Our Parasha spans the Flood, its causes and aftermath, and leads to the Tower of Babel and the subsequent dispersion of humanity. Here, as in many other Parashot*, we find certain keywords (words stemming from the same three-letter root) repeated within a passage or scattered throughout the text.
In Parashat* B’resheet (in Gen. 5:29), Noach’s name was explained: “Now he called his name Noach, saying, this one will comfort us “. The root of “comfort” here is n.ch.m (nun, chet, mem), pronounced nachem. Noach’s name, however, does not contain the consonant “m” (the Hebrew letter “mem”). And whereas in his evil generation he was a comfort to Elohim, his name actually means “rest” (n.u.ch, noon, vav, chet). At the end of Parashat B’resheet (6:6), another reference appears to the root n.ch.m. We read there, “And YHVH repented [or “regretted,” that is, “was sorry”] that He had made man on the earth”. In this case, “regretted” is “(va)yinachem”. But how does “comfort” relate to “regret” or “being sorry”? The root n.ch.m’s primary meaning is to be “sorry” or to "reconsider," which indicates that only deep empathy with another’s sorrow can be a source of genuine comfort at a time of grief. Conversely, a change of attitude or direction may also bring comfort and relief. Moreover, a close examination of Lamech’s words reveals what he lamented and why he hoped his newborn would be a “comfort” (literal translation): “our toil and sorrow of our hands, from the ground which YHVH cursed”. In his lament, Lamech was echoing YHVH’s words in 3:17 to Adam (literal translation): “Cursed is the ground for your sake, in sorrow you shall eat of it…” Lamech repeats the three terms used in 3:17, being: “sorrow”, "ground", and "cursed".
At the end of Parashat Noach, the text explains the name Ba’vel (Babel). According to 11:9, “Ba’vel” was named so because “there Elohim confused the language” of the tower's builders. However, the verb “confuse”, used here, is actually “balal”, and even though similar in sound, Ba'vel does not originate from this root; it actually means (in the Sumerian and Akkadian languages) “Gate of El”. Noach and Ba’vel are two examples of how the Tanach (O.T.) uses puns to drive a point home, even at the expense of grammatical accuracy (for another such case, see Yehoshua-Joshua 5:9).
Despite the sought-after comfort and rest, Noach, ironically, lived in a time of great unrest, which led to the natural disaster that befell his contemporaries. Yet in the midst of it all, calm could be had in the 'eye of the storm' represented by the one who was found righteous at that time (ref. 6:9; 7:1), and by the place of refuge that he was constructing. In 8:4 we find the ark “resting upon the mountains of Ararat” (italics added). Following the raven, a dove was sent out “to see if the water had abated… and [she] found no resting place for the sole of her foot… (8:8, 9 italics added). Rest is depicted here, and even highlighted, against the backdrop of the grave catastrophe. When Noach, his family, and the animals emerged from the ark, he built an altar. In 8:21 we read, “And YHVH smelled the soothing aroma”. The word for “soothing” is “nicho’ach”, which once again originates with the root “rest”.
The dove was sent “to see if the water had receded” (8:8). Here, “Receded” is “kalu,” spelled with the letter “kof” rather than the expected “kaf” (which would have meant “finished, done, complete”). The word “kalu,” as it appears here, means “having become light, or of little substance,” from which stems “k’lala”- "curse" (and literally, to “make something of light esteem”). In 8:21, YHVH says: “I will never again curse [a’ka’lel] the ground.” Does the unusual form of “recede” here imply that YHVH's curse caused the great deluge?
Last week we dealt with the root of “erev” (“evening”), which means “pledge” and “mixture” (two of its several meanings) … This time we look at the “raven” (“orev”), which shares this root. The association between “raven” and “evening” is found in the Song of Songs (Song of Solomon) 5:11, where the beloved’s dark curls are compared to the dark raven. The black fowl, therefore, borrows its name from the evening’s fading light (i.e., darkness).
Mankind’s corruption is highlighted in 6:11. The word used there is “tisha’chet”, of the root sh.ch.t (shin, chet, tav), which primarily means to “destroy or destruction”. In verses 12, 13, and 17, derivatives of this root appear four times as “corruption” and also as the verb for the “destruction” that YHVH was about to bring upon the entire earth and its inhabitants (v. 13). Inherent in the verb “sha’chot”, therefore, is corruption's self-destructiveness. In Yishayahu (Isaiah) 11:9 (and 65:25) we read: “They shall not hurt nor destroy – yash’chitu - in all My holy mountain.”
Interestingly and in a strangely similar way, the condition of ‘no destruction’ ("lo yashchitu") is also characterized by water, as Isaiah 11:9 continues: “… for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of YHVH as the waters cover the sea”, which in our narrative is the agent of annihilation. Additionally, the impact of the verb “sha’chot” (with the letter “tav” at the end) receives an extra emphasis, as it evokes a similar-sounding verb ending with a different “t” consonant (“tet”), which is to “slaughter” (e.g., Exodus 29:11,16, 20).
The other noun repeated in chapter 6 is “chamas” (ch.m.s, chet, mem, samech), translated as “violence”: “…And the earth was filled with violence” (vs. 11, 13). As a rule, the noun/verb “chamas” is connected to sinful acts of violence and injustice. “Chamas” rhymes with another verb - “chamad” - which means to “delight” but also to “desire or covet” (as was the case with the fruit of the tree in Gen. 3:6, which seemed “desirable – nechmad - to make one wise). Quite often, similar-sounding words, like “chamas” and “chamad,” are also connected in meaning. Thus, the violent actions of “chamas” are motivated by covetousness or unbridled desire. (Is it a linguistic coincidence that Chamas is also the name of the notorious terror organization, bearing in mind the similarities between Arabic and Hebrew?)
Planted right in the midst of these descriptions of corruption, violence, and pending destruction is the only (potential) solution: the ark - "tey'va". More than a millennium later, another would-be savior will be protected by a "tey'va" (though translated as "basket" in English), which will also float on water. This will be Moshe. In building this ark, our attention is first drawn to the act of propitiation and atonement: “kippur.” “Make yourself an ark of gopher wood… and… cover it inside and out with pitch" (6:14 italics added). The verb and noun for the action (“covering”) and the material itself (“pitch”) come from the root k.f.r (kaf, pey/fey* resh), which makes up “kippur”. Thus, this ark was to become a shelter, offering protection from the disasters resulting from the age's sins. The rabbis believe that anyone who watched it being built over the many years of its construction could also have found refuge in it. Instead, the spectators scoffed and ridiculed its builder. In most other cases, the verb and the noun from the root k.f.r are used directly with “atonement” (e.g., Daniel 9:24), or as “payment of a price, or ransom” (e.g., Num. 35:31).
Our Parasha also presents the principles of atonement and the reasons for its requirement. Thus, we read in chapter 9:4-6: “But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning … From the hand of every man's brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed…” Indeed, for atonement to be effective, blood is imperative.
The importance of covering is brought out again in our Parasha, in the story of Noach’s three sons’ respective responses to their father's drunken stupor. Cham (Ham), the son who looked upon his father’s nakedness, was condemned to slavery by a curse which was pronounced upon his son, Cna’an (
The other two siblings, on the other hand, are said to have covered their father’s naked body.
"And it happened in the six hundred and first year, at the beginning, on the first of the month that the waters were dried up from off the earth. And Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked. And, behold, the face of the earth was dried!” (8:13). “Dried” in both instances in the above verse is “cha’rvu”. In 7:22 we read, “All that was in the dry land, died”. Once again, “dry land” is “charava”. Both the verb, as well as the noun, are of the root ch.r.v (chet, resh, bet/vet) which is also the root for “waste, desolate, attack, sword, plunder, wage war, fight” and more. In Hebrew thought “dryness”, denoting lack of water and rain (and hence drought), is commensurate with terms associated with lifelessness and destruction, which points to the shortage of water characterizing the
When they emerged from the ark, Noach and his family were given the same ‘marching orders’ as Adam, their predecessor. Humanity’s survivors were to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth”. The injunction to be fruitful is “pru”. In the 10th generation, one of Noach’s descendants, Avram (Abram), will be informed by the bestowal of a blessing that he will become “fruitful” (Gen. 17:6), while four generations after that event, Avraham’s grandson will be named, in faith, “multiple fruitfulness”?-?that?is,?Ephraim. However, one striking difference between Elohim’s blessing and charge to and over Noach and his sons and the one over Adam’s, is that this time the Almighty declares that “the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast… bird … and on all that moves on the earth, and on all the fish…” (Gen. 9:2). Notice that the “fear and dread” are absent from YHVH’s word to Adam regarding the latter’s “subduing” of the earth and the “dominion” he was to have over all that lives and moves (ref. Gen. 1:26, 28).
Among the many names in our Parasha, three in particular call for our attention. The first two persons are second cousins: Yefet’s (Japheth) grandson, the son of Yavan (Javan), is Dodanim (or Rodanim, as he is called in 1 Ch. 1:7); the second is Cham’s (Ham) grandson, the son of Cush – Nimrod.
Yavan is the Hebrew word for
In the next generation, we have the son of the third cousin, Shelach, whose name is Ever, a firstborn. His name is given to the entire race, the Hebrews (“Ivrim”), who are to represent Elohim’s Kingdom on earth. The name Ever derives from the verb “pass or cross over”, a fact this race will demonstrate throughout biblical history, beginning with Avram. We will observe the Hebrews passing over from one place or condition to another, whether physically or otherwise, to earn the name of their forbearer.
The generation of the “cousins” (is it a coincidence that one of them, as mentioned, is actually named “Dodanim”- cousins?) is unique, having left its imprint upon humanity to this very day.
It says that Noach and his sons were to “fill the land/earth”. This “filling” was likely not meant only in a physical sense. Nimrod and the other inhabitants of the
Earlier, in 9:19, it says about the sons of Noach that, “the whole earth was populated by them”, with the verb “populated” being literally “scattered” (the same one as used in 11:4, 8). The “scattering” was YHVH-initiated because, “indeed, the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they will begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them” (11:6). “Propose to do” is “yazmu”, which in Modern Hebrew refers to “initiatives” and “entrepreneurship”, but in Biblical Hebrew the root y.z.m. means “unrestrained activity”, and not surprisingly is analogous to the verbs “zamom” which is “to devise wickedness”, and “zimah” which is “to lust”.
At the very end of the Parasha (11:26ff), we are introduced to the “exalted father” - Av’ram, whose goings forth, preceded by the command “lech lecha” (“go!”), will be reported next, in the Parasha?by?the?same?name.
*Parashot - plural of Parasha (feminine gender)
*Parashat – “Parasha of…”
* The p and f sounds are designated by the same letter and may be pronounced as “p” in one form of the word, and as an “f” in another. The same is also true about the “b” and “v” sounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment