Vol.

20 Issue #3

Parshas Noach

Somewhere over the rainbow:

Is it just a pretty sight?

Rabbi Elisha Bacon

(MTA 92, REITS 01)

On our way back from a recent trip to Baltimore,

my family and I were treated to a marvelous sight, the
complete arc of a spectacular rainbow stretching over the
Delaware Memorial Bridge. Notwithstanding the Shulchan Aruchs warning (230:1) not to stare at a rainbow, I
could not help but gaze in awe. I wasnt the only one;
cars all around us were stopped and people, young and
old, were pointing and marveling.
We know from the Torahs account of the flood
that the rainbow was the an a sign placed by Hashem to
symbolize the bris Hashem made with the postdiluvian
world. Hashem had promised never again to bring a flood
to destroy the world and the rainbow was the reminder
of this bris. We might ask, why did Hashem choose the
rainbow to symbolize this bris? Is there an inherent quality to the rainbow that relates to the episode of the flood
or is it simply a random choice?
On a simple level, one could say that the rainbow
is a fitting symbol for a flood bris. It is a bright multicolored dazzling delight, the polar opposite of the dark
world just prior to the flood, a world muddied by immorality and sin. Likewise, the rainbow would have
been a welcome change from the storm clouds that blackened the world for the duration of the flood. But a look
into some of the classic commentaries on the Chumash
provides some other, fascinating ideas.
The Ramban opines that the rainbow represents
an archers bow. During combat the bow faces outwards
ready to strike the enemy. The rainbow is Hashems bow
and it faces towards the heavens, away from the Earth, in
a display of peace and goodwill. It is as if to tell us that
Hashem, who was the archer striking the world, has
turned his bow around in a display of peace. Hashem is

4 Marcheshvan 5776

indicating through the rainbow that He is done smiting

the world for Mans sins, and from now on He will not
harness the destructive powers of rain to erase mankind.
The Chizkuni offers two explanations. The first
is that the rainbow is a symbol of the glory and graciousness of Hashem as referenced in Yechezkel (1:28). Since
Hashem would not be revealing his glory and splendor to
a world he was intending to destroy, the rainbow is an
omen of peace.
The second explanation is that the rainbow contains both the color of fire (red) and the color of water
(blue) within its color spectrum. Chizkuni asserts that
just as water, represented by the blue, does not extinguish fire, represented by the color red, but rather they
reside in harmony within the rainbow, so too Hashem
will not let the water destroy the world.
Let me suggest a further explanation. The structure of the rainbow is in fact the blueprint for fixing the
mistakes of the dor hamabul. Of all the wickedness of the
generation of the flood, their fate was sealed because
of chamas, robbery (see Rashi [6:13] citing Gemara Sanhedrin 108a). During the dor hamabul thievery was rampant. Property, money, and personal space were not safe
and as such society dissolved into chaos and anarchy. Peace, law and order, the bedrocks of a functioning
society, were nonexistent.
With this in mind lets appreciate the makeup of
a rainbow. A rainbow is the refraction of white light or
visible light into its component wave lengths. Each
wavelength is a different color and within the arc of the
rainbow each distinct color is visible because it occupies
its own domain. The rainbow is the antithesis of discord. Its beautiful array of colors are perfectly organized
and ordered. In a metaphorical sense, each color respects
the space and rights of its neighboring color. Ultimately,
with orderliness and respect for personal space secured,
the colors have plenty of room for sharing and harmoniz-

ing to give us the usable light that we are accustomed

to. In contrast, black is the result of the total absorption
of all colors. In a sense black does not respect the rights
of the other colors, but grabs all wavelengths for itself. Continuing with our metaphorical interpretation,
black represents chamas, thievery, for black steals all the
colors around it. The blackness that enveloped the world
during the time of the mabulmirrored the very character
trait of the people of the time. Once the world was
cleansed of chamas and had a chance to start over,
Hashem revealed to Noach the rainbow, which represents the recognition that all people need to respect each
others property and belongings. On that foundation, a
world based on cooperation and chesed could be rebuilt.
Page 2

Dovid HaMelech teaches us and Chazal emphasize that Olam Chessed Yibane (Tehillim 89:3), we need
to build a world based on kindness. To reverse the terrible consequences of the dor hamabul, we need to constantly remind ourselves and strengthen our commitment
to helping others. In this way we will continue to preserve a world that is as beautiful and harmonious as the
rainbow.
Yetzer Hara: Childlike but Powerful

Dovid Tanner

This weeks parsha, parshas Noach, offers a unique

insight into human nature and the yetzer hara. After the
mabul is over and Noach offers thanks to Hashem in the
form of korbanos, we are told:

Hashem said in His heart: Never again will I curse
the ground because of man, for the inclination of mans
heart is evil from [the time of] his youth. (8:21)
From this pasuk, an obvious question arises. What
does one half of the pasuk have to do with the other
other? Why does the evil nature of mans heart prevent
Hashem from destroying mankind?
Rav Shimon Schwab, as quoted by Rav Schwab on
Chumash, asks an additional question. The Ramban states,

Vo l. 20 I s su e # 3

different than the yetzer hara of man before the mabul.

Before the mabul, the yetzer hara started affecting a person during their youth, leading to more sophisticated
ideas of evil developing in a person as he matured. As a
result, the older and more intelligent a person became,
the greater his inclination for evil grew. Thus, if one
gave in to his yetzer hara even once, it would utterly consume him. This unfortunately gave rise to a generation
of intelligent, sophisticated evildoers which needed to be
destroyed with a flood.

However, after the mabul, the yetzer hara no

longer became more sophisticated with age; ones
youthful evil inclinations were very similar to ones evil
inclinations in adulthood. As Rav Schwab beautifully explains, just as a child desires attention and to have everyone do as he wishes, adults also desire power. Similarly,
just as a child loves flattery and thinks only of his own
benefit, adults also desire praise and often act only for
their own self-benefit, without thought of anyone else.
Unlike our yetzer hara, our yetzer hatov and intelligence
do not remain stagnant. They develop further as we
grow in intelligence and self-control. It is therefore easier for us to control our yetzer hara as we grow older because our ever-increasing positive traits combat the yetzer hara and are hopefully dominant over it. This is the
intent of the Ramban when he says that the yetzer hara is
in mans youth and not in his old age, the yetzer hara may
continue in mans old age, but it develops in his youth
and that is the intellectual stage in which it remains.
We can now explain the meaning of Hashems
statement in our pasuk. Hashem is saying that He no
longer has a need to destroy the earth because He has
weakened our yetzer hara and we will now be able to
constantly overpower it. Though the thought that
Hashem weakened our yetzer hara to help us should encourage us, it also gives us a greater responsibility.
Hashem is putting His confidence in us that we will
make the right choices and we cannot let Him down.
Serving Hashem with Emotion

Max Landsberg

Noach had just spent the last 120 years con structing the teivah, aware that Hashem was going to
This line seemingly indicates that older people
dont possess a yetzer hara. What does the Ramban mean?
Rav Schwab suggests that the yetzer hara we have today is

bring a flood upon the entire world. All the animals had
gathered to Noach, and the rain had started falling. Yet
where is Noach in all of this? He was still outside the
teivah, watching as the rain quickly accumulated! It was

Page 3

only when the water had reached his ankles that Noach proper service to Hashem. We are commanded:
finally decided that he might as well get inside the teivah
...
as Hashem had told him. The Torah makes reference to
this when it states,
You shall know today, and take to your heart, that
... Hashem is the God in heaven above, and earth below. (Devarim 4:39) Later, we are also told
and Noach came into the ark due to the flood water. In

fact, the Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah) explains that this
demonstrated a lack of faith in Noach, as if he had The matter [i.e. the Torah] is very near you, in your
thoughts of doubt regarding the arrival of the flood. How mouth and your heart, to perform it. (ibid. 30:14) Its
is it that Noach, who was told through nevuah that not enough that we know Hashem as our sovereign, or
Hashem was bringing a flood, could still have a lingering that the Torah is in our mouths. We must make the effort
uncertainty
to ensure that our worship of Hashem is one which

Vo l. 20 I s su e # 3

A story regarding Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai

can provide an answer to this question. The gemara on
Berakhos 28b relates the story of Rabban Yochanan BenZakkais students, who visited him while he was ill. Before they left, they asked him to bless them. Rabban
Yochanan Ben Zakkai famously blessed them, saying:
May your fear of heaven be as great as your fear of your
fellow man. The first thing that catches our eye in this
story is that our fear of people can be greater than our
yiras shamayim. Yet, it is exactly this point which Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai is pointing out. A person will
make sure to avoid being seen by other people, as there is
a conscious fear of being caught in sin and being humiliated. When it comes to Hashem, its not enough that
aperson is aware that Hashem is watching him to deter
that person from sinning; the person needs some other
motivation to desist from his sinful acts.
This is something which Rabban Yochanan Ben
Zakkai felt was a tremendously difficult challenge, even
to the best of his students. The ability to intellectualize an
abstract concept is simple, but to internalize and emotionally feel a concept is something that even the greatest
of people struggle with. In fact, this was the lack of faith
within Noach to which the Midrash refers. Noach understood perfectly that Hashem was bringing a flood upon
the world, and built the teivah in preparation, as commanded. But Noach lacked the emotional connection to
the warning, and thus waited until the water had accumulated before taking action to ensure his and his familys
safety. This isnt a flaw inherent only to Noach, but one
which we all struggle with ourselves.
To this effect, the Torah requires that we make
an effort to make the emotional connection needed for

reaches us on a passionate level, and not just on an intellectual one.

One question that recurs several times throughout shas is regarding kavanah: does one need to feel the
mitzvos (mitzvos tzrichos kavana), or is a mere lip service
sufficient (mitzvos einan tzrichos kavana)? The general
consensus is that no emotional connection is required,
yet this doesnt contradict the aforementioned pesukim
which seem to say otherwise. The Rabbanan were aware
of the difficulty in internalizing ones belief in Hashem.
An emotional connection to ones performance of mitzvos, is just too difficult.
Just because this task is a great challenge, we still
shouldnt be prevented from trying to the best of our
ability. We dont all have to attain the same uniform level
of emotional service to Hashem; the singulative of the
pesukim hints that each person has a different tier which
he can attain. Let us learn from the faults of Noach, as
well as the lesson of Rabban Yochanan Ben Zakkai, and
bring more emotion and passion to our emunah and avodas Hashem.
Actions and Implications

Ezra Epstein

It is not surprising to come across a person in a

passuk whose fathers name is mentioned next to his own.
However, in a case where ones sons name is mentioned
after his own, we have a greater challenge establishing the
significance of the added name. Such a case appears in this
weeks parshah, which states:

; ,--- ,-
,

Page 4

And the sons of Noach who came out of the ark were
Shem, Cham, and Yafes- and Cham was the father of Canaan.(Genesis 9:18) Why do we mention Cham being
the father of Canaan in this passuk? Rashi elucidates, saying
that this is because Canaan was punished as a result of
Chams actions, which are depicted in the following pessukim. The Torah had not yet mentioned Chams descendants, and do not yet know that Canaan was the son of
Cham, therefore their relationship is noted here to establish how Chams actions are linked to Canaans punishment.
However, this description gives the impression
that Cham was an evil sinner and Cannan was innocent.
The Ibn Ezra argues that this is not the case; rather Canaan was punished as a result of his own actions, a sin he
committed which the Torah does not state explicitly. A
later passuk states

- , ; ,
And Noach awoke from his wine and realized what his
youngest son had done to him.(Genesis 9:24) Here, the
youngest son truly refers to Chams youngest son, Canaan.
On the contrary, Ramban argues that the Ibn
Ezras approach is a false interpretation as it fails to recognize the simple meaning of the passuk that was just mentioned; namely Cham is the sinner. Instead, Ramban affirms the following: In actuality, Cham, Noachs youngest
son misbehaved in the incident with Noach. In addition,
Canaan is really Chams oldest son, even though he is
mentioned last in the list of Chams children. This is due
to his punishment to be sold as a slave of slaves, a status so
low that even his younger brothers are mentioned before
him.
However, why was Canaan the only son to be
punished if Cham had three other sons? The answer is
simple but technical: Canaan was the only son of Cham
who had been born during the time which Cham behaved
in a sinful manner against his father. Noach could not
curse the children who Cham did not have at the time of
cursing.
Noach had two options. Before making his curse
Noach thought of the futuristic implications regarding his
words. The first option would be for him to curse Cham
and his descendants. However, Noach did not know for
certain that Cham would have any more children, and
since the curse only discussed unborn children, Chams

Vo l. 20 I s su e # 4

already existent son, Canaan,

would not be included. This Rabbi Michael
would mean that there
Taubes
would be no guarantee that
the curse would take effect.
Rosh Yeshiva
The second, more practical
option was to curse Canaan Rabbi Baruch Pesach
and his current children (or Mendelson
child, in this case). This
Rabbinic Advisor
way, regardless of whether
Noach had more children, Avi Rothwachs
he was sure Chams offEzra Epstein
spring would be cursed.
The fact that a son
Editors in Chief
who has done nothing can
be punished for his fathers Yehuda Goldberg
actions is part of a greater Ben Tzion Zuckier
discussion, of which we
Executive Editor
will not delve. However,
one can still learn a valu- Ari Hagler
able lesson here, which is
Distribution Coordinator
how much of an impact our
actions can have. This message is especially poignant
in the weeks which follow
Yomim Noraim where we find ourselves currently. May
we all be able to realize the disastrous effects that our actions can have, and on the flipside, the positive change
that we can bring about, and do the right thing.