|
Parashat
Noah
Three there were,
who were wild over the earth, and no benefit came of them, and these are
they: Kayin, Noah, and Uziyahu.” (Bereshit Raba 36:3)
What Separates “the Ox Stoned to Death” from a Deadly
Automobile?
Or
The Dimension of Height Intervenes to Create Balance
Translated
from Hebrew by S. NAthan
l'ilui nishmat Esther bat mordechai
Ramban 9:5: “ ‘From every animal’s hand, I will
demand [spilled blood].’ I wonder if this demanding is as it sounds. Is
‘from every animal’s hand’ just like from the hand of man, that it is a
matter of punishment? The animal does not have the wherewithal to be
punished, nor to receive reward. Perhaps it may be so only in the case of
human blood, that any animal who killed man would be killed, for this is
g’zerat melech, ‘the King’s’ decree’. This is the reason that “the
ox shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten.” It is not
to punish its owners with monetary loss, because even an ox in the desert
is condemned to death, and He commanded it so for the children of Noah
just as for Yisra’el.”
In our parasha a novel idea appears, which
belongs to a principle that is fundamental to the structure of relations
between the Creator and His universe. This hidush does not apply
to the structure of relations between the Creator and man, but rather
specifically between the Creator and the creation.
This point is expressed by the Creator, in His words
of conclusion after the flood - after Noah has built an altar to God and
has offered sacrifice from every pure animal: “And He smelled the fragrant
smell and He said…in His heart: ‘I shall no more curse the earth on
account of man, because man’s heart’s urge is evil from his
youth…henceforth all the land’s days – sowing and harvesting and cold and
heat and summer and winter and day and night will not cease.”
In these passages, the Creator is pointing to
substantive changes in the structure of creation. Meaning: If until now I
had entrusted the creation into man’s hands, “to work it and to protect
it,” from now on, I free man somewhat from the burden of responsibility,
and I take back creation’s orderly functioning into My Own hands.
This decision altered man’s status in relation to
nature’s titanic forces, and also in relation to the other creants. In
addition, this decision altered the balance between the forces of nature,
among themselves, and freed them of their dependency on man’s behavior.
The beginning of this process commences specifically
with Noah. In parashat Bereshit, Noah is mentioned: “And Lemech
lived…and begat a son - ben,” and Midrash Tanhuma adds, “from whom
nivneh ha’olam, the world was rebuilt,” “and he called his name
Noah, saying, ‘this one will comfort us for our deeds and for our hands’
sadness, because of the earth that God has cursed.’”
Rashi brings a midrash: “Until Noah came, they had no
plowing tool, and he prepared one for them.” According to this midrash,
man had been suffering from the cursing of the earth, “and the land would
bring forth thorns and thistles when they would sow wheat, because of the
curse of Adam HaRishon. And in the Noah’s days, naha, it rested.”
Noah was the first who dared, on his own power, to
confront the problem that hindered man from controlling the earth and from
using it for his own needs. Such daring has two sides to it.
On the positive side, Noah’s contribution held a
blessing, in that it eased man’s condition, and returned control over the
earth to man.
On the other side, Noah’s contribution violated God’s
will, Who had intended to take away from man his attempt to break free of
his absolute dependency upon his Creator. Man’s wish to participate
actively in the creative work of managing the universe had been accepted
by the Creator only in part – in part, in the wake of the devastation man
had caused himself and the creation as well. Yetsira, creativity,
includes the root of yetser – the ability to build, and to destroy
as well.
“And Noah found grace in the eyes of God”, meaning
that Noah’s contribution, which he initiated for the improvement of
relations between man and the earth, was accepted and was pleasing to the
Creator, for the reason mentioned above.
This means as follows: Man finds it difficult to
control his land, thereby fulfilling “by the sweat of your brow you will
eat bread.” The difficulty of earning a livelihood causes doubt in his
own earning power to penetrate man’s awareness. He is worried and anxious
with the fear of survival. This doubt that creeps into him, weakens his
belief in his own power, and directs him to cast his burden on God, and
returns him to his original glory. Along comes Noah, and gives back to
man his belief in his own ability to overcome the difficulties of
existence by his own intelligence, by inventing helping devices (a plow).
On the one hand, it is a positive act. On the other
hand, there is a fly in the ointment. This is Hazal’s meaning: “Some
expound him [Noah] in terms of praise (in that he improved man’s relation
to the earth) and others expound him in terms of contempt (in that this
comfortable – noah – relationship to the earth did not bring man to
a new turning toward dependency on his Creator, but rather to building up
his confidence in his own ability.)
This means that the hardships of existence have two
faces. The one face of hardship, that which causes worry and existential
suffering, has benefit. Man is unable to live in fear and under
existential pressure, and so he seeks and finds peace by turning to his
Creator, in the sense of “O God, save, pray.”
Along comes Noah and invents a means to dispel man’s
dread and to bring him peace and happiness by increasing his ability to
resolve existential problems on his own powers.
Not only did Noah’s contribution deny man the
opportunity to return to his Possessor and to strengthen his faith in his
Possessor, it also added menuha, restfulness, in that it dispelled
man’s existential dread, and what is more, it strengthened his faith in
his own creative ability, adding arrogance to arrogance.
Humility prevents a split; it is the secret of
unity. The comparison with Avraham is meant to clarify and to remove the
confusion that Noah introduced into the system of relations between human
ability and the Godly ability. The addition that Noah contributed, only
added confusion to the delicate balance between the abilities of both
sides.
Avraham merited independence in his relationship to
the world and in his relationship with his Creator, specifically because
of the absolute dependence upon his Creator that he cultivated. He never
attempted to bolster his own power so as to break free of dependency on
his Creator, so as to take a stand opposite Him and be an equal partner.
This dialectic gained him the privilege of
representing his Creator to the world of humanity. It is the secret of
humility. “I am dust and ashes.” Let lei midilei, he has nothing
at all of his own. There is no confusion in the delicate balance between
the supreme ability and man’s ability. Only one, single ability exists –
and it is the supreme ability.
An anav, a humble person serves as a vessel
containing bracha, besides the supreme ability. An anav
prevents split. In himself, he constitutes the key to unity.
Noah’s taking the initiative and intervening in the
creation gained him the privilege of participating in the rescue of the
world. He builds a teva. He is responsible for all terrestrial life, and
for man. Then HaKadosh Baruch Hu commands him to come out of the teva.
Noah does not rely on the Divine instruction. He
feels obliged to verify that the water has abated. He sends the raven,
the dove, until he has satisfactory evidence that “behold, the face of the
earth has dried.” It is only after inquiries have been made by Noah that
orders issue from above. “And God spoke to Noah, etc. ‘Go forth from
the teva.’”
Noah continues to take the initiative, and he builds
an altar. Offering sacrifices partakes of human initiative, as we have
seen with Kayin. “And God smelled the fragrant smell” in the sense that
God consented to the human initiative, to the human’s pining to be an
active partner in the management of creation.
There is one new condition however: In consideration
of the device of yetser, and of its great power, which enables
man’s to participate in yetsira, in creating, it would now be
necessary to introduce balance between the partners, to divide the power
of influence, so that one side could not deviate too far at the expense of
the other.
No longer would the world be dependent on human
involvement. “No longer will I continue to smite all of life” as a result
of man’s failure. I will not alter the orders and processes of the planet
and its laws will not be violated because of human behavior.
The world turns as usual, or as human? Only in
relation to human beings will the world’s laws change, toward him alone,
in keeping with his behavior. In relation to man, but not in relation to
creation. For the sake of man, but not in and of themselves. Here the
concept of relativity is born: It is not “en soi”, but “pour soi”. “No
longer will I continue to curse the earth for man (for the sake of man and
for his well-being). Woe to a world that is dependent on man, and woe to
man if he is dependent on himself, and woe to another who is dependent on
him. A solid base is needed, that will not be affected, that will not be
impaired by the impaired behavior of man.
The relationship between creation and a human being
enjoys its law-governed character because it is based upon a foundation of
reciprocity. He is given greater control over the inorganic realm, and
over all flora and fauna, by the power of the new relationship, man is
permitted the eating of meat, which is limited by the prohibition against
ever min hahai, “a limb from the living”.
He may initiate action to take control over animals:
“And fear of you and dread of you will be upon all the beast of the earth
and upon all the fowl of the sky.” “Only meat with its life force – its
blood you shall not eat.” An attitude of reverence, and a prohibition
against destroying for no beneficial purpose.
Human responsibility toward the creation increases
the more human intervention is permitted. Yet this responsibility too, is
not absolute. The prohibition against castrating animals is added to the
prohibition against eating ever min hahai.
“Whatsoever spills the blood of man, in man, its
blood will be spilled.” “From the hand of every beast, I will demand
it.” Ramban comments, in context of the halacha, that an ox that killed a
person is not killed as a punishment, but rather by force of the new law
that has been fixed into creation, the purpose of which is to protect the
balance between man and creation.
It is not only man who commits himself to keeping the
balance, but also HaKadosh Baruch Hu promises to keep the element of
balance, that it should not become impaired without dependency upon human
actions. By his actions, man can exert an effect upon creation’s
relationship to him, but to him alone. He cannot affect creation’s
relationship to itself.
“And there shall be no more a flood to destroy the
earth.” The reference is to all the earth. A partial flood might that is
directed at a specific country where man has not kept his part. In that
country a flood could appear as a punishment. Yet there would be no
danger of its devastating the entire creation.
It would be correct to conclude from the general rule
of this promise that a nuclear holocaust endangering the entire planet
earth is not possible.
The rainbow – sign of the covenant, reveals these new
rules that will obtain between the Creator, the creation, and man. Yet
despite all this “Noah was a man of the earth.” Noah remained imprisoned
in the bosom of Mother Earth, with all that this implies, including the
danger of enslavement, including the danger of losing the ever-delicate
balance, including the danger of devastation and ruin.
Drunkenness symbolizes loss of the clarity required –
as an inviolable condition – for fulfillment of the new ultra-sensitive
role. Adam mu’ad le’olam, a human being is held eternally
responsible.” The Torah makes this demand on a human being in no
uncertain terms.
“And Ham, father of Canaan, saw his father’s
nakedness.” What did he see? He saw a weak point, destined for
disaster. It was the tendency to subjugate oneself to the earth that he
saw. From this, his punishment was derived – the punishment of slavery.
From this day on, the phenomenon of slavery shall never quit the earth,
despite all liberal attempts. “A slave of slaves shall he be to his
brothers,” as a commemoration of sin, of the danger of enslavement to
physical matter, to the earth, and most importantly, to what comes in the
wake of enslavement to the earth which is the illusion of brute power –
man’s arrogance seeking to express effrontery toward heaven.
Dor HaPlaga, the Generation of the
Separation: A direct sequel to Noah’s tendency, and to his insolent
ambition to participate as an active partner in controlling creation.
“And the brick became their stone.” The difference between brick and
stone lies in the degree of human intervention in creation.
Stone is not the fruit of man’s creative spirit. Its
source is the handiwork of the Creator of the universe. Brick came to the
world as the fruit of human creativity, as a substitute for stone. By
creating brick, man sensed the experience of human creativity as a
substitute for the creation – the fruit of human arrogance, a creativity
that led man “to cut down God’s plantings”, to be impudent towards heaven,
to travel the axis of power that leads to slavery.
Contrast this with enslavement to God, which need not
damage the sense of capability experienced by the human being who seeks
shade and shelter beneath the wings of the Creator.
In contrast, attempting to amass independent power
detaches one from the sense of dependency upon one’s Creator, and creates
the illusion of brute power. This is a double-faced condition. One face
is the experience of power, of rule. Yet there is no ruler unless there
is someone who is ruled.
The sense of power here is not a true sense of true
power, as exemplified in one who identifies with the ruling power of the
Creator – a rule that requires no proof of a personal nature as demanded
by ego, because it is the fruit of humility, the fruit of one’s ego-
nullification and of one’s identification with and dvaikut to one’s
supreme source.
In contrast and as opposed to this, the sensation of
human power is the fruit of the sensation of power which man took for
himself, attributing itsw source to himself, to his own ego. This
sensation comes from an illusory source, from a need that stems from the
fear of existence. This sensation has no intrinsic justification.
Hence its need to incessantly prove itself.
Egocentric brute force must fortify itself with evidence. The results of
rule are all those who are enslaved by it. This rule’s other face is
surrender. Enslavement.
Here stone symbolizes the power of Godly creation,
whereas brick symbolizes man’s attempt at rule and intervention – an
intervention which seeks to push aside the power of the Godly Presence.
The Creator’s response: There is no root to man’s
power. It is an artificial, barren phenomenon. How easy to crumble the
brick, whose power lies in man’s spirit’s imagination. Enough to confuse
his spirit for illusion’s house of cards to collapse.
Noah, the source of the phenomenon of the races, was
the source of division between man and wife upon entering the teva. The
pure animal was given priority. Seven of each, as opposed to two of each
as with the impure animal. The races began with the sons of Noah: Cursed
is Canaan, a slave of slaves shall he be to his brothers. Blessed is God,
the Lord of Shem, and let Canaan be a slave to him. Yaft, May God
be beautiful to Yafet, and may he dwell in the tents of Shem…and let
Canaan be a slave to him...From these, the islands of the nations
separated to their countries, each one according to its language…and the
children of Ham were Kush and Mitsrayim…and from these the nations
separated throughout the land after the flood.”
…Teaching you that the ideal of equality has no power
to eliminate the original uniqueness that characterizes each race. Dor
HaPlaga, which tried to whitewash differences in order to achieve
unity, failed for the reason that any attempt at unity that derives from
ego’s brute force tendency – can only end badly.
Unity dwells in an individual who attaches himself to
a framework that poses no threat to his uniqueness, to his private
domain. Only a framework that protects an individual’s uniqueness can
enable him to relate generously to the public domain, and to the other.
Within the framework of non-dependency upon nature
that was contained in the new program of brit, of covenant between
the Creator and Noah, it would not be viable to create external
ideological or political conditions for the purpose of creating unity.
Unity from this point on could only result from man himself, from the
power of his moral creativity, a creativity of values that he alone
activates and initiates.
Go To Top
|