Parshat Noach  6 Cheshvan 5763, 12 October 2002

Shabbat Shalom: Parshat Noach    Genesis 6:9-11:32

By Shlomo Riskin

Efrat, Israel - A seminal act of Noah, specifically after he leaves the ark once the deluge has abated provides a startling insight into how we must relate and react to the tides of war which have engulfed us for the past two years and which are now threatening to engulf the entire Middle East and perhaps the entire world. "And Noah the man of the earth became profaned (or merely "began" to work), and he planted a vineyard" (Genesis 9:20). Rashi, (1040-1105) the most classical of the Biblical commentaries, explains that "when Noah entered the ark, he brought with him branches (of the vine) and shoots of fig-trees" (Rashi ad loc, Midrash Rabbah ad loc).

Apparently, Rashi is perplexed as to the genesis of the grape-seeds; after all, all of animal and plant life had been destroyed in the flood - except of course for whatever had been preserved in the ark. Rashi is therefore telling us that Noah brought branches of the vine into the ark. But why must this great commentary add "shoots of fig-trees" which seems superfluous to our question at hand? And if Rashi is merely quoting what the Talmudic sages taught in Midrash Rabbah, why did he not include "young olive saplings," which the midrash also suggests in the same source? Why does Rashi select these two fruits for inclusion in the ark - the fruit of the vine and the fig - when our textual problem could have been resolved with the vine branches alone and faithfulness to the midrashic source would have demanded including the olive sapling!

A careful analysis of the ambivalence of our Talmudic sages concerning the personality of Noah will provide the key to understanding - not only with regard to Noah's maturation for preserving what he preserved but also with regard to our difficult situation today. The story of Noah opens with what appears to be a rather complimentary character description: "...Noah was a righteous man, wholehearted in his generations; Noah walked with G-d" (Genesis 6;9). Nevertheless, Rashi immediately notifies us: "there are among our Sages those who expound these words ("in his generations") as giving praise (to Noah) ... and there are those who expound these words as denigrating (to Noah).

Why denigrating? Why give such a praiseworthy description a negative spin, suggesting that Noah's wholeheartedness was only in comparison to his contemporaries, and that had he lived in the generation of Abraham, he would have not been considered at all noteworthy?

The Maharal of Prague explains that, whereas Abraham argued with G-d on behalf of the preservation of the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, Noah appears to remain silent when informed that the entire world is about to be destroyed by a flood. He seems satisfied to rescue himself and his immediate family via the ark; in light of the fact that "the earth has been corrupted before G-d and the earth is filled with violent terror" (Genesis 6:12, hamas being the Biblical Hebrew for violent terror, ironically enough), he decides to remain a self-satisfied isolationist only interested in self-preservation. The light in his ark was provided by a brilliant diamond, a magnificent chandelier - which only served to insulate the occupants of the ark even more from the world outside.

There is however a second way of interpreting Noah's character, insisting that had he been a contemporary of Abraham's, he would have been even more righteous! According to this view, Noah took 120 years to construct his ark, spending all the extra time in convincing the citizens of the world to forsake their violence, to accept the basic laws of morality expressed by ethical monotheism, to establish democratic, freedom-loving anti-terror governments whose greatest value was the pursuit of peace. He built his ark with a window to provide the light, because for him it was cardinal that the righteous never stop looking out and attempting to persuade the others to adopt codes of proper ethical behavior.

The deluge recedes, and Noah leaves the ark. He plants a vineyard. Where did he get the grape-seeds? Here again there are two disparate views in the midrash, each reflecting another view as to Noah's basic personality. One midrashic opinion has it that he made a pact with Satan, he brought him the requisite seed to plant his vines and ultimately produce wine. This is Noah the isolationist, who allows evil to remain in power, who turns a blind eye to the Satanic totalitarian governments who enslave their citizenry and use terror tactics to control the weaker vessels. In return for wine (or drugs or oil) it may be worth Noah's while to come to a "business agreement" with Satan.

The second midrashic opinion sees Noah as a righteous proselytizer, who never gives up on humanity. Even after 120 years of fruitless preaching about the importance of the seven Noahide laws of morality, the principle of "Thou shalt not murder" which fell on deaf ears, Noah still doesn't give up. Yes, G-d commands him to enter the ark, literally forces him to do so as the waters of the deluge begin to engulf him (Genesis 7:7, Rashi ad loc), but Noah feels the necessity to take with him the seeds of two fruits, the grape and the fig, wine being a symbol of freedom (remember the Passover cups of wine harking back to the Biblical expression of redemption) and both fruits indigenous to the Land of Israel.

Nachmanides insists that the Land of Israel was the one place in the world where ethical monotheism, G-d's creation of human being in His image, was never forgotten - and so he maintains that the flood never engulfed Israel. Remember that it was Malki Zedek, the King of Jerusalem - identified as Noah's son Shem - who gave Abraham bread and wine in the name of the G-d of the world when the patriarch returned from saving Lot and all of free civilization from the hands of the terroristic four nations (Genesis 14:18-21). Noah brings the seeds of these two fruits to remind future generations never to stop fighting against injustice and violence, never to forget the message of the people of Israel which will emanate from the land of Israel and its capital Jerusalem, never to give up the battle for a humanity accepting of a G-d of justice and peace, a world where "nation will not lift up sword against nation and humanity will not learn war anymore" (Isaiah 2, Micah 4). And why does Rashi insist on specifically these two fruits, the vine and the fig? Micah prophesies that, at the end of the days, when the world will accept G-d's morality emanating from Zion and Jerusalem, then "everyone will sit under his vine and fig-tree and will not fear, for the word of G-d will have been spoken (and accepted)" (Micah 4).

Shabbat Shalom.

Return to Ohr Torah Stone