The Fall of Noach

These are the events related to Noach. Noach was a completely righteous person in his generations. Noach walked with Hashem. (Sefer Beresheit 6:9)

1. The famous debate over Noach The above passage introduces Parshat Noach. The passage describes Noach as a completely righteous person. However, it adds that he was completely righteous “in his generations”. The message of this added phrase is the subject of a well-known but often misunderstood debate cited by Rashi.

Rashi explains that some Sages understand the added phrase as complimentary to Noach. Noach had the misfortune of living in a completely corrupt society. Undoubtedly, he was subjected to enormous social pressure to conform to contemporary moral standards and religious practices. Nonetheless, he resisted these influences and achieved a remarkable level of personal righteousness. The added phrase emphasizes his accomplishment and suggests that had Noach lived in a more righteous generation he would have been an even greater spiritual giant.

Rashi explains that other Sages understand the added phrase as deprecatory. It qualifies the earlier praise in the passage. Noach was completely righteous relative to the people of his era. However, he was not as remarkably advanced over the people of more normative eras.[1]

At first glance it seems that these Sages disagree over whether Noach was a truly great person or whether he was merely the best product of a depraved society. However, Rashi’s very next comment seems to contradict this interpretation.

Our passage describes Noach as one who “walked with Hashem”. Rashi notes that a similar phrase is used by the Torah in describing Avraham. Hashem directs or commands Avraham to walk before Him.[2] Rashi explains that although these phrases are similar, their meanings are not identical. Avraham was encouraged to walk before Hashem and he fulfilled this directive. One who walks before Hashem is self-motivated, confident, and demonstrates initiative. Noach walked with Hashem. His righteousness required Hashem to walk at his side and to provide His support. Hashem did support Noach and he did achieve greatness. However, he cannot be compared to Avraham who confidently traveled before Hashem.[3]

It seems clear from Rashi that both of the disputants previously cited accept this interpretation of the latter portion of the passage. In other words, the Sages dispute whether the first portion of the passage is intended to emphasize or qualify Noach’s righteousness. Yet, they agree that the phrasing in the latter portion of the passage in intended to distinguish him from Avraham and underscore Noach’s inferiority to Avraham.

2. Finding the true Noach Considering Rashi’s comments on both portions of the passage suggests that the Sages are not disputing Noach’s actual character or the degree of righteousness he achieved. All of the Sages agree that Noach never achieved Avraham’s greatness. They also agree that his failing was not the result of a lack of inherent character. It was a consequence of the undermining influence of his era. He was remarkably righteous – given his era. Because of his contemporary setting, he was not as great as he could have been living in another time. Neither was he as great as the giants of these other eras.

These Sages are not debating Noach’s greatness. They agree on the same basic description of Noach and of his spiritual accomplishments. The issue that the Sages are debating is the intention of the passage. The first opinion is that the passage is emphasizing the positive aspect of Noach’s achievement – the degree to which he overcame the affects of his contemporary society. The second opinion is that the passage intends to emphasize the negative aspect of Noach’s achievement. He would not be as remarkable, were he compared to the people of a more normative time.

In short, there is no debate among these Sages regarding Noach’s greatness. He was a spiritual giant. He overcame enormous adversity in order to achieve righteousness. However, others who lived in more favorable times achieved more and surpassed him.

And Noach, the man of the earth, began and he planted a vineyard. And he drank of the wine and became drunk. He undressed himself in his tent. And Cham, the father of Cana’an saw the nakedness of his father and told his brothers who were outside. And Shem and Yafet took a covering; they placed it on both of their shoulders and they proceeded while turned away. They covered their father’s nakedness. Their faces were turned away and they did not see the nakedness of their father. (Sefer Beresheit 20-23)

3. Noach acting the fool Much of the parasha is devoted to describing the Deluge and its aftermath. Following his emergence from the ark, Noach renewed the practice cultivating the earth. He planted a vineyard, harvested the grapes, and made wine. Noach overindulged; he became drunk, returned to his tent, undressed, and there he lay drunken and naked.

His youngest son Cham saw his father in his drunken stupor and reported his discovery to his older brothers, Shem and Yafet. Unlike Cham, the older brothers did not wish to observe their father’s humiliating state. Instead, they took a covering and – while scrupulously avoiding looking at him – they covered their father.

Upon awakening from his drunken sleep, Noach understood all that had occurred. He cursed his youngest son and blessed his oldest sons. The curse and the blessings that he pronounced shaped the destiny of the descendants of each of the sons.

4. Drunk but righteous? There are two important conclusions suggested by the efficacy of Noach’s pronouncements. First, apparently the blessings and the curse were deserved. Because each deserved his blessing or curse, Noach’s wishes were fulfilled.

Second, Noach was wrong to become drunk. However, despite his shortcoming, he remained a sacred and righteous person. This is demonstrated by Hashem’s response to Noach’s pronouncements. Each was fulfilled. If Noach had squandered his status as a righteous servant of Hashem, his pronouncements would not have been executed by Hashem.

This suggests a very important lesson. Even the righteous are imperfect. Everyone has flaws. We should each strive for wisdom and virtue. However, we must also recognize our humanity. The quest for wisdom and virtue cannot be pursued without encountering obstacles and experiencing set-backs. Each of us has the potential to strive for righteousness. However, no one will be without flaws. The reality in these inevitable flaws in an individual does not negate the person’s wisdom and virtue.

Because the actions of the brothers shaped the destiny of humanity, it is important to more carefully consider their behaviors and attitudes. Why were their actions so significant and what do they reveal about the brothers?

5. Facing the challenge of greatness Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik Zt”l observes that Cham’s behavior is composed of two elements. First, he was fascinated with his father’s failing. Second, he was eager to share his fascination with his brothers. Why was Cham so attracted to his father’s defect? Why did he feel compelled to share it with his brothers?

Rav Soloveitchik explains that Cham’s fascination is a common response to an encounter with righteousness. When we encounter impressive wisdom or virtue we feel challenged to emulate the model. We then either rise to the challenge or seek to escape it. Cham sought to escape the challenge. His strategy was to uncover and publicize his father’s flaws. Cham was excited to discover that his father was not perfect – his father was a flawed character capable of being the fool. His objective was to emphasize his father’s failings so as to minimize his greatness. Ultimately, his objective was to dismiss his father as a model to be emulated.

Shem and Yafet were able to acknowledge their father’s flaw but to not overemphasize it. They could accept their father as a model of greatness, worthy of emulation, and yet acknowledge that he was not perfect. Their assessment of their father was honest. They recognized his greatness but also accepted his humanity.[4]

6. When self-management is not possible Rav Soloveitchik’s comments explain Cham’s punishment. He was “condemned” to servitude. Cham was unwilling to accept humanity’s most basic challenge – pursuit of virtue and wisdom. He preferred minimizing his father to recognizing that we are each capable of greatness. In short, Cham demonstrated a lack of capacity to constructively manage his own life. Therefore, his descendants were assigned to servitude. They were denied the authority over the management of their own lives and instead, their masters would manage their lives.

7. Choosing to be Cham or Shem and Yafet Each of us is often confronted with Noach-types. These are individuals who posses impressive virtue and/or wisdom. Like Noach’s sons, we choose how we will respond to the inevitable personal challenge that these individuals silently impose upon us. We may seek to find fault in these inspirational characters. Thereby, we diminish their stature and the challenge that they might impose upon us. Alternatively, we can recognize that the inevitable flaws of these remarkable individuals only serve to demonstrate that, despite our humanity, we can each rise to greatness.

[1] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 6:9.

[2] Sefer Bereseheit 17:15.

[3] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Beresheit 6:9.

[4] Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, Yemai Zikaron (Jerusalem, 1986), pp. 128-129.