PARS HAT N OAH

WAS NOAH A TZA DD IK?

Ra bbi Ari Kahn

These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man. He was a
complete man in his generation. (6:9)

The saga of Noah is well known. However, Noah remains an elusive personality.
What was the nature of the righteousness of Noah? The description of Noah as a
righteous man, complete in his generation, sounds like a back-handed
compliment. Why the limitation “in his generation”? Rashi brings two opinions.

In his generation: There are among the sages who expound him (it)
positively,- certainly had he been in a generation of Tzadikim - pious
individuals - he would have been more pious. While some expound it
negatively: had he been in the generation of Avraham he would have been
worthless (Rashi 6:9).

One opinion is that had Noah lived in a more righteous generation, he would have
been even more righteous. According to the other opinion, only in his generation
was Noah considered righteous. Had he lived in a more righteous generation, he
would have been considered worthless. There is a lack of symmetry to the words
of Rashi. Why, on the one hand, does he speak of a righteous generation, and on
the other hand, of the generation of Avraham? Could not Avraham have served as
the model for both opinions?

Let us return to the generation of Noah. In order to understand Noah’s

righteousness, we must first understand the generation in which he lived.

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth.
And daughters were born to them, that the sons of Elohim saw the
daughters of men that they were pretty; and they took as wives all those
whom they chose…The earth also was corrupt before G-d, and the earth
was filled with violence. And G-d looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was
corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth. And G-d said to
Noah, The end of all flesh has come before me; for the earth is filled with
violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth
(6:1,2,11,12)

The terms which the Torah uses to describe the generation of Noah, include
corruption and thievery. A description is given of powerful men taking any women
they chose. In fact, this seems to fit the description of corruption, which has
sexual overtones, and thievery.1 It is a generation whose moral boundaries have
broken down. The very fabric of society or its social contract is nonexistent. So
again, what was the nature of Noah’s righteousness? Apparently Noah did not
1
See the comments of the Ibn Ezra 6:11
partake of the sexually immoral practices and thievery of his generation. Noah
does not commit evil acts. On the other hand, we do not find him performing
good deeds either.

In a sense, Noah is an island—neither hurting others, nor helping people. This is

the greatness of Noah, as well as the tragedy of Noah.

According to the Zohar, after the flood, the following conversation took place
between Noah and G-d.

What did G-d answer Noah when he left the Ark and saw the world
destroyed? He [Noah] began to cry before G-d and he said, “Master of the
universe, You are called compassionate. You should have been
compassionate for Your creation.” G-d responded and said, “You are a
stupid shepherd. Now you say this! Why did you not say this at the time I
told you that I saw that you were righteous among your generation, or
afterward when I said that I will bring a flood upon the people, or afterward
when I said to build an ark? I constantly procrastinated and I said, “When is
he [Noah] going to ask for compassion for the world?” . . . And now that the
world is destroyed, you open your mouth, to cry in front of me, and to ask
for supplication?” (Zohar Hashmatot, Margoliot edition Bereishit 254b)

Noah asked G-d why He didn’t have compassion. G-d responds by calling him a
“stupid shepherd”. Noah as leader of the generation has responsibilities. He was
given the task to build the Ark; yet he could not save even one person. As a
shepherd of G-d, Noah had the responsibility to lead the people. Yet he didn’t
lead them. He failed miserably as a leader. It is analogous to a shepherd who
sees his flock straying from the proper path, wandering in the proximity of
dangerous wolves and concluding that the sheep deserve to be eaten because
they have strayed from the path. Therefore, G-d called him a “stupid shepherd.”
Noah was guilty of “malpractice.”

The Zohar continues:

Rabbi Yochanan said, “Come and see the difference between the righteous
among the Jews after Noah, and Noah. Noah did not defend his generation,
nor did he pray for them, as Abraham did. When G-d told Abraham that the
scream of Sodom and Gomorah was numerous, immediately Abraham
began to pray in front of G-d until he asked of G-d if ten righteous people
were found, would G-d forgive the entire city because of them. Abraham
thought that in the city which had Lot and his wife and children, there must
have been ten righteous people. Therefore, Abraham did not pray any
further. Afterwards, Moshe came, and he prayed and protected his
generation when G-d said to him, “They have turned aside quickly from the
way in which I commanded them.” Immediately, Moshe stood and prayed .
. . It is said that Moshe did not leave G-d alone until Moseh was willing to
give his soul for the people in both this world and the next. . . . Rabbi
Yehoshua said, “What was Noah thinking, that he did not ask for mercy for
 his generation?” He said to himself, “Perhaps I won’t escape.”

The next great religious leader was Avraham. When faced with the horrific acts of
the cities of Sodom and Gomorah, Avraham pleads with G-d not to kill the
righteous along with the wicked. Noah never engaged G-d in a similar dialogue.

Moshe went even further. After the Jews commit the terrible sin of worshipping
the golden calf, G-d is prepared to destroy the entire people. Despite the people’s
guilt, Moshe pleads with G-d, challenging Him: what did G-d expect of this nation
who had just left Egypt and had not yet had time to develop spiritually. Moshe is
referred to in the Zohar as a “faithful shepherd”. Despite the people’s guilt,
Moshe argues with G-d. He even has the audacity to tell G-d that if He will wipe
out the entire people, “then wipe me out as well.”

Noah accepts the decree of G-d. If the people are guilty, there is no argument.
Avraham tries to argue to perhaps exonerate some of the people of the city and,
at best, perhaps save the city from annihilation2. Moshe, despite the
unquestioned guilt of the people, is prepared to sacrifice himself in order to save
them. Imagine what would have happened had Noah refused to get on the boat.
That is surely how Moshe would have responded.3

According to the Torah, Noah builds the Ark over a period of 120 years. Not one
person is brought under the influence of this great religious personality. In a word,
Noah is an island. The name “Noah” means comfortable. He was comfortable.
He was comfortable and, self satisfied, in his own righteousness. The sad truth is
that Noah is a spiritual misanthrope.

It is fascinating that the next person we see in the Torah in an Ark is Moshe.

“And there went a man of the house of Levi, and took for his wife a
daughter of Levi. And the woman conceived, and bore a son; and when she
saw that he was a handsome child, she hid him three months. And when
she could not longer hide him, she took for him an ark made of reeds, and
daubed it with slime and with pitch, and put the child in it; and she laid it in
the rushes by the river’s brink. And his sister stood far away, to see what
would be done to him. And the daughter of Pharaoh came down to wash
herself at the river; and her maidens walked along by the river’s side; and
when she saw the ark among the reeds, she sent her maid to fetch it.”
(Shmot 2:1-5)

There seems to be a sense that Moshe as an infant, floating in an ark in the Nile,
is destined to begin his mission where Noah ends his own. Moshe’s entire career
will be filled with self-sacrifice for his flock. The life of Moshe will span 120 years,
perhaps in order to rectify, the failure of Noah in his 120 years of building the ark.
Moshe is the “faithful shepherd.”
2
According to the Zohar Avraham thinks there are 10 righteous people, therefore he stops arguing -he thinks he has won
3
The story is told of the Brisker Rov who refused to comply to the last wish of a condemned man, for he understood that
such compliance would seal the man’s fate. In the end the man was saved.
The Ariza”l explains the connection between Noah and Moshe in these terms,
Moshe is chosen to complete the task which Noah failed.

This idea is borne out of a verse in Yishayahu:

“For this is like the waters of Noah to me; for just as I have sworn that the
waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I
would not be angry with you, nor rebuke you.” (Is. 54:9)

The Zohar explains the term “waters of Noah”:

“R. Yosi said: ‘It is written, “For this is as the waters of Noah unto me” (Isa.
LIV, 9). Why have we here the expression “waters of Noah” and not “waters
of the flood”? The reason is that when mankind are sinful and there is a
righteous man in the world, G-d speaks with him in order that he may pray
for mankind and obtain forgiveness for them. G-d first promises to save him
alone and destroy the rest. Now the proper thing for a righteous man to do
at such a time is to forget himself and espouse the cause of the whole world
in order to appease G-d's wrath against them, as Moses did when Israel
sinned. When G-d, however, said to Noah, “The end of all flesh is come
before me”, Noah replied, “And what wilt thou do to me?”, to which G-d
replied, “I will establish my covenant with thee, make thee an ark of
gopher wood”. So Noah did not pray for the world, and the waters came
down and destroyed mankind, and therefore they are called “the waters of
Noah”.’(Zohar, Vayikra, Section 3, Page 15a)

The Zohar is blaming Noah for the waters that fell. The Hebrew term is “May
Noah”. Moshe exemplifies the faithful servant in no instance more valiantly than
when he offers his own life for his people:

“Yet now, if you will forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I beg you, from
your book which you have written.” (Shmot 32:32)

The Hebrew for blot is MICHANI - the same letters as “may Noah!” (‫)מי נח = מחני‬.
The Arizal therefore stresses that the moment which Moshe prays and says the
word Machayni - the spiritual lapse of noah is healed. 4
After Noah leaves the Ark, he views a holocaust. He is a survivor. How does Noah
cope? The Torah tells us that one of the first things that Noah does is plant a
vineyard and becomes intoxicated.

“And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard; And he drank

of the wine, and became drunk; and he lay uncovered inside his tent.”
(9:20,21)

Noah cannot deal with the enormity of the destruction that he has witnessed.
Perhaps he senses that he failed; that his passivity led to the destruction of an
entire civilization. The Torah records that one of Noah’s sons, Ham, uncovers
4
Ariza”l Shar Pesukim Berieshit Drush 4
Noah’s nakedness while the father is intoxicated.5

“And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told
his two brothers outside. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it
upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness
of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their
father’s nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his
younger son had done to him.(9:22-24)

The Rabbis have two opinions about what actually transpired.

“Rab and Samuel [differ,] one maintaining that he castrated him, whilst the
other says that he sexually abused him. (Sanhedrin 70a)

According to one authority, Ham raped his father; according to the second, he
castrated his father. What both opinions have in common is the incredible
outrage of Ham directed toward Noah. Noah’s children were saved from the flood
not for their own righteousness, but by virtue of the merit of their father. It would
seem that Noah failed even in educating his own children.

Let us consider the world view of Ham. He was involved in the culture of violence,
thievery and sexual licentiousness. His father caused the destruction of Ham’s
world. This destruction took place because of Noah’s passivity. The Talmudic
opinions that Ham raped his father, or castrated him, seem to be an expression of
Ham’s disdain for that passivity. In a sense, Noah’s nakedness is his passivity.

Noah lives for some 300 years after the flood, fathering children, witnessing the
birth of numerous descendants, countless future generations. What message
does Noah impart to his descendants? It seems that Noah remains passive; he
has nothing to say. As if the rest of his life remains clouded by intoxication.

“And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. And it came
to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land
of Shinar; and they lived there. And they said one to another, Come, let us
make bricks, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and
slime had they for mortar. And they said, Come, let us build us a city and a
tower, whose top may reach to heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we
be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the Lord came
down to see the city and the tower, which the sons of men built. And the
Lord said, Behold, the people are one, and they have all one language; and
this they begin to do; and now nothing will be restrained from them, which
they have schemed to do.

At the tower of Babel, all the people of the world were gathered. The sages tell us
that Noah was still alive:

“We find that Noah lived after the dispersion [which resulted from the Tower
5
See my comments to Parshat Shemini for a mystical understanding of this wine which was drunk.
 of Babel] ten years, (Seder Olam chapter 1)

Noah was still alive, but he is silent. This is the tragedy of Noah. It was not just
his own generation that he did not try to protect and educate, but even his own
children and grandchildren were deprived of the influence of that “righteous”
man. One would have imagined the wonderful leadership which Noah would have
displayed. The insights which he could have shared with future generations. The
courage, and religious zeal, he could have displayed. But tradition reports
nothing.

Aside from Noah, there was another prominent individual who was present at the
tower. His name was Avraham.

“We find that Noah lived after the dispersion [which resulted from the Tower
of Babel] ten years, Avraham was forty eight years old at the dispersion.
(Seder Olam chapter 1)

These two spiritual giants met at the tower where the Bible describes that all the
people of the world had gathered. Noah has nothing to share with Avraham.
Whatever greatness Avraham will achieve, it will be without the insight or tutelage
of Noah. Some commentaries see this meeting of Noah and Avraham as a
potential watershed in human history. The Torah hints at the opportunity:

“And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the sons of
men built And the Lord said, Behold, the people are one, and they have all
one language; and this they begin to do?! (11:5,6)

A spirit of unity had swept the world , Noah was there with experience, while
Avraham was there with his idealism.6 The time and place were ripe for a religious
renaissance. If these leaders would merge, the world could be elevated and
saved. They could have reached heaven, and would not have needed a tower. But
alas, Noah was silent, Avraham will have to start anew, alone.7

This is what Rashi meant when he commented on the verse that “Noah was a
great man in his generation.” We noted at the outset the lack of symmetry. Rashi
commented that;

“some interpret this positively, for had he lived in a generation of righteous

people, he would have been more righteous. Others interpret the
statement in a negative way. In his generation, Noah was righteous; but
had he lived in the generation of Abraham, he would have been worthless”.

The Talmudic source which Rashi draws from makes no mention of Avraham:

“These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man, and perfect in his
6
See comments of Alshech Hakadosh, 11:1
7
When Noah dies Avraham is 58 years old which is numerical value of Noah – this is understood in terms of
responsibility – now Abraham will have to become Noah – the righteous man of his generation
 generations. R. Johanan said: In his generations, but not in other
generations. Resh Lakish maintained: [Even] in his generations — how
much more so in other generations.” (Sanhedrin 108a)

The Midrash also addresses the righteousness of Noah:

“R.Judah and R. Nehemiah differed. R. Judah said: Only in his generations

was he a righteous man [by comparison]; had he flourished in the
generation of Moshe or Shmuel, he would not have been called righteous: in
the street of the totally blind, the one-eyed man is called clear-sighted, and
the infant is called a scholar. It is as if a man who had a wine vault opened
one barrel and found it vinegar; another and found it vinegar; the third,
however, he found turning sour. ‘It is turning,’ people said to him. ' Is there
any better here?’ he retorted. Similarly, IN HIS GENERATIONS he was a
righteous man. R. Nehemiah said: If he was righteous even in his
generation, how much more so [had he lived] in the age of Moshe.”
(Midrash Rabbah - Genesis XXX:9)

The reference to Moshe is understood, Moshe succeeded where Noah failed.

Moshe personified leadership - responsibility to the point of self-sacrifice. By why
is Shmuel chosen from among all the prophets? Shmuel was the one who anointed
David. If Noah could not lead as Moshe had, then he should have at least assumed
an auxiliary role of anointer - of Avraham. But Noah never communicates to
Avraham nor any of his descendants.

Rashi in his inimitable way is interpreting the Talmudic passage. Perhaps it seems
strange that Rashi should ignore the passage in the Talmud, and the Midrash in
favor of his own example - namely Avraham. Obviously Rashi is attempting to
convey a teaching with this subtle change. Rashi is telling us that the authorities
are not in conflict The two opinions of Rashi are not contradictory. They are both
true. Had Noah lived in a greater generation, he would have been greater; and
had he lived in the generation of Avraham, he would have been worthless. But of
course, Noah did live in the generation of Avraham and, indeed, he was
worthless.8 The image of Noah left for posterity is of a righteous man, a calm in
the face of turbulent waters, withstanding the incredible decadent social
pressures. Alone, floating on his ark/ island, forming no relationships, forging no
change. Alone, in silence.

8
See Rav Yonatan Eibshitz in Tiferet Yonatan page 14 (Parshat Noach) for a similar observation.