2021/5782
In Parashat Noach, the Torah States “Noach was a righteous man, perfect in his generation, and walked with Hashem.” (Bereishit 6:9) On the surface level, this pasuk sounds like a beautiful declaration and praise of Noach. However, as one delves deeper into the more famous commentaries on the Torah, not everyone agrees with this surface-level interpretation of Noach’s compliment. For example, Rashi presents two distinct ways to read the Passuk, focusing on the words “in his generation.” Rashi’s positive interpretation of these words notes that since Noach was righteous in one of the worst generations in the history of creation, even more so he would have been a massive Gadol during a more prominent generation. On the flip side, if Noach was in Avraham’s generation, Noach would have been a nobody. To settle this debate, let us take a look in the second aliyah.
In Sefer Bereishis 7:7, the passuk states: “Noah, with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives, went into the ark because of the waters of the Flood.” Once again, one could interpret this Passuk through the basic understanding as the Torah praising Noach for getting on the Teiva. However, on this passuk, Rashi criticizes Noach for getting on the Teiva only once the rain started falling from the sky, thereby showing a certain lack of Emunah Noach had that the flood might not occur. Although he did not enter the Teiva until the Mabul started, how can Rashi go as far to say as Rashi was a nonbeliever in Hashem. After all, wasn’t it he who built the ark in anticipation of the flood?
An answer to the prior question can be found in this week’s Haftarah. In Sefer Yeshayahu 54:9, the Navi refers to the Mabul as “the waters of Noach.” Wouldn’t it make more sense to name the Mabul after the evil people who caused it? There are two dissenting opinions reagrding this question. Starting with the more positive answer, naming the flood after Noach is like naming a cure to a disease after the doctor who created it even though the doctor had never been affected by the disease. On the flip side, by naming the flood after Noach, the Navi suggests that Noach had a hand in allowing the flood to occur by having a minimal impact on those around him to do Teshuvah. Either Noach didn’t try, or he tried but he wasn’t invested enough in the people to make a difference.
Noach’s minimal impact on the people around him highlights the main difference between Noach, Avraham Avinu, and Moshe Rabbeinu. When it was all said and done, Noach did not motivate a single soul to do teshuva before the beginning of the Mabul. He gave up on the people leaving them out to drown in the waters of the flood. When Hashem told Avraham that Sodom would be destroyed, Avraham refused to accept the Din and tried his hardest to save the people of Sodom through immense prayer to Hashem. We find the same regarding Moshe Rabbeinu. After the incident of the golden calf, Hashem was ready to wipe out the people and start a new nation through Moshe. However, Moshe refused and even told Hashem that if He erased the nation, he should erase Moshe as well.
Chazal say that on the surface, Noach’s name means calm. Anger is undoubtedly one of the worst Middot, but one should find a comfortable middle ground. The negative part of Noach’s relaxed personality was that he didn’t care all that much for the people about to be swept away in the flood. He lacked the passion to fight for the people. If Noach truly cared about the people, he should have had a proper balance of anger just like Moshe Rabbeinu at the sin of the golden calf.
Beezrat Hashem, we should learn from Moshe Rabeinu to try our hardest to perfect our Middot so that we can have a perfect mix of calmness and passion. Sometimes, we get caught up in the madness of the world and become perhaps more passionate about a topic that barely pertains to our daily lives. However, as Jews, we must be so careful to be peaceful and respectful with each other’s opinions as to not cause strife in all of Am Yisrael. Shabbat Shalom!