Parashat Noach - The Righteous Man

 What kind of man was this week's cover star, Noach?  This is the question that I am posing today as the first verse in the Parasha appears to be very complimentary of our protagonist.

This is the story of Noach - Noach was a righteous man; a person of integrity in his generation; Noach walked with Gd.

Rashi, as usual, enables us to look beyond the simple translation to glance at another view of Noach and how the Rabbis understood the term 'in his generation':

Some of our Rabbis explain it (this word) to his credit: he was righteous even in his generation; it follows that had he lived in a generation of righteous people he would have been even more righteous owing to the force of good example.  Others, however, explain it to his discredit: in comparison with his own generation, he was accounted righteous, but had he lived in the generation of Abraham he would have been accounted as of no importance (cf.  Sanhedrin 108a).

Before the flood, it appears as though Noach could be described using Rashi's first citation.  This man appears to have such integrity, to the point that we are told he ‘Walked with Gd'.  The Lord chooses him to build an ark to save his family, along with his assorted non-human cargo.  Everyone and everything else (aside from the fish) perish in the ensuing flood, which takes over the world, from above and below.  I think that Noach would be deserving of being known as 'righteous'.  This fellow is a hero and we are here because of him!

Why would our commentators wish to sully his fine reputation as a saviour of humanity by questioning his actions?  Could Noach have acted any differently?

 

Rabbi Sacks ztl, notes in his superb book on the Parshiot (Covenant and Conversation - Genesis: The Book of Beginnings, 2009, 'Beyond Obedience'), that throughout the detailed instructions that Gd gives regarding the building of the Ark (Ikea should take note!), Noah's response is...silence.  He writes:

What does Noach say to Gd when the decree is issued that the world is about to perish? What does he say as the rain begins to fall?  The answer is nothing.  During the whole sequence of events, Noach is not reported as saying a single word.  Instead, we read, four times [verses such as] 'Noach did everything that Gd had commanded him'...Noach does as he is commanded.  What the story tells us is that obedience is not enough.

What did Noach eventually do when he left the ark?  He planted a vineyard, drank some of the wine he produced and became so drunk that he ended up lying naked in his tent.  His youngest son, Ham, then saw 'the nakedness of his father' (which Messechet Sandedrin 70a tells us means, according to some, that he committed an immoral act upon his father) and went to tell his brothers what he'd done.  It is to the credit of his brothers, Shem and Yafeth that a shred of dignity remained within the first generation that stepped out of the Ark.  Noach, the man who we are told ‘walked with Gd’, had been utterly debased and humiliated.

Following on from Rashi's comparison with Avraham, Rabbi Sacks wonders how this man would have acted, had he been in Noach's position:

What might an Abraham have said with the possibility of a flood?

[Genesis 18:24-25]
‘Then Avraham stepped forward and said, "Would You really sweep away the righteous with the wicked?  What if there are fifty righteous people?  What if there are ten? Far be it for You to do such a thing - to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous like the wicked.’ Avraham might have saved the world.  Noach only saved himself and his family.  Noah's end - drunk dishevelled, an embarrassment to his children - eloquently tells us that if you save yourself while doing nothing to save the world, you do not even save yourself.

Generations of children have been brought up to believe that Noach was a hero who saved all the animals from Gd's wrath.  Yes, he did, but only because he did nothing to plead for the survival of anyone or anything else.  Had Noach been an ‘Avraham’, perhaps the flood may not have happened, for there may have been fifty righteous people in the world, which hints to the first explanation that Rashi cites. Before we fully condemn his reputation to a watery grave (pun intended), let us look at Rashi’s final comment, regarding Noach walking with Gd. Perhaps, we can salvage his standing in society:

In the case of Avraham, the Scripture says,

[Genesis 24:40]
“[God] before whom I walked.”

Noach needed God’s support to uphold him in righteousness, Abraham drew his moral strength from himself and walked in his righteousness by his own effort (Bereshit Rabbah 30:10).

The man who stayed silent, when he could have spoken, was not the hero he could have been.  The greatness he could have achieved was denied by a significant flaw in his personality.  If he had been righteous of his own accord, he would have earned the respect due to him.  Instead, his achievements, as they were, lasted as long as the wooden structure that housed the Noahide family and their animal companions. To his credit, he did offer up a Thanksgiving Offering when he stepped out of the Ark, but aside from that noble gesture and Gd’s response, Noach’s last act focuses on the planting of the vineyard and its tragic consequences. Even his ‘righteousness’ is questionable. When Avraham's arrival is mentioned just before the end of the Parasha, it signifies the emergence of the Torah's first great individual.  His decisive actions and those of his wife take centre stage and usher in the extraordinary story of our nation - one which continues to the present day, for in the end, the righteous man was not Noach, but his 10^th generation descendant, Avraham Avinu.

Shavua Tov.