Noach (Genesis 6:9 - 11:32) Part 1, Torah Lesson Plan, or YHVH Homepage
There is a verse in this weeks Torah reading which is quite interesting; 7:8, It refers to the animals by their common category of “tehor,” or clean / kosher in layman’s terms. The opposite of this word is “tammay,” or unclean. But, in this verse, the Torah does not wish to use this term. Rather, it only uses the word “tehor” for the clean animals, and then gives a lengthier delicate euphemism. The verse is as follows; “Of the pure animal (tehor), of the animals which are not clean (tammay).” Under the normal conditions, where the Torah explains the kosher laws applicable to these animals, it uses the “tehor, and tammay” wording instead. The Talmud says; “An unrefined word should never pass a man’s lips, for the Torah goes out of its way and uses eight extra letters to avoid an unpleasant word.” Rashi, on this, explains that using the word “tammay” would have saved eight letters in place of the phrase, “of the animals which are not clean.” Here the message relates that one’s speech should be at all times free of improper expressions.
This details speech, but there is a similar lesson which deals with sight. The sons of Noach, Shem, Japhet, and Ham find their father in an unmoral situation. In verse 9:23 it explains that Shem and Japhet were careful not to look upon Noach’s nakedness, “they went backwards, and their faces were turned backwards, and they did not see their father’s nakedness.” They are rewarded for this with a blessing which exemplifies their virtue; “Blessed be the Lord, God of Shem, and may Canaan be servant to them, May God enlarge Japhet and may he dwell in the tents of Shem.” A question again arises, due to the abundance of expression with which the Torah once again goes out of it’s way. Why is their father’s condition repeated. And not just twice, but three times the Torah relates to us the condition of Noach. Once in verse 9:22, and twice in verse 9:23. As follows; 9:22 “And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father’s ‘nakedness’ and told his two brothers outside. 23: And Shem and Japhet took a garment, laid it upon both their shoulders, and they walked backwards, and covered their father’s ‘nakedness,’ their faces were turned backward, and they saw not their fathers ‘nakedness’.”
The Ba’al Shem Tov said that if a person sees something wrong with someone else, this is a sign that he himself has a similar fault. It is as if he sees himself in a mirror. If the “face which he sees” is soiled, it is actually his own which is dirty. This may be difficult to understand, because an intelligent person, who can distinguish between right and wrong, does not necessarily share the same traits with the flawed trait in the person whom he is viewing. So what did the Ba’al Shem Tov wish to relate?
We must remember that “hashgacha - Divine Providence” is present constantly, in every aspect of life, continually. A leaf does not blow in the wind without hashgacha, there are no powers outside, or secondary to God. If we see someone with a bad trait, we must realize that hashgacha is also present there. As the Ba’al Shem Tov further relates, when we see an event, we must always reflect on why it is that we are permitted to see it. What does this event do for my service to God? Therefore, when we see a bad trait in someone, we must first receive it as our own trait, however buried it may be within us, and no matter how much rationalization we thrust upon it. Why am I being shown this, how does it relate to me, and how can I correct myself? To begin with, we learn from the Torah that our task is not only geared to self-perfection, but also to the improvement of others; “You shall surely rebuke your friend, even a hundred times” (Mind you, there are rules to this action as well, for first one must be able to relate to the place of one’s friend, i.e. from where he comes, his surroundings, his feelings, etc). Since we must also be responsible for the care of our fellow’s downfalls, we cannot assume that everything which we see pertains to our own need for self-perfection. Now that we realize that it is a two way street, we still have the same question as above. When is it applicable to my self-improvement, and when is it applicable to helping my fellows improvement?
The answer lies within the passage of the Talmud quoted above; “A man must always speak in proper expressions.” After this phrase, the Talmud goes on to ask; “But do we not find in the Torah the expression ‘tammay’?” The Talmud is referring to our verse in the reading of Noach. For example, the very term which we have been asked to avoid. In other words, as Rashi pointed out, about saving eight words too many, the Torah used delicate explicatory language rather than the more direct word of ‘tammay’, which would have been the “proper expression,” as the Talmud says, “…speak in proper expressions.” But the very opposing question of the Talmud; “But do we not find … the expression tammay?” is strange in itself, because the word “tammay” appears in over a hundred places in Torah, so why was this discussion not brought up earlier? Why exactly here dealing with the verse of Noach’s modesty? What is it that the Sages are trying to point out with their discussions of proper expressions related to this weeks reading of the Torah?
The explanation is, that in halacha (legal contexts), the requirement of clarity outweighs the consideration of propriety. In other words, when the Torah is teaching us law, it does not elaborate with long expressions, and is very blunt, despite any uncomfortable situations which it may seem to present. As with the simplicity of the word “tammay.” However, when the Torah narrates, it may use lengthier expressions, which in turn may lead to other, deeper drashim, or hidden lessons. This is the point which the Talmud’s question is referring to. The use of words like “tammay” does not contradict the principle that wherever possible, we should use a more delicate phrase. For even in the sections which only relates to the law of cleanliness in passing, the Torah prefers to use the more delicate euphemisms.
This can apply to speech as well as to sight. When we see our fellow doing something wrong, one’s first duty is the above mentioned verse in Torah; “You shall surely rebuke your friend…” However, if one finds oneself rebuking one’s fellow critically, or violently in his attempt to do his duty, as in our word “tammay,” rather than tactfully and gracefully, one can be sure that this is because deep inside, subconsciously, one recognizes this flaw as one’s own, and this in turn may set off the auto defense mechanism inside of us. The barrier which denies us of being imperfect. Thus, the violent or critical rebuke. If one recognizes this response in oneself, one may apply the self-perfection rule, and adjust accordingly. However, if one finds that in his attempt to correct his friend, he is patient, caring, graceful, and tactful, he can be sure that the flaw lies only in his fellow.
This explains why the Torah repeated the condition of Noach, his nakedness, after Shem and Japhet had turned their faces already. It is emphasizing that they did not see their father “physically.” They did not see his flaw as him, therefore it reflected their own true virtue. They only saw the flaw which was within their father. This is also what the Ba’al Shem Tov meant when he said; If the “FACE which he sees” is soiled, it is actually his own which is dirty. This would then be referring to Noach’s other son, Ham, who did see his father’s nakedness. He did see the physical aspect. He was looking directly into the mirror.
We also learn that we should not only refrain from talking about the flaws of others, as Ham did when he told his brothers of their fathers condition, but we should also not think about the flaws of others, except as it lies with us to correct them, or help set them right. It is the flaw which we should be focused on, not the person. If we see the person and say; “he’s like this,” or “he does such and such and I can’t stand it,” etc. either to others or to ourselves, then we should re- evaluate our own standings. And, whoever follows this way will fall under the blessing, “Blessed be the Lord, God of Shem,” and, “May God enlarge Japhet.”
Post note: One should not confuse a bad trait with a wicked or evil person. Of this type of person the Torah has directed us to stay far from. “Do not take counsel with the wicked, do not follow in their ways, etc.”
THE READING OF NOACH; DRASH:
"In the six hundredth year of Noach's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened. (Genesis: 7:11)"
The Zohar interprets this verse to allude also to the sixth century of the sixth millennium, according to the Hebrew calendar, and that would be the Hebrew date 5500, or 1740CE. The world will flood again. Water, the prime sustenance of Creation, is also an allusion to the Divine Wisdom. In other words, the Zohar informs us that once again the world will flood at that time, in order to prepare the world for the seventh millennium, which is par with the Holy Shabbat. Six days we labor, and on the seventh we rest. For here the Zohar counts a day as a thousand years. Such is the task within the Creation at large as well, six millenniums we labor and one we rest. Being that our sustenance is provided for from above, we are granted a double portion on yom shishi (the sixth day), one for that day, and one for the Shabbat day when we are not allowed to do labor. As was also the case in the desert with the Mahn (mannah). We were given a double portion on the sixth day.
Continued - Part 2, Torah Lesson Plan, or YHVH Homepage
