש.

 

Uz, the first son of Aram mentioned, is the name of the place Job is mentioned as living in at the beginning of the Book of Job. Hul, the second, might be identified as the namesake of the Hula Sea, north of the Kineret, that has been drained and renamed the Hula Valley. No additional information regarding Gether and Mash are readily available.

 

בראשית י:כד

וארפכשד ילד את שלח, ושלח ילד את עבר.

 

It is possible that Shelach was the only son Arpachshad had. No other son is mentioned in the Torah or the rest of the Bible.  Similarly, no other son of Shelach is mentioned, other than Ever.

 

בראשית י:כה

ולעבר ילד שני בנים; שם האחד פלג, כי בימיו נפלגה הארץ, ושם אחיו יקטן.

 

The verb “yulad”, the Pual form of the verb “to progenate” , is the extreme passive form of that verb. This form when it appears with  a male as the subject implies extreme  recognition of the female contribution to the pregnancy. This was already explained in verse 21. Its use here once again regarding Ever, further emphasizes this unique form. “Yulad” appeared already in chapter 4:26 when Seth is first mentioned as having his first child, Enosh. This verb form is used only by people who are perceived in our tradition as righteous people; Seth, Shem, Ever.. (Although in Genesis 6:1 the Pual form indicates lack of interest, when righteous people such as Seth, Shem, and Ever are allotted this verb, the indication is that they experienced the birth as being a joint effort of oneself and one’s wife).

 

In the midrashim it is widely assumed that the “Dispersion of the land” referred to in Peleg;s name took place the year Peleg died. This interpretation assumes Ever was a prophet, and thereby called Peleg ‘s name by the significant event that was to take place the year he will die.

In a more pshat oriented interpretation, it would seem that Ever called Peleg by that name because the dispersion happened shortly after Peleg was born. This would push back the Dispersal over 200 years. In that case, the dispersal would have been an ancient event by the time of Abraham. This seems to be the simple reading of the Torah. By the time of Abraham Haran was a developed city, and Egypt was a developed country with a king. It is very difficult to imagine these developments happening so shortly after the Dispersal.

 

בראשות י:כו

ויקטן ילד את אלמודד ואת שלף, ואת חצרמות ואת ירח.

 

The names of Yaktan’s second, third, and fourth children have clear meanings in Hebrew. Shalef is “to draw one’s sword”, Chatsarmavet is “the Gate of Death”, and Yarach is “the Moon” .. It is impossible to know why these names were given. It is possible the first two are descriptions of the violence that took place at the time of the Generation of Dispersal. The Moon may have been  in honor of the moon as an idol, or perhaps the moon was full, shiny, or reappeared when Yerach was born.

 

Almodad may have a meaning in an ancient language. If it is based on Hebrew, the root “to Study” ,למד, appears therein, preceded by an א, with a repeated ד at the end. It is striking that the first child is given a name connected to education, and the next two to violence, followed by “the moon” . These changes might indicate striking world events of historic proportions that were taking place.

 

בראשות י: כז-כט

ואת הדורם ואת אוזל ואת דקלה. ואת עובל ואת אבימאל ואת שבא. ואת אופר ואת חוילה ואת יובב, כל אלה בני יקטן.

 

The only names familiar to us from the list of Yaktan’s children in these verses are Ofir, Sheva, and Chavilah.

Sheva, or Sheba, as it is usually known, is  mentioned in ספר מלכים as a nation whose queen visits King Solomon (Kings 10).

 

Ofir is mentioned there in Kings as well as a place from where Chiram brought gold to Solomon.

Chavilah is mentioned already in Genesis 2 as the land surrounded by the first of the 4 rivers that came from Eden. There it is mentioned as the specific place of gold.

 

Here, Chavilah is a person. In chapter 2, it is a place. Chavilah the place is associated with the river Pishon, and Pishon was identified as the Nile. One would think the place Chavilah is named after the person who settled that place. But the name dates back to Eden, which itself cannot be located, while the person is 6 generations after Noah. Apparently, Chavilah the person is named after the place, as a memoriam for a place of the past (just as Kehat in Egypt calls one of his sons Chevron after the city in Canaan) full of gold and precious metals.

 

בראשית י:ל

ויהי מושבם ממשא, באכה ספרה הר הקדם.

 

Kedem has already been mentioned in Breishit 2:8 and 3:24. Onkelus on those verses interprets Kedem “before”, or “earlier”, in reference to the Garden of Eden, while here it is a mountain of Kedem, that is, the mountain of the East..

 

If we may identify the Kedem here in Breishit 10:30 as the Kedem of Breishit 2:8 and 3:24 (different than Onkelos’ commentary), one might understand the settlement in the direction of the border (באכה ספרה) as an effort to return to the direction of the Garden of Eden, to a prehistoric, predeluvian world of tranquility. The coming story of the Dispersal , merely a few verses forward, says explicitly that the people who built the City and Tower of that generation were traveling from Kedem. This quest for tranquility is soon shattered by the Dispersal, soon to be mentioned. The place Mesha is spelled with an א at the end, not a ה. Despite this, it is possible to see a hint in the 2 words משא and ספרה a hint to Moshe and the Sefer Habrit he will present to the Jewish people at Sinai.

 

The next time Har Kedem is mentioned in the Torah is in the opening blessing Bilaam gives to the Jewish people, Bamidbar 23:7. There Bilaam describes that Balak king of Moav led him from הררי קדם, from the mountains of Kedem (as in our verse) . Combining the hint of Moshe and the Sefer Torah  with the geographic origin of BIlaam would hint to the Midrash that Bilam was viewed  as a prophet equivalent  to Moshe for the gentile nations.Since many of the children of Shem have names that identify not only nations but lands as well, it is fair to assume that the description of settlement here relates to the descendants of Yaktan specifically.

 

 

בראש’ת י:לא

אלה בני שם למשפחתם ללשנתם בארצתם לגויהם.

 

The families of Shem have all been mentioned, including Peleg, the child from whom Abraham will descend, as described in the next chapter. Despite Shem being distinguished as protecting his father from shame, and the verb “Yulad” as described above regarding his siring children,  nothing further is indicated regarding his descendants. This is assuming, as suggested above, that Peleg was named after an event that had already taken place, a s opposed to the Midrashic view that his naming was a prophecy. Like the descendants of Yefet and Cham, his descendants have their own families, languages, and lands. that resulted in nations.

 

  בראשית י:לב

אלה משפחת בני נח לתלדתם בגוייהם, ומאלה נפרדו הגויים בארץ אחר המבול.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              The descendants of Noach’s children and several generations beyond have been mentioned. They number 70. Here is the list:

 

1.גמר

2.מגוג

3.מדי

4.יון

5.תבל

6.משך

7.תירס

8.אשכנז

9.ריפת

10.תגרמה

11.אלישה

12.תרשיש

13.כתים

14.דדנים

15.כוש

16.סכא

17.חוילה (1)

18.סבתה

19.רעמה

20.סבתכא

21.שבא (1)

22.דדן

23.נמרד

24.מצרים

25.לודים

26.ענמים

27.להבים

28.נפתחים

29.פחרוסים

30.כסלוחים

31.פלשתים

32.כפטורים

33.כנען

34.צידון

35.חת

36.יבוסי

37.אמרי

38.גרגשי

39.חוי

40.ערקי

41.סיני

42.ארודי

43.צמרי

44.חמתי

45.עילם

46.אשור

47.ארפכשד

48.לוד

49.ארם

50.עוץ

51.חול

52.גתר

53.מש

54.שלח

55.עבר

56.פלג

57.יקטן

58.אלמודד

59.שלף

60.חצרמות

61.ירח

62.הדורם

63.אוזל

64.דקלה

65.עובל

66.אבימאל

67.שבא (2)

68.אופר

69.חוילה (2)

70.יובב

 

The number of nations being 70 is easily counted, but is never stated explicitly in the Torah. What is mentioned explicitly are 2 points. One, is that the number of people descending to Egypt with Jacob towards the end of Breishit is 70. The second, is the verse towards the end of the Torah in the song of Haazinu:

יצב גבולות עמים למספר בני ישראל

 

God set the nations’ borders according to the number of the people of Israel.  The implication is that the number of Jewish people mirrors the number of gentile nations.

 

בראשית י:לב

אלה משפחת בני נח לתולדתם בגויהם ומאלה נפרדו הגוים בארץ אחר המבול.

 

This verse clarifies the relationship between the list of 70 descendants of Noach’s children and their differing languages and lands, and the next story in the Torah, describing the cause of the dispersal. Let us ask the “elephant in the room” question: The historical order of these 2 chapters is that the dispersal story in chapter 11 preceded the description of 70 nations in chapter 10. Why then, does the Torah first present the result of the dispersal and only afterwards its cause?

A possible answer is that there is a dual track of causality taking place in the dispersal, and the Torah presents both tracks as actually taking place. Chapter 10 presents the “natural ” dispersion and resulting nations. Families separate for all sorts of reasons. Brothers may end up living far from each other. Their families develop separately, despite the biological and genetic connection.

 

The distance may result not only in estrangement, but in complete ignorance, and lack of family identification with relatives who live far away. Distance can also result in differing linguistic development, to a point where a few generations back all were speaking one language, but currently the languages are merely related, but incomprehensible to one another. This is the “natural” track of the dispersal and the development of different languages. This is described, or assumed, in chapter 10.

 

The second track explains that the dispersal, and separation of languages was Divinely decreed.

The second track is describing the Providential cause of the separation of the nations and languages and the resulting world order that developed. The 2 track system described above is similar to the 2 track system at the beginning of Breishit, describing the creation story in 2 different ways. It is important to be aware of the 2 track system as a method of presentation the Torah uses to provide different perspectives on the same event. There is reason to expect that the Torah will continue to present 2 presentations of the same story, and sometimes more than 2. Hopefully we will succeed in pointing this out as the Torah continues to unfold.

 

בראשית יא:א

ויהי כל הארץ שפה אחת ודברים אחדים.

 

The words “all the land” means “all the people of the land”. All the people spoke one and the same language. This was natural enough, given they were a single united community. The further explanation, that they spoke about singular matters, implies there was no disagreement. This is difficult to imagine. We don’t know how many people there were at the time that is being described. But even if there were only 70 male adults and their wives, how could it be that there was no dispute about anything?

 

The implicit implication is that there was enforced unity of expression. Who was enforcing this unity is not clear. One might tend to blame Nimrod. But it seems to have been widely accepted that this is the way it should be. Social pressure itself resulted in a unity of minds, or at least of expression.

 

Let’s remember that we are talking not too long after the Flood. At least Shem is certainly alive, and perhaps his brothers as well. Noah himself is also almost certainly alive. His silence regarding what is about to happen, is indicative of his not being considered a leader of the community at all. This may be as a result of the episode of his drunkardness, or perhaps simply because of his very advanced age.

 

בראשית יא:ב

ויהי בנסעם מקדם, וימצאו בקעה בארץ שנער וישבו שם.

 

It is not clear whether the word “Kedem” in this verse referred to a particular place, or from the eastern direction. See Breishit 3:24, 4:16, Bamidbar 23:7. It appears that all the people were searching for a single place that could comfortably contain all of them together. They found such a place in a “bikah”. A bikah does not seem to be a regular valley, for the word in Hebrew for “valley” is עמק. Bikah is a place which seems like it had once been a connected land that was broken into 2 portions. The Bikah is the ground between the 2 heights that had been connected before the break took place. It is a sharply distinct place, and perhaps is best translated in English as a “canyon”. The sense of isolation within the canyon from the rest of the world, as well as a powerful feeling of togetherness is much stronger than would result from merely being in a valley.

 

 

בראשית יא:ג

ויאמרו איש אל רעהו “הבה נלבנה לבנים, ונשרפה לשרפה.” ותהי להם הלבנה לאבן, והחמר היה להם לחמר.

 

There are 24 key words that appear in the Dispersal Generation story here in Breishit 11  that also appear in Shmot 1, the description of the Jewish people’s enslavement in Egypt.

Here is a list:

 

1.הבה (בראשית 3, שמות 1)

2. פן
3. הארץ (בראשית 5, שמות 2)
4. נפוץ, ויפץ, הפיצם (בראשית), יפרוץ (שמות)

5, חמר (בראשית 2, שמות פעם 1)

6. לבנים
7. העיר (בראשית), ערי (שמות)
8. אחת
9. אבן (בראשית), אבנים (שמות)
10. בנו

11.שם (בראשית 3(שם, שמה, ומשם), שמות 2)(יש גם שמות, וגם שם (there)

12. עשה (ונעשה, לעשות, לעשות (3)-בראשית. עשו, עשיתן (2)-שמות)
13. נבנה, לבנות (בראשית), ויבן (שמות)
14. בני
15. לראות (בראשית), וראיתן (שמות)

16.ויהי (בראשית 2, שמות 2)

17.דבר (בראשית-דברים, שמות-דבר)

18. אמר (בראשית-ויאמרו, שמות-ויאמר)
19. החלם (בראשית), ונלחם (שמות) (למרות שינוי סדר האותיות)
20. שפתם (בראשית), סבלתם (שמות) (תם מסיים 2 המלים, ה “ש” וה”ס” אותה צליל, וה “פ” וה “ב” מתחלפים בביטוי, כמו “הפקר” ו”הבקר” במשנה במסכת פאה )
21. איש
22. כן

23.קרא (בראשית), תקראנה (שמות)

24. כל

 

There is an implicit linguistic comparison between these 2 portions of the Torah. I would like to interpret the connection. Breishit 11 describes the world before nations, as a united people. Their intention is to live together, to build a city for all the people of the world, to have a structure that can be seen from afar to center their settlement for miles around, and thus remain together. It is impossible to know how many people there were. But just to put things in some perspective, on a clear day when crossing the George Washington Bridge from New Jersey to northern Manhattan, the World Trade Center can be seen clearly, although it is more than 10 miles away in southern Manhattan. Many other shorter buildings in Manhattan can also be seen.The daytime working population of Manhattan is estimated at 8 million people. Regarding the population of the Dispersal Generation, we may be talking about 100 people, or we may be talking about 10 million people, or anywhere in between. The mutuality of the activity of building, as well the expected gigantic structure itself, was seen by God in the next verses as a uniting factor.

 

The building was not due to a housing shortage. The purpose, while described murkily, seems to have 2 factors:

 

1. “Let us make a Name for Ourselves”. In other words: Let Us accomplish something BIG. “Let Us make a Monument to Our Greatness”.
2. “Let’s Prevent Our Dispersal”. The Mutuality of Effort , combined with the Grand Symbol of Our Accomplishment, will keep us together and United. Lincoln’s words taken out of context here are appropriate: “United We Stand, Divided We Fall!”

 

The lack of any reference to God in the oral preparation of this grand effort indicates it was meant as a completely secular effort. Whether the people believed in God, in idols, or in nothing, this building is not about religion, but rather a tribute to themselves as a whole. The tension of commandment experienced by Adam and Eve is absent. The violence of the Flood Generation is absent as well. They are getting along beautifully. But they have idolized their society itself.

There is nothing forbidden in this activity. But it does not forebode well for the future of this society. God’s question is “What will they do next?”

 

In effect, the people have been enslaved individually by their Collective. It is all voluntary activity at this point. But in light of there being Free Will not only individually but Collectively as well, even God is unsure what is coming next.

 

The Egyptian enslavement of the Jews reflects a future catastrophe that takes place on a local though national level, but not universally. The Israelites are slowly sucked into an enslavement not as part of society at large like the Dispersal Generation, but rather by a coercing nation that fears them and looks to subjugate them before it gets too late. The pre-Dispersal generation is enslaved to itself. The Israelites were enslaved to the Egyptians. The need for freedom from the enslavement of the Jewish people is at the core of the Pesach celebration and many other commandments of the Torah. The need for freedom from enslavement to Society at Large is discerned by God as a long term concern that should be nipped in the bud.        .

 

 

בראשית יא:ד

הבה נבנה לנו עיר, ומגדל וראשו בשמים, ונעשה לנו שם, פן נפוץ על פני כל הארץ.

 

The alliteration in this verse is striking. The alliteration itself divides the verse into 3 portions: The first 3 words alliterate the ב,נ,ה, sounds, the Hebrew root letters of “to build”, their practical goal. The last 6 words alliterate the נ, פ, צ sounds, the Hebrew root of “to disperse”, their fear. The middle 6 words alliterate the letters ש, מ, the sounds of the Hebrew word “Name”, the goal the people were seeking to accomplish for their collective unity.

 

The contrast between their goal of reaching שמים,the heavens, with their skyscraper, and their fear of dispersal throughout ” הארץ” , the lowly land should they not succeed, reminds us of the opening 2 verses of the Torah. God creates the Heavens and the Earth, but then goes on to describe the Earth, leaving the Heavens for impractical curiosity and speculation  To quote Psalms 115 “The Heavens are the Heavens of God, and the Earth He gave over to Men.” Their intention to build into the Heavens is a trespassing of Man beyond his assigned realm.

 

בראשית יא:ה-ו

וירד ה’ לראות את העיר והמגדל אשר בנו בני האדם. ויאמר ד’: הן עם אחד ושפה אחת לכלם, וזה החלם לעשות, ועתה לא יבצר מהם כל אשר יזמו לעשות.

 

The notion of God descending is  anthropomorphic. The language is further confounded by the implication that God needed to descend in order to see what was going on. But the Sforno injects a unique meaning to this phrase:”The language of “descent in order to see” is said regarding God when the activity itself is not itself worthy of punishment. The problem is rather the long term results after many generations of the activity. The efforts of the people to remain united will result in very little changing over the generations.

 

The Sforno takes it a step further. It is clear from the continuation of Breishit that idolatry took hold of the world sometime after the Flood, and was the religious framework by the time of Abraham. But the Torah gives no time line for when idolatry took hold, nor how it came about.The only event from Noah to Abraham of universal significance mentioned in the Torah is the Dispersal.

 

The Sforno understands that idolatry was already the accepted theology at the time of the Dispersal. The absence of God  in the discussion towards the building of the city and tower supports this view. God was optimistic that the people would return to Him eventually. But the unity and central concentration of the people worshipping their Collective may prevent the search for God. It would be through a Dispersal that seeking out the God of Creation would take place.

 

 

 

בראשית יא:ז

הבה נרדה ונבלה שם שפתם, אשר לא ישמעו איש שפת רעהו.

 

The plural verbs are best understood as referring to God alone, using the plural majestic verb form. God does not disperse the builders of the tower by physical force. He uses the linguistic confusion to cause them to disperse on their own.This is the most miraculous Divine action since Creation itself, and may be considered an extension of Creation per se.

 

We have already pointed out when interpreting chapter 10 that the development of different languages described there seems a natural result of their development of families and the distancing of groups from each other. Here we are informed there was something abrupt that brought this about.

 

Now to the verse itself. It is striking that the idea of forming bricks preceded the idea of building a city and tower.The generation sensed it needed bricks to build something. What exactly they needed the bricks for was not clear. Once the bricks were there, they found use for them. But the opening motivation to form bricks was to just have them. In a pre-monetary society, security was found in the potential for building.

 

בראשית יא:ח

ויפץ ה’ אותם, משם על פני כל הארץ, ויחדלו לבנות העיר.

 

The activity of Dispersal is mentioned before explicit mention of the Confusion of languages, which is saved for the next verse. The order of events here is not clearly described. Practically speaking, it was the dispersal that stopped the building of the city. The building of the city and tower might have continued despite the sudden lack of common language had there been a will to remain together despite the communication difficulty. The difference in language resulted in the people having no desire to stay together. They dispersed, and of course stopped building the city and tower meant to unite them.

 

While the division of languages is explicit in God’s description of what He will do, and is stated in the final verse of the paragraph, the first thing mentioned in God’s action is His dispersing the people throughout the World. This results in our current situation, with people living from New Zealand to England , from the southern tip of South America to Alaska and Greenland, and everywhere in between.

 

 

 

בראשית יא:ט

על כן קרא שמה בבל, כי שם בלל ה’ שפת כל הארץ, ומשם הפיצם ה’ על פני כל הארץ.

 

The city of Bavel, or Babylon as it came to be known, has its name rooted in the Hebrew root בלל, “mix up.” The language confusion took place already in the city itself, and that was God’s way of dispersing the people throughout the world, as God wanted, “ומלאו את הארץ”.

Thus describes the Torah the Divine plan that resulted in Man’s dispersal. As we mentioned before, this miraculous event may not have been experienced by those present as miraculous. It may well have been experienced as a natural result of what was going on at the time. Please remember, we are given no hint as to whether the number of people being dispersed are in the hundreds or the millions. The difference in terms of the nature of the event is astounding.

It is striking that Babylon thousands of years later became the centerpoint of the Jewish Diaspora at the time of the First Temple destruction. It was almost as if God exiled the Jewish people to a pre national state by placing them in Babylon. The Jewish people, exiled from the land of Israel, are left in a prestate existence, as represented by Babylon itself.

 

It has been suggested by some that the Flood and/ or the Dispersion are mentioned in the Torah not as real events, but rather as a Torah perspective on the mythologies that were accepted at the time of the receiving of the Torah, incorporated by God into the Torah He gave us..While this approach in no way contradicts the Divinity of the Torah, it may well be historically inaccurate. The flooding of the Black Sea  which took place at some point in human prehistory was probably experienced by those who lived through it as a Flood that decimated humanity and all animal life, except for a lone few who survived, who seemed to have a “premonition” that others lacked that it was about to take place. The book “Noah’s Flood” by Ryan and Pitman, oceanographers who investigated the matter, see the Flood as a real historical event. While their account of it has many details at odds with Parsht Noach, much more is similar to it than one would have imagined. It is safe to say that the event of the Flood, and the Dispersion that came about in its aftermath as described in the Torah, is real.

 

בראשית יא:י

אלה תולדת שם: שם בן מאת שנה ויולד את ארפכשד שנתים אחר המבול.

 

Like the previous generations who lived in the pre diluvian era, Shem bears Arpachshad approximately at the age of 100 . From chapter 10, it appears Arpachshad, the child reported born in this verse, is Shem’s 3rd child, after Eylam and Ashur. Here we are getting a limited description of Shem’s progeny, The lineage here is meant to inform us of the lineage leading to Abram.

 

Arpachshad is a name that does not seem to have a Hebrew root. Most names have meanings. Arpachshad has no apparent meaning in Hebrew. It is fair to assume it has a meaning in the language from which Shem derived the name, whatever that may be. It is striking that of the 5 children mentioned in chapter 10 that Shem fathered, 4 have names that appear elsewhere in the Bible: עילם, אשור, לוד , ארם. Only Arpachshad is mentioned exclusively in chapters 10 and 11 of Genesis, and its parallel verses at the beginning of דברי הימים. Why?

 

It is possible that Arpachshad, though one of the 70 “nations” mentioned previously in chapter 10, has only one purpose in history: to continue the line from Shem to Abram. That’s it. His role is exclusively to bring the world from the era of Noah and Shem to the era of Abram. It is possible that this role is as important or more important than the various roles the other sons of Shem play in the Bible.

 

בראשית יא:יא

ויחי שם אחרי הולידו את ארפכשד חמש מאות שנה, ויולד בנים ובנות.

 

Shem lives after the Flood 502 years, for a total of 600 years.. His longevity is significantly lower than the median age of the genealogy from Adam to Noah, but significantly higher than all those mentioned in the descendancy from himself to Abraham. His life span of 600 years seems to be a bridge connecting the common lifespan from Adam to Noah (900) and the common lifespan from Arpachshad to Ever (400).

 

Shem outlives Noah by about 152 years, and lives for 502 years after the Flood. Abraham is born 360 years after the Flood. Thus Shem had the opportunity to meet Abraham from the time Abraham was born until Abraham turned 141. This includes Abraham’s first recorded prophecy at the age of 75, the miraculous birth of Yitchak when Sarah was 90 years old and Abraham 100, the complete duration of Abraham’s life with Sarah, and in Shem’s last year of life, Abraham’s marriage to Keturah. The Medrash, which identifies Shem as Malkitsedek king of Shalem, views Abraham as knowing and having a relationship with Shem. This would give Abraham the opportunity to discuss all matters , religious, personal, and communal with Shem for the complete duration of his life until Isaac marries Rebecca.

 

 בראשית יא:יב

וארפחשד חי חמש ושלשים שנה, ויולד את שלח.

 

The name Shelach in Hebrew means “sent”. If this is what is meant, it is hard to discern the intention of the namer. Given that Shelach is the ancestor of one of the 70 nations, each with its own language, it is possible that the meaning of the name is found in a different language, and is not meant to be translated based on the Hebrew translation of the word.

 

בראשית יא:יג

ויחי ארפכשד אחרי הולידו את שלח שלש שנים וארבע מאות שנה, ויולד בנים ובנות

Arpachshad is the first of a few people mentioned in the Torah to live for 400 plus years. He is from the first generation born after the flood. 400 years seems to be the expected life span of this lineage until the Dispersal, which will cause a further drop in longevity.

 

בראשית יא:יד

ושלח חי שלדים שנה ויולד את עבר.

 

The name Eiver means “side” or “other side”. It might imply that the namer sees this generation as beyond the generation of the Flood, on the other side of world history, reminiscent of “the end of history ” approach when Russia started having elections 35 years ago, and made moves towards democracy.  The looming of the Dispersal was not sensed at all.

 

בראשית יא:טו

ויחי שלח אחרי הולידו את עבר שלש שנים וארבע מאות שנה, ויולד בנים ובנות.

 

There is something striking that the number of years Shelach lives after bearing Ever is exactly the same as his father Arpachshad, 403 years. This might indicate that there was no significant change in this stage of the lineage. There are certainly significant changes from Noah to Shem, and Shem to Arpachshad, and Shelach to Ever. The identical numbers of years after progeny indicates that this rung of the lineage is static.

 

בראשית יא:טז

ויחי עבר ארבע ושלשים שנה ויולד את פלג.

 

Living 34 years before having his first child is the longest wait from Arpachshad until Nahor. That is, the longest from the first of this chain born after the Flood, until Abraham’s father, who is apparently in a different category, as we will soon see. In other words, 34 is the longest wait still within the general range, not beyond in a category of its own.

 

In Midrash, Ever is considered a righteous person. It is possible that this is because he waited a bit longer to understand the situation after the Dispersal., or it may be indicated from hןs living 464 years , longer than anyone from Arpachshad up to and including Nahor.

 

 

 

בראשית יא:יז

ויחי עבר אחרי הולידו את פלג שלשים שנה וארבע מאות שנה ויולד בנים ובנות.

 

 

 

Ever lives 464 years, as mentioned before, longer than anyone else from Arpachshad to Nahor. He is the last of those mentioned in the Torah to have lived 400 years or more. It is clear that his lifespan is indicative of being from an earlier period of history, the pre-Dispersal era, when either such long lifespans were known to be. His continuing to live even during the life of Yaakov Avinu must have rendered him a relic of a different era of history towards, certainly after Shem passed away. He probably represented what a person was meant to be like during the pre-Abrahamic period, had only the masses been righteous as he was.

 

If we are to accept the position expressed above that the Dispersal took place at or before the birth of Peleg, his birth is a crucial moment in this genealogy. It is hinted to by the severe drop in lifespan following progeny, as will be explained in the coming verses.

 

בראשית יא:יח

ויחי פלג שלשים שנה, ויולד את רעו.

 

Peleg lived a regular number of years before bearing children, 30, comparable to the several past generations, starting from Arpachshad. His son’s name, Reu, seems to be from the root of friendship. used as a plural verb, as if saying or hoping, “Let’s all be friends.” This would indicate that Peleg, whose name was related to the tragedy of Dispersal, was hoping his son’s generation would seek universal friendship. This would indicate that Peleg learned from the righteousness of his father, and was hoping his son’s generation would also seek that goodness.

 

בראשית יא:יט

ויחי פלג אחרי הולידו את רעו תשע שנים ומאתים שנה, ויולד בנים ובנות.

 

Here it becomes clear that we have entered a new era, the era following the Dispersal, when lifespan is reduced from an expected 400 years to 200 years. Peleg lives 239 years, and passes away during the lifetime of Shem, Arpachshad, Shelach and Ever. It might have been viewed as an exception from the norm, but the continuing generation’s lifespan would make it clear that this would be the new norm, 200 instead of 400 years. The Dispersal affected the lifespan of those who were born when it happened, and those born from then on.

 

בראשית יא:כ

ויחי רעו שתים ושלשים שנה, ויולד את שרוג.

 

“Srug” means “knitted.” Following the name Reu, “Let’s be friends,” Srug might mean “Let’s be so close, as if we were knitted together.” This hope was hardly realized. Srug, grandson of Peleg, is living in an era of continual dispersion. The hoped for centrifugalism has been completely replaced by centripetal forces, fulfilling God’s will to populate the planet.

 

בראשית יא:כא

ויחי רעו אחרי הולידו את שרוג שבע שנים ומאתים שנה ויולד בנים ובנות.

 

It is striking that both Reu and Peleg lived 239 years. It was as if the downward spiral of longevity begins with a father and son both of whom live the same number of years, almost a steadying term of life before the descent comes forth full blast.

 

בראשית יא:כב

ויחי שרוג שלשים שנה ויולד את נחור.

 

Srug maintains the age of progeny at its previous minimum, 30, the age when Shelach and Peleg bore a child. The meaning of Nahor may be related to a decision not to perform שחיטה,but rather to kill the animal without formality. נחירה became the language of killing the animal without shechitah in the Talmud. How this may reflect avoiding אבר מן החי is unclear, if this is the case.

 

Another meaning of the root of the name Nahor is “nostrils”. This meaning connects the word נחור with a word containing the same letters, חרון, which means “anger”. Similarly, the Hebrew word אף means both “anger” and “nose”. A person becomes short of breath when he gets angry.

Anger may well have increased substantially as the generations become less and less spiritual, and had trouble understanding the frustrations their generation was subject to as the result of the Dispersal.

 

בראשית יא:כג

ויחי שרוג אחרי הולידו את נחור מאתים שנה ויולד בנים ובנות.

 

While Srug is not successful in knitting together the world, his life is a life with an admirable goal. His years following his age of marriage is a round number, 200, indicating a life of structure and purpose. His lifespan after marriage mirrors the positive content of his life, weaving the world together.

 

בראשית יא:כד

ויחי נחור תשע ועשרים שנה, ויולד את תרח.

 

Angry Nahor is the only person in this genealogy who bears a son before he turns 30. He seems to sense his life will not have the longevity of his ancestors, all of whom lived beyond 200. He therefore marries and bears a child when merely 29. His son is named Terach, a word vaguely associated with the word for moon. This might indicate that Nahor was a moon worshipper. If so, this would be the only hint that idolatry is the religion of the world at this time. This connection to idolatry may be the textual basis for the Midrash that Terach had an idol shop.

 

בראשית יא:כה

ויחי נחור אחרי הולידו את תרח תשע עשרה שנה ומאת שנה, ויולד בנים ובנות.

 

Nahor’s lifespan dips significantly from his father, grandfather, and great grandfather, all of whom lived over 200 years. He lives 148 years. This gets closer to a lifespan we are familiar with. This dip may be part of the continual diminishing of lifespan taking place after the Dispersal, or may be unique to Nahor the angry idolater, who is undeserving of the longevity of his ancestors.

 

בראשית יא:כו

ויחי תרח שבעים שנה, ויולד את אברם, את נחור, ואת הרן.

 

Terach stands out in several ways.

1. Instead of bearing a son in his 30s like almost all his ancestors, he bears a son when he reaches more than twice that age, namely 70.
2. He does not have numerous children like all his ancestors from Shem down. He has only 3 children.
3. His children have names that are uniquely suggestive. Avram means in Hebrew “Great Father”. Terach has great expectations from the family that Avram will father. Nahor is named after Terach’s father. This is the first time in the Torah where a person is named after an ancestor. Haran is a name rooted in pregnancy.

 

It is likely that the Torah mentions all 3 of Terach’s sons because their families have roles in the continuation of Breishit. Terach’s decision, if it was that, not to have a child until 70, is reminiscent of Noah, who like Terach , had children only many years after the point of life when his ancestors did. It is an indication that Terach, like Noah, considered first whether or not to have children at all, and finally came to the conclusion that he would. And like Noach, he does not have many children, but rather only three. Terach seems to view Noach as a role model. If this is so, this would place Terach in opposition to the builders of the Babylon Tower, who did not look to Noah for advice or leadership. Let us remember that Noah is still alive when Terach’s children are born.

 

בראשית יא:כז

ואלה תולדות תרח, תרח הוליד את אברם, את נחור, ואת הרן, והרן הוליד את לוט.

 

This verse repeats the information given ai the second part of the previous verse, and adds that Haran fathered Lot. If one compares this verse with several similar verses in the Torah, it seems there is a method to this “repeated” repetition. Here are the sets of verses with this method. What is common to the examples listed below is that an earlier verse gives information regarding children born, and the later verse starts with the words אלה תולדות, and then  repeats part or all of the children or descendants already mentioned in an earlier verse.

 

1: Genesis 5:32, 6:9-10 (regarding Noah)

2. Genesis 9:18-19, 10:1 (regarding Shem, Ham, and Yafet)

3.Genesis 10:21-25; 11:10-17:(regarding Shem, Arpachshad, Shelach, and Ever)

4. Genesis 11:26; 11:27 (Regarding Terach, Avram, Nahor, and Haran)
5. Genesis 16:15; 25:12 (Regarding Ishmael)
6. Genesis 21:2, 25:12 (Regarding Isaac)

 

Let me suggest the following: The phrase ואלה תולדות indicates that the new genealogy mentioned indicates a different phase of Biblical history. It repeats information already given to emphasize that although it may appear that this is merely the next generation, actually it is a new, or separate stage of Biblical continuity. Sometimes it introduces the main character of the continuing Biblical narrative. This is the case with Noah, Shem Ham and Yaphet, Avram, and Isaac.Sometimes it introduces a genealogy that merely moves us along the generations until a main Biblical character is introduced. This is what happens with the genealogies from Shem to Avram, and Ishmael.

 

בראשית יא:כח

וימת הרן על פני תרח אביו, בארץ מולדתו, באור כשדים.

 

The death of Haran may well have been a rare tragedy. It is the only death of a child in his father’s lifetime that is recorded regarding the generations following the Dispersal. Terach, after deciding to have only 3 children, like his ancestor Noah, loses one to early death. Regardless of where the 2 older sons of Terach were born, Haran was born in Ur Kasdim, a major metropolitan city in its time. There he was born, and there he died. Terach may have had hopes for a successful life in the big city of Ur. Haran’s death may well have depressed him, and led him to find a place to live where he can have a fresh start.

 

בראשית יא:כט

ויקח אברם ונחור להם נשים, שם אשת אברם שרי, ושם אשת נחור מלכה, בת הרן אבי מלכה ואבי יסכה.

 

If we are to take the order of the verses as chronologically correct, Haran married and died before Avram and Nahor married. It is possible that they originally intended to delay marriage to a more advanced age as their father did. The death of Haran may have traumatized his brothers to get married already. Nahor clearly married a daughter of Haran, and according to the Midrash, Sarah and Yiskah are the same person, in which case Avram also married a daughter of Haran.

 

 

בראשית יא:ל

ותהי שרי עקרה, אין לה ולד.

 

Let us start with the view of Sarai’s barrenness from Terach’s perspective.

On his own, Terach created 2 limitations on the extent of his progeny; he bore children late, and had only 3 children’ like Noah. Haran’s demise further lessened Terach’s family, though Haran did live long enough to have Lot as a son, as becomes clear in the next verse.. Sarai being barren further reduces the likely future size of Terach’s family. There are people who under these circumstances would hint to Avram to drop Sarai, or at least to take an additional wife.

 

בראשית יא:לא

ויקח תרח את אברם בנו, ואת לוט בן הרן בן בנו, ואת שרי כלתו אשת אברם בנו, ויצאו אתם מאור כשדים ללכת ארצה כנען, ויבאו עד חרן וישבו שם.

 

Terach senses that Ur Kasdim is not the appropriate place for his family. Nahor is doing well enough in Ur, so there is no reason for him to relocate. But Terach takes his 2 less successful progenies, Avram and his barren wife Sarai, and Lot, the orphan of his deceased son, and starts a trek to the Land of Canaan. Alas, he does not make it. On the way he arrives at the city of Charan, a city whose name sounds a lot like the names of his 2 sons Nahor and Haran, and his own name as well. He seems drawn to this city, and settles there. It is not clear whether Terach had intentions of eventually continuing his travel to Canaan, but for the meantime stopped in Charan for a short rest that ended up continuing for the duration of his life, or whether upon arriving at Charan he gave up his plans to continue the journey to Canaan. But the trek is over.

 

בראשית יא:לב

ויהיו ימי תרח חמש שנים ומאתים שנה, וימת תרח בחרן.

 

In the final phrase of Parshat Noah, “And Terach died in Charan”, the final letter of the final word is a נון סופית. In certain traditions, including that of Rashi, the regular form of that letter is flipped inside out, so that it appears like a closing bracket. Terach’s life, the genealogy that his life concludes, and perhaps the whole of Genesis up to this point is bracketed away, almost as a different and distinct section of Genesis, the Universal section, or in a different perspective, the Gentile section. From here on Genesis and the rest of the Torah is a book about the Jewish people. This becomes clear as the Torah continues.